Introduction: In the first week of August, 2016, I contacted a Salafi, talib ul ilm (seeker of knowledge), to ask if he has any information on the Hadith of, whosoever introduces a good Sunnah in Islam he/she is assured reward like those who follow it, and whosoever introduces a evil Sunnah in Islam than he/she will bear the burden of sin just as those who followed it. Knowing the reasons why I am requesting information he shared with me a link of AhlalHdeeth forum, here, and link of IslamToday, here, thinking it negates/refutes Islamic understanding. He followed it with plea; read posts ponder over them, it will take time to make sense, and don’t be quick to dismiss what following wrote: Abul Fadl,1, 3 Ustad Ayman bin Khaled wrote in post 2, and sister Um Abdullah wrote in posts 4. I informed the brother, I never have closed the gate of guidance upon myself. I fear Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) displeasure and worry about the end in hereafter. And told him, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills, I will be just to the material you have passed on to me. After directing his attention to extensive written material already available I enquired if he would be interested in reading any material related to the Ahadith? He excused himself citing busy schedual. But promised, if I personally write something in response to the material he could look into the matter and give me his honest verdict. It seemed he was under impression I would direct him to material written by others. And the reality was all material was written by me but I did not feel to spell this out for him because it would appear, I am begging for attention. So decided I will respond to the material presented in the links. And al-hamdu lillah it was a good decision because both links make my job easy. Authors of material spell out what innovation is all I need to do is to draw their attention toward how the Hadith fits theirs/mine definition of innovation. Note in this article material found at Ahlalhdeeth forum will be addressed, and material of Salafi Muftis at IslamToday will be dealt in the following article, here. The Material In On Which Disscussion Will Be Based: A certain Abul Fadl quoted Hadith of good/evil Sunnah in its entirity and wrote: “I know there is disagreement about Bid'ah Hasanah and Dalâlah. I would like to know how the opponents of Bid'ah Hasanah interpret and understand "sunnah sayyi'ah"? BarakAllâhu fîk and thanks in advance.” [Ref: Abul Fadl, post 1] Shaykh/Ustad Ayman bin Khaled responded to Abul Fadl: “Scholars identify "sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” [Ref: Ayman Bin Khaled, post 2] Abul Fadl got back and wrote the following: “BarakAllâhu fîk brother. I heard that Salafi's opposed the categorizing of Bid'ah in hasanah and dalâlah, is this view of bid'ah hasanah- and dalalah accepted as a valid ikhtilâf among them or did I misunderstood the fatwa? It could be because I still need to work hard on my Arabic.” [Ref: Abul Fadl, post 3] Sister Um Abdullah responded to brother Abul Fadl with following: “Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullah. Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), but bidah in deen/worship is all bad, and what makes a bidah in deen is a long detailed topic that can't be discussed in one post. And what is fatwa says is that if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it good bidah, which means that it is bidah in language not in shari'ah, because if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah, and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah. As for sunnah sayi'ah, it is every sin/evil that is done which people follow the person in doing it. And sunnah hasanah is opposite, it is every good deed done which people follow hte person in doing it, like in story of the hadith, the good deed was sadaqah. And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” [Ref: Um Abdullah M, post 4] I did read the entire thread number of times to make sure content gets registered and I can mull over the implications of it. And even though my Salafi brother did not instruct me to read the following post of Shaykh Ayman bin Khaled but because brother Abul Fadl directed post to him and Shaykh responded I have included it: “In simple terms; the dispute over categorizing bid'a is theoritical and all scholars from both sides agree on the application of it. So, examining such topic will bring no benefit at all to anyone in terms of good deeds or adding beneficial knowledge that is practiced by average Muslims. This is said while making a note that all scholars mention such topics while emphasizing on the known principle, taking the safest view is the best to do and the most praised act. Wallahu A'lam” [Ref: Ayman Bin Khaled, post 7] Post seven of Shaykh Ayman bin Khaled demonstrates his correct understanding of subject but has a misguiding element. There were more exchanges between members but I will end it here. Hadith Of Whosoever Introduces A Good/Evil Sunnah In Islam: “Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woollen clothes came to Allah's Messenger. He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger said: He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] “The Messenger of Allah said: He who introduces good precedent in Islam, there is a reward for him for this (act of goodness) and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards; and he who introduces an evil precedent in Islam, there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2219] “The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever sets a good precedent in Islam, he will have the reward for that, and the reward of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. And whoever sets an evil precedent in Islam, he will have a burden of sin for that, and the burden of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest."' [Ref: Nisa’i, B23, H2555] 0.0 – Explaining Important Statement Of Sister Um Adullah: Following statement of sister Um Abdullah is about innovative actions, practices, ideas: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good in shari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” [Ref: Um Abdullah M, post 4] In other words she is saying, if judgment, on something innovative, is required to see if it is good or bad in Shari’ah, than its reality is, as Shari’ah declares it to be, good/bad. Shari’ah judges goodness/evilness of innovations based on existance of evidence and she states this:“And what is fatwa says is that if it (i.e. innovation) has a daleel in shari'ah then it good bidah, which means that it is bidah in language not in shari'ah, because if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah …” Alhasil both these statements explain each other and thus are connected with topic of innovation and they will be employed in this context in future. From a more rational perspective. If y is already part of Shari’ah than it is not an innovation. Agreed! And if something was not dealt in religion of Islam either by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) than it is innovation? Agreed! And if innovative y requires judgment from perspective of prophetic teachings to see if it is good/bad than it means, it was not part of religion and it is innovation and requires Ijtihadi judgment. And if you agreed with the last point, you will agree that sister Um Abdullah’s statement can only refer to innovative, actions, practices, ideas. 0.1 – Innovation In Religion Is All Bad Or Maybe Some Is Bad: Please bare in mind, here I will address sister Um Abdullah’s claim briefly. Without going too much into supporting evidence, but when I deal with Shaykh Ayman’s material, than detailed exposition will follow. Sister wrote: “Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullah. Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), but bidah in deen/worship is all bad, and what makes a bidah in deen is a long detailed topic that can't be discussed in one post.” Innovation is something which was not part of prophetic teaching, and it later did not became part of religion when it was completed/perfected. Sister Um Abdullah agrees with what I have stated: “… and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The Hadith indicates, reward being told is for a good Sunnah which is not already part of Islam. And what is not part of Islam but one is permitted to make part of Islam to earn reward is, innovation. In light of this statement of sister, “… but Biddah in deen/worship is all bad, …” is in correct because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) permitted introduction of good innovated Sunnahs in to Islam by telling there is reward for them. 0.2 – Innovation In Worship Is Not All Bad: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was leading prayers and when he said: “Sami Allahu liman hamidah.” A Sahabi said: “Rabbana wa lakal-hamd, hamdan kathiran tayyiban mubarakan fih.” After finsihing the prayer Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) enquired who uttered the words and a Sahabi admitted to uttering them. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told him: “I saw thirty-some angels rushing to see which of them would write it down first." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B12, H1063] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught Tasbih and it ends with: “Rabbana wa lakal-hamd.” The companion made the following addition to it: “Hamdan kathiran tayyiban mubarakan fih.” Once again words of sister Um Abdullah defining what an innovation is: “… and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah.” In light of meaning of innovation, the companion introduced an innovation into worship. And this refutes the claim of sister that all innovations in worship are bad: “… but Biddah in deen/worship is all bad, …” Another point, originally the addition of companion and by its nature, the addition was an innovation. After Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) became pleased with it than it became a Sunnah. Alhasil not every innovation into worship is evil in fact innovation can be so good that it can become prophetic Sunnah. 0.3 – Restoring Balance To Insanity Regarding Innovation: Sister Um Abdullah wrote regarding innovation: “… if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah …” And before this sister wrote: “… that if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it is good bidah …” Question begs to be asks, how can something which has daleel from Shariah is good innovation in your methodology? You just stated with evidence it is part of Shariah and not innovation and than you termed something which has evidence as good innovation. It is either innovation or no-innovation. With existance of evidence means it is already part of Shari’ah hence its not innovation, but it is Shari’ah, full-stop. Without evidence it innovation. Salafi classification doesn’t have room for good innovation - it has; innovation, and Shariah. And there is no room for, good innovation, or linguistic innovation, in Salafi classification either like she claimed here: “…if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it is good bidah, which means that it is bidah in language linguistic sense not in shari'ah, …” Our sister is just flapping around like a fish out of water in the hope she hits water – or says something useful and convincing. There was and is no need to explain the position of Fuqaha Shafiyyah because they adhere to different defintion. I understand she is attempting to bring reconciliation between her own definition and definition of innovation taught by Fuqaha Shafiyyah but she is just confusing the matter. Only way to bring reconciliation between both defintions as as it follows. Salafi, innovation is equal to Shafi, evil innovation. Shafi, good innovation equal to Salafi, Shari’ah. There was and is no need for acrobatics. 0.4 - Innovation With Evidence Is Shar’ri Or Linguistic - Innovation: Sister said: “… that if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it is good bidah …” And she also wrote: “… if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah …” Note she said, if innovation has evidence it is not innovation because it is part of Shari’ah. But good innovation, she states has to have evidence of Shari’ah. If her both statements are true than logical out come has to be that good innovation is part of Shariah. 0.5 - Inconsistant Ramblings Of Sister Um Abdullah: Unfortunately the lack of knowledge is obvious from the following from what sister Um Abdullah wrote. She writes: “Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), …” If Biddah in linguisitic sense is good/bad, and it is divided into five categories by Shafi scholars. Than did they not use their definition to judge matters of religion? When it is obvious they used their definition to judge matters of Islam than how can their definition of innovation be good/bad in linguistic sense? Sister Um Abdullah herself wrote: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” If the judgments of Shafi scholars good/bad come under the category of Shari’ah, and what they judge to be good/evil it is good/bad in Shariah than how can their definition of innovation and classification of innovation be not part of Shariah? How can it be possible to judge matters of religion with something which is not part of religion? For their judgments to be part of Shariah their definition and classifications must also be part of Shariah. And they did indeed take their definition as part of Shariah. And what can be derived from her own rule sister Um Abdullah should take their definition as part of Shariah: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” 1 + 1 = 2, its mathematics, and it was solved using rules of mathematics. Or was it solved/judged to be, 2, using rules of English grammar or rules of mathematic? I am only being sarcastic, peeps. Point being made is that a judgement to be made on something has to relate to field. If judgment is being made, y is prohibited in Islam, than the tool/rules of judgment has to be from Islam, and in this context, innovation. 0.6 - Resolving The Problem And Falling Into Another Misguidance: Alhasil, sister Um Abdullah M, is only doing the best to pull wool over her own eyes. Distorting the obvious reality of definition of Fuqaha Shafiyyah until she fooled brother Abul Fadl. The reality of matter was demonstrated even from her own understanding. The Fuqaha of Ahnaf and Fuqaha Shafiyyah both believed their defintions of innovation are Shar’ri definitions. And the rule which sister Um Abdullah adheres to, should lead her to believe defintion of innovation of Fuqaha Shafiyyah is Shar’ri definition, and she should believe in accordance with her own principle that Shafiyyah had Shar’ri defintion of innovation. Otherwise she should either let go of following rubbish: “Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), …”. Or she should let go of her following rule: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.”. Or else she would be contradicting her ownself. If she had thought through what she was writing should would have realised her misguidance. In case she lets go of her linguistic rubbish then she would acknowledge Shar’ri existance of good/evil innovations. And if she lets go of her rule, judgment on something being good/bad is of Shariah, than she would negate existance of Shar’ri existance of good/bad innovations. But she would also be guilty of negating a principle which Fuqaha of; Ahnaf, Hanabilah, Shafiyyah, Malikiyyah have agreed upon. The safest path would be to acknowledge Shar’ri legality of existance of good/bad innovation and give-up making excuses where none can do. 0.7 - Sister Um Abdullah On Evil Sunah: It is stated in Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently, he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] With regards to evil Sunnah sister Um Abdullah writes: “As for sunnah sayi'ah, it is every sin/evil that is done which people follow the person in doing it.” I suppose sister here intends, every sin/evil, which is defined by Shari’ah, lik Shaykh Waheed al-Zaman has stated in his Mukhtasir Sharh of Sahih Muslim. In other words sister means, evil Sunnah is; every sinful action which has been defined by Quranic teaching or prophetic teaching to be evil/sinful, and which a person is seen comitting and people imitate the sinful action. If her point is valid - it is omitting a key component but it is valid - than it is equally applicable for innovation because there are Ahadith which use word, innovation instead of Sunnah, and the meaning of these Ahadith is exactly same as meaning of evil Sunnah: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e evil innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] All one has to do is, remove the words, Sunnah Sayyah, and replace it with, Biddah. For demonstration purposes; as for evil innovation, it is every sin/evil that is done which people follow the person in doing it. What this establishes is her definition of evil Sunnah is also definition of evil Biddah. And this leads to logical conclusion; evil Sunnah and evil Biddah are one and the same. 0.8 – Setting In Islam An Evil Precedent: Sister is just repeating the words her scholars without giving thought to if they fit into the Hadith or not. If portion of Hadith in discussion is about only sins which Quranic and prophetic teaching has defined sinful than following underlined words were uncalled for and play no part in the Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which …” Sinful action which is immitated by others, is not being introduced into Islam, is not a precedent set in Islam, because it is already defined by Islam to be sinful/evil. The Hadith talks about a evil Sunnah, or sinful action, which has no precedent prior to being set. I will explain, suppose I am drink alcohol of finest quality, my true Salafi buddy, the only true Muwahid on earth, and only one with true understanding of Quran and Hadith, gets inspired by me, and decides to defile his self with it. Question is did he immitate an action of mine which had no precedent in Islam, or there was already a precedent set – before prohibition: “Narrated Jabir: Some people drank alcoholic beverages in the morning (of the day) of the Uhud battle and on the same day they were killed as martyrs, and that was before wine was prohibited.” [Ref: Bukhari, B65, H4618] And after prohibition command was revealed: “Narrated Anas: The Prophet lashed a drunk with dateleaf stalks and shoes. And Abu Bakr gave a drunk forty lashes.” [Ref: Bukhari, B81, H767] So even though I maybe the influence and be responsible for advertising it. I am not, introducing into Islam an evil precedent. Or in other words, I am not setting an evil precedent in Islam. 0.9 - Setting/Introducing Evil Precedent In Islam: The Hadith indicates evil Sunnah for which the burden of sin will be equally shared between the initiator and its actor thereafter is not already part of Islam. In other words that evil Sunnah already has not been declared to be evil in Islam. Suppose a Sufi Shaykh, and worse, Sufi who is Ashari/Maturidi, wakes up every Fajr time, performs Salah, than this Sufi Shaykh looks for a Salafi/Wahhabi, once he finds one, he beats the Wahhabism out of him, than shaves all hair leaving only those in private areas, makes him drink Hindu cows urine, makes him bark like a dog, forces him to make face like Khanzeer and tells him to go. The terrorist Sufi Shaykh than goes to his mosque and preaches his mureeds (i.e. disciples) do the same. This starts tradition of Wahhabi wich hunt, and the evil Sufis go, and do what their Shaykh has instructed, inflicting all humiliations upon their peacful/harmless pacifist Wahhabis in precise order which their Shaykh has been doing. This practice/precedent has no judgment in Islam from prophetic Sunnah because it did not exist at the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The collective judgment of Muslims regarding this custom of Sufi Shaykh is that it is an evil Sunnah and therefore in light of following Hadith it will be evil Sunnah in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as well: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] And this way it will be an innovated into Islam as an evil Sunnah and those who acted on it will be equally responsible like their Sufi Shaykh. Our sister has acknolwedge: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” That is because judgment of good/bad in light of Islamic principles makes the issue part of Islam. Natural conclusion is; an evil Sunnah being introduced into Islam, or set in Islam, must not already have precedent and judgment of Shariah regarding it. And if it already has a judgment, it is already part of Islam. 0.10 – Sister Um Abdullah On Good Sunnah: Regarding good Sunnah sister Um Abdullah writes: “And sunnah hasanah is opposite, it is every good deed done which people follow the person in doing it, like in story of the hadith, the good deed was sadaqah.” Sister Um Abdullah connected part of good Sunnah with the context of Hadith by saying: “… like in the story of the Hadith, the good deed was Sadaqah.” It is common among the Salafi’s to negate the generality of principles in this Hadith to by contextualising it. Implication of which is, Sadaqah is prophetic teaching/Sunnah, and nothing is being new is being introduced into Islam, no innovation has been introduced. But this negates the natural meaning of Hadith therefore it cannot be correct. The Islamic position is; principles in this Hadith are not limited to context of event. If they were limited than evil Sunnah portion of Hadith would have connection with action of companion/companions and it is obvious there is no relationship. Considering the implications of the prophetic words (i.e. innovated good/evil Sunnahs not already being part of Islam) its most likely that practice of Sadaqah became part of Islam when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) encouraged to give Sadaqah to the poor Muslims and companions acted on it. And after all the event had transpired Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) received revelation to announce the two principles. This explanation puts everything into perspective. It establishes that principle is connected with context and it supports the natural implications of Hadith. This leads to conclusion that, Sadaqah was a innovated good Sunnah into Islam. Also as demonstrated in earlier section, evil Sunnah portion of Hadith is refering to evil innovated precedents introduced into Islam and therefore naturally the part of good Sunnah refers to good innovated practices set in Islam, which were not already part of Islam. 1.0 - Shaykh Ayman Bin Khaled On Meaning Of Hadith Of Good/Evil Sunnah: Shaykh Ayman bin Khaled writes: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins, whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” In the context of Hadith Shaykh is saying; following part of Hadith refers to sinful actions: “And he who introduced some [sinful action as] evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] What Shaykh did not consider is that Hadith states, whoever introduces x into Islam, implication of which is, the Sunnah being introduced into Islam is not already part of Islam. And anything not part of Islam but is made part of Islam is innovation. Hence the x Sunnah being introduced into Islam has to be an innovation which in this Hadith is being reffered as ‘Sunnah Say’yah’. 1.1 - Refuting Shaykh Ayman Bin Khaled’s Understanding With Evidence: Shaykh writes: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins, whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” Regarding sin/innovation, sin is sin until it is practiced by an individual but when a sin is committed in public and it is immitated by others than it becomes a evil innovation/precedent and this point is connected with section, 0.7. Therefore the following saying of Shaykh and his scholars is incorrect: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins…” When there is clear mention in the Hadith about people following the evil Sunnah than the Hadith is about evil Sunnah/Biddah: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] 1.2 - Granting The Shaykh His Interpretation And Its Implication: Shaykh Ayman and his bunch of Salafi scholars claimed, evil Sunnah refers to sins, and in my own words sinful actions. There is no reason to completely reject the understanding of Shaykh and the Shuyukh he adheres to. But obviously we cannot reject the natural meaning of Hadith. Hence I do affirm following interpretation of Hadith is correct: “And he who introduced some [sinful action as] evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] In the context of Shaykh’s stated meaning of Hadith, and actual meaning of Hadith, which I explained in previous two sections the meaning of Hadith is; And he who introduced into Islam a sinful action which is followed after its invention[thus becoming an evil innovation/precedent than] the one who introduced the sinful action and one who followed it will be equally responsible. Or it could mean; And he who introduced into Islam an evil innovation/precedent [in form of a sinful action] which is followed after, the initiator and the actor will bear equal burden on judgment day. Both interpretations virtually mean the same thing but linguistically there is confirmation of second interpretation in text of Hadith: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] The following Hadith is with following underlined addition: “Whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210] But the following version of Hadith there is addition of word dhalalah (i.e. evil): “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e.reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] 1.3 - The Logical Outcome Of Discussion So Far: Shaykh turned the ‘Sunnah Say’yah’ toward, sinful actions, and logical opposite of ‘Sunnah Hasanah’ would be, rewardworthy of actions and I have inserted this into following portion of Hadith: “He who introduced some [rewardworthy action as] good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] If Islamic position in section, 1.0 and 1.1, are also put into context of this portion of Hadith than Hadith would give meaning of; He who introduced into Islam a reward-worthy innovation/precedent [in form of a rewardworthy action] which is followed after, the initiator and the actor will earn equal reward on judgment day. And in context of Hadith good/evil Sunnah the Ahadith of, Ibn Majah – H209, H210, and Tirmadhi – H2677, are proof that linguistically word Sunnah can be a perfect subsitute for word Biddah. And the natural meaning of mentioned portion of Hadith is of innovative good Sunnah. 1.4 – Understanding Shaykh Ayman’s Statement As Whole: Shaykh wrote: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins, whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful.” Shaykh Ayman’s sinful innovation is Shar’ri innovation. In other words, if something is termed innovaiton according to Shaykh’s definition of innovation than it is innovation according to judgment of Shari’ah. And the innovation which Shaykh states is not sinful is linguistic innovation. Meaning it is something new, newly invented, it could be anything made from materials … mobile phones, cars etc. And therefore these things are not connected with religion hence their invention and innovations in techonology cannot be sinful, because they are innovations of linguistical sense. 1.5 – Responding To Shaykhs Definition Of Innovation: Firstly, Islamicly all innovations are of two types, praiseworthy and blameworthy. Both type are Shar’ri innovations because both type of innovations require Shar’ri judgment for permissbility and impermissibility. If it is permissible it is good and it is Shari’ah. If it is prohibited it is bad hence they are part of Shari’ah. And this principle is attested by sister Um Abdullah: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” And I see no reason why Shaykh Ayman would dispute it. Shar’ri innovations are good as well as evil. And there is nothing as linguistical innovation simply because if a innovation requires judgment good/bad then the innovation and the judgment both are connected with Shariah. Secondly, prophetic saying, one who innovates evil innovation with which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are pleased, the innovator and actor both will be equally responsible, was presented but it is being repeated again: “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e.reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] And this Hadith is further supported by Ahadith of evil Sunnah in Islam due to their meaning. In light of this Hadith, innovation which is sinful is evil/bad innovation. Or a sinful innovation is which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam). In both cases we have Shar’ri recognition of existance of evil innovation/precedent. The Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam, its natural meaning explained in section 1.0 and in 1.1, indicates reward for introducing good innovation into Islam. And it would be correct to say prophetic Sunnah does recognise existance of good precedent/innovation. 1.6 – An Attempt To Distort Prophet Teaching: Alhasil Shaykh does not mention nor does Shaykh believe that Islam recognises and tells of reward for good innovations. And nor does he believe that prophetic Sunnah recognises sinful innovations as evil innovations and prophetic teaching tell initiator and actor, both bearing equal burden. Shaykh Ayman and his Shuyukh have attempted to distort the natural meaning of Hadith with their Taweel. Had they held to natural meaning (i.e. innovative evil/good Sunnahs) and gave it the meaning of sinful/reward-worthy actions it would have been acceptable but their negation of natural meaning puts them at odds with Islamic understanding. 1.7 – Dispute Theoritical And Application Agreed Upon: Shaykh Ayman states in response to Abul Fadl: “In simple terms; the dispute over categorizing bid'a is theoritical and all scholars from both sides agree on the application of it.” Actually dispute over categorisation is not conceptual but substantial. It is an issue of valid and invalid Ijtihad. Double reward or single. Comprehensive understanding of definition innovation or minimilistic. And of prophetic teaching or innovated teaching. If definition employed by Salafis is correct than Muslims who oppose them with categorisations of good/evil innovation have innovated definition of innovation, and their Ijtihad is invalid, and their definition does not accord prophetic teaching. And if definition of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah accords with all the evidence available than Salafi definiton of innovation does not accord with prophetic teachings. And this is no small matter. With regards to claim of Shaykh that both sides agree on the application of two definitions. Shaykh is distorting the reality. Fuqaha Shafiyyah do not agree with Wahhabi Neo-Hanbalism nor their application of defintion of innovation. If both parties agreed with the application and classification of innovation was theoretical as Shaykh claims than their judgments on issues would be in agreement. As an example, neo-Hanbali Wahhabis deem celebration of prophetic birthday as innovation and its equivlent in Shafi defintion is, evil innovation. Yet the renown Shafi jurists such as; Imam Nawavi (rahimullah), Hafidh Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani (rahimullah), Imam Suyuti (rahimullah), and many more have deemed it good innovation. The truth of matter is Fuqaha Shafiyyah are in agreement with Fuqaha Ahnaf on application of definition innovation. Even the Maliki Fuqaha are in agreement with regards to Mawlid being good innovation. The only connection with scholars of past in regards to application of definition of innovation the Wahhabi neo-Hanabilah have is Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah and his rabid students. And Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah was a loner in his Madhab and his contempory scholars rejected his Ikhtilaf. Just like Hanbali contempories of Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab rejected him and his scholarship. Conclusion: A combination of Shar’ri transgressions/sins makes an evil Sunnah. And when this evil Sunnah is immitated/followed it becomes an innovation. Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa alaihi was’sallam) is reported to have informed for introducing good Sunnah into Islam and told of reward for setting evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam. And a Sunnah which was not part of Islam but; (i) is made part of Islam is innovation, (ii) set in Islam by anyone other than Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is innovation. And which ever Sunnah accords with and is composed of all that is Halal, Ibadah, Tarbiyah, Saqaqah, an Muslism collectively judge to be good innovated Sunnah is also a good innovated Sunnah in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And whatever Muslims deem to be evil innovated Sunnah, due to being Kufr, Shirk, Haram, Zanb (i.e. sin), or being composed of these practices, is evil innovated Sunnah in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: A Salafi shared with me an explanation of Shaykh Salim Al Qarni and Shaykh Abd Al-Rahman Al-Ajlan on Hadith of good/evil Sunnah. These Salafi Shuyukh provide answers to questions on, IslamToday. Both these Shuyukh are of opinion that the Hadith in question does not substantiate the Islamic position of introducing good innovation into Islam. Shaykh Al-Qarni is of opinion portion of, whosoever introduces into Islam good innovation, refers to someone who takes initiative to do something. Shaykh al-Ajlan is of opinion, good Sunnah, is prophetic Sunnah which has been forgotten and a Muslim who revives it. Islamic understanding is that this Hadith is about innovated good/evil Sunnahs, and reward/sin is regarding which did not already exist in Islam. As part of the package, subject of Mawlid was also discussed by these Salafi Shuyukh. Like it is typical of modern day Khawarij to oppose celebration of Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) birthday, so did these Shuyukh opposed it. They deem it to be [reprehensible] innovation and place blame of sin and issue threat of hell fire for those who practice it. Even though the Salafi brother did not request that I address the matter of Mawlid. I feel compelled to do so because the question and an answer given by Shaykh does mention it explicitly. Answer Given By Shaykh Salim Al Qarni: Q: “I know that practices like celebrating the Prophet's birthday and honoring the 27th of Rajab are innovations. However, there is a group of people who are arguing that they are good innovations and that such practices can be defended by the following hadîth: "Whoever starts in Islam a good practice (sunnah), he gets the reward of it and the reward of all those that act on it. And whosoever starts in Islam an evil practice (sunnah), he gets the evil of it and the evil of all those that act on it." A1: “There is nothing in our religion that is known as a “good innovation” because the word innovation (bid`ah) in Islamic discourse means to introduce into the religion something that is alien to it. On the other hand, there is such a thing as a “good Sunnah” as mentioned in a hadîth that can be found in Sahîh Muslim. […][1] This is talking about the person who takes the initiative to do something that complies with Islamic teachings. Whoever does this will be engaging in a good Sunnah. This is not referring to any sort of innovation. An innovation can never be good, because it is, by definition, something that contradicts with the religion. An innovation is something that neither the Prophet (peace be upon him) did nor the people who followed him. Therefore, innovations would include observing the celebration of the Prophet’s birthday or engaging in special observances on the occasion of his night journey and ascension (al-isrâ’ wa al-mi`râj). May Allah guide us all.” Answered by: Sheikh Salim al-Qarni. 1.0 – Innovation According To Shaykh: The first, anything which is prophetic Sunnah or Sunnah of companions is not innovation according to Shaykh – underlined: (i) “An innovation is something that neither the Prophet (peace be upon him) did nor the people who followed him.” With regards to second, to introduce into Islam that is alien to it: (ii) “… because the word innovation (bid`ah) in Islamic discourse means to introduce into the religion something that is alien to it.” Means to introduce into Islam which is unfamiliar to Islam. Shaykhs understanding is for something to be familiar to Islam it has to be prophetic Sunnah or Sunnah of companions (i.e. wa sunnati khulafa ar-rashideen) and if it is not either of the two than it is innovation. This leaves the third, something which contradicts teaching of Islam as stated in the following: (iii) “An innovation can never be good, because it is, by definition, something that contradicts with the religion.” It is important to point out what Shaykh means by, innovation is something which contradicts the religion of Islam. He means, contradicts established religion as demonstrated by prophetic Sunnahs and Sunnahs of those who followed him. In this context the all three are interlinked and and explain each other. There is also possibility that Shaykh did not intend the second and third definitions of innovation to be explanations of the first. And that will be dealt in following sections. 1.1 - Implications Of What Has Been Explained: In light of how the statements of Shaykh al-Qarni have been interpreted it needs to be pointed; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor the companions gave lessons on Sahih of Imam Bukhari (rahimullah). And Sahih Al Bukhari would be alien to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions. None can deny the fact that Sahih Bukhari did not originate from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor from his companions therefore it does contradict religion of Islam. In this context Sahih Al-Bukhari is an [reprehensible] innovation but its goodness cannot be negated. And this establishes action of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor his companions is criteria for a practice/action to be not an [reprehensible] innovation. Rather if something is composed of prophetic teaching, and even if it did not originate as a prophetic Sunnah or Sunnah of companions, it still is not [reprehensible] innovation. And therefore Sahih al-Bukhari and commemorating/celebrate Mawlid of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be [reprehensible] innovations because they are composed of practices of prophetic Sunnahs. 2.0 – Good Innovation Is In Islam Or No Good Innovation In Islam: Shaykh Al-Qarni wrote: “There is nothing in our religion that is known as a “good innovation” …” Regarding Taraweeh prayers being performed under a single Imam and for entire month of Ramadhan, the second Khalifah, Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is on the record for saying:” On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is reported to have said regarding Salat ad-Duha: “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.” And in another version he is reported to have said: "It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" It is important to point out that Salat ad-Duha is prophetic Sunnah and it is established from authentic Ahadith. But Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) likely was not aware of this fact. What these two Ahadith establish is that Sahabah believed there are good innovations in Islam. And they acted on these good innovations proving; they deemed good innovations to be acceptable in religion otherwise companions collectively and Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) individually would not have acted nor would have found innovation to be dear/good. 2.1 – Innovation Is Something That Is Alien To Islam: Shaykh writes:“… because the word innovation (bid`ah) in Islamic discourse means to introduce into the religion something that is alien to it.” The Shaykh is stretching the truth to fit his neo-Hanbali Salafi agenda. The words of Shaykh are clearly against what companions believed. If innovation was something alien/unfamiliar to Islam than why would Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu), re-issue a three day prophetic Sunnah for entire month of Ramadhan, and deem it excellent innovation? Clearly Taraweeh prayers was not alien to Islam otherwise a companion would not declare excellent innovation. And if Hadhrat Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was of innovation is alien to Islam than why would he deem it an excellent innovation? Foolish will say he said it is excellent innovation in linguistic sense. But how can a Muslim judge something to be excellent according to linguisitc usage of innovation when the pronouncement of Taraweeh under leadership of single Qari is regarding an act of worship! Its like saying, Lama is halal linguistically, but at similtaneously the fat Arab Shaykh is stuffing his mouth with Lamian Kebabs. To engage in it requires Shar’ri judgment and if it wasn’t excellent in Shari’ah it would not be practiced by companions. 2.2 – Defining Alien-ness Of Innovation: If alien-ness of [reprehensible] innovation was defined as, which is composed of non-Islamic practices (i.e. yoga) than it is indeed alien to Islam and [reprehensible] innovation. And believing Yoga is part of religion and expecting reward for engaging in it is sinful, and expecting reward for it is an [reprehensible] innovation. But if alien-ness is defined as; anything which does not have its name/lable mentioned in Quran/Hadith. Or if alien-ness is defined due to absence of intruction from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to perform it. Or if alien-ness was determined based on lack of prophetic action than such defintion of alien-ness is rejected. The foolish judge innovated Sunnahs to be alien based on the name/label yet when they are directed toward innovations which they deem acceptable they judge its nature on the content and not on label. The name/label given to an innovation maybe alien. Yet all good innovations are composed of prophetic Sunnahs; acts of worship, charity, spreading knowledge, encouraging good, prohibiting sin, or Kufr, or Shirk. Shari’ah judges alien-ness of a [reprehensible] innovation based on what it is composed of and not based on the label/name. Just as Sahih Al Bukhari would be alien to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions yet it is composed of his teachings. Therefore it is not alien to Islam due to its content. Similarly Mawlid name/label is alien but the activities performed in Mawlid are all Islamicly sanctioned therefore it cannot deemed as an alien activity in Islam. 3.0 - Good Sunnah Is Something Which Complies With Islam: Regarding, whosoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, Shaykh writes: “This is talking about the person who takes the initiative to do something that complies with Islamic teachings. Whoever does this will be engaging in a good Sunnah.” Shaykh here means, compliance with prophetic Sunnah by performing performing prophetic Sunnah. In other words, who takes the initiative to act on prophetic Sunnah for them is equale reward. Implication of which is that the Hadith is not about good Sunnah which has not been innovated into Islam. Yet the Hadith states: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] This indicates the reward being told is for a Sunnah which is not already part of Islam. And innovation is which is alien to Islam like Shaykh has already stated: “… the word innovation (bid`ah) in Islamic discourse means to introduce into the religion something that is alien to it.” Therefore the reward being told for good Sunnah is for an innovated good Sunnah which was not already part of Islam. Yet he negates, whosoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, is refering to an innovation: “This is not referring to any sort of innovation.” And he said this either due to lack of knowledge, or to conceal the truth, and to misguide a Muslim. 3.1 – Taking Initiative To Do Something That Complies With Islam: Taking the following words of Shaykh literally and without subjecting them to interpretation in light of his Salafi methodology only weakens his own position: “This is talking about the person who takes the initiative to do something that complies with Islamic teachings. Whoever does this will be engaging in a good Sunnah.” Taking initiative to engage in something which complies with Islam can be understood in two meanings: (i) compliance of an act/custom with Shariah even though there is no prophetic guidance on it in Quran or Hadith, (ii) or taking initiative in performing an act which is a prophetic Sunnah which complies with Islamic teaching [of good, charity, worship]. Incase the Shaykh intended the first position out of two.[2] Shaykh wrote: “This is talking about the person who takes the initiative to do something that complies with Islamic teachings. Whoever does this will be engaging in a good Sunnah.” A innovated Sunnah can comply with Islamic teaching if it is composed of various prophetic Sunnahs and even if holistically it is not a prophetic Sunnah. Ahmad fast during the day, performs Tahajjud, performs ten Nawafil, recites last ten Surahs of Quran, and supplicates Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Even though this entire process is not prophetic Sunnah but it is composed of prophetic Sunnahs and therefore it complies with Islamic teachings. And similarly comemorating/celebrating birthday of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would comply with Islamic teaching hence it is a good Sunnah and not [reprehensible] innovation. 4.0 – Evil Sunnah Part Does Not Refer To Innovation: Shaykh writes regarding the portion of Hadith connected with good Sunnah: “This is not referring to any sort of innovation.” If it did not refer to innovation than does the following portion of the Hadith refer to innovation: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] According to logic employed by Shaykh al-Qarni the answer would be something like this: This is talking about the person who takes the initiative to do something that contradicts with Islamic teachings. Whoever does this will be engaging in a evil Sunnah. As an explanation of this it would be said, someone who takes initiative to do evil which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) declared to be evil. Than question is, would this portion of Hadith include pole dancing performed by whores all over the world? If yes, than what explicit/direct proof does the Shaykh have in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) prohibited pole dancing? If Shaykh and his supporter deem it to be part of this Hadith than will they not realise pole dancing is an [reprehensible] innovation and an evil Sunnah. Regarding which there was no explicit prohibition but its prohibition was implied from various prohibited/sinful activities such as nakedness in public and dancing. You considered the pole dancing as an evil Sunnah, and deemed its initiator and its actor being equally responsible. But ignored the fact that it has not been prohibited by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with clear injunction. Instead its prohibition and sinful-ness is implied from various sinful/haram activities. Therefore naturally it is a innovation and to be precise innovated evil Sunnah. 4.1 – Evil Sunnah Is Evil Innovation: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] A point to note is; introducing an evil Sunnah in Islam, implies the evil Sunnah is not already part of Islam and this naturally implies innovation. In other words whosoever introduces an evil innovation/precedent into Islam and those who follow it will be equally responsible for acting on it. And this meaning is further attested in the following Hadith, where the Hadith is word for word same part from usage of word innovation: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] Another version has the following words but it agrees with basic meaning of, H209: “Whoever introduces an innovation with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210] The following Hadith puts it into perspective, the innovation for which there is equal blame for initiator and its actor is evil innovation and in this way it connects the the Hadith of evil Sunnah: “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e.reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] Alhasil – the evil Sunnah part of Hadith does refer to evil innovation than indeed the meaning of good Sunnah part is to do with good innovation. 4.2 – Evil Sunnah/Biddah Of Son Of Prophet: It was stated by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And in following Hadith same is stated about innovation: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] In another Hadith it is explicitly stated the Biddah being mentioned in H209 is evil innovation: “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e.reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] So we have so far, evil Sunnah v.s. evil innovation. In an Hadith of Bukhari it is recorded: “Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "Whenever a person is murdered unjustly, there is a share from the burden of the crime on the first son of Adam for he was the first to start the Sunnah (i.e.tradition) of murdering." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H552] Did the son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) introduce an evil Sunnah or an evil innovation? Note the words of Hadith of Bukhari use word Sunnah hence natural answer would be evil Sunnah. But if you consider the fact that murder had no precedent prior to his killing his brother than he introduced an innovation. How ever Salafi/Wahhabi plays the game of hide [the truth], insha Allah, we will seek [the truth] what he has hidden behind the wall of distortions. What these Ahadith establish is; Ahadith of evil Sunnah/Biddah give meaning of innovation. In light this it would be logical and correct to conclude the following part of Hadith substantiates good innovation and tells of reward: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] 5.0 – Innovation Not Good, It By Definition Contradicts Islam: Shaykh writes regarding nature of innovation: “An innovation can never be good, because it is, by definition, something that contradicts with the religion.” Innovation by its very nature is not something that contradicts nature of Islam and proof of this are the words of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). He re-issued three day prophetic Sunnah of Taraweeh under leadership of a Qari for entire month of Ramadhan and stated it is an excellent innovation. Further more following Hadith itself establishes goodness of innovated Sunnah and reward for initiating and acting on it:“He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And by nature innovation is act/custom which is initiated and than followed by others. The Hadith states precisely; the initiator and the enactor of good Sunnah will equally earn reward. Indicating they are to be rewarded for innovating a good Sunnah into Islam. 6.0 – Innovation Is Something Which Prophet And Companions Didn’t Do: Shaykh wrote: “An innovation is something that neither the Prophet (peace be upon him) did nor the people who followed him.” If one takes this defintion of innovation to be authentic than question begs to be asked; did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) or his companions compiled Sahih of Imam Bukhar, or of Imam Muslim, or Jami at-Tirmadhi, Sunan Abu Dawood? When the obvious answer is in negative than they are innovations. Or did the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave lessons on these books of Ahadith and formulated the entire science of Hadith? When the obvious answer is in negative than these acts are innovations. And Shaykh himself wrote: “An innovation can never be good, because it is, by definition, something that contradicts with the religion.” This leads to conclusion books of Ahadith and science of Hadith are not good and they contradict religion of Islam. Well do they really contradict the religion of Islam? In reality these sources are foundation for understanding Islam. When a definition of innovation demonises something on which Islam depends and proper understanding of Quran depends than how can it be correct? This demonstrates incapatitibility of this principle of innovation with Islamic teachings and therefore it is invalid. 7.1 – Innovation Is Observance of Mawlid, Isra Wal Miraj: If all the words of Shaykh are taken literally without subjecting them to taweel than the following words of Shaykh are nothing but stupidity of elite calibre: “Therefore, innovations would include observing the celebration of the Prophet’s birthday or engaging in special observances on the occasion of his night journey and ascension (al-isrâ’ wa al-mi`râj). May Allah guide us all.” According to literal reading of his definition of innovation, (i) “… because the word innovation (bid`ah) in Islamic discourse means to introduce into the religion something that is alien to it.” (ii) “An innovation can never be good, because it is, by definition, something that contradicts with the religion.” (iii) “An innovation is something that neither the Prophet (peace be upon him) did nor the people who followed him.” Commemorating Mawlid is not alien to Islam because the idea and the practices performed it it are all in accordance with teaching of Islam. Neither does Mawlid contradict any aspect of Islam because it is composed of prophetic Sunnahs, acts of worship, charity, spreading of knowledge, and encouraging good and forbidding evil. Lastly Shaykh defines, innovation to be anything which is not prophetic Sunnah or Sunnah of companions. Yet this defintion of innovation is basless. According to Shaykh for anything not to be innovation it must be either prophetic Sunnah or Sunnah of his companions. If permissibility required that a practice to be prophetic Sunnah or Sunnah of companions than would Sahih Al Bukhari be an innovation? If compiling of it is not Prophetic Sunnah nor learning religion from it is prophetic Sunnah, and nor of his companions, should we than deduce it is innovation just because its not Sunnah? Shaykh should know; permissibility of a practice, or impermissibility of a practice, does not depend on it being prophetic or Sunnah of his companions. Permissibility is judged if a act accords with prophetic teachings indirectly. If it agrees with spirit of Islam. Celebration of Mawlid of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is absolutely in agreement with prophetic teaching. 7.2 – Methodology Of Hadhrat Ibn Abbas Against Khawarij: Khawarij fighting against Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed there is no judgment except of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And on this ground they stated, Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and those who agreed with arbitration between him and Hadhrat Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) have committed Shirk/Kufr. Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) during debate with Khawarij reasoned with them employing: "O you who have believed, do not kill game while you are in the state of ihram. And whoever of you kills it intentionally - the penalty is an equivlent from sacrificial animals to what he killed, judged by two just men among you as an offering (to Allah ) delivered to the Ka'bah, …” [Ref: 5:95] Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) reasoned with them to convince them that arbitration between companions was acceptable:“And it is from the judgment of Allah that He delegated men to judge in this matter. If Allah willed, He could have judged in this matter but He allowed men to judge. I ask you by Allah, is it better thatmen judge in something regarding reconciliation in disputes and in preventing bloodshed or regarding the hunting of a rabbit? They said ,“Of course, this is better.” [Ref: The Great Debate Of Ibn Abbas With The Khawarij. Sourced from AlSilsilah Al Sahihah Vol5, Page 12/13, Trans by Abbas Abu Yahya, Page 5/6.] He also quoted the following verse: "And if you fear dissension between the two, send an arbitrator from his people and an arbitrator from her people. If they both desire reconciliation, Allah will cause it between them. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Acquainted (with all things)." [Ref: 4:35] And using this verse he reasoned with them in following verse: "Are not men judging to reconcile disputes and [judging for sake of] the prevention of bloodshed better than men judging regarding the private parts of a woman? Have we finsihed with this point" They replied, "Yes!" [Ref: The Great Debate Of Ibn Abbas With The Khawarij. Sourced from AlSilsilah Al Sahihah Vol5, Page 12/13, Trans by Abbas Abu Yahya, Page 6.] Eventually party of Khawarij realised their error and repented after having their three points being satisfactorily answered. And among these poins was their position, no judgment except of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), being refuted. 7.3 - Methodology Of Ibn Abbas: From this discussion it is possible to understand the principle on which Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) solved matters which are not dealt in Quran/Sunnah. In the context of debate, a rightly guided Khalifah Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) solving dispute with Hadhrat Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) via arbitration and appointing judges. And a there was no explicit evidence in Quran/Sunnah suggesting that a Khalifah should should/can appoint arbitors. The manner in which Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) demonstrates Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had principle, when there is no explicit evidence on y matter and y is greater than what is explicitly stated in Quran/Sunnah, than y is permissible. In this case he substantiated legality of creation being judges and arbitors for a dispute between between two parties of Muslims. 7.4 – Mawlid Festivities Within Bounds Of Shari’ah Are Permissible: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) narrated the story of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam): "Said Jesus, the son of Mary, "O Allah , our Lord, send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven to be for us a festival for the first of us and the last of us and a sign from You. And provide for us, and You are the best of providers." [Ref: 5:114] On the request of followers Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for table of food from paradise and his request was accepted and his followers celebrate this day as Eid. Using the principle of Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu), when there is no explicit evidence on y matter and y is greater than what is explicitly stated in Quran/Sunnah, than y is permissible, we can establish legality celebrating/commemorating birthday of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If occasion pf receiving table full of food was such a joyous occasion that it is celebrated as a Eid by the followers of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) than by comparision the birth of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is greater reason for joy and happiness. And therefore celebrate/commemoration of his birthday as a Eid is of greater merit than celebrating Eid for receiving food of table from paradise. And celebration/commemoration of lesser by default establishes celebration/commemoration of what is greater than it. In this case the Mawlid of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). A party of the worst in the creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) agreed with Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) yet another one of these worst ones from Najd will not agree with his methodology, nor with Muslims. 7.5 - Mawlid Is Not [Reprehensible] Innovation: Mawlid is a good Sunnah introduced in Islam for which there is reward for the one who innovated it and those who follow it: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] It is innovation in the sense that it originated as a festivity after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). From perspective of Shari’ah commemorating/celebrating Mawlid of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is a good innovated Sunnah for which there is reward and who teaches contrary to it is Iblees incarnate. Shaykh Abdur Rahman Al Ajlan’s Answer The Question: Q: “I know that practices like celebrating the Prophet's birthday and honoring the 27th of Rajab are innovations. However, there is a group of people who are arguing that they are good innovations and that such practices can be defended by the following hadîth: "Whoever starts in Islam a good practice (sunnah), he gets the reward of it and the reward of all those that act on it. And whosoever starts in Islam an evil practice (sunnah), he gets the evil of it and the evil of all those that act on it." A2: “[…][3] A Muslim is obligated to preserve and uphold the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and to eschew innovations. The meaning of “good Sunnah” in this hadîth – and Allah knows best – is to renew a Sunnah of our Prophet (peace be upon him) that has disappeared, been forgotten, or has become neglected. It does not mean to initiate a new practice that has no basis in Islamic teachings. That would be an innovation. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours that is not part of it, then it will be rejected.” [Sahîh al-Bukhârî and Sahîh Muslim] And Allah knows best.” Answered by: Sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Ajlan. A.0 – Prophet Taught Concept Of Ijtihad To Address Innovated Matters: Emphasis is upon following the Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) yet he taught concept of Ijtihad to deal with innovated matters. If all innovations were by default rejected/evil and sinful than there was no reason for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to impart teachings which enable the Muslims to carry out Ijtihad in light of Quran/Ahadith to see if an innovated matters is within bounds of Shari’ah. Anyone with ounce worth Deen sense will acknowledge not all innovations by default are to be rejected and avoided. Otherwise the concept of Ijtihad taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would be utterly useless and contradictory. It is recorded in Hadith that Muadh Ibn Jabal was asked by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “How will you judge when the occasion of deciding a case arises? He replied: I shall judge in accordance with Allah's Book. He asked: (What will you do) if you do not find any guidance in Allah's Book? He replied: (I shall act) in accordance with the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah.” The next question indicates, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is asking about matters which are innovations and have no clear/emphatic discussion in Quran or Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “He asked: (What will you do) if you do not find any guidance in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah and in Allah's Book? He replied: I shall do my best to form an opinion and I shall spare no effort. The Messenger of Allah then patted him on the breast and said: Praise be to Allah Who has helped the messenger of the Messenger of Allah to find something which pleases the Messenger of Allah.” [Ref Abu Dawood, B, H3585] This establish Ijtihad sometimes is carried on matters which have not been directly/explicitly addressed in Quran or Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And these matters have to be innovations if they were not innovations than judgment regarding them would be found in Quran/Ahadith. And matters which have not been adressed in Quran/Ahadith they are in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as the Muslim Ummah collectively judges them to be: And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah. And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Alhasil, Ijtihadi matters by their nature are innovative and require judgment of a qualified expert and even though these matters maybe innovated/innovations they are not by default [reprehensible] innovations and misguidance. If it was the case than there would be no need for any judgment. Any innovated matter would be misguiding innovation and rejected. A.1 – Muslims Is Obliged To Uphold Sunnah And Avoid Innovations: Indeed a Muslim is obligated to perserve the Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not instruct to avoid all types of innovations. On the contrary he told of reward for goods Sunnahs which are innovated in Islam. And evidence for this position is the following quoted Hadith: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits a detailed explaination of Hadith will follow in forth coming sections. B.0 – Good Sunnah Refers To Reviving Forgotten/Neglected Prophetic Sunnahs: Shaykh wrote: “The meaning of “good Sunnah” in this hadîth – and Allah knows best – is to renew a Sunnah of our Prophet (peace be upon him) that has disappeared, been forgotten, or has become neglected.” Contextually if one reads the Hadith the following rule does not fit into what Shaykh said: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Contextually, a group of poor Muslims came to Masjid Nabvi and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) encouraged the companions to give them charity but the companions were reluctant to do so but eventually a companion initiated it and the rest followed: “Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woollen clothes came to Allah's Messenger He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] In light of this information it is foolish to direct the words of good Sunnah toward reviving forgotten/neglected Sunnahs because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had encouraged them to give Sadaqah (i.e. optional charity) moments before his anger appeared on his face. No sane individual would purpose such distortion of Hadith because the implications of this are; the distorter of Hadith believes, the best of nation (i.e. companions), had the memory capacity of less than an ant, and therefore had forgotten exhortion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in an instant. B.1 – Understanding First Principle In Light Of Second Principle: Shaykh wrote: “It does not mean to initiate a new practice that has no basis in Islamic teachings. That would be an innovation.” Apart from the obvious, Shaykh indirectly also is implying if good Sunnah was initiating a new practice in Islam which had no basis that would be an innovation. Please bare this in mind because it will help us to determine of good Sunnah is innovation or reviving forgotten/neglected prophetic Sunnahs. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And this part is explained by incident of son of Prophet Adam murdering his brother. Hadith states he was the first one to start the Sunnah of murdering and he will be held responsible for every murder committed unjustly on earth: “Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "Whenever a person is murdered unjustly, there is a share from the burden of the crime on the first son of Adam for he was the first to start the Sunnah (i.e.tradition) of murdering." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H552] Point to note is; an innovation is which does not have precedent in Islam and this is agreed by Shaykh also: “It does not mean to initiate a new practice that has no basis in Islamic teachings. That would be an innovation.” And murder did not have a precedent before son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) killed his brother, therefore he introduced an innovation, something which did not exist prior to the event. Alhasil both Ahadith compliment each other and establish clear understanding that son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) introduced an evil Sunnah/Biddah in Islam and he will be responsible for each and ever murder committed unjustly. And this is also supported with following Hadith: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] When we know the words of Hadith about evil Sunnah are regarding a Sunnah/Biddah which does not already exist in Islam and with which Shaykh agrees: “It does not mean to initiate a new practice that has no basis in Islamic teachings. That would be an innovation.” Than naturally, just as word evil Sunnah mean evil Biddah, the words of good Sunnah mean good Biddah, and to deny it would be rebellion against prophetic guidance: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] B.2A – Innovated Matter Not From Allah And RasoolAllah Is Rejected: Shaykh quotes the Hadith: “Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours that is not part of it, then it will be rejected.” It is stated “A'isha reported Allah's Messenger as saying: "If anyone innovates in our matter something which does not belong to it, [than that matter] will be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266] This Hadith is explained by another Hadith in which the rejected matter is mentioned to be any action which is not of prophetic Sunnah: “A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: “He who did any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf, that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] In other words, any innovated action [for which reward is believed] is to be rejected if it is not prophetic Sunnah and Sunnah of his companions. And this explains the following Hadith: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations [composed of non-prophetic non-companion Sunnahs]; and every [such] innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Alhasil any/every innovation which is composed of innovated acts of worship, charity, goodness, and these innovated acts of worship, charity, goodness are not prophetic Sunnahs, or are not Sunnahs of his companions, than ever/any such innovation misguidance and is to be rejected on judgment by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and should be rejected by Muslim Ummah. B.2B – The Innovation Of Commemorating Mawlid Of RasoolAllah: In the light of above it should be apparent that Mawlid of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not an innovation which is composed of actions which are alien to Islam. In fact the idea of commemorating/celebrating Mawlid is prophetic Sunnah and it is established from the following Hadith: “The tradition mentioned above has also been transmitted by Abu Qatadah through a different chain of narrators. This version add: He said: Messenger of Allah, tell me about keeping fast on Monday and Thursday. He said: On it I was born, and on it the Qur'an was first revealed to me.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B13, H2420] “Abu Qatada Ansari reported that Allah's Massenger was asked about fasting on Monday, whereupon he said: It is (the day) when I was born and revelation was sent down to me.” [Ref: Muslim, B6, H2606] The idea of commemorating/celebrating Mawlid is indeed prophetic Sunnah and none but Iblees would reject it. The methodology which the Ahlus Sunnah engage in it is innovated and it cannot be rejected because it is composed of engaging in all that Islam as deemed good and instructed. Just as the idea of cleaning teeth is prophetic Sunnah. And the prophetic Sunnah for cleaning teeth is Miswak but if anyone cleans teeth with Colgate tooth paste and tooth brush it does not incur any blame. Instead such a person will not earn the reward for the Sunnah of using Miswak but will earn reward for engaging in the idea and action of cleaning teeth. Similarly if one does not fast on Monday but commemorate/celebrate Mawlid every year, and performs other acts of worship, charity, recites Quran, than he will miss the reward for acting on Sunnah but he still will be rewarded for engaging in the idea and actions of worship, charity – as established from the following Hadith: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] B.2C – Issue Of Permissibility And Impermissibility: The permissibility of a non-prophetic innovated Sunnah does not depend upon; the name of non-prophetic innovated Sunnah, the methodology of non-prophetic innovated Sunnah, timing to engage in non-prophetic innovated Sunnah, all be established clearly/explicitly from the prophetic teaching. Rather the permissibility depends upon what the innovated Sunnah is composed of. If it is composed of various prophetic Sunnahs found in Quran/Ahadith than it is permissible. But it does not become a prophetic Sunnah even if it was composed of his Sunnahs. The impermissibility of an non-prophetic innovated Sunnah does not depend upon it being a non-prophetic innovated Sunnah. Rather it is based and judged on if it is composed of all that is prohibited. B.3 - Shaykh Al-Qarni And Al-Ajlan Contradict Each Other: Al Qarni believes good Sunnah is to take charge in doing something good something which complies with Islamic teaching: “This is talking about the person who takes the initiative to do something that complies with Islamic teachings. Whoever does this will be engaging in a good Sunnah.” Al-Ajlan is of opinion, good Sunnah, is reviving/reinvegurating prophetic Sunnahs which have been neglected, or forgotten: “The meaning of “good Sunnah” in this hadîth (and Allah knows best) is to renew a Sunnah of our Prophet (peace be upon him) that has disappeared, been forgotten, or has become neglected.” Both cannot be right and in this case both maybe not be right at all. They hold to contradictory positions. If they had known the truth and had properly understood the Hadith there would have been agreement in their understandings. Conclusion: It has been established from clear texts of Hadith; whoever intrdouces good Sunnah in Islam, does not refer to prophetic Sunnahs, nor does it refer to reinvigurating forgotten or neglected prophetic Sunnahs. Instead the Hadith refers to those Sunnahs which are not already part of Islam. And if the innovated Sunnah is good by its nature, and that’s to say; it is composed of prophetic Sunnahs, than it earns reward for the initiator and its actor. And nature of innovation is that it does not exist but when it originates it is followed by others. In this sense, whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, does refer to good innovation, because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has foretold one who introduces and those who follow the newly introduced good Sunnah. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “Jarîr narrates: Some desert Arabs clad in woolen clothes came to the Prophet (peace be upon him). He saw them in a sad plight as they had been in dire need. He exhorted the people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansâr came with a purse full of silver. Then another person came forth and then others followed suit until signs of happiness could be seen on his face. Thereupon the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever starts in Islam a good practice (sunnah hasanah) and is emulated by others in doing so will get the reward of it and the reward of all those who act upon it without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And whosoever starts in Islam an evil practice (sunnah sayyi’ah) and is emulated by others will bear the sin of it and the sin of all those who act on it without their burden being diminished in the least.” [Sahîh Muslim,1017] - [2] I am absolutely certain that Shaykh intended the latter of the two. Remember I am ex-Salafi and I know inner workings and the mind set of people now I am refuting. I have let go believing in Salafism but have not let go of their methodology. I have kept in touch with my ex-Salafism. It is an evil that I have had to maintain so I have better grasp of what these enemies of Islam are saying. And alhamdu lillah it also allows me to pre-empt any counter arguments. - [3] “The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever starts in Islam a good practice (sunnah hasanah) and is emulated by others in doing so will get the reward of it and the reward of all those who act upon it without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And whosoever starts in Islam an evil practice (sunnah sayyi’ah) and is emulated by others will bear the sin of it and the sin of all those who act on it without their burden being diminished in the least.” [Sahîh Muslim, 1017]

Well we don't need to agree with him on anything. When an Aalim starts to work against the Maslak of Ahle Sunnat than you should oppose him. Ahle Sunnat ka dahira itna tang nahin kay sirf ginti kay das mauvli is mein rahen. Sirf hamaray dill tang hen. Nah mein Tahir Ul Qadri kay gumrahi walay nazriyat say raazi hoon aur nah ussay Ahle Sunnat say kharij samajta hoon. Nah mein Dawat e Islami ki vhs video aur digital video say raazi hoon aur nah innay ahle sunnat say kharij samajta hoon. Aur mein ba-zaat e khud Sayyidi Taajush Shariah ka mureed hoon, aur un kay mowaqif kay Dawat e Islami walay ahle Sunnat say kharij hen, say raazi nahin hoon. Maulvi Abdul Qadir Qadri Jilani say mein sakht nafrat karta hoon is kay kartooton ki waja say magar mein is ko chand ek issues ki waja say Ahle Sunnat say kharij nahin manta. Jazbat mein agar kohi aur chawal maar jahoon toh woh aur baat heh. Hazrat Aysha (radiallah ta'ala anha) ka mowaqif joh deed e illahi par heh, aur Hazrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta'ala anhu) ka joh heh, bilqul contradictory hen magar ham donoon kay Ahle Sunnat honay say kharij honay ka nazria nahin rakhtay. Mera kehnay ka matlab yeh huwa jab taq kohi Ahle Sunnat kay asool o zawabat kay teht reh kar kohi es'si baat kehta heh joh jamhoor e Ahle Sunnat kay khilaf ho, ussay chor deeya jahay, nah kay Maulvi kay peechay par kar us'see waqt dam leeya jahay jab taq woh alal ilaan Kafir honay ka ilaan nah kar deh. In ikhtilafat aur Maulviyoon ki agay peechay ki chavlen agay peechay publicise mat keeya keren. Is say ikhtilaf aur fasaad barta heh aur nuqsaan Ahle Sunnat ka hee hoga. Chotay motay ikhtilafat ki bina par kohi bi Ahle Sunnat say kharij nahin. Us'see waqt ahle Sunnat say kharij heh jab woh Ahle Sunnat kay tamam ya bot say asool o zawabat ko chor deh. Eka duka gumrahi walay nazrat ko khata tehqeeq par mehmool karna chahyeh. Hamaray chaar Imam, in kay apas mein kesay ikhtilaf hen, magar sab kay mutaliq yahi nazria heh kay khata ijtihadi huwi aur sab qabil e dua o salam o dua maghfirat hen. Agar ham thora dil bara karen toh yahi asool Tahir Ul Qadri, waghera ki taraf mora ja sakta heh. Magar insaan ki koshish yahi heh kay logh ussi kay nazriyeh ko qubul karen aur joh khilaf heh ussay ghalat janay. Both kam Ulamah esay hen jin par kohi ilzam nah aata ho. [Muj par abhi Sullah qulliat ka bi ahay ga.] Abh agar ham sab ko istera ilzam denay lagay toh phir shahid kohi ek bi khalis Sunni nah ho. Is tera kay maslay joh hen un ko nah pehlahen, joh fitna jis maulvi say uthay, us par itni khamoshi ikhtiyar karen kay ussi kay saath mar jahay. Ghaliban ek Hadith mein para thah, kay jab Musalmanoon mein kissi maslay par ikhtilaf ho ya Quran ki kissi ayaat ki tafsir mein ikhtilaf ho, toh uss behas ko chor dena chahyeh. Keun kay ikhtilaf baray ga aur chornay say khatam hoga.

Shaykh Syed Mukhtar Naeemi Ahle Sunnat kay Aalim hen. Aur Syed Shah Turab Al Haq Qadri (rahimullah alayhi ta'ala) say unneh Hadith ki ijazat heh. Raha Shaykh Syed Mukhtar Naeemi ka nazria kay Amir e Dawat Islami Mawlana Ilyas Qadri Mujadid hen is mein kohi haqiqat nahin. Ghaliban yeh in ki muhabbat ka izhar heh.

Allamah Muhammad Imran Yazdani joh Sunni huway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04NIxTmKF_0

Saudi Arab kay petro dollar par is ka payt palta hoga. Jis ki waja say yeh jin khanziroon ka khata heh, uneeh kay tareek kar, yazeediat ga raha heh.

Introduction: (A) Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has taught introducing praiseworthy innovation into religion of Islam will earn reward for one who introduces a praiseworthy innovation and those who follow it. Similarly, one who introduces blameworthy innovation he will be sinful and those who follow it. Contrary to this belief, the anti-Muslim elements propagate every innovation is reprehensible even if it is composed of Islamicly sanctioned practices. Muslims employ evidence from Quran and Ahadith to establish the Islamic position but the opponents of Islam attempt to explain them away with excuses. This article is being dedicated to carefully examining the position of opponents of Islam and refuting such excuses with sound arguments. ( Consider this part two of an earlier article. In the earlier article Ibn Fawzan’s argument was based on the word ‘every’ of following phrase of Hadith: “… every innovation is misguidance …” The argument is that ‘every’ is inclusive of absolutely every type of innovation and exclusive of none, which has been responded to, here. This article responds to Ibn Fawzaan's unaddressed content. Part Two: Saalih Al Fawzaan’s Quote: “And there is not a proof for them that there is good innovation, except for the statement of Umar (radiallaahu 'anhu) regarding the Taraweeh prayer, "What a good innovation this is!" (i.e. نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ). […][1] And the statement of Umar (radiallaahu anhu), "What a good innovation", he intended the linguistic sense of word innovation, and not the religious usage of word innovation (i.e. al bida'atush Shar'iyyah). So whatever has an origin in the law, it returns to it (i.e. Islamic law) [therefore Taraweeh is not innovation in Shar’ri sense]. If it is said that it is an innovation, then it is an innovation in linguistic sense and not from perspective of Islamic law because the religious innovation is what does not have an origin in Islam for it to return to [Quran and Sunnah]. Indeed the Prophet (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) prayed Taraweeh with his Companions (radiallaahu anhum) nightly. And they (i.e. companions) had fear about appointment [of an Imam for Taraweeh]. The companions (radiallaahu anhum) continued praying in separate groups in the lifetime of the Prophet (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) and after his (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) passing, up until Umar Ibnul Khattaab united them behind one Imam [and they performed Taraweeh] like how they used to be behind the Prophet (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and therefore this is not an innovation in the Religion.” [Ref: Clarification Of Doubts Concerning Innovation. Originally taken from; Kitab at-Tawheed, author; Saalih al Fawzaan, page 107/110 Translation; Maaz Qureshi, Amendments; Muhammed Ali Razavi.] Four Points Raised By Ibn Fawzaan: i) There is no proof for concept of good innovation except the statement of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu).[2] ii) Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) saying excellent innovation is in linguistic meaning because there is evidence for Taraweeh from prophetic Sunnah. iii) If it is an innovation then it is an innovation in linguistic sense and not from Shar’ri perspective because Shar’ri innovation does not have origin in prophetic Sunnah for it to be supported by Quran and Ahadith. iv) Companions continued to perform Taraweeh [individually and as] small groups until Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) revived the prophetic Sunnah by unifying all behind a single Imam. Excellent Innovation Remark Is From Linguistic Perspective: He said it is linguistic innovation and to justify his position Ibn Fawzaan says: “… and not the religious usage of word innovation (i.e. al bida'atush Shar'iyyah). So whatever has an origin in the law, it returns to it (i.e. Islamic law).” When we all know Taraweeh has an origin in Shari’ah then how can Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) say it is excellent innovation even in linguistic sense? The answer, he introduced something which was not Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The prophetic Sunnah for Taraweeh was for three days and after which he stopped leading companions. Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is accredited with Taraweeh performed for entire month of Ramadhan under leadership a Qari who recites the entire Quran in Taraweeh prayers. These are the innovations on basis of which Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said Taraweeh is an excellent innovation. I ask; a judgment based on secular humanism is it binding upon a Muslim? The answer is obvious no because a judgment based on Quran and Hadith is it binding upon Muslim because it is part of Shari’ah. It is binding upon a Muslim because it is derived from Quran and Hadith hence judgment is of Shari’ah. Please bare this in mind for the next point. I ask; can a scholar judge something to be good or bad without judging it on basis of Shari’ah?[3] If a scholar cannot judge something to be good or bad without judging on basis of Shari’ah then how can statement Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) be good innovation in linguistic sense when it is apparent that he judged it based on Quran and prophetic teaching? His judgment was based on evidence of Shari’ah, hence his statement; Taraweeh is excellent innovation, is from perspective of Shari’ah. Therefore his statement; نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ , is valid proof of good Shar’ri innovation. Shar’ri Innovation Does Not Have Origin Of Prophetic Sunnah: Ibn Fawzaan writes Hadhrat Umar’s statement; excellent innovation, is: “… and not from perspective of Islamic law because the religious innovation is what does not have an origin in Islam…” If this is correct, then Taraweeh for entire month under leadership of an Imam and recitation of entire Quran in Taraweeh prayers is without evidence from prophetic Sunnah. Why is that not a Shar’ri innovation [from Islamic perspective, reprehensible innovation]? If you say, companions performed Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam throughout the life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence it is not Shar’ri innovation. I say, companions performed Taraweeh in small groups under leadership of Imams because Hadith records there were many small groups being led by Imams: “… Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abd al-Qari said, "I went out with Umar ibn alKhattab in Ramadhan to the mosque and the people there were spread out in groups. Some men were praying by themselves, whilst others were praying in small groups.” [Ref: Muwatta Malik, B6, H3] “… the people praying in different groups. A man praying on his own, or a man praying [by leading as an Imam] with a little group behind him.” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] The prophetic Sunnah is to collect all people in the Masjid under one Imam and this is even accepted by Ibn Fawzaan: “… and after his (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) passing, up until Umar Ibnul Khattaab united them behind one Imam [and they performed Taraweeh] like how they used to be behind the Prophet (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) …” The companions performing Taraweeh in small groups, after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) abandoned it, itself is an innovation, which became tacitly approved prophetic Sunnah because he did not prohibit it, even after knowing it. Hence Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) not only introduced an innovation he also removed tacitly approved prophetic Sunnah by unifying the people of Masjid under one Imam. Not only performing Taraweeh for entire month of Ramadhan is without of prophetic Sunnah. It also eliminates a tacitly approved prophetic Sunnahs, such as performing Taraweeh in small groups under an Imam and individually.[4] Not finished just yet, Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) remarked regarding his innovation: “On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good."[5] Considering these points Taraweeh is Shar’ri innovation according Khariji Shaikh’s definition of innovation and methodology. These Are Matters Of Which There Is Asal In Shari’ah: Readers must have noted Ibn Fawzaan has repeatedly stated, matters which have origin in Shari’ah are not innovation in legal (i.e. shar’ri) sense. Asal (i.e. origin, foundation) for a matter which has not been explicitly stated in Quran or established from prophetic Sunnah is always implicit/indirect evidence. Indeed matters which have Asal from Shari’ah are not legal/reprehensible innovations rather they are part of religion as praiseworthy innovations. We the Muslims agree there is Asal for Taraweeh prayers but the question is; whatever that has Asal in religion is it prophetic Sunnah? If yes then; is performing Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam for entire month of Ramadhan and reciting entire Quran or more, part of prophetic Sunnah? If you say yes, you have lied because prophetic Sunnah is of three days.[6] If you say; no, then is that innovation or not? Shar’ri innovation is without precedent in Shari’ah and there is no precedent for Taraweeh of entire month under leadership of an Imam hence it is innovation. If you say it is innovation but in linguistic sense. How can something which has origin in religion be innovation in linguistic sense? Do you not see a practice which has origin in religion is reward worthy act because it is praiseworthy practice/innovation, according to religion, and in religion, and it is not compulsory, nor a prophetic Sunnah? Do you not see how the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and this Muslims, the Iblis as clouded your judgment? We thank Allah for the guidance. Putting The Issue Into Perspective For Readers: Servant has only employed the entire blade of Salafi sword on the issue of Taraweeh and Ibn Fawzaan chose to tame his regular Salafism regarding this aspect. The only way out of this difficulty is the methodology of Ahlul Islam otherwise you will limit your movements by further entangling yourself. Bottom line is, according to Salafi methodology, Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is guilty of introducing a Shar’ri innovation according to Salafi definition and methodology. Ibn Fawzaan does not see the action of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in such light because he wishes to make excuse for Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). He is applying some of the principles and suspending those with which he chooses to fight against Muslims. What is required from Ibn Fawzaan and his Salafi clan is to establish full Ramadhan month Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam or admit it is Shar’ri innovation according to their own definition and methodology. One, who does confess to it being Shar’ri innovation as per definition of Ibn Fawzaan, is ruined. One, who refuses to do so, is insane and intellectually challenged. The correct course is to re-think the definition of innovation and judge the matter afresh. Companions Continued To Perform Taraweeh After It Was Abandoned: It is established from Ahadith that companions continued to perform Taraweeh in small groups lead by Imams as well as individually. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not discourage them hence the practice became a tacitly approved prophetic Sunnah. It should be pointed out this is not proof of performing Taraweeh, under leadership of a single Imam, for the entire month of Ramadhan, in a Masjid, because the participants were under numerous Imams in same Masjid. Part Three: Saalih Fawzaan’s Quote: “And they [the Muslims] also say, 'Verily there were things invented and they were not objected to by the Salaf, like the collection of the Qur`an in one book, and the writing of the Hadeeth, and recording them.' So the answer to these is; these are matters which have an origin in the law (i.e. Shar), so they are not newly invented [hence not innovation]. So the collecting of the Qur`an in one book has origin in the law to return to, because the Prophet (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) had commanded the recording of the Qur`an, but it was written scattered so the Companions collected it into one book for its protection. And the writing of the Hadeeth also has an origin for it in the Law. Indeed the Prophet (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) commanded the writing of some hadeeths for some of his Companions (radiallaahu anhu), so as to study that from them. And there was warning against writing them on regular paper according to his (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) advice fearing that they would be confused as text of the Qur`an and with that which was not from them. So when the Prophet (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) passed away, this warning was done away with - because the Qur`an was completed, and vowelized before his (sallaahu alayhi wa sallam) passing. So the Muslims recorded the hadeeth after that, preserving it from destruction.” [Ref: Clarification Of Doubts Concerning Innovation. Originally taken from; Kitab at-Tawheed, author; Saalih al Fawzaan, page 107/110 Translation; Maaz Qureshi, Amendments; Muhammed Ali Razavi.] Two Fundamental Points Made By Ibn Fawzaan: i) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) commanded the recording of Quran, so the collection of Quran in one book format has origin in prophetic Sunnah. ii) He also instructed some companions to record Ahadith. The Issue Of Writing Word Of Revelation: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indeed instructed the companions to record the Quran. Question based on his instruction of writing the revelation down is; is it correct to believe compiling the Quran into a single book is a prophetic Sunnah? So what is it if it is not prophetic Sunnah – an innovation? It is established and none disputed fact that collection of Quran in one book is something which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not do. And evidence of this claim is here: “Therefore I consider it advisable that you should have the Qur'an collected.' I [Abu Bakr] said: How dare I do something which Allah's Messenger did not do? Umar said: هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ (i.e. By Allah, it is good).” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] Innovation means something which does not have precedent in linguistic sense and in Shar’ri sense it means something which does not have precedent in Quran or Sunnah. According to Lughvi and Shar’ri meaning of innovation it is clear that collecting Quran into single book is without precedent hence from technical perspective it is an innovation. And according to Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) it should be collected as a single book because it is something good and evidence this is as follows: “Therefore I consider it advisable that you should have the Qur'an collected.' I [Abu Bakr] said: How dare I do something which Allah's Messenger did not do? Umar said: هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ (i.e. By Allah, it is good).” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] He used the word Khayr because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had used the word Khayr in the following Hadith: “Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed, then for him is a reward, and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was reminding of prophetic regarding reward for one who starts good Sunnah. Another Hadith explains the quoted Hadith in following words: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] In other words one who introduces Sunnah Khayri/Hasanah in Islam for him and those who follow the innovation introduced in Islam will all receive equal reward. So indeed Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced into Islam an excellent innovation and there is reward for him and those who act upon it. The Issue Of Collecting Ahadith In Books: It is true that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed his words to be recorded. Some companions compiled for themselves a small book but this is no proof for compiling books of Ahadith and science of Hadith which we recognize. Scholars developed science of narrators via Ijtihad and there was no explicit instruction from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Bukhari, Muslim, and all other collections of Ahadith are innovations which had no explicit sanction from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). From linguistic meaning of innovation, all books of Ahadith known to us and all related sciences are innovations but these collections of Ahadith are not innovations in legal sense [from perspective of Salafi definition]. In Islamic perspective these are innovations from legal perspective but praiseworthy innovations and there is reward for such innovations according to following Hadith: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Anyone who claims the collection of books of Ahadith and the science related to Hadith is not innovation is either mentally challenged or foolish. Conclusion: We have established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not perform Tarawih for entire month of Ramadhan and he did not appoint an Imam in his life time to lead companions in Tarawih prayers. It was Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) who instructed the Tarawih to be performed under leadership of a single Imam for entire month of Ramadhan and he deemed his innovation as an excellent innovation. Also Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is also accredited with inspiring compilation of Quran in a single book and this too was an innovation which he termed as [Sunnah] Khayr (i.e. good). Compilation of Bukhari, Muslim and other books of Ahadith are innovations and are good innovations. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had foretold of reward for one who introduces into Islam something good which was not already part of it and for those who follow the newly introduced practice. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] The following material was part of the quote and it was removed: “And they also say, 'Verily there were things invented and they were not objected to by the Salaf, like the collection of the Qur`an in one book, and the writing of the Hadeeth, and recording them.' So the answer to these is; these are matters which have an origin in the law (i.e. Shar), so they are not newly invented.” It was inserted in the beginning of part three for two reasons, i) one it interrupted the flow of discussion regarding Taraweeh and, ii) it fitted in the new place due to the subject being discussed in both parts. - [2] Even though Ibn Fawzaan says Muslims have no proof for good innovation except statement of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). His actual position is as follows: The statement of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in which he states Taraweeh is excellent innovation is in linguistic meaning and therefore there is no proof for concept of good innovation. Also note, this point has already been addressed in this article. - [3] “Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people but fear Me and do not exchange My verses for a small price. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers.” [Ref: 5:44] It is advised that readers check the commentaries of classical scholar for proper understanding of verse. Scholars have stated one who does not judge by what Allah revealed he is Muslim and is guilty of minor act of disbelief, which is major sin. - [4] The Salafis argue, every innovation eliminates Sunnah. They argue, commemorating Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) birthday is innovation because commemorated it by fasting on every Monday, you do it your way hence you eliminated a Sunnah. Here with regards to Taraweeh prayer same yardstick was used to judge Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) action. Abandon the yardstick and adopt proper methodology or judge with it, fairly and without bias. If a Salafi was to judge using his methodology, and judge fairly and without bias, then he would come to understanding; Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced what Ibn Fawzaan termed Shar’ri innovation. As a Muslims, we believe innovation only eliminates prophetic Sunnah when the proponent of an innovation promotes it as an alternative prophetic Sunnah to what actual is prophetic Sunnah. Result of this is, people adopt innovation [which has been disguised as prophetic Sunnah] thus leaving the actual prophetic Sunnah. Hence the argument that commemorating Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) eliminates a prophetic Sunnah is bereft of reason. In short, the Salafi style reasoning was chucked in just for Salafi flavoring against Salafi Shaikh. It has no substance according to Islamic methodology because of mentioned underlined reason and Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not guilty of eliminating tacitly approved prophetic Sunnahs. - [5] Ref: “Related by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal ilas-Sunan (no.191) and also Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (p.24). “Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun!” - [6] Note, when they are enquired is Taraweeh a prophetic Sunnah? They reply Taraweeh is prophetic Sunnah. Ibn Fawzaan did not explicitly say; performing Taraweeh for entire month of Ramadhan under leadership of a Qari is prophetic Sunnah. The reason behind this is Ibn Fawzaan and his clan is fully aware; Taraweeh prayer is prophetic Sunnah of three days only. On the fourth day Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not return to lead the companions for Taraweeh prayers. They will not say Taraweeh for entire month of Ramadhan is prophetic Sunnah because that is clearly invalid position. They are familiar with the fact that Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) practiced Ijtihad and instructed performing of Taraweeh under single Imam for entire month. Yet Ibn Fawzaan and his minions will not address actual issue of dispute. When they are asked; is Taraweeh is prophetic Sunnah or innovation? They answer the question from literalist perspective but the questioner is enquiring about the disputed aspect. No sane and educated Muslim doubts Taraweeh being prophetic Sunnah. The dispute is on the issue of performing Taraweeh under leadership of single Imam for entire month of Ramadhan. Yet they do not address the disputed issue when they are questioned. Instead they say; Taraweeh is prophetic Sunnah. The result of this ambiguity is the questioner is misled to believe the disputed aspect which he questioned about is prophetic Sunnah. We lay no blame upon Ibn Fawzaan or upon his clan because the questioners ask in general terms without precisely specifying what the question is about. The questioners should ask; is performing of Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam, for entire month of Ramadhan, reciting entire Quran or more, a prophetic Sunnah? Note, the last three words are important, if the question at the end is phrased as; “… reciting entire Quran or more, an innovation?” then they will say no it is not an innovation because their definition of innovation is different from Islamic definition. So you must ask, as it was originally stated. If you ask the question as instructed, the answer will be negative combined with excuses why it was performed and you should disregard them. Simply ask; if performing of Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam, for entire month of Ramadhan, reciting entire Quran or more is not a prophetic Sunnah then what is it? If there is an ounce of truth in the person he will agree it is an innovation and he will combine his admission with excuses, so disregard them. Judge between his excuses and Islamic position, with what Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] There is reward for Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) for introducing a praiseworthy innovation/practice of Taraweeh for entire month of Ramadhan under leadership of an Imam and the reward is for those who follow his footsteps and those who followed their footsteps.

Allah ta'ala Allama Ashraf Sialvi rahimullah kay darjat buland karay unoon nay Deobandiat kay kaffan mein Islam ka keel khoob gara.

Introduction: While carrying out research to see what the opponents fo Islam have stated on Hadith, whatever Muslims collectively view as good/evil it is also good/evil in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).A knowledgeable brother suggested an article be dedicated to possible misunderstanding which may arise due to the text of Hadith. He said the foolish opponents of Islam will attempt to discredit the authenticity. Brother stated they might attempt to reason that Muslims now days consider it acceptable to view TV programs in which ghayr-mehram women/men dress in provocative clothing. Is this now also acceptable in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And ofcourse the implications would be that it would not be acceptable hence the Hadith cannot be authentic. Or they may argue that Hadith is valid proof for Shar’ri matters but may argue; just as view of people does not change the reality of something even if the people view it as good/evil, the innovations do not become good in Islam even if the people view them to be good nor they will become good in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This was a very good point raised by my dear brother and it should be addressed. Hadith Of What Muslims View As Good/Evil: “Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud said, “Verily, Allah looked at the hearts of the servants and He found that the heart of Muhammad, was the best among them, so He choose him for Himself and He sent him with His message. Then He looked at the hearts of His servants after Muhammad, and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah. And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] The Prophetic Guidance With Regards To Rejected Innovations: It is recorded in Sahih of Imam Bukhari (rahimullah): “Narrated Aisha: “Allah's Messenger said: "One who innovates something in this matter of ours that is not of it, will have it rejected.” [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] Same is reported in another Hadith: “Aisha reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: If any one introduces into this affair of ours anything which does not belong to it, it is rejected.” Hadith continues: “Ibn `Isa said: The Prophet said: If anyone practices any action in a way other than our practice, it is rejected.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4589] In another Hadith it is stated: “All of them could be combined in one house; and then said: 'A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: He who acted any action not from our affair that is rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] Rejection is due to the fact that they are not good innovations rather they would be evil innovations: “And the most evil affairs are the [erroneous] innovations; and every [erroneous] innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] These erroneous innovations are which do not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): "And whoever introduces an erroneous Biddah with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] An erroneous innovative action/belief will be rejected because it did not conform to prophetic guidance. And the blame of sin of adhering to erroneous innovations/precedents is upon the individual who initiated the sinful innovation/precedent in Islam and its actor: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The Judgment Regarding Issue: One who deems the propheticly and Quranicly prohibited to be good, he has innovated something rejected into matter of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And has deemed something to be good which was not good in religion of Islam. Such a person engages in a action which is not established from prophetic guidance and therefore his conception of good and his action both are rejected. The blame of sin is upon him and anyone who follows the erroneous innovation/precedent. Hence those who consider the viewing of ghayr-mehram women on TV as good have blameworthy ideal and egnage in blameworthy action. If a foolish person innovates something, composed of Islamicly prohibited and permitted, and deems it to be good than such person has introduced an sinful precedent/innovation and upon him and those who act on it will incur equal sin. For something to be good from perspective of Shari’ah it must be composed of all that which is good and permitted according to prophetic teaching. Scholars Are Intended By The Hadith Not Laymen: The Hadith in discussion does not count the judgment of laymen as valid judgment. Rather the Hadith is about scholars of Islam. Meaning whatever the Muslim scholars collectively deem to be good/evil is also good/evil in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). With regards to understanding of scholars 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: M.I.Ahmad, Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, H20776] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will only command the Muslims to hold to which is better and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the Muslims to, stick to the Jammah. The Hadith conveys meaning; Jammah is composed of majority and Jammah is not composed of every single Muslims, which would be inclusive of heretics. And similar meaning is conveyed in the following Hadith: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] Alhasil, the understanding of majority of scholars on a issue is authorative and correct guidance. Be that disagreement amongst scholars regarding prophetic Sunnahs or views regarding innovated precedents/innovations. In this context of collective understanding of Muslim scholars Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And whatever the [scholars of] Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Conclusion: The judgment of foolish folk regarding what is good and what is evil according to religion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is void. The judgments of scholars and to be precise majority of scholars, the Jammah of scholars of Islam is valid proof. Whatever the majority deems good/evil it is also good/evil in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: Shaykh Al-Bani, considered a authority amongst the Khawarij, is said to have commented on the Hadith of; what Muslim deems to be good is also in good in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and what Muslim declares to be evil, it is so in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Objective would be to adress his points in which he attempted to argue against the Islamic understanding and distinguish the truth above the false-hood of Shaykh Al-Bani. Note an article explaining Islamic position on this Hadith has been written, here, and it is advised that readers familiarise with that material before proceeding any further. About Material Attributed To Shaykh Al-Bani: From the text, it seems someone else quoted/edited the material and it entirely is not Shaykh Al-Bani’s work, instead a author is writing, and attributing material to him, and has stated he has sumarised what Shaykh has written. The earliest source for the material of Shaykh Al-Bani I traced to website, SayingsOfTheSalaf, dated January13th 2009 in google search engine, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows best. Note this is website is dedicated to preaching the Khariji doctrines of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab of Najd, and those who have followed his teachings, Shaykh Al-Bani being one of them. Thereafter it seems, it was rapidly publicised on sites dedicated to promoting beliefs and understandings of the two Shaykhs. It hasn’t been possible for me to personally verify the material attributed to him by checking refference given by author quoting Shaykh’s material. But considering the objective of content attributed to him, and number of Khariji websites/forums hosting this material, it can be said with pretty certaintity the content has been correctly attributed to him. In any chance of material not being his than please note; at the very least this content does represent the position/understanding of people hosting it. And it challenges Islamic understanding of Hadith hence it needs to be adressed for its worth. Bottom line is, it is irrelevent who the author of material is. What my concern it is; this material is addressed so Islam remains dominant and false-hood is obliterated. Finally, I have omitted material of editor/presenter of Shaykhs writing and made slight improvements, but no alteration wil alter the intended meaning of author, where omission is made, following is inserted, (…), between the connecting parts. The Hadith In Discussion: “Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud said, “Verily, Allah looked at the hearts of the servants and He found that the heart of Muhammad, was the best among them, so He choose him for Himself and He sent him with His message. Then He looked at the hearts of His servants after Muhammad, and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah. And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Material Of Shaykh Al-Bani As Quoted: Shaykh Al Bani wrote: (A) “This narration emphasizes the significance of the understanding and consensus of the Companions, (Allâh be pleased with them all). It highlights their superiority and authority as the ministers of Allâh’s Messenger, (Allâh’s peace and blessings be upon him). (…) (B) “It is amazing how some people argue for the existence of good innovations in the religion based upon this hadîth, and that the proof that these innovations are good is that the Muslims have taken them as a norm! It has become routine for them to argue on the basis of this hadîth when this issue is brought up. However, they miss the following points …” (…) (C) This narration is mawqûf (a reported statement of a Companion, or someone other than the Prophet). It therefore cannot be used as an argument to contradict unequivocal textual evidence that states, “… every bid’ah is misguidance …”, as is authentically reported from the Prophet (Allâh’s peace and blessings be upon him). (D) Even if it is supposed that this narration qualifies as a proof (on a par with the aforementioned texts), it does not in fact contradict those texts, for a number of reasons: (E) The intended meaning is the consensus and agreement of the Companions over a matter. This is proven by the context, and is supported by Ibn Mas’ûd’s line of reasoning about the Companions’ consensus over selecting Abû Bakr as the Caliph. Therefore, “the Muslims” does not refer to all Muslims in all places and times; but instead to the Muslims of that time. (F) If we suppose that “the Muslims” refers to Muslims in general, it definitely does not refer to every single Muslim – even the ignorant one who understands nothing about knowledge. Therefore, the statement must be interpreted to mean the knowledgeable (scholars) amongst the Muslims.” A.i - Narration Emphasizes Ijmah Of The Companions And Superiority: Shaykh Al-Bani correctly writes: “This narration emphasizes the significance of the understanding and consensus of the Companions, (Allâh be pleased with them all). It highlights their superiority and authority as the ministers of Allâh’s Messenger, (Allâh’s peace and blessings be upon him).” This Hadith mentions the merits of companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and merit of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It states Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) chose the best from mankind as a Nabi with the best of hearts from mankind and chose for this Nabi the best of companions with the best of hearts. Companions were made ministers of our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fighting for the sake of His religion and this was done as fulfillment of the promise made in following verse: “Allah has promosed to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their religion - the one which He has chosen for them; ...” [Ref: 24:55] This far the Shaykh and myself would be in agreement but the parting of way is how he intended the following: “This narration emphasizes the significance of the understanding and consensus of the Companions, (Allâh be pleased with them all).” Shaykh believes the following part of Hadith is limited/restricted only for companions: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Meaning, Shaykh believes that this part of narration high lights the importance of Ijmah of companions and it is not for Muslim Ummah. And he stated this clearly also: “The intended meaning is the consensus and agreement of the Companions over a matter. This is proven by the context, and is supported by Ibn Mas’ûd’s line of reasoning about the Companions’ consensus over selecting Abû Bakr as the Caliph. Therefore, “the Muslims” does not refer to all Muslims in all places and times; but instead to the Muslims of that time.” Firstly, this narration is not exclusive for Ijmah but it is quite possible to explain it to mean Ijmah over innovated Sunnahs/Biddahs. As it was demonstrated and corroborated in section, Biv. Secondly, this Hadith compliments Hadith of good/evil Sunnah because it explains how good/evil is to be determined and by whom, as explained in section, Bv. Thirdly, yes it can also refer to Ijmah. But there is problem with Shaykh’s understanding of exclusiveness of Ijmah for companions because it is negated by the wording of Hadith. For continuation of this section reffer to section - E. A.ii – Ijmah Of Ummat And Not Of Just Ashab Of RasoolAllah: The Shaykh attempted to discredit the notion of Ijmah of Muslim Ummah but the generality of meaning stated in Hadith of Musnad Imam Ahmad - H3589 – is upheld and further explained by the following 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] In another Hadith from Musnad of Imam Ahmad it is stated: “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, Hadith 20776] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) himself has replaced with word with Muslims to mean, my Ummah. The words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) establish that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not allow the Jamah of Muslims to agree on misguidance. In other words, when they the Muslim Ummah collectively agree on goodness of something it is good and when they the Ummah collectively deem something to be evil it is misguidance/evil even in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This corroborates the following: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Alhasil, Shaykh’s argument that this portion of Hadith was exclusive for the companions is refuted and generality inclusive of elite of Muslims, or entire Ummah, is established al hamdu lillah. B.i – Narration Routinely Used As Evidence For Good Innovation: Shaykh Al Bani writes: “It is amazing how some people argue for the existence of good innovations in the religion based upon this hadîth, and that the proof that these innovations are good is that the Muslims have taken them as a norm! It has become routine for them to argue on the basis of this hadîth when this issue is brought up.” Shaykh Al Bani finds it strange that Muslims interpret the Hadith in discussion in to establish existance of good innovation. Note Shaykh believes, there is no room for good innovations in Islam and it was for this reason Shaykh wrote the quoted. His belief is based on distortion of true prophetic message and a unjust lie against teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And the reality of Shaykh and his ilks knowledge regarding this matter is best summed up by what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said to Yahood and Nasara: “They have no knowledge of it, nor had their fathers. Grave is the word that comes out of their mouths; they speak not except a lie.” [Ref: 18:5] B.ii – Hearts Of Companions Best Amongst Servants, Accords Quranic Teaching: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states regarding tthe companions: “Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the cause of Allah as well as those who give (them) asylum and aid,- these are (all) truthful believers (i.e. mominoon): for them is the forgiveness of sins and a provision most generous.” [Ref: 8:74] “These are truthful believers (i.e. mominoon): they have grades of dignity with their Lord, and forgiveness, and generous sustenance.” [Ref: 8:4] Forgiveness of sins, and grades of dignity are for companions according to these verses. To earn these grades they had pure/good hearts. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states, only person to benefit in hereafter is one who returns to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with good/pure heart: "The Day when there will not benefit (anyone) wealth or children. Except only one who comes to Allah with a sound heart. And Paradise will be brought near (that Day) to the righteous." [Ref: 26:88/90] It is established the forgiveness and entry to paradise was due to their faith, works, and purity of their heart with which they returned to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The level of purety and goodness in the hearts of companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can be determined from another verse of Quran. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “You are the best nation produced (as an example) for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah.” [Ref: 3:110] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would only declare them to be best of mankind if they had not the best/purest of hearts from mankind. This coroborates the following part of Hadith of: “Then He looked at the hearts of His servants after Muhammad, and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them.” B.iii – Companions As Ministers, Accords With Quranic Teaching: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Allah has promosed to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their religion - the one which He has chosen for them; ...” [Ref: 24:55] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had promised those who believed (i.e. companions of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that he will make authority over the land and establish religion of Islam on these lands. And similarly in another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although they who associate others with Allah dislike it.” [Ref: 9:33] And to fulfill the promise of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the ones with purest/best hearts became promoters and defenders of religion of Islam, with action of their limbs, and with their tongues. And the following part of Hadith of Musnad Imam Ahmad – 3589 attests to fulfillment of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) promise: “Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion.” B.iv – Good/Evil In Sight Of Muslim, Accords With Prophet Teaching: In order for a intelligent Muslim to realise that the truth of Islam dominates the falsehood presented by Shaykh Al Bani it is important to understand the following Hadith correctly: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] This narration states what a Muslim deems good is good in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and what a Muslim deems bad is bad in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Yet we the Muslims know good is what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) commanded, and bad is what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) prohibited. We have no right to determine which aspect of Shari’ah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is good, or bad. Both, the good, and the bad, has been defined by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) just like all the Prophets did prior to him, and we have no say, nor we can deem anything contrary to how he, and what he defined as good/bad because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should (thereafter) have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.” [Ref: 33:36] And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “… when an announcer of the Messenger of Allah announced that the people should gather together for prayer, so we gathered around the Messenger of Allah. He said: It was the duty of every Prophet that has gone before me to guide his followers to what he knew was good for them and warn them against what he knew was bad for them; but this Umma of yours has its days of peace and (security) in the beginning of its career, …” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4546] Implication of which is that he is no different from the earlier Prophets – he has the same responsibility to tell his Ummah of good and bad. Note he then proceeded to tell the good and bad that was to take place. When this is obvious that, prophetic teaching have already have classed what is good good and bad and we have no right to reinterpret them into good/bad than question begs to be asked: What are matters on which the goodness/badness of matters depends upon collective judgment of Muslims? Answer to this question is; these matters are innovated as Sunnahs of rightly guided Khulafah and Muslims, and to put it plainly, innovations. In plain language the Hadith states, an innovation if people deem it to be good/evil than it is good/evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). At fundamental level it means; any innovated matter which the elite of Muslims judge to be good/evil are as Muslims judge them to be. Existance of good and bad innovations is also substantiated with the following Hadith: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Therefore Hadith does indeed refer to good and bad Biddahs/Sunnahs. Only those who lack proper understanding of prophetic Sunnah will argue contrary against Islamic understanding of Hadith. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “In their hearts is disease, so Allah has increased their disease; and for them is a painful punishment because they (habitually) used to lie.” [Ref: 2:10] “But as for those in whose hearts is disease, it has (only) increased them in evil (in addition) to their evil. And they will have died while they are disbelievers.” [Ref: 9:125] B.v - Whatever Muslims View As Good/Evil Is So With Allah: The Islamic understanding is further supported by Ahadith of innovated Sunnahs in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) continued and stated: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And the Hadith in discussion itself is proof of existance of good/evil Sunnah in Islam but it also gives us principle how to judge the goodnesss and evilness of a practice which has no explicit basis in prohetic Sunnah, and the Hadith: “Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Alhasil, the innovated Sunnahs of people after the death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) if they are deemed good then they are good in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And if collective judgment of Muslims is against the goodeness then it is evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Shaykh Al-Bani unfortunately disregarded the contextual relevance of the Hadith in discussion with Hadith of Sahih Muslim – 6466 and refused to believe in the prophetic teaching, and lead others astray. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Rather they have denied that which they encompass not in knowledge and whose interpretation has not yet come to them. Thus did those before them deny. Then observe how was the end of the wrongdoers.” [Ref: 10:39] B.vi – The Matter Of Judgment And Prefference: It was stated earlier in section Ci, stronger Hadith is to be preffered over a weaker Hadith and it was conditioned if harmonisation is not possible. We will suppose harmonisation between Ahadith is not possible. In light of this principle, following Hadith is to be preffered over Hadith of Musnad Imam Ahmad – H3589 – because it is graded as Sahih where as Hadith refferenced is graded Hassan: “And the most evil affairs are the [erroneous] innovations; and every [erroneous] innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] It is also matter of principle amongst Muhaditheen that affirmation takes precedence over negation. In light of following Hadith it is established that Islam allows good innovations: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) continued to say following: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Hence this Hadith – Muslim, H6466 - would be preffered over Hadith of Sahih Muslim - H1885 – if harmonisation was not possible. And due to the implications of - Muslim, H6466 – and considering natural meaning of Hadith – Musnad Ahmad, H3589 – as explained in – see Biv – it is clear both Ahadith establish legality of innovations and explain each other perfectly. Hence the Matan (i.e. text) of Hadith of Musnad Imam Ahmad is Sahih and in accordance with Sanad and Matan of Sahih Ahadith. Therefore it is evidence on matters of Shariah. Note perfect harmonisation of Ahadith of innovation such as Muslim - H1885 – is possible and it has already been demonstrated in sections; Civ, Cv and Cvi. And therefore there is no need to preffer Ahadith of good/evil Sunnah over Ahadith of every innovation is misgudance. C.i - Shaykh Al-Bani’s Authentication And Classification: Shaykh Al-Bani authenticated the Hadith, and his comments were: “Reported by [Musnad Imam] Ahmad, [Musnad Abu Dawud] Al-Tayalisi and others, excluding the last sentence. Shaykh Al-Albani graded its chain of transmission Hasan (i.e. good). The narration is reported with the last sentence by Al-Hakim, who said its chain of transmission is, Sahîh (i.e. authentic). Al-Dhahabi agrees, while Al-Hafidh Al-Sakhawi said: “It is Mawqûf, Hasan.” See Al-Albani, Al-Da’îfah Vol. 2 pp17-19.” This authentication of Shaykh will add strength to Islamic understanding when it is presented and it will leave no room for the people of fire to argue against Muslims. Nor they could discredit the authenticity of the Hadith without undermining scholarly credentials of their ‘Muhaddith’. Nothing more needs to be added to what Shaykh has produced except, alhamdu lillah wa lillahil hamd. C.ii – Mawquf Narration Is Not Proof Against Definitive Text: As a matter of principle it should be noted, a weaker Hadith cannot be used to override a stronger Hadith in usual circumstances. In case opposing views have been expressed in Ahadith than the view expressed in stronger Hadith is to be preffered if harmonisation between them is not possible. Where the Ahadith are of equal grading than it is also principle that affirmation (i.e. Ithbat) takes precedence over negation (i.e. nafi). That is to say, if a Hadith negates a practice, and a Hadith attests to it (i.e. Salat Ad-Duha), than prefferance will be given to one which attests to the practice. It is also true as the Shaykh Al-Bani said that a Mawquf narration cannot be used to contradict/negate the emphatic words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), established from a authentic narration. He based this on the grounds that generally Mawquf Hadith is classed as Daif and is not proof in Shari’ah. We find Shaykh Al Bani himself authenticating the Hadith by presenting the view of Imam Al-Hakim (rahimullah) and Imam Dhahabi (rahimullah), both said it is, Sahih. And quoted Imam Sakhawi (rahimullah), who acknowledge it is Mawquf but graded it as Hassan. These scholars grading this Mawquf Hadith as Hassan and Sahih itself is proof that it has been elevated due to conformity with Quranic and prophetic teachings (i.e. elevated to grade of marfu hukman). The unfortunate Shaykh did not inform the readers due to his sectarian zealotry; this Hadith has reached level of Marfu Hukman. Such Ahadith can be used, and always have been used as evidence on matters of Shari’ah. This Hadith accords/agrees with the Quranic teaching and with Ahadith of introduction of good/evil Sunnahs earning equal reward/blame. How it accords and conforms to prophetic teaching will be addressed in –Bii, Biii, Biv, and Bv. Hence it is valid proof in matters of Shari’ah. C.iii – Misguiding Muslims With Erroneous Implications: Shaykh quoted the Hadith, every innovation is misguidance, and he stated: “It therefore cannot be used as an argument to contradict unequivocal textual evidence that states, “… every bid’ah is misguidance …”, as is authentically reported from the Prophet (Allâh’s peace and blessings be upon him).” Shaykh is doing a great disservice by implying; Muslims scholars present Hadith in discussion to contradict unequivocal textual evidence. He should know Muslim scholars do not use Ahadith to contradict another Hadith. This would be akin to establishing fault in teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), or establishing contradiction in words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Rather Ahadith of opposing view are quoted to negate the definitive interpretation of a set of Ahadith (and in this case the understanding that there can be no good innovation into Islam after completion of Islam) in order to force opposing point of view to re-evaluate understanding in light of presented evidence. Or do so to re-evaluate and present a comprehensive understanding on a subject, using all available evidence. To say Muslims attempt to negate/contradict the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is unbefitting a claimant of knowledge. And as a Muslim I say this, Muslims contradict/negate the bogus interpretation given to the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by the Juhala and we do not negate/contradict words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). C.iv – Prophetic Words Opposing Unequivocal Textual Evidence Of Shaykh: Shaykh wrote: “It therefore cannot be used as an argument to contradict unequivocal textual evidence that states, “… every bid’ah is misguidance …”, as is authentically reported from the Prophet (Allâh’s peace and blessings be upon him).” The Hadith Shaykh refferenced is from Sahih Muslim: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] The Khawarij and their Shuyukh only employ one set of Ahadith on subject of innovation and censor every innovation. They disregard the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) where he is reported to have said: “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And he also said: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] So numerously are these Ahadith reported in many collections that its content might have reached level of Mutawatir (i.e. continous), and at minimum it status as Sahih cannot be negated. When there are clearly two equally authentic opposing sets of Ahadith than agreement between these Ahadith needs to be established. C.v – Unequivocal Text - Every Innovation Is Misguidance: Firstly, every/qullu in Arabic is never used in its haqiqi (i.e. literal/true) meaning except when it is used for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In other words, qullu/every is never used in meaning of absolutely everything, which excludes nothing. Every is always restricted due to context whenever it is used for creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). If the words of Hadith: “… every innovation is misguidance …”, are used unrestrictedly and in haqiqi meaning. Then everything that emerged after completion of religion of Islam is misguidance, be it Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Sahih Muslim, Sahih of Imam Bukhari (rahimullah), including the marble floors and excessive gold thread writtings on Kabah. Once one attempts to exclude these from qullu/every, you have just validated; every in Arabic is never used in its haqiqi and you have validated the position that every/qullu in is restricted to a particular type of innovation and not literally every. Following Ahadith explain which type of innovation it is: “Narrated Aisha: “Allah's Messenger said: "One who innovates something in this matter of ours that is not of it will have it rejected.” [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] “All of them could be combined in one house; and then said: 'A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: He who acted any action not from our affair that is rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] Finally both these are narrated togather in another Hadith: “Aisha reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: If any one introduces into this affair of ours anything which does not belong to it, it is rejected. Ibn `Isa said: The Prophet said: If anyone practices any action in a way other than our practice, it is rejected.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4589] Alhasil, every innovation which is, not from, or, not based on, matters legislated by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by his Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is misguidance and such innovation is to be rejected. But the innovations which are based on and are from Shari’ah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) they can be practiced. One such innovation is Taraweeh. Prophetic Sunnah was for three days in Masjid under leadership of an Imam but Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) issued it for entire month of Ramadhan. And in which entire Quran, or more, and yet he termed it excellent Biddah: “On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] C.vi – Rejected Affairs Are Evil/Erroneous And Misguiding Innovations: Now the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which the Shaykh quoted:“And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] To understand what the actual meaning of the Hadith is first we have to understand which type of innovation Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has told us about. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "One who innovates something in this matter of ours that is not of it will have it rejected.” [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] “He who acted any action not from our affair that is rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] These rejected affairs are ones for which the innovators and those who follow their Sunnahs/Biddahs are to be held responsible for without any blame being reduced. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Another version of Hadith has word Sunnah replaced with word Biddah: "And whoever introduces an erroneous Biddah with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] Considering these two Ahadith it is apparent; baring the burden of introducing evil Sunnah into Islam, or erroneous Biddah [into Islam], is for those Sunnahs/Biddahs which a Muslim should have rejected. When it has become apparent that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught about evil Sunnah/Biddah we have to conclude the following Hadith was about evil Sunnah/Biddah – implications inserted: “And the most evil affairs are the [erroneous] innovations; and every [erroneous] innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] The word [erroneous] was inserted into text of Hadith because, it was established every is always restricted to a particular context/type. Also Ahadith explain that burden of sin is to be equally shared between one who introduces an evil Sunnah/Biddah. This establishes prophetic recognition of evil Sunnah/Biddah. Which leads to conclusion that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not mean, literally every innovation is misguidance. But rather every evil innovation/precdent for which there is blame upon initiator and actor, is evil affair and misguiding/erroneous innovation. D - Suppose If The Narration Does Or Doesn’t Qualifies As Proof: Shaykh writes: “Even if it is supposed that this narration qualifies as a proof (on a par with the aforementioned texts), it does not in fact contradict those texts, for a number of reasons: …” Firstly, suppose even corner stone of this discussion did not qualify as valid Shar’ri evidence. Even than the Muslims have not lost any ground against the Shaykh of Khawarij because there are numerous Ahadith which support the Islamic position – 6466 being one of them. As already explained this Hadith when a Mawquf Hadith is corroborated by Quranic evidences and words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly, or indirectly, it reaches to level of Marfu Hukman, which by agreement of all scholars is valid proof in Shar’ri affairs. Secondly, earlier Shaykh wrote that Muslims use the Hadith to contradict unequivocal text when they quote this Hadith as proof of their position: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Shaykh here has acknolwedge that the Hadith does not contradict: “… it does not in fact contradict those texts, for a number of reasons …” He knew too well that the words of Hadith, quoted previously do not contradict the set of Ahadith, which Shaykh employing to argue his understanding. Shaykh rightly attempted to reconcile Ahadith of innovation with the Hadith – 3589. He has given reasons due to which he thinks they do not contradict each other. And even if both these reasons were batil blant lies this Hadith would not contradict the Ahadith of: “… every innovation is misguidance …”, and why there is no contradiction, has already been explained previously. Also if both reasons of Shaykh were absolutely valid even than the Islamic position would not be weaken. Infact a Muslim can be happy for the Shaykh to have his cake and eat it. In other words Shaykhs following interpretation can be tolerated: ”The intended meaning is the consensus and agreement of the Companions over a matter.” But his insistance upon exclusive correctness of his interpretation while negating other possibilities is heretical and was demonstrated to be incorrect. E.i – Does It Refer To Companions Or Muslim Elite In General: Shaykh Al-Bani wrote: “The intended meaning is the consensus and agreement of the Companions over a matter. This is proven by the context, and is supported by Ibn Mas’ûd’s line of reasoning about the Companions’ consensus over selecting Abû Bakr as the Caliph. Therefore, “the Muslims” does not refer to all Muslims in all places and times; but instead to the Muslims of that time.” To properly understand Hadith it is best to state some facts. The Hadith of Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (radiallah ta’ala anhu) used the word, Ashab (i.e. companions), and that is specific for the group of Muslims, who accepted Islam and followed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in his life time, see: “…and found the hearts of his Companions to be the best hearts; so He made them the …” But when giving the following principle he changed from specific (i.e. Ashab) to general (i.e. Muslims😞 “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] And then reverted back to usage of Ashab (i.e. companions😞 “And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” What this means is a Mutliq (i.e. general) statement was being employed in a specific context, to provide a specific interpretation. And therefor general statement is not specific to context. It is similar to, every innovation is misguidance, it is a general statement, but this general statement is employed in specific context of Mawlid, to provide specific verdict that Mawlid is an innovation and misguidance. But the context in which it is employed does not restrict and limit the application to context in which it was employed (i.e. Mawlid). The Sahabi employed the word of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and used it in context of Khilafat of Hadhrat Abu Bakr as-Sideeq. One cannot restrict the generality of a statement due to the context in which it is exmployed or is found in. The nature of prophetic words is jawami al kalim, short sentences expressing widest meaning possible. Hence prophetic words cannot be restricted to an era, or to group of people. And this Hadith establishes Ijmah of Ummah [over innovated Sunnahs] and to reject it, is to negate jawami al kalim nature of prophetic words. E.ii – Generality Contextualised Without Restricting Generality: Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) narrates: “I heard Allah's Messenger saying, "The reward of deeds depends upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended.” This is a general principle, and it has been contexted to two examples: “ So whoever emigrated for worldly benefits or for a woman to marry, his emigration was for what he emigrated for." [Ref: Bukhari, B1, H1] Does the Shaykh and his spawns from Najd restrict the principle to the context in which it is found in? Yet Shaykh has audacity to limit/restrict the following rule to the context in which it is found: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Many other examples can be given in which a principle is found but it is not limited and restricted to the context but they are generally applied. It is dishonest scholarship to limit/restrict principles given in Ahadith to the context in which they are found in to prevent harm invented methodologies and beliefs. And the one engaged in such dubious scholarship does nothing but closes the gate of guidance upon himself. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “So follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you avoid justice; and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do.” [Ref: 4:135] E.iii – The Harm Of Restricting At Will And As Desired: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “You are the best nation produced (as an example) for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah." [Ref: 3:110] The Ummah being reffered is the group of companions. They are the best from mankind and the verse describes their collective qualities. Can you deny it was revealed regarding the Group of companions? Is this verse inclusive of two generations that followed them, and the righteous (i.e. Saliheen) and the friends of Allah (i.e. Awliyah-Allah) who became part of Ummah uptil present? What is the criteria which you have invented to judge this case? And what is your proof substantiating it? In another verse, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should (thereafter) have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.” [Ref: 33:36] Is this verse solely regarding those whom the verse was revealed? Or are you and me and the Muslims in general are also being told, that we do not have any choice on a matter which has been decided by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Khariji, why whould you not restrict this verse to those companions only? Is it because it does not effect your belief? And is it not true that you would restrict any verse to context of its revelation if it opposed what you believe? It is true even if you deny it, and you’re nothing except a liar. A man with no principle, no moral, no guidance and your actions speak for themselves. And I cannot make the dead hear, nor guide those who are in hell-fire. E.iv - Statement Is About Concensus Of Companions On Khilafat: To begin with, contextually and historically the following statement of Hadith does refer to companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam😞 “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Yet this does not mean the general statement is limited to them.To restrict something to a group of people, or a time, evidence is required which proves it was for this person, people, time - only. Or atleast the ayat/hadith has to indicate definitive meaning which restrcits it to a time, group of people, and person. No teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can be restricted to an era without proof of Wahi or prophetic guidance in form of Hadith. If such self deluding indulgance was permitted/practiced than anyone can argue as Shaykh argued; the entire Quran is restricted historical context of 6th century AD and it is specific to companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), Jews, Christians, Polytheists, and people of that time. And its injunctions of prayer, charity, encouraging good, forbidding evil are all restricted to them and none of them apply to us. What would your response be to such argument if a modernist/secularist ‘Muslim’ employed it to discredit the practicing of Quranic injunctions and adherance of laws of Islam – like Majid Nawaz the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Would you believe in him and abandon prophetic teachings and turn your back to Islam and become one of the disbelievers? In principle, you have no legitimate ground to refute such fools except the pathetic and childish display of, what I said is correct and you’re wrong. There is no difference between Shaykh’s action of restricting teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to a people and restricting of prophetic teaching by a modernist/secularist to by-gone era, and thus claiming prophetic teaching a incompatible with modern society. The only difference that would exist is; each will follow their desires and restrict those practices to period of time, or group of people, person which you desire and which opposes your world view, or belief system. Anyone who does so appoints himself to status of god: "Have you seen he who has taken as his god his desire, and Allah has sent him astray due to knowledge and has set a seal upon his hearing and his heart and put over his vision a veil? So who will guide him after Allah? Then will you not be reminded?" [Ref: 45:23] And one guilty of this crime his end will be in hell-fire. F.i – It Refers To Scholars Not All Muslims: Shaykh Al-Bani states: “If we suppose that “the Muslims” refers to Muslims in general, it definitely does not refer to every single Muslim – even the ignorant one who understands nothing about knowledge.” Note Shaykh has conditioned the statement with ‘if’. Apart from the conditional clause what Shaykh Al-Bani has stated is correct. In fact it is as the Shaykh as stated in the following: “Therefore, the statement must be interpreted to mean the knowledgeable (scholars) amongst the Muslims. That being the case, who are these scholars?” In other words the Hadith means: “And whatever the [scholars of] Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] The words ‘the Muslims’ do not refer to every single Muslim but elite from Muslims (i.e. scholars). In a attempt to pin point who these scholars are, Shaykh sets to discredit the scholarship of Muslims. He attacks the scholars who conform to a Madhab.[1] In brief, saying they refuse to go against the established teaching of their Madhab but to support innovation they become Mujtahideen to justify the innovations. Readers should note, this Khariji Shaykh was known for his rabid anti-Taqleed rehtoric. The idiotic logic of Shaykh is; Muslim scholars are not scholars about whom the Hadith states their judgment and agreement about an issue is judgment and agreement of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because of their blind-Taqleed and switching to Ijtihad. First of all, Shaykh is distorting the matter, Taqleed is adhering to prophetic Sunnah as indicated by an expert scholar of religion and following his Ijtihad on matters for which there is no clear/explicit teaching from Quran and Sunnah. Neither Taqleed is blameworthy nor is excercisng the right of Ijtihad. Shaykh is just barking mad and has hatred for Muslims who follow the Madhab of four Imams. F.ii – Types Of Scholars To Whom The Hadith Does Not Refer: Returning to the question, who are these scholars to whom Hadith applies. Are they the ones who have declared the vast majority of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), scholars and laymen alike, as polytheists/disblievers? And believe none knew meaning of, none is worthy of worship except Allah, until Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab the Najdi once again revived Tawheed by re-introducing meaning of; ‘la ilaha il allah’ in Arabian Peninsula? Or the ones who had issued edicts permitting killing of Muslims who believes, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah? Or declared that Muslims are polytheists for committing major sins (i.e. prostration to ghayrullah with intention of respect)? Or does the Hadith refer to those scholars who have declared the vast majority of Muslims out of fold of Islam for their sinful actions? Or does the Hadith refer to Khawarij who follow the methodology of Kharijism and adhere to teaching of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab? Or does it refer to you and those who follow your teaching, O Shaykh? F.iii – Shaykh Of Khawarij In Perspective Of Kharijism: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, Satan has lost hope of worshipers ever worshipping him Arabian Peninsula, and in language of Quran it is to say, Satan has lost hope worshipers ever worshiping idols in Arabian Peninsula, here, and here. Note the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) discredit the notion; Muslims worshiping idols. And it does not discount disbelievers worshiping idols in Arabian Peninsula and disbelieving Arabs reverting religion of polytheistic fore-fathers (i.e. worship of idols; Al-Lat, Uzza, Dhil Al Khalasa) will take place after all the Muslims die after blowing of cool musky fragrant wind. Yet the reviver of Kharijism, Shaykh of Najd, taught the entirity of Muslims of Arabian Peninsula had fallen into major Shirk by worshiping idols, graves, … and none knew meaning of ‘la ilaha il allah’. O Shaykh this Hadith is not for you because you’re believer of Kharijism and you believed in Shaykh of Najd and disbelieved in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had prohibited killing of anyone who professed; la ilaha il allah. He also prohibited nullifying a Muslim’s Islam for a action and for [major/minor] sins. Following Hadith is proof of it: “Anas bin Malik narrates from the Prophet who said: Three things are the roots of faith: (i) To refrain from (killing) a person who says “there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah” (ii) Not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits (iii) and also not to declare him out of Islam due to any of his deed. Jihad continues from the day I was sent as Prophet to ...” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B14, H2170] Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab nullified Islam of those who said, la ilaha il allah, due to their sins and their actions. And permitted/encouraged the killing of all Muslims who had not accepted teaching of your Shaykh even when they professed, la ilaha il allah. How can the Shaykh of Najd, and you O Shaykh, be upon the guidance when he left Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and you blindly followed his path instead of straight prophetic path? When this much is true, O Shaykh, than how can this Hadith be regarding evil doers who followed chief scholar of group of Iblees (i.e. qarn ash-shaytaan) aka Wahhabism/Salafism? G.i – The Ever Existing Jammah Of Muslims: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "I only fear for my Ummah from the misguiding Aimmah." He said that the Messenger of Allah said: "There will never cease to be a group from my Ummah manifest upon the truth, they will not be harmed by those who forsake them until Allah's Decree comes.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2229] This group upon manfiest/clear truth is the main body of Muslims and this is why Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said regarding one who deviates from them: “One who found in his Amir something which he disliked should hold his patience, for one who separated from the main body of the Muslims even to the extent of a handspan and then he died would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4559] The main body of Muslim was and is composed of majority. And we find Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicating this in the following Hadith: “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, Hadith 20776] Out of three, two is majority, and one is minority, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said majority is better. From five, two is minority and three is majority, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said majority is better than two. He than said, so hold on to the Jammah, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would only recommend what is better. Therefore natural conclusion is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) commanded the Muslims to hold to majority, the main body of Muslims. And this understanding is further verified by another Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in which he explicitly stated, follow the great majority: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] Alhasil, the Jammah upon manifest truth, which never will cease to exist is the main body of Muslims, and it is composed of majority, and they will not agree upon misguidance, and therefore we should follow the great majority as we are instructed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). G.ii – Shaykh, Al-Bani, Of Najd And Their Followers According To Ahadith: This main body of Muslims, the Jammah, the Sawad Al Azam (i.e. the greath majority) is of elite of Muslims – scholars. The laymen are not included in these Ahadith. And we are commanded by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to follow the great majority, the main body of Islamic scholars. Al-hamdu lillah, this great majority is of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. This great majority existed upon manifest truth when Shaykh of Najd nor his band of Khariji rabble was no where to be seen on face of earth. And Najdi Shaykh departed from the main body of Muslims and accused all of the Muslims and the over whelming majority of scholars [except those who followed his Kufr] of being guilty of idol-worship. Yet the reality is he departed from the main body of Muslims, and he departed to death of pre-Islamic era of Kufr and Shirk. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the Muslims to hold to what was better (i.e. the Jammah composed of majority) but he abandoned the prophetic guidance for what he invented. And when the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was united; Muslims are upon Tawheed and Islam is firmly established as Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) promised. Than Shaykh of Najd raised his voice of misguidance and declared; none before him knew the meaning of; la ilaha il allah, and Muslims worship idols, and instructed his band of foolish dessert beduins to murder the followers of great majority. G.iii - The Scholars Are Deserving Of These Ahadith: The scholars for whom the word Ahadith of section, Gi, apply they existed prior and during emergance of Wahhabism, and its many ugly manifestations. These scholars are the Jammah, the main body, the great majority. Fundamental teachings regarding Tawheed, Shirk, Nabuwah, … of these scholars are found in scholars who preceded them and their teachings are further connected with generation before them. This way establishing a chain going back to righteous scholars of Ummah.[2] These scholars compose the main body of Muslims, the great majority. And those scholars who succeded the great majority of scholars of Arabian Peninsula and world are today known as Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah – Sunni. And the guiding star of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat, the Imam, the Mujtahid, the Mujadid, Ahmad Raza Khan, the Barelwi. He is the criterion on which you can judge a Sunni and a heretic. Those who revile him are heretics and disbelievers and those who love him are from Ahlus Sunnah. And regarding this Jammah of scholars Prophet (sallallahu alayhhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “And whatever the [scholars of] Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] They are the criterion of what is acceptable and what is repugnant and what they deem to be good is good in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and what they deem to be evil is evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Conclusion: The Hadith in discussion has reached level of Marfu Hukman and according to agreement of scholars of Islam such Ahadith are valid Shar’ri evidence. It is coroborated by Sahih Ahadith. Muslims do not have right to re-assign a practice to be evil/good which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly/indirectly stated is good/evil. Therefore meaning of Hadith in discussion is, any innovated practice[3] which the Muslim scholarship collectively judges to be good/evil is also good/evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In light of Ahadith of, whosoever introduces a good/evil Sunnah in Islam for him there is reward/blame; the following Hadith of – Musnad Ahmad, H3589 – is principle on which one can judge, what are good/evil Sunnahs introduced into Islam. In light of Ahadith of: Muslim H4559, Musnad Ahmad H20776, and Ibn Majah H3950. The meaning of Hadith of Musnad Ahmad H3589 is; whatever the majority of scholars of Ummah judge to be good/evil is also good/evil, in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Hadith of, every innovation is misguidance, is limited/restricted to a particular type of innovation. An innovation which does not conform to prophetic teachings. And such are evil innovations for which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of equal blame/sin for one who innitiates the innovation and for those who follow it. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammad Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] “That being the case, who are these scholars? Are the blind-followers (al-muqallidûn) who have closed on themselves the door to understanding the religion from Allâh and His Messenger included amongst them? Are they those who claim the door to ijtihâd has been locked? For sure they are not included, and here is why: Al-Hâfidh Ibn ‘Abd Al-Barr states in Jâmi’ Bayân Al-‘Ilm Vol. 2 p36, 37, “The definition of knowledge according to the scholars is whatever a person is clear and sure about. Anyone who is certain and clear about something knows it. Therefore, whoever is not certain about something but says it blindly following someone else, does not know it. Blind following is – according to the scholars – different from following (al-ittibâ’). Because following is to follow a person based on what has become clear to you of the correctness of his position, whereas blind-following is to say what he says while not understanding it or its reasoning. So when it comes to following the Sunnah, many of these blind-followers claim they are not qualified to go against the opinions in their schools of thought because – by their own admission – they are muqallidah, but when it comes to arguing for and supporting innovations in religion, they become mujtahidûn, interpreting and misinterpreting to justify the bid’ah that many laypeople practice!” - [2] Shaykh of Najd and his blind follower Shaykh Al-Bani cannot establish the chain for their beliefs. How many before Shaykh of Najd believed the entire/majority-of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) didn’t know meaning of, la ilaha il allah? This is a tactical Takfir of entirity of Muslims living in Arabian Peninsula. In reality vast majority of Muslims of earth because the majority of Muslims of earth professed the same beliefs as their Arab brothers/sisters. And Takfir of, one group, in reality is Takfir of all those who share the belief. The Khawarij consistently charged the Muslims of committing major Shirk throughout the centuries. Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) being the first victim of Khariji edict of Shirk/Takfir and later an attempt on his life was made, consequently resulted in his matyrdom. The only historical connection Shaykh of Najd and Shaykh Al-Bani have is with the Khawarij and anthropomorphists. - [3] Innovated practice which is not already part of Islam and therefore not already defined as good/evil.

Introduction: Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed the Muslims of reward for introducing good Sunnahs into Islam and also informed us one who introduces an evil/sin Sunnah such a person will have to bear the consequences of it. And to determine what is good and evil/sinful Sunnah the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave rule; whatever a Muslim deems as good/evil is also good/evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Understanding Ahadith Of Good And Evil Sunnah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated whosoever introduces a good Sunnah (i.e. precedent) into Islam and one who follows the innovated Sunnah will earn equal reward: “Whoever introduces a good Sunnah that is followed he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in their slightest." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] “He who introduced some good precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And he is also reported to have said, whosoever introduces a bad/evil Sunnah into Islam for him and one who follows the evil/bad precedent both will earn equal blame/sin: “Whoever introduces an evil Sunnah (i.e. precedent, practice) that is followed after him, will bear the burden of sin for that and the equivalent of their burden of sin, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207] “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Common sense dictates to introduce something into Islam it cannot be already part of Islam and if it is already part of Islam then nothing has been introduced into Islam. Please bare this point in your mind and read the following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) who is reported to have said: “… introduces good Sunnah into Islam …” and “… introduces evil Sunnah into Islam …” When something is designed, or created, or assembled, or thought of, and that tradition, precedent, custom, belief, is not already part of Islam, then what is that something? Would that be prophetic Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Or would that be an innovation? The words of Hadith itself imply innovation. In another Hadith the general meaning of prophetic statement is exactly same but the word, precedent, is replaced with word, innovation: "That indeed whoever revives a Sunnah from my Sunnah which has died after me, then for him is a reward similar to whomever acts upon it without diminishing anything from their rewards. And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation, which Allah is not pleased with nor His Messenger, then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it, without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] “’Whoever revives a Sunnah of mine, which people then act upon, will have a reward equivalent to that of those who act upon it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. And whoever introduces an innovation that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, without that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] Establishing that even though Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used words good precedent he meant and implied good innovation. What Is Good And Evil: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “… and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus, He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Note in this Hadith the goodness and evilness is of a Muslim who has understanding of Islam and is a practicing Muslim. And at the very minimum has understanding of Haram and Halal, Kufr and Shirk. One who is without knowledge of Islam, and has no connection with Islam apart from the label, and yearly visit to mosque, and the moral campus of that Muslim is facing in the direction of Western secular humanism, and liberal prostitutionism, what such a Muslim sees as good and evil has nothing to do with good and evil of a Muslim. To begin with, good in the sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is all that which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has instructed. Such as acts of Salah, Hajj, Saum, Nawafil, Tilawah, Sadqa, Khayrat, Zakat and other things. And evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is all which He has prohibited, polytheism and disbelief. Including all activities prohibited such as, murder, gambling, all types Islamicly illegal sexual activities, alcoholic beverages, usury/interest on money/goods, consumption of prohibited meats, and others. For a righteous Muslim Good of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is good in his sight and evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is evil in judgment of a Muslim. Also note that following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) imply; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) uttered these words about something which requires judgment of a Muslim: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] And this cannot be about something which already exists in Islam. Goodness and evilness of customs which are already in Islam has been made in Quran and Sunnah. So it must be about those activities which the Muslims did not find a judgment in Quran or Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In other words, the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were about Ijtihad and innovations, and he informed whatever new affair a Muslim judges to be good/evil via his Ijtihad is good/evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This also establishes that for such judgment one must be an Aalim/Mufti to be able to make judgments on Shari’ah. And correct judgment of a Mufti/Mujtahid regarding a new affair is in the sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is as it is in judgment of Mujtahid/Mufti. What Is Good Sunnah In Sight Of Muslim: Any innovated Sunnah, even if it is not Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as whole, but is composed of parts of prophetic Sunnahs: consisting of worship, charity, spreading of knowledge, invitation to good, is a good Sunnah, and it will bring reward for the one who practices it and one who introduced it to Muslims. And when such a practice has been recognised as a good Sunnah in sight of Muslims than it is good Sunnah in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) also. Any innovated Sunnah/Bid’ah which an Aalim judges to be evil/sinful due to it being composed of activities which religion of Islam has determined to be blameworthy than such a innovated Sunnah is evil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Even if the foolish consider it to be good, its standing in Shari’ah will not be positive. Goodness and evilness of innovated Sunnahs is determined on what they are composed of. If they are composed of Islamicly sanctioned good, than it is good even if a Mufti declares it to be evil. And if innovated Sunnah is composed of Islamicly sanctioned evil than its true standing is evil if some Mufti declares it to be good. If there is dispute on an issue than refer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And even when an issue is referred to an Aalim and there is no resolution than remember that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has instructed us: “One who found in his Amir something which he disliked should hold his patience, for one who separated from the main body of the Muslims even to the extent of a hand-span and then he died would die the death of one belonging to the days of pre-Islamic era of ignorance.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4559] The main body of something is always the bigger portion, the larger quantity, and this is also evident from following Ahadith: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] “… the Prophet (Peace be upon him): "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, Hadith 20776] Hence we’re under the prophetic instruction to adhere to teaching of majority of Muslim scholars, the Jamhoor (i.e. the majority), Sawad Al Azam (the group of great majority) and as per instruction of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) any judgment favoured by the great majority of Muslim scholars is so in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Conclusion: Any Muslim with correct understanding of religion of Islam will judge those innovated Sunnahs which are composed of Islamicly sanctioned practices of; worship, charity, invitation to righteousness, prohibition of blameworthy, … as good by their nature. Even after acknowledging, the said innovated Sunnah did not exist at the time of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), or his companions, or in the two generations which succeeded companions. Any innovated Sunnah which is deemed to be evil/sinful, or more serious such as Kufr, or Shirk by a righteous Muslim and it accords with the understanding of Jamhoor, belief of the great majority of correctly believing Muslims, than in the sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be as the great majority judged it. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ قَالَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ نَظَرَ فِي قُلُوبِ الْعِبَادِ فَوَجَدَ قَلْبَ مُحَمَّدٍ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ خَيْرَ قُلُوبِ الْعِبَادِ فَاصْطَفَاهُ لِنَفْسِهِ فَابْتَعَثَهُ بِرِسَالَتِهِ ثُمَّ نَظَرَ فِي قُلُوبِ الْعِبَادِ بَعْدَ قَلْبِ مُحَمَّدٍ فَوَجَدَ قُلُوبَ أَصْحَابِهِ خَيْرَ قُلُوبِ الْعِبَادِ فَجَعَلَهُمْ وُزَرَاءَ نَبِيِّهِ يُقَاتِلُونَ عَلَى -دِينِهِ فَمَا رَأَى الْمُسْلِمُونَ حَسَنًا فَهُوَ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ حَسَنٌ وَمَا رَأَوْا سَيِّئًا فَهُوَ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ سَيِّئٌ “Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud said, “Verily, Allah looked at the hearts of the servants and He found that the heart of Muhammad, was the best among them, so He choose him for Himself and He sent him with His message. Then He looked at the hearts of His servants after Muhammad, and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is Hadith ki sanad ka hukum Mawquf heh, aur jahan taq mein nay totay joray hen yeh Marfu Hukman kay darjay par faiz heh. Guzarish heh kay Ulamah ki grading is Hadith kay mutaliq kia heh. Joh is par jirah heh agar kissi kitab mein is ka jawab ho toh share keren. Khadim Nasirud Din Al Bani ki jirah ka jawab likh raha heh.

Salam alayqum, Bhai saab mein jab aap ko deen e Islam kay ikhtilafi masail ki alif bay ka bee pata nahin toh aap ko kia majboori pari kay munazra karnay ki. choti say choti baat aap idhar aa kar poochtay hen. Kabi kissi pehalwan ko kushti kay dangal mein kushti seekhtay dekha heh. Ya car race mein, kohi car chalana seekhtay heh? Pehlay deen kay bunyadi masail seekhen, Ahle Sunnat kay aqahid o nazriat seekhen, is kay wastay Sunni, aur khaas kar kay, hamaray ek bot achay Sunni bhai, Muhammad Tariq Lahori, kitaben upload kar kay thak rahay hen. Pehlay deen seekhen, ikhtilafi masail kay baray mein he seekhen, magar bunyad toh darust karen, munazray karnay ka shoq aap ko heh, magar seekha kuch nahin. Yahan par logh farigh nahin bethay, kay aap ko baby sit karen. Har kohi itna masroof heh kay dunyawi mumulat kay saath deeni mamulat ko pura karnay ka waqt mushkil say muyasir aata heh. Aur aap ko baby-sit karna idhar mushkil ho raha heh. Mein nay bi aap ki tara hi ikhtilafi masail kay mutaliq seekha. Magar mein ek sawal kay jawab kay wastay do teen kitaben parta, agar phir ghor o fikr karta aur agar phir samaj nah aati toh kissi say ruju karta. Yahan par aap ek esay nahin, saray Sunni loolay langray hen, hammen taleem yafta ahle tehqeeq sunniyoon ki zeroorat heh, un logoon ki nahin jin ko ham baby-sit karen. Aap bey-fizool behas mein paray hen, kia Abu Jahl ko Islam qubul karwanay ka mission Nabi e kareem nay banaya? Bas is'see ko musalman karna heh, ... agar banatay toh baqi phir musalman ho jatay. Jin kay diloon par kufr ki mohr lagi heh woh Islam qubul nahin kartay.

Miftah e Sunnat Aizah e Sunnat kay jawab mein likhi gahi heh. Misbah e Sunnat Rah e Sunnat kay jawab mein likhi gaee thee. Misbah ki chaar jilden juda hen Miftah e Sunnat say. Deoband ki taraf say Aizah e Sunnat keun kay Misbah e Sunant ki pehli jild ka jawab thah is leyeh Mufti Sahib Miftah e Sunnat volume 1 likhi shahid tawaqoh thee kay baqi 3 jildoon kay jawab bi Deobandi hazraat ki taraf say ahay ga toh tarteeb waar baqi jildoon ka jawab bi ahay ga. Magar Deobandiyon ki taraf say kuch hal chal nahin huwi is waja say volume ek par hee bat khatam lagti heh. Misbah ki jild number ek darkar heh.

Misbah e Sunnat Bajawab Rah e Sunnat, Vol 2.

Salam alayqum Misbah e Sunnat ki volume 1 aur 2 ho agar kissi kay pass to please upload kar deh. Miftah Ul Jannat Bajawab Rah e Sunnat agar kissi kay pass hoon toh zeroor share karen. Jazallah khayr.

Heh eman walo, mat ra'ina kaho, chor gay Sahabah, joh thay aur hen Eman walay. Bila-taweel ra'ina chora, ra'ina o taweel, nah chor pahay, Kafir, tum deoband walay. Asaan ilfaaz mein upar walay sher ki wazahat: Mashkook ka istimal sahabah nay chora, Thanvi nah chor paya ilfaaz towheen walay. Kabi, niyat ka wawela, towheen ki tashreeh, bey-toba mara, maro gay Deoband walay. Bast Al Banan, nay haq bata diya, phir bi atleast man loh, ilfaz shayba towheen walay. Mashkook jumla chortay, deobandi aur thanvi, gar musalman hotay tum Deoband walay. Dhul Quwaisirah towheen karnay wala, nah kam us kay bi towheen ki taweel walay. Quwaisirah say sakht gustakh Rasool, kia kartay nahin taweel tum Deoband walay?

Gangohi andhay qavwa khor ko, andha kaha, yeh ilfaaz tumari na-pasand walay. Gangohi ki itni tazeem heh, kay sach bi bura laga, buray ho tum Deoband walay. Dehalvi Nabi say mansub karay aur likhay, Nabi mar kar matti mein milnay walay. Idhar tummen keun nah itni ghayrat aaye, Bella margay tum Kafir, Deoband Walay. Ala Hadhrat ta-hayat sahib noor basr o samat thay, teray jhoot harami nishani walay.* Mushakat tehreer say nazr mein farq huwa, andhay dill o haya ho tum Deoband walay. * Yehni teray jhoot, baghayr kissi asal foundation bunyad kay, jis tera harami banday ki bunyad ghalat aur darust nahin, aur is ka matlab yeh heh kay, tumaray soruces jin say yeh jhoot tum nay hasil keeya heh woh darust nahin, bey-asal, bey-bunyad hen, umeed heh taweel qubul hogi. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Heh eman walo, mat ra'ina kaho, chor gay Sahabah, joh thay aur hen Eman walay. Bila-taweel ra'ina chora, ra'ina o taweel, nah chor pahay, Kafir, tum deoband walay. Asaan ilfaaz mein upar walay sher ki wazahat: Mashkook ka istimal sahabah nay chora, Thanvi nah chor paya ilfaaz towheen walay. Kabi, niyat ka wawela, towheen ki tashreeh, bey-toba mara, maro gay Deoband walay. Bast Al Banan, nay haq bata diya, phir bi atleast man loh, ilfaz shayba towheen walay. Mashkook jumla chortay, deobandi aur thanvi, gar musalman hotay tum Deoband walay. Dhul Quwaisirah towheen karnay wala, nah kam us kay bi towheen ki taweel walay. Quwaisirah say sakht gustakh Rasool, kia kartay nahin taweel tum Deoband walay?

Salam alayqum, Sag e Madinah bhai, aap nay is Kafir ki dukhti rag par haath rakha toh mein nay socha kay mein bi thora daba doon. ---------------- Gangohi andhay qavwa khor ko, andha kaha, yeh ilfaaz tumari na-pasand walay. Gangohi ki itni tazeem heh, kay sach bi bura laga, buray ho tum Deoband walay. Dehalvi Nabi say jhoot mansub karay, likhay; Nabi mar kar matti mein milnay walay. Idhar tummen keun nah itni ghayrat aaye, Bella margay tum Kafir, Deoband Walay. Ala Hadhrat ta-hayat sahib noor basr o samat thay, teray jhoot harami nishani walay. (yeh gali nahin heh, agar shak ho toh zeroor wazahat talb kar lena, mein tumaray Murtaza Hassan Darbangi ki tarah gandi gali nahin deta). Mushakat tehreer say nazr mein farq huwa, jhootay andhay dill ho tum Deoband walay. ----------------

Is mein kohi contradiction nahin. So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Isl�m), while you are having the upper hand. God is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds. S. 47:35 Hilali-Khan Uppar wali ayaat, jang kay doran, agar Musalmanoon ko Fatah ho rahi ho aur Kafir sulah ki dawat denh, yeh ayaan honay kay baad kay woh haar jahen gay, is context mein peace say rokti heh. Ilfaz joh under lined hen un par ghor keren. But if they incline to peace, you also incline to it, and (put your) trust in God. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower. S. 8:61 Hilali-Khan Yeh ayaat, jang say pehlay, kay wastay heh, misaal kay tor par Kafir musalmanoon kay mulk par hamla awar honay kay wastay tiyar ho, fojen border par aa jahen, jang kay ilan ka intizar ho, aur phir woh agar sula ki taraf ruju karen toh, sulah ki taraf ruju ka hokam heh. Aur khas nutqa, ayaat 8:61, mutliq hokam heh peace ki taraf ruju karnay ka, 47:35 is mutliq mein exception (ghaliban urdu mein issay istisnah kehtay hen) sabat karti heh, kay aur halatoon mein peace ki taraf ruju karo agar dushman tiyar ho jahay toh, magar is halat mein nahin jab musalmanoon ka ghalib ana larahi kay doran bilqul wazia aur kuffar ki haar bilqul wazia ho. Jahan taq baat contradiction ki thee us ki wazahat kar deeh. Baqi kay leyeh tehqeeq ki zeroorat heh kay jamhoor ka kia nazria heh aur kin dalail par mansookh tehrahi gahi heh, jis kay leyeh meray pass waqt muyasir nahin.

Ulamah e Islam, apnoon say mansoob keren, bey-izzat firqay walay. Fazal e Haq Khayr par abad thay, deo-abad ho tum Deoband walay. Fazal e Haq par Fazal thah, ham-maslak woh Fazal Rasool walay. Kuen likhtay al-motaqid par taqreez woh, hotay agar Deoband walay. Bey-iman Dhul Quwaisirah jesa, nah ahle Taweel thah, tum dawa iman walay. Taweel, towheen e RasoolAllah ki karo, kesay bey-aqal ho tum Deoband walay. Ala Hadhrat ra'i kay istimal say mujrim huway, woh Sunnat e Qawli par amal walay Ambiyah Ummatoon kay ra'i hen, oonth baghayr ra'i jesay, tum ho Deoband Walay. Apnoon ki gustakhiyoon ki ra'i say parda poshi heh, keren woh yeh kam kalay dil walay. Ra'i e ummat, mansub nabuwat ka heh, sari towheen kay murtaqib tum Deoband walay. Bey-haya, RasoolAllah ki zuban say niklay, pakiza ilfaz, tummen lagay gali walay. RasoolAllah towheen o tanqees kartay thay kaho nah yeh tum Deoband walay. Rasool ummat ka rai, khalifah khilqat ka ra'i, ilfaaz Nabi ki sunnat e qawli walay Woh tafseer thee, towheen ki taweel jissay samjay, bewaqoof tum Deoband walay. Towheen sar'ri mein taweel nahin, kia samjay, pedawar najaiz talluqat walay. Taweel karni heh toh karo phir, kaha, Haram kay ho sab tum Deoband walay. (nahin jee, mera matlab Masjid Haram wala Haram heh.) Towheen o Tanqees kay asool o zawabat tum sam'jay nahin nah samaj'nay walay. Ahle iman say nahin, warna samaj'tay, Nabi ki tazeem, izzat, tum Deoband walay.

Jaa-yeh ga mat, jahan taq aap mojood hen mujjay bi is complete karnay ka moqa mil raha heh. In sha Allah joh aynda ihtirazat hoon gay, mazeed ambiguity clear hoti jahay gi. In sha Allah tamam asool e ahle sunnat idhar wazia kar doon ga, aur is'see style mein. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bey-haya, RasoolAllah ki zuban say niklay, pakiza ilfaz, tummen lagay gali walay. RasoolAllah towheen o tanqees kartay thay kaho nah yeh tum Deoband walay. Rasool ummat ka rai, khalifah khilqat ka ra'i, ilfaaz Nabi ki sunnat e qawli walay Woh tafseer thee, towheen ki taweel jissay samjay, bewaqoof tum Deoband walay. Towheen sar'ri mein taweel nahin, kia samjay, pedawar najaiz talluqat walay. Taweel karni heh toh karo phir, kaha, Haram kay ho sab tum Deoband walay. (nahin jee, mera matlab Masjid Haram wala Haram heh.) Towheen o Tanqees kay asool o zawabat tum sam'jay nahin nah samaj'nay walay. Ahle iman say nahin, warna samaj'tay, Nabi ki tazeem, izzat, tum Deoband walay. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Narrated Jabir bin `Abdullah: We were with Allah's Messenger collecting Al-Kabath at Mar-Az-Zahran. The Prophet said, "Collect the black ones, for they are better." Somebody said, (O Allah's Messenger! Have you ever shepherded sheep?" He said, "There has been no prophet but has shepherded them." [Ref: Bukhari, B65, H364] "Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: The Messenger of Allah as saying: Each of you is a shepherd and each of you is responsible for his flock. The amir (ruler) who is over the people is a shepherd and is responsible for his flock; a man is a shepherd in charge of the inhabitants of his household and he is responsible for his flock; a woman is a shepherdess in charge of her husband's house and children and she is responsible for them; and a man's slave is a shepherd in charge of his master's property and he is responsible for it. So each of you is a shepherd and each of you is responsible for his flock." [Ref: Bukhari, B19, H2922] "Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Messenger said, "Whilst a shepherd was amongst his sheep, a wolf attacked them and took away a sheep. The shepherd chased it and got that sheep freed from the wolf. The wolf turned towards the shepherd and said, 'Who will guard the sheep on the day of wild animals when it will have no shepherd except myself?" The people said, "Glorified be Allah." The Prophet said, "But I believe in it and so do Abu Bakr and `Umar although Abu Bakr and `Umar were not present there (at the place of the event)." [Ref: Bukhari, B57, H39] Aur un ko Ra'i e Ummat kehna kohi nuqsan qadr wali baat nahin.RasoolAllah nay wazahat kay Ummat kay responsible banday ra'i hen aur hadith say sabat heh kay Ra'i ka mansub hifazat wala heh. RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'allam) ko Ra'i e Ummat tehrana unnay ummat kay muhafiz honay kay mansub par sabat karna heh. Murtadeen kay mutaliq farmaya kay woh qayamat kay din esay camel ki tara hoon gay jin ka kohi Ra'i nahin. Mafoom mukhalif huwa kay, Ummat e RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) kay Ra'i RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa alihi was'sallam) hen. Ra'i bamana badsha bi heh, aur badsha e ummat hona bi sabat heh, check Feroz Ul lughat. Agar lafz Ra'i akelay istimal hota toh phir ihtimal thah kay, ra'i bamana bakriyon ka charwaha ho. Magar jab wazia ra'i e ummat farmaya toh, mafoom wazia ho gaya kay lafz mafoom mein istimal nahin huwa. Aur Ala Hazrat ki ibarat kay context say sabat huwa kay unoon nay Ra'i bamana muhafiz keeya heh, keun kay unoon nay likh: "... aur muhabbat baray dil say hafiz haqiqi kay supurd kar raha heh." Yehni RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'allam) ra'i/muhafiz mein hen aur haqiqat mein Allah hi hafiz heh jin kay supurd Ummat ko kar rahay hen. Ambiyah alayhis salaam ka shepherd hona sabat heh aur RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ka Ra'i honay ka iqrar Nabi e kareem (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) say huwa, joh Sunnat qawli banta heh. Aap ko ihtiraz huwa kay Sunnat e qawli say sabat lafz ka istimal Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat nay keeya aur mujrim tehray. Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat Sunnat e Qawli par amal kay mujrim. Wah! Kia chawal fehm heh Deoband ki. Aakhir mein arz heh, kay joh Raina Quran mein heh, hamara charwaha, wala nahin, balkay al-ru'una say heh. Kissi tafsir ko parh loh phir ihtiraz karna. Heh eman walo, mat ra'ina kaho, chor gay Sahabah, joh thay aur hen Eman walay. Bila-taweel ra'ina chora, ra'ina o taweel, nah chor pahay, Kafir, tum deoband walay. Kaha nah, esa makhrooh khiyal bi na aya, eh Rabb, ra'ina say roknay walay. Keun ke woh thay ashab e RasoolAllah, bahanay baaz tum Deoband walay. Sahabah e kiram joh sahih ul aqeedah thay aur ba-adab thay, unoon nay kohi excuse nahin banaya aur raina ka istimal chor deeya magar thanvi sahib ko jab ba khabr keeya gaya toh us nay kia kaha, kay esa behuda khiyal meray dil mein bi nah aya aur phir yeh taweel, woh taweel, idhar taweel udhar taweel, joh abhi taq jari heh. Halan kay Sahabah bi toh lafz kay istimal par behas kar saktay thay, esa nahin wesa thah, niyat esi thee, wesi thee, jesi thee, magar kohi taweel nahin ki apnay amal ki. unoon nay bila-taweel chora. Keun kay woh iman walay thay. Uneh zeroorat nahin thee. Woh ba-adab thay aur ba-iman thay. baqi sheron say wazia heh. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ala Hadhrat ra'i kay istimal say mujrim huway, woh Sunnat e Qawli par amal walay Ambiyah Ummatoon kay ra'i hen, oonth baghayr ra'i jesay, tum ho Deoband Walay. Apnoon ki gustakhiyoon ki ra'i say parda poshi heh, keren woh yeh kam kalay dil walay. Ra'i e ummat, mansub nabuwat ka heh, sari towheen kay murtaqib tum Deoband walay. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ilm zahir ki khasusiat par bi Sunni iman lahay, bata gahay Ahmad Raza ki rah walay. Ilm e ghayb toh hi Nabi ki khasusiyat heh, nah samaj pahay issay tum Deoband walay. Heh eman walo, mat ra'ina kaho, chor gay Sahabah, joh thay aur hen Eman walay. Bila-taweel ra'ina chora, ra'ina o taweel, nah chor pahay, Kafir tum deoband walay. Kaha nah, esa makhrooh khiyal bi na aya, eh Rabb, ra'ina say roknay walay. Keun ke woh thay ashab e RasoolAllah, bahanay baaz tum Deoband walay. Ulamah e Islam, apnoon say mansoob keren, bey-izzat firqay walay. Fazal e Haq Khayr par abad thay, deo-abad ho tum Deoband walay. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fazal e Haq par Fazal thah, ham-maslak woh Fazal Rasool walay. Kuen likhtay al-motaqid par taqreez woh, hotay agar Deoband walay. Bey-iman Dhul Quwaisirah jesa, nah ahle Taweel thah, tum dawa iman walay. Taweel, towheen e RasoolAllah ki karo, kesay bey-aqal ho tum Deoband walay. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salam alayqum, Khadim Mawlana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Sahib ki kitab kay jawab mein Sirat e Sunnat likhna shoroon ki heh. Agar kohi Sunni likhay huway material ko proof read karnay ki khawaish karay toh private mein mujjay message karen. In sha Allah tarteeb-war material post karta jahoon ga.