MuhammedAli

Salam alayqum, Jab taq scanned refference nah ho kuch jawab nahin deeya ja sakta.

Introduction: Khawarij employing bogus scholarship attempt to argue Ahadith of Najd – which indicate group of Satan is to emerge from it - were in fact regarding Iraq because Iraq is East of Madinah. Their attempt to use logic/rationalism to interpret Ahadith without the considering contradicting geographical data are gross distortions. It is best example of heretical Qiyas (i.e. Analogy). Employing correct information and deducing incorrect conclusion – like Iblees did, created from fire, created from clay, qiyas = I am better then him. Mixing falsehood with some truth. Poison presented as healthy food. Hence objective would be to expose the fraud perpetuated by the young and foolish Khawarij. So the seekers of truth can correctly employ the information to know that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) warned Muslims regarding emergence of group of Satan from Najd, warned people about emergence of Wahhabism/Salafism from Najd. Told the Ummah that their methodology would be to quote the best people in the Ummah Muslimah as proof of their ideas.[1] Another Hadith tells that they will employ best of speech[2] to argue their case against Muslims.[3] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said this and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said that but they will be without guidance and out of Islam. Coming back, one the dust of heresy/disbelief will be removed it will become clear and those who are concerned for their hereafter will be able to use the information in Ahadith to guide themselves to straight path. 0.0 - The Rationale Behind Iraq Being East And Najd Being Iraq: A Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding Najd: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] They say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Iraq when he refused to supplicate Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Abdullah Ibn-Umar related that once, he saw the Prophet showing Iraq with his hand, and saying: "The fitna is here, the fitna is here, the fitna is here, three times, it is from here that will appear the devil's group.” [Ref: Musnd Ahmad V10, Hadith.6302, or 6129, P391] “Narrated Yusair bin 'Amr: I asked Sahl bin Hunaif, "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said, "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq.” There will appear in it (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats, and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body.' " [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] To seal the deal they present the following evidence in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was pointing toward the direction of East: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle while he was facing the East, saying, "Verily! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] On this they conclude, Iraq is in the East of Madinah, and by Najd Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intended meant Iraq. 1.0 - Appearance Of Dajjal And Issue Of Najd: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding Dajjal: “Thereupon he said: I harbor fear in regard to you in so many other things besides the Dajjal. If he comes forth while I am among you, I shall contend with him on your behalf, but if he comes forth while I am not amongst you, a man must contend on his own behalf and Allah would take care of every Muslim on my behalf (and safeguard him against his evil). He (Dajjal) would be a young man with twisted, contracted hair, and a blind eye. I compare him to `Abd-ul-`Uzza b. Qatan. He who amongst you would survive to see him should recite over him the opening verses of Sura Kahf (xviii). He would appear on the way between Syria and Iraq and would spread mischief right and left. O servant of Allah! adhere (to the path of Truth). We said: Allah's Messenger, how long would he stay on the earth? He said: For forty days, one day like a year and one day like a month and …” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7015] Another Hadith provides additional detail: “Allah has not sent any Prophet but he warned his nation about Dajjal. I am the last of the Prophets, and you are the last of the nations. He will undoubtedly appear among you. If he appears while I am among you, I will contend with him on behalf of every Muslim, and if he appears while I am not among you, then each man must fend for himself and Allah will take care of every Muslim on my behalf. He will emerge from Al-Khallah, between Sham and Iraq, and will wreak havoc right and left. O slaves of Allah, remain steadfast. I will describe him to you in a manner in which none of the Prophets has described him before me. He will start by saying "I am a Prophet," and there is no Prophet after me. Then a second time he will say: "I am your Lord." But you will not see your Lord until you die.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4077] According to these Ahadith, Dajjal would appear between Syria and Iraq [of that time]. The second Hadith provides Al Khallah as the place from where Dajjal would appear. It also states: “He (i.e. Dajjal) undoubtedly appear among you.” Indicating he would appear from Arabia as well. Another Hadith states, that Dajjal will appear from East, in land of Khurasan: It was narrated that Abu Bakr Siddiq said: "The Messenger of Allah told us: 'Dajjal will emerge in a land in the east called Khorasan, and will be followed by people with faces like hammered shields.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4072] Following link leads to map depicting ancient Khurasan on modern geographical data, here. In another Hadith it is stated: “We said: 'Yes.' He said: 'Inform me about the Prophet, has he been sent?' We said: 'Yes.' He said: 'Inform me how the people came to him.' We said: 'Quickly.' He leaped up to try and escape.' We said: 'What are you?' He said: 'I am the Dajjal.'" (The Prophet(s.a.w) said) "He will enter all of the lands except At-Taibah, and At-Taibah is Al-Madinah." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2253] In other words, Dajjal will go to every country, or maybe every city of every country, but the city of Madinah – in other words he would appear in every country/city of earth. Please bare with me, the preceding was not related to Najd but it will be put into perspective and will establish inconsistent and defective, and deceptive methodology of opponents of Islam. 1.1 - Refuting The Logic And Rationale On Which Najd Became Iraq: From the Ahadith it is established, Dajjal will appear from East, will appear between Syria and Iraq, he will appear from Khurasan, and he will enter every city except city of Madinah. Using all this information, would it be correct to argue, land between Iraq and Syria is in East and called Khurasan? Or land of Khurasan is in East, and Iraq and Syria are in Khurasan? In the first case, Khurasan which is in East is moved to North of Madinah. In the second case, Khurasan which is in East, but Syria and Iraq have been made in direction of East and made part of Khurasan. Considering the saying of Prophet, Dajjal will enter every land and Dajjal is to appear in Khurasan, can we assume all countries/cities are in East of Madinah and are called Khurasan? England, East of Madinah, its also called Khurasan. France in East and part of Khurasan. What kind of methodology is this? And what kind of scholarship is this? Is this the scholarship of Salaf Saliheen and methodology inherited from them? Its not scholarship its blendership, you put everything in one blender of stupidity, and get everything out which suites your purpose. O enemy of Islam – do you reason like this when you wish to demonstrate from where the Dajjal will appear? Do you interpret one place by the name of another? Have you ever argued Khurasan is between Syria and Iraq? Or Syria and Iraq are region, or places in Khurasan? Or argued Khurasan is another name of Al-Khallah? No! Then why display of such depravity with regards to appearance of Khawarij from Najd and Iraq? 1.2 - Restoring Sanity Amongst The Insane Distorters Of Islam: Appearance of Dajjal is mentioned from many places, in East, from Khurasan, from North of Madinah – between Iraq and Syria. And Muslims do not combine all this data and distort the location of Khurasan, or direction of East, or location of Syria and Iraq. Instead we believe he will visit all lands, and Hadith stating about appearance of Dajjal in these lands only means he will visit these lands – as well as all lands of earth. The actual residence of Dajjal, the actual place of origin of Dajjal is mentioned in Hadith of Tamim Dari and definitely the lands are not of Iraq, Syria, Khurasan. These lands are where he would make his appearance but these are not lands of his origin. Neither do we interpret a name of place by another. And this is correct methodology. Yet on issue of Najd, instead of maintaining and affirming all regions our opponents interpret Najd to mean Iraq on the grounds that detail – i.e. group of Satan is said to appear from Iraq, and Najd. If matching of details means two different places can be one and the same then appearance of Dajjal between Syria and Iraq, Khurasan, from East, can/should all be combined, to make a new intepretation – Khurasan is Al Khalla, and it is between Syria and Iraq. Or we can wait for fruit-cake[4] scholarship to produce another logical/rational master pieace – in which all the mentioned details are crammed without any due respect to accuracy. Such bogus and shameless scholarship was and is foundation of all Khawarij, and it is also true for followers, defenders and promoters of Khariji teaching of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab.[5] And we must leave such incredulous disgraceful scholarship lacking morally upright character to Shaykh of Najd and his band of foolish dessert rabble good for nothing except enemity to religion of Islam and Muslims whose only major contribution is destruction of Ummah Muslimah whole-sale. And we as Muslims follow the upright methodology and apply it consistently every time. 2.0 - Rebellion Of Khawarij In Syria - Al-Siffin: According to Ahadith it is also clear that Khawarij will appear when there will be tribulation amongst the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) – such as war between companions. The following Hadith is evidence of it: “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) gave an example (to give their description) or he said: … 1Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq. it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, M2324] The dissension mentioned was battle of Al-Siffin between the armies of rightly guided Caliph Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and leader of pious Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). 2.1 - Emergence Of Khawarij – Najd, Syria, Iraq: Vast majority of Khawarij and their leader Dhil Quwaisirah at-Tamimi belonged to Bani Tamim. He resided toward East of Madinah in region of Najd. From there he along his followers marched to Syria to take part in battle between Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). After incident of arbitration – which they disapproved - they seperated from Army of Ali (radiallaht a’ala anhu) and later marched to Harura [Haruri is another name for Khariji] in Iraq. There like minded people joined them and then they moved camp to Nehrawan. At Nehrawan Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) faced them in battle which resulted in utter and complete defeat of Khawarij. In short, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold that Khawarij will emerge from Banu Tamim, from East of Madinah, from Najd, will march to Syria, become Khariji, march to Iraq, and fight battle, and foretold their complete anahilation – when he stated every single group of Khawarij will be cut-off, meaning anahilated. Considering this, why should you argue Iraq is Najd, why not Syria? Have you any principle by which you stand? Shouldn’t Najd, Syria, Iraq be one and the same according to your own methodology because Khawarij left the party of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in Syria? Doesn’t your sense of shame cause you to feel embrassed and feel ashamed of your distortions? 3.0 - Hypothetically Speaking – Najd Is Iraq, Najd Is Syria, So What: Suppose even if Iraq is Najd, Syria is also Najd, it still would not lighten the burden of Kharijism carried by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab because the Najd which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward was in East of Madinah, here, the direction of sunrise, here, from the prophetic pulpit of Masjid Nabvi – toward the direction Ummul Momineen Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha) house, here – which establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Saudi capital Riyadh. And these details which indicates direction of Najd you cannot fit on Iraq or Syria. These detail only substantiate traditional and Islamic understanding of Najd; Najd is in Arabian Peninsula, central Arabia, region surrounding Riyadh. It is established that the first Kharijis were followers of Dhil Quwaisirah at-Tamim, from tribe of Banu Tamim. Following article provides links to maps published by Khawarij and neutral sources which indicate where Bani Tamim was located in Arabian Peninsula during the prophetic times. It also contains links to maps which indicate direction, location and region of Najd in Arabian Peninsula, here. Finally the following article refutes the rationale and logic on which the opponents of Islam have argued, Iraq is East, Najd is Iraq, here. Coming to back Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and Riyadh - Uyainah the birth place of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and Dirriyah the missionary centre of his Khariji movement are stones throw away from Riyadh. Alhasil, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) precisely pointed the region of Najd from which group of Satan – Khawarij were to emerge. Conclusion: Najd, Iraq, Syria, Khurasan, are all different vast regions of Earth. Najd and Khurasan are East of Madinah. Syria is pretty precisely North, Iraq is more North from in context of Arabia then East and in context of Madinah North East. Baghdad/Kufa where Khawarij were in Iraq is toward North then North East.All these places were and are known as separate places from Ahadith and geographical data. On basis of a trait, a detail of information, it is foolish to interpret, Iraq to mean Najd or Najd to mean Iraq, or Al-Khalla to mean Khurasan, or any other distorted possibility. We cannot interpret Ahadith like this, accurately; distort Ahadith like this and if one does so such one is guilty of distorting and is attempting to distort Islam. Ahadith establish Khawarij are to appear from Najd, Iraq and even Syria. Najd is place of origin of Khariji Fitnah and Banu Tamim is the mother tribe in which it festered until it infected battle of Al-Siffin and then Iraq. And Iraqis were the people who killed the Khawarij. Also pre-supposing, Iraq is also Najd even then it cannot be Najd toward which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed – he pointed toward direction of Riyadh which is established from Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha). This supposition disregards all available information which negates/refutes the Khariji position that Najd is Iraq or in Iraq. And despite this a single detail refutes it and establishes Islamic position that Najd is in central Arabia, region surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] Hadith records: “Abdullah [bin Mas'ud] narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "In the end of time there will come a people young in years, foolish in minds, reciting the Qur'an which will not go beyond their throats, uttering sayings from the best of creatures, going through the religion as an arrow goes through the target." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2188] Even though scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah also do this but it is not trade-mark. Yet their maybe hardly any practicing Salafi/Wahhabi who doesn’t do this. And this is their trade mark call: – understand religion as the Salaf as-Saliheen understood it. Who are the best of generations, the Sahabah, the Tabiyoon, and the Taba Tabi’een. And who puts the mosts emphasis on following these three best of generations? Be fair if you know, is it not the Wahhabiyyah? This excessive emphasis on Salaf Saliheen is proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had foretold the emergence of Wahhabism and described their trait – calling them young foolish people who have gone out of religion. Note this was not the trait of earliest Khawarij. They put emphasis on Quran more then the Sunnah. The Shaykh of Najd and his followers put great emphasis on Salaf Saliheen so much so that they are called Salafi i.e. one who follows predecessor. - [2] “Narrated Abdullah: The best talk (speech) is Allah's Book, and the best way is the way of Muhammad, and the worst matters are the heresies (those new things which are introduced into the religion); and whatever you have been promised will surely come to pass, and you cannot escape (it).” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H382] - [3] “Narrated Ali: I relate the traditions of Allah's Messenger to you for I would rather fall from the sky than attribute something to him falsely. But when I tell you a thing which is between you and me, then no doubt, war is guile. I heard Allah's Messenger saying, "In the last days of this world there will appear some young foolish people, who will use (in their claim) the best speech of all people (i.e. the Qur'an), and they will abandon Islam as an arrow going through the game. Their belief will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have practically no belief), so wherever you meet them, kill them, for he who kills them shall get a reward on the Day of Resurrection." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H808] Anyone interested on seeing the actual demonstration of this can buy any random book published by Wahhabiyyah. It will be crammed with Quranic and refferences from Ahadith and references of Salaf Saliheen. Yet the reality is what they quote has nothing to do with what the scholars of Islam wrote, nor the Quran or Ahadith teach. These books contain wgross distortions which go against emphatic teaching of Ahadith. For ilustration purposes, Kitab at-Tawheed of Shaykh of Najd, is replete with quotes from Quran and Ahadith. Yet all verses are about polytheists but he has applied them upon Muslims. And according to Abdullah Ibn Umar, it was trait of early Khawarij, the worst of creatures in existance and not of Muslims: “... and the Mulhidun (heretical) after the establishment of firm proof against them:"And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.' [9:115] And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.” [Ref: Bukhari, Volume 9, Page 49, Chapter 6: Killing The Khawarij] So even though their books are replete with refferences they contain no guidance and their authors are standing at gates of hell inviting people to hell and one who responds to them will be in fire with them. - [4] Fruit-Cake scholarship, is my way of very politely saying bogus and fraudulent scholarship. Offensive way would be, whore-scholarship. With a whore, moral depravity and money justifies the action, in whore-scholarship of Wahhabism, moral depravity and end justifies the means – i.e. methodology is justified by what the Khariji wants to achieve. To earn money whore sells body. On other hand a Khariji, Wahhabi, Salafi scholar to protect the sectarian interest and to ensure smooth flow of Saudi petro-dollars, is willing to sell everything; sound methodology is first one to go, consistent honest objective application of methodology is the second victim of petro-dollars, and lastly sells his soul to Iblees, and earns hell-fire for distorting the religion, and for introducing innovations. - [5] Note readers, it is not that they don’t know the correct way of interpretation. They do know how to correctly interpret the given data in Ahadith. They demonstrate their correct knowledge when they explain the Ahadith of Dajjal in which appearnce of him is mentioned from different plcaes. The problem is that their blackened hearts love the teaching they have been exposed to. Hence when the truth of Islam is established and it becomes apparent to them; by accepting the truth of Islamic argument they would destroy their own religion of Kharijism, and religion of Islam would be triumphant against them, as it is destined to be triumphant. Then they resort behaving like a fish out of water – unpredictably flaps, looses all grace. In similar fashion, the brain fuse goes pop and the resulting spasm attack results in such arguments and such scholarship. I am waiting for some true follower of Salaf as-Saaliheen to come and say, sun will rise from West near the judgment day, hence West is East, and group of Satan is European Uninon. Hint! Hint! Qarn = European Union = European Group = East Is West = Eurpean Union/Group of Satan. What do you care about distorting the Ahadith. As long as, group of Satan is not from direction of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s place, all interpretations are valid, right? Psst!!! Over here! Shhh! Not so loud, Alps in France establishes Najd is Europe because Najd means raise/elevated land, keep it between me and you. Hehe! Okay? Hehe! Okay!

Kalay safaat dekh kar mukhalif ka lajawab hona, yeh ilmiat heh, aur Allah nay yeh mujjay mubarak kee. Chand points ka zikr karna bhool gaya, yaad anay par izafa kar raha hoon. Khadam nay apnay puranay material mein ek aur point - point five, six, seven ka izafa keeya heh. Point one, Mufti Sahib nay likha heh kay: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Janab tashbih is jumlay mein Noori bashr honay mein deeh jaa rahi heh. Abh sawal peda hota heh kis jesay Noori bashr hen, saamp jesay noori bashr (mazallah astaghfirullah) ya Jinn jesay noori bashr? Ya Jibraeel alayhis salaam jesay Noori bashr hen? Siyaaq o sabaq say toh sabat heh kay Allamah Sahib rahimullah nay, Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) kay Noor honay aur Bashr ban kar anay ka zikr farmaya heh, phir tashbih us'see waqt hoti heh jab kissi zaat mein kissi aur ki zaat o sift ko shamal keeya jahay. Aur yahan par wazia heh kay Mufti Sahib nay Jibraeel alayhis salaam ka Noor e hissi ho kar bashr ban kar anay say tashbih deeh. Aur tashbih jaiz is waja say huwi keun kay, Nabi e kareem rauf ar raheem Noor minallah (Allah ki taraf say Noor hen) aur Bashr ki soorat mein ahay. Yahi Ahle Sunnat ka aqeeda heh. Aur issee mein tashbih deeh jaa rahi heh. Point two, Abh agar is jumla ko siyaq o sabaq say juda keeya jahay toh phir bi aap ihtiraz nahin kar saktay, keun kay likha heh, Esay hee hamaray Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen? Kesay Noori bashr hen,us'see bashriat kay teht jis mein nikkah, khana, peena heh. Mufti Sahib nay Jumlay kay shoroon mein tashbih kay lafz istimal keeya aur aakhar mein mumasilat kay point bi biyan kar deeyeh. Ta-qay aap jesay anparh aur gawar logh ihtiraz bi na kar saken. Point three, Meray yeh aakhiri point pehlay donoon points ka majmua heh donoon points ki ilada sabat keeya aur phir idhar jama keeya. Aap ko is ibarat par keun ihtiraz huwa us ki taraf aata hoon aur aap ki kam fehmi aur kam aqli sabat karta hoon. Aap nay samja ya janbooj kar aap nay ghalat mafoom nikala taqay aap apnay uqabir ki tara Islam dushmani aur Musalman dushmani par qaim rahen. Mufti Sahib likhtay hen: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib likhtay hen, "aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah." Magar Mufti Sahib nay agay likha us par tawajoh nahin ki. Mufti Sahib nay saamp ki tara nigalnay, ya saamp ki tara khanay mein tashbih nahin deeh. Balkay Mufti Sahib nay likha: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib nay, samp kay khanay say tashbih nahin deeh, balkay tashbih Noori Bashr honay mein deeh aur bashr honay ki tafseel mein tashbih deeh, aur likha kay khana peena nikkah bashariat kay ihkam mein thah. Point four, Raha kay samp ka zikr keun darmiyan mein ayah jab is ka talluq nahin thah aur tashbih mein is ki kohi munasbat nahin banti thee aur nah is ki tashbih deeh. Musa alayhis salaam ki laathi ka zikr ki munasbat, joh mein pehlay likh aya hoon, Zaat badli, toh phir us ki sifaat badli, banda jab taq sahih ul aqeedah sahih ul amal Sunni ho toh RasoolAllah say muhabbat aur un ki shaan biyan karta heh, magar jab Thanvi, Ismail Dehalvi, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, Murtaza Hassan Chandpuri, Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri ka chahnay wala ho toh phir gustakhiyan karta heh, hasil kalam yeh huwa kay zaat badalnay say sifaat o khoobiyan badalti hen aur needs badalti hen. Idhar banda toh wohi heh sirf label Deobandi aur taleem Deobandi mazhab ki - ba-adab say bey-adab ho gaya. Sayaq o sabaq mein dekha jahay toh Mufti Sahib yeh keh rahay hen kay Jibraeel alayhis salaam Jab farishtay thay toh kalay baal nahin thay, insaani ankh nahin thee, insaani shakal o soorat nahin thee, lebaas bi insaani nahin thah, magar jab zaat badli toh sab kuch insaani ho gaya, keun kay noori zaat say insaani zaat banay. Musa alayhis salaam ka aasa thah toh bey-jaan thah, khata peenay ki khoobiyan nahin theen, aankh nahin thee, magar jab samp bana toh phir khoobiyan badleen. Hamaray Nabi e kareem, Jab Noor thay toh phir khana peena sona jagna insaani jism nahin rakhtay thay, magar jab bani Adam say afzalul khalq bashr huway toh phir insaani khoobiyan aur insaani zerooriyat bi saath huween aur insaani limitations bi saath huween, yehni peda huway, shahadat bi huwi, waghera ... Point Five: Sayaq o sabaq say sabat huwa kay Mufti Sahib ka mowaqif - zaat badli toh sifaat badli - issee ko sabat karnay kay leyeh Mufti Sahib (rahimullah) nay tafseel likhi. Mufti Sahib nay jumla tashbiya mein. Tashbih zaat badalnay aur sifaat badalnay, mein deeh. Mufti Sahib ki ibarat: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Tafseel yoon heh, jistera, Jibraeel alayhis salaam ki zaat badli toh zaat kay saath sifaat badli, Jin joh atashi hen insaan bantay hen jab un ki zaat badli toh agar insaani zaat ka roop apnaya toh insaani sifat lazam aahi, is'see tera Musa alayhis salaam ka Aasa mubarak ki zaat badli aur bi iznilah saamp bana toh zaat badalnay say joh zaat ikhtiyat ki us kay mutabik sifaat badli, hamaray nabi Noor thay aur noorani sifaat kay jamay thay. Jab Noor ki Zaat badli aur bashri zaat apnahi toh sifaat badleen. Is context mein Mufti Sahib ka farmana: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Yeh mafoom deta heh kay, esay hee jab hamaray Nabi e kareem Noori Bashr hen jin ki badli, pehli zaat Nooraniat thee. aur badalnay kay baad phir bashr banay, toh khana peena nikkah is'see bashariat kay ihkam mein heh. Hasil kalam, tashbih zaat kay badalnay aur sifaat kay badalnay mein huwi. Mazeed wazhat, jumla maqabl mein a'asa ka samp bannay ka zikr heh: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Is jumla mein khaas point - zaat badli aur new zaat kay mutabiq sifat badli heh. Aur tashbih zaat badal kar aur soorat ikhtiyar kharnay mein deeh gahi heh samp honay ya saamp kee tara nigalnay mein nahin. Point Six: Note, mein ibarat hafzay say likh raha hoon, shahid chota mota hifz ho ya izafa, overall mafoom mein farq nahin hoga. Thanvi Sahib ki ibarat: "... phir yeh kay aap ki zaat e muddisa par ilm e ghayb ka hokam keeya jana agar baqawl Zahid sahih ho toh daryaft talab amr yeh heh kay is ghayb say qull ghayb murad heh ya baaz, agar baaz uloom e ghaybiya murad hen to is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh esa ilm ghayb..." Pehla point yeh heh kay Thanvi Sahib ka yeh ek sentence heh aur kohi break nahin. Is puri ibarat mein Thanvi Sahib nay aap ki zaat e muqadisa kay ilfaz istimal keeyeh, aur ilm e ghayb kay ilfaaz. Phir Thanvi sahib nay, ghayb ki zameer ilm e ghayb kee taraf lutahi, aur jama kay seeghoon kay saath ilm e ghayb ka zikr keeya, phir hazoor ki zameer ko Allah kay Nabi ki zaat e muqadisa ke taraf lotaya, phir ilfaaz ilm e ghayb ka istimal keeya - istera apnay mozoo aur jis zaat ka zikr heh sayaq o sabaq kay mutabiq qaim rakha. Yehni, Thanvi sahib nay sayaq o sabaq ko qaim rakha, mozoo aur jis zaat ka zikr heh us ko mustaqil zikr heh, aur tashbih ka lafz 'esa' bi istimal keeya, aur jis sift mein tashbih deeh us ka zikr be keeya, yehni "esa ilm e ghayb ...". Aur Thanvi Sahib nay, jin zaatoon say tashbih deeh us ka zikr bi keeya ... RasoolAllah ki zaat e muqadisa aur janwar, pagal, bachay, zaid, bakr. Agar yaqeen nah ahay toh aap khud dekh lenh: Abh aatay hen Mufti Sahib ki ibarat ki taraf.Mufti Sahib ki ibarat: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Jumla maqabl aur jumla ma-bad mein bazahir kohi connection nahin - sirf zaat badal janay say sifat badal janay ka connection heh. Mufti Sahib nay jis sift mein tashbih deeh us ka jumla maqabl say kohi talluq nahin, tashbih Noori bashr honay mein heh jis ka jumla maqabl say kohi talluq nahin, Nabi ki zaat ko insaan say tashbih deeh is ka zikr bi wazia heh: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Aur is ka talluq jumla maqabl say toh nahin magar Jibraeel alayhis salaam kay bashr bannay say heh. Alhasil, nah samp ki zaat aur Allah kay Nabi ki zaat mein tashbih - yehni, yeh nahin farmaya kay hamaray Nabi e kareem samp jesay hen - agar yoon hota toh sar'ri kufr thah aur taweel lazam nah hoti aur nah mein aur nah kohi Sunni taweel karta. Nah samp kay khanay aur peenay aur RasoolAllah kay khanay peenay mein tashbih. Yehni yeh nahin farmaya, jesay saamp khata thah wesay hamaray Nabi khatay hen. Alhasil, ibarat Mufti Sahib mein tashbih har giz nahin yeh aap ki ziyadti heh jis kay aap jawab deh hoon gay. Ibarat aap jantay hen magar ek dafa phir, parh saktay hen: Jab donoon ibarat mein itna farq, thanvi sahib ki ibarat mein jin zatoon mein tashbih, jis sift mein tashbih, sab ka wazia zikr heh. ilm mein tashbih, Allah kay Nabi aur pagaloon, janwaroon, bachoon, kay darmiyan tashbih, sar'ri ilfaz say sabat heh. Mufti Sahib ki ibarat mein jis tashbih par kufr lazam ata heh woh mojood nahin aur jis say aap ko mowaqif sabat hota heh woh mojood nahin. Balkay joh mera mowaqif heh wohi sabat heh. Sar'ri tor par mufti sahib ki ibarat say kufria tashbih sabat nahin agar hoti toh aap chup nah kartay. Bas zan ki bunyad par aap Kufr ka hokam jaari kar rahay hen. Zan par daleel ghalab hoti heh. Aur aap ki tashbih bil farz e muhal, agar heh bi toh zanni, aur zan par hokam Kufr kabi nahin hota. Thanvi sahib ki ibarat mein Kufr sar'ri heh zanni nahin - wazia tashbih heh. Aap agar tashbih ko zan sabat kar denh mujjay auroon ka pata nahin magar mein wada karta hoon takfir nahin karoon ga. Agar aap ko Mufti Sahib rehmatullah alayhi ki takfir kerni heh toh dil ki hasrat bi puri kar lenh ham nay apna imaan o Islam kharab nahin karna - Mufti Sahib ki takfir kar kay. Aap kay pass donoon nahin, takfir kar kay aur kia bigar lenh gay apna! Wesay, takfir kay asool hen, pehlay, takfir kay leyeh Kufr ka sadir hona, dosra Kufr baknay walay ka ihtimam e hujjat kay bad bi Kufr say toba ka munkir hona, aur phir hokam e takfir hota heh. Mufti Sahib say Kufr ka sadoor nahin huwa, toh phir ihtimam e hujjat kesay hoti, aur nah kissi Mufti e Islam aur nah kissi Mufti e Deoband nay hokam kufr ka lagaya is bunyad par, nah ihtimam e hujjat ki bunyad bani. Misaal kay tor par chalen ibarat kufria hee hoti, toh kia aap Takfir karen gay? Aap kay mazhab mein Musalmanoon ki majority, aksiriat wesay be Mushrik heh, Taqwiyatul Iman ka pehla bab parh lenh, is leyeh Mufti Sahib par Kufr ka hokam laganay mein aap ka kia nuqsan hoga. Jis jammat nay Ummat kay jamhoor ki takfir ka bhoj uthaya huwa heh us par ek banday ka aur laad dena kia bura hoga. Mein likh raha thah kay chalen Mufti Sahib ki ibarat Kufria hee hoti, ham musalman tab bi takfir nah kartay, keun kay anjani mein Kufr ka baqa jana - khata par mabni hota, dosra ham ibarat kay kufr kay qail hotay magar mufti sahib ki takfir nah kartay keun kay ihtimam e hujjat nahin huwi agar hoti toh shahid toba kartay. Ham Musalman toh Ismail Dehalvi kay 70 say zaid Kufriat kay qail hen aur Ala Hazrat, Hakeem Ul Ummat, Mujadid e Deen O Millat, Mujtahid e Mutliq, Qutb Ul Ulamah o Awliyah, Al Imam, Ahmad Raza Khan rehmatur rahman, Asr e Hazir mein haq ki pechan nay bi Ismail Dehalvi ki Takfir nah kee, doh bunyadoon par, toba mashoor honay ki bunyad par, aur ihtimam e hujjat nah honay par. Esay khabees banday ki Takfir nah kee, Mufti Sahib rahimullah toh aap kay ilzam say bari hen, kufr huwa bi nahin, phir ihtimam e hujjat bi nahin huwi aur nah jawab banta heh, toh ham Musalman Takfir kesay karen? Aap karen, gadday par jamhoor e Ummat ko Mushrik tehrana aur Kafir tehranay ka bhooj lada heh, aap joh jamhoor/majority kay ilawa minority bachi heh us ki bi kar lenh. Point Seven: Kufr sar'ri mein taweel nahin hoti. Agar kohi Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) kay ilm ko bachoon, pagaloon, janwaroon, keeroon makaroon jesa kahay. Cha-hay miqdar/quantity mein kahay - yehni baaz honay mein, ya ilm jannay mein, toh aap say batahen aap kay dil mein yeh baat bey-adabi nah lagay gee? Ya agar kohi kahay, Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) kay Quran hifz kernay mein kia khasoosiat/takhsees heh esay 10 saala bachay bi hifz kar letay hen. Aap apnay iman say bata-hen kay Allah kay Nabi kay Quran hifz karnay ko 10 sala bachay say muqabala karwana mein Allah kay Nabi ki towheen nahin? Baat sach heh kay bachay kartay hen - magar tashbih aur muqabala baazi mein Allah kay Nabi kay hafzay ko 10 sala bachay kay jesa tehrana - aap apnay imaan say batahen towheen o tanqees nahin? Thanvi Sahib ki ibarat aur Mufti Sahib ki ibarat, Thanvi sahib nay ibarat mein Allah kay Nabi kay ilm ka muqabala bachoon, pagaloon janwaroon say karwaya aur RasoolAllah ki khasoosiat ka inqaar keeya. Thanvi sahib toh khasoosiat kay munkir hen aur yahi sabat kar rahay hen. Aur is'see munkr ko sabat karnay kay leyeh Thanvi sahib nay tashbih deeh takay khasoosiat qaim nah ho.Alhasil, Thanvi Sahib nay RasoolAllah kay wohi ilm e ghayb mana joh us nay pagaloon janwaroon kay leyeh mana. Abh es'see sift ki kia shaan joh pagaloon kay pass bi ho? Aur esay ki kia izzat/shaan jis ki khoob mein pagal shareek hoon? Apnay dil par haath rakh batahen, kay agar aap kay pass Christian Hindu ya ek Deobandi hee, ata heh aur kehta heh, tumara Nabi wohi heh jis kay ilm e ghayb mein pagal, bachay, janwar shareek hen, jis ki ilm e ghayb jannay mein khasoosiat nahin? Toh, aap ka kia rad e amal hoga, aap hifz ul iman utha kar us kay samnay rakhen gay, dekho jee, yahi toh ham keh rahay hen kay khasoosiat nahin, ya aap midan e jang laga lenh gay us kay khilaf? Tawaqoh nahin. Aap shahid us ko batahen kay hamara Islam toh kehta heh kay Namaz mein Nabi e kareem kee taraf khiyal mein tawajoh karna bi biwi say jismani talluqat kay suhanay khiyalat say bi badtr heh. Aap bad-sha hen apni aakhirat kay, kuch be kar saktay hen, aur karen gay, ham par farz samjna thah samja deeya. Abh aah kar apni, jheet kay dhol bajahen. ----------------------------

Taweel kesi? Aap kakay toh nahin nah kay Urdu parna nahin aati, mein panween jammat Urdu para hoon, agar mein samaj gaya ibarat ko to kia aap muj say kam paray hen joh aap ko samaj nahin aahi?

Janab is ka faisla toh parnay walay karen gay kay chavlen kis kee hen. Yeh aap ki pesh karda, scan aur ihtiraz: Aur yeh huwi meri wazahat - jissay logh parh kar faisla kar lenh gay: Agar mein nay taweel kee heh toh aap phir batahen kay kesay joh mein nay wazahat kee heh ghalat heh. Sirf gilay shikway hujjaten qaim nah karen. Apna mowaqif wazahat o daleel say pesh karen. Mein joh ihtiraz karoon ga Thanvi Sahib par aur joh hokam qaim karoon ga woh daleel par hoga. Mein gila nahin karoon ga, shikwa nahin karoon ga, aur rona dona nahin hoga - aap esay hen wesay hen is waja say meri baat nahin mantay. Mein nay toh daleel qaim karni heh apnay mowaqif par aur karoon ga aur agar zeroori samja ya fitrat say majboor huwa toh saath hi shahid kuch jali bhuni suna doon. Magar khalis rona dona nahin hoga meri taraf say, aur nah khalis jali bhuni sunahoon ga. Joh aap kar rahay hen yeh sirf jali bhuni aur rona dona kar rahay hen aur yeh mujjay manzoor nahin. Apna aur aap ka waqt doon/loon toh hasil kuch toh ho awaam ko. Aap nay meri nahin man-ni aur mein nay toh aap ki nahin man-ni keun kay mein toh al-hamdulillah samajta janta behtr hoon. Is leyeh yeh meray aur aap kay darmiyan nahin. Keun kay aap nay bi faisla keeya huwa heh kay aap ka firqa hee sacha heh, aur aap ka mazhab hee sacha heh aur aap kay feham mein is ka ghalat hona esa muhaal hona heh jesay Allah ka makhlooq hona. Aur mera nazria heh kay Allah ka Quran, Nabi ka farman, aur Islam hee sacha heh aur aap ki Deobandiat mardood heh. Aur Islam hee woh mazhab heh joh Allah ko qabool hoga aur aap ka mazhab Allah radd kar deh ga. Is waja say ham donoon nay faisla kar leeya kay kia sacha heh kia jhoota heh. Magar awaam kay leyeh kuch likh denh. Parnay walay logh kia kahen gay kay Deobandiyoon ko kuch nahin aata. Is waja say awam kay faida kay wastay chand ilmi nuqat hee biyan karen taqay logoon ko pata chalay kay waqia hee aap kay point mein wazan heh kuch jaan heh.

Kon say Kufr, kahan heh sar'ri Kufr? Sirf chavlen hen tumari. Jistera tum maar rahay ho yahi tumaray uqabir ka warsa heh. Kis kay saath tashbih ka iqrar keeya? Abh kohi jawab nahin toh hawahi firing par utar aahay - esay bi kabi radd hota heh? Yeh wazahat tamacha heh ahle jahl kay moon par.

Al-Muhannad also known as Al Farad Wal Dajjal [by me]. Wazahat karo nah kesay iftara o buhtan heh. Mujjay bi toh pata challay kay kis mantaq kay mutabiq yeh aap ka dawah haq heh. Chalo tum yeh karo, Al Muhannad wali ibarat Hifz Ul Iman say nikaal kar doh. Agar tum Hifz ul imaan wali ibarat tum Al Muhannad say nikal doh tum jheet gahay, theek? Shart yeh kay ibarat lafz ba lafz wohi ho. Jis ka tum nay refference deeya heh usee version kay page 51 par dekho, tashbih ka lafz hee nikal deeya gaya heh yehni "esa ilm'. 'Esa ilm' kee jaga "baz ghayb ka ilm" dala. Yeh darust heh kay zameer baaz ilm e ghayb ki taraf uthai ghai thee, is waja say baaz ka izafa problem nahin balkay 'esa' ko nikalnay say ibarat ka mafoom badla. Agar al Muhannad mein yeh hota toh; 'esa baaz ilm e ghayb ...' tehreef ka ilzaam lazam nah ata.

Salam alayqum, Point one, Mufti Sahib nay likha heh kay: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Janab tashbih is jumlay mein Noori bashr honay mein deeh jaa rahi heh. Abh sawal peda hota heh kis jesay Noori bashr hen, saamp jesay noori bashr (mazallah astaghfirullah) ya Jinn jesay noori bashr? Ya Jibraeel alayhis salaam jesay Noori bashr hen? Siyaaq o sabaq say toh sabat heh kay Allamah Sahib rahimullah nay, Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) kay Noor honay aur Bashr ban kar anay ka zikr farmaya heh, phir tashbih us'see waqt hoti heh jab kissi zaat mein kissi aur ki zaat o sift ko shamal keeya jahay. Aur yahan par wazia heh kay Mufti Sahib nay Jibraeel alayhis salaam ka Noor e hissi ho kar bashr ban kar anay say tashbih deeh. Aur tashbih jaiz is waja say huwi keun kay, Nabi e kareem rauf ar raheem Noor minallah (Allah ki taraf say Noor hen) aur Bashr ki soorat mein ahay. Yahi Ahle Sunnat ka aqeeda heh. Aur issee mein tashbih deeh jaa rahi heh. Point two, Abh agar is jumla ko siyaq o sabaq say juda keeya jahay toh phir bi aap ihtiraz nahin kar saktay, keun kay likha heh, Esay hee hamaray Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen? Kesay Noori bashr hen,us'see bashriat kay teht jis mein nikkah, khana, peena heh. Mufti Sahib nay Jumlay kay shoroon mein tashbih kay lafz istimal keeya aur aakhar mein mumasilat kay point bi biyan kar deeyeh. Ta-qay aap jesay anparh aur gawar logh ihtiraz bi na kar saken. Point three, Meray yeh aakhiri point pehlay donoon points ka majmua heh donoon points ki ilada sabat keeya aur phir idhar jama keeya. Aap ko is ibarat par keun ihtiraz huwa us ki taraf aata hoon aur aap ki kam fehmi aur kam aqli sabat karta hoon. Aap nay samja ya janbooj kar aap nay ghalat mafoom nikala taqay aap apnay uqabir ki tara Islam dushmani aur Musalman dushmani par qaim rahen. Mufti Sahib likhtay hen: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib likhtay hen, "aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah." Magar Mufti Sahib nay agay likha us par tawajoh nahin ki. Mufti Sahib nay saamp ki tara nigalnay, ya saamp ki tara khanay mein tashbih nahin deeh. Balkay Mufti Sahib nay likha: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib nay, samp kay khanay say tashbih nahin deeh, balkay tashbih Noori Bashr honay mein deeh aur bashr honay ki tafseel mein tashbih deeh, aur likha kay khana peena nikkah bashariat kay ihkam mein thah. Point four, Raha kay samp ka zikr keun darmiyan mein ayah jab is ka talluq nahin thah aur tashbih mein is ki kohi munasbat nahin banti thee aur nah is ki tashbih deeh. Musa alayhis salaam ki laathi ka zikr ki munasbat, joh mein pehlay likh aya hoon, Zaat badli, toh phir us ki sifaat badli, banda jab taq sahih ul aqeedah sahih ul amal Sunni ho toh RasoolAllah say muhabbat aur un ki shaan biyan karta heh, magar jab Thanvi, Ismail Dehalvi, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, Murtaza Hassan Chandpuri, Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri ka chahnay wala ho toh phir gustakhiyan karta heh, hasil kalam yeh huwa kay zaat badalnay say sifaat o khoobiyan badalti hen aur needs badalti hen. Idhar banda toh wohi heh sirf label Deobandi aur taleem Deobandi mazhab ki - ba-adab say bey-adab ho gaya. Sayaq o sabaq mein dekha jahay toh Mufti Sahib yeh keh rahay hen kay Jibraeel alayhis salaam Jab farishtay thay toh kalay baal nahin thay, insaani ankh nahin thee, insaani shakal o soorat nahin thee, lebaas bi insaani nahin thah, magar jab zaat badli toh sab kuch insaani ho gaya, keun kay noori zaat say insaani zaat banay. Musa alayhis salaam ka aasa thah toh bey-jaan thah, khata peenay ki khoobiyan nahin theen, aankh nahin thee, magar jab samp bana toh phir khoobiyan badleen. Hamaray Nabi e kareem, Jab Noor thay toh phir khana peena sona jagna insaani jism nahin rakhtay thay, magar jab bani Adam say afzalul khalq bashr huway toh phir insaani khoobiyan aur insaani zerooriyat bi saath huween aur insaani limitations bi saath huween, yehni peda huway, shahadat bi huwi, waghera ... Khadam nay aap ko tafseelan jawab deeya heh ... aur tawaqoh heh kay aap meray sawal ka jawab joh pichli post meh guzray hen, zeroor denh gay. Wesay yeh musalmanoon kay mufti hen Deobandiyoon kay kutb ul aftaab o hakeem ul ummat qasim ul uloom nahin joh gustakhi par gustakhi karen gay.

janab yeh aap meri zuban aap kay uqabir ki tehzeeb o ghali galoch o towheen o tanqees ki akasi kar rahi heh aap ko buri lagi. Aap ko toh pata hi heh kay yeh aap ka warsa heh bas mein insaaf say taqseem kar raha hoon. Magar yahi rawayya aap bilqul darust aur jaiz mantay hen. Jis Thanvi kay mutaliq khadim nay tashbih kay jumlay likhay ussee Thanvi nay Allah kay nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) kay ilm e ghayb jannay mein takhsees aur khasoosiyat ka inqar bi keeya balkayesa ilm jamnwaroon, pagaloon, bachoon, keeray makoroon, kay leyeh sabat keeya, link yahan par. Aur behas choren, kia Allah kay Nabi ka ilm e ghayb pagaloon jesa heh? Mera Iman toh yeh heh kay Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ka ilm e zahir bi bey-misaal o misl heh ur us jesa bi kohi ilm nahin rakhta tumaray Thanvi sahib toh ghayb ki khasoosiyat ka inqar kar rahay hen aur janwaroon pagaloon ko saath mila rahay hen. Sirf is'see ka jawab deh dena. Udhar rahay ga.

Aur jumlay mein ek taraf ishara Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa alaihi was'sallam) ki taraf hota, aur saath hee, esa wesa, jesa kay istimal kay saath ishara danday ki taraf hota toh phir tashbih hoti aur towheen hoti. Misaal kay tor par, thanvi apnay haath say roti khata heh aur esay hee bandar bi khata heh, ya, thanvi apnay moon say roti khata heh aur jesay khanzeer khata heh wesay hee thanvi khata heh. Is tera say tashbih hoti heh. Aur har tashbih buri nahin, balkay woh tashbih buri heh jis mein say tanqees o towheen ka pehloo nikalta ho. ya towheen o tanqees hoti ho.

Salam alayqum, Janab Mufti Sahib nay kaheen par tashbih nahin deeh. Kohi lafz esa istimal nahin keeya jis say donoon kay darmiyan tashbih deeh gahi ho. pehlay jumlay say yahi sabat heh kay jab Musa (alayhis salaam) ka Aasa thah toh khata nahin thah magar jab zaat badli toh khanay laga. Hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noor thay toh khatay peetay nahin thay, aur jab noor bashr bana toh khata, peeta, sota jagta, thah. Jistera mein nay jumla ma qabl o bad mein tashbih nahin deeh is'see tera Mufti sahib nay kohi tashbih nahin deeh. Pehlay jumla say point nikla, zaat badli sifaat aur bodily needs badli, dosray jumlay say yahi sabat huwa. Tashbih tab hoti jab jumla maqabal say jornay kay leyeh ilfaaz, esay, esa, jesa, wesa, misal kay tor par, waghera ka istimal hota.

Jazakallah khayr.

Salam alayqum Shirk e Riya say amaal kay barbad honay par ek hadith pari thee, kay chimti jesa heh, aur naik amaal ko deemak kee tara khata heh ... reference darkar hen, bot talash keeya nahin millay. Agar kohi esi Ahadith nahin, aur mein ghalt fehmi meh mubtila hoon toh ahle ilm hazrat is sawal ka jawab anahit farma denh: Ek sawaal, kia naik amaal ka Shirk e Riya kay zariya barbard hona Ahle Sunnat ka bi nazria heh?

Introduction: Often Hadith of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is quoted by opponents of Islam to argue that Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) considered the Iraq as East and deemed it to be the place of emergence of tribulation Of Khawarij. It is true that Khawarij emerged from Iraq and there are Ahadith which establish this. But it is distortion of Ahadith when Ahadith stating Najd/East are said to apply to Iraq. Hence effort will be made to explain contexual relevance of various parts of Hadith and establish precise location and direction of from which the group of Satan – Khawarij were to emerge. Versions Of Hadith Of Abdullah Ibn Umar: “Narrated Ibn Abi Nu'm: A person asked `Abdullah bin `Umar whether a Muslim could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply). "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's Messenger. The Prophet said, They are my two sweet basils in this world." [Ref: Bukhari, B57, H96] “Narrated Ibn Abi Na'm: I was present when a man asked Ibn Umar about the blood of mosquitoes. Ibn Umar said, "From where are you?" The man replied. "From Iraq." Ibn `Umar said, "Look at that! he is asking me about the blood of Mosquitoes while they (the Iraqis ) have killed the (grand) son of the Prophet. I have heard the Prophet saying, "They (Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet-smelling flowers in this world." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H23] “Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim b. 'Abdullah b. 'Umar as saying: O people of Iraq, how strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father 'Abdullah b. 'Umar, narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily. the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another; and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said: "You killed a person but We relieved you from the grief and tried you with (many a) trial." (xx. 40). Ahmad b. Umar reported this hadith from Salim, but he did not make a mention of the words: "I heard". [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6943] Explaining The Ahadith Of Iraqis – Major And Minor Sin: Hadith records: “…O people of Iraq, how strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins?” Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is displeased with being asked about minor sins by Iraqi/Iraqis. The Hadith of Bukhari reveals the minor sin he was being asked about was with regards to killing of flies/mosquitoes. The major sin toward which Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) hinted was deliberate killing of sons of Fatimah (radiallah ta’ala anha) – Imam Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Imam Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) by Iraqis. And evidence of this is in another Hadith: "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's Messenger.” The next part which connects to this portion of Hadith is the statement regarding Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) being tried/tested because he unintentionally killed a person: “… and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said: "You killed a person but We relieved you from the grief and tried you with (many a) trial." What he is implying is that, Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam), a Nabi, killed a random person by mistake yet Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) tried/tested him with many hardships. But you Iraqis – bunch of nobodys in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) - have committed major sin of killing sons of Fatimah (radiallah ta’ala anha), the daughter of Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hence you were tried and will continue to be tried more serverly then Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam). Also he has implied, that your are concerned about minor sins but your concern should be the major sin – killing of Imam Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Imam Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Pointing Toward East Of Madinah, In Direction Of Najd: Hadith states: “… that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily. the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and …” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is also reported to have said: “… He said, "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham (north)! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] From these two Ahadith it is deduced, Najd is in direction of East from city of Madinah. Following Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicated the direction from which group of Satan would emerge while pointing toward house of Aysha (radialla ta’ala anha): “Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's group will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was seated on his pulpit in Masjid Nabvi and if he pointed toward the direction of house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) he would be pretty precisely pointing toward direction of Saudi capital, Riyadh. In other words, he would be pointing toward East from his pulpit to indicate region of Najd. Following links lead to maps which depict location of Najd, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Please visit the following, link, operated by David Rumsey. He owns a huge collection of historical maps. His website contains four hundered forty-four maps of Arabian Peninsula. It is strongly recommended that readers visit the link given and browse through the maps to find general direction/location of historical Najd. Alhasil based on all the available evidence would be sound to conclude, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the direction of Najd. And foretold that from this place Qarn (i.e. group, head, horn) of Satan would emerge. Contextual Relationship Of Entire Hadith: First he implied the Iraqis would be tested severly for intentionally killing the sons of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And in context of his statement regarding Khawarij, it is established that he wished to imply; the trial of Iraqis at the hands of Khawarij who had emerged from East of Madinah and from region of Najd was/is due to intentionally killing innocent sons of Fatimah (radiallah ta’ala anha). And Khawarij are only one of many trials which they have faced and will continue to face many more trials. Striking The Necks Of One Another: Hadith goes on to state that when group of Satan emerges, you (i.e. the Muslims, Iraqis, Arabs, Syrians) will strike necks of one another: “…Satan and you would strike the necks of one another; …” This indeed happened, the were battle between the army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Khawarij. And the Iraqis were part of this army and helped to defeat the Khawarij. This is confirmed from another Hadith: “Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person (i.e., 'Abdullah bin Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tarnimi): 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Apostle of Allah made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. The Apostle of Allah gave an example (to give their description) or he said: A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it. Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] Hence Abu Said (radiallah ta’ala anhu) reffered to the majority to mean whole. This establishes that Iraqis were not the Khawarij but they were the people who killed them. Who Were The Khawarij And From Where Did They Come: Khawarij were zealots/extremists, they were from tribe of Banu Tamim, their leader was Dhil Quwaishirah. Following map depicts the area inhabited by tribe of Banu Tamim in the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), here, here, here, here. Note, location of Banu Tamim corroborate other details mentioned earlier in the article – Najd, East, toward direction of Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha) house, and from direction of sunrise – evidence of which follows: “The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where ‘group of Satan will come out’, or said, ‘the side of the sun[rise]’." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] A article fully explains sunrise detail mentioned in this Hadith, here. Basic facts established now moving to the main point. Hadith records Dhil Quwaisirah disrespected Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and a companion wished to kill him and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said Dhil Quwaisirah has companions: “Narrated Abu Sa'id:While the Prophet was distributing something, 'Abdullah bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said, "Be just, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said, "Woe to you ! Who would be just if I were not?" 'Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "Allow me to cut off his neck!" The Prophet said, " Leave him, for he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with theirs, you will look down upon your prayers and fasting, in comparison to theirs.” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] Note, beduins only kept in touch with their tribe. Their daily business was with members of tribes and they seldom ventured outside the territory of their tribe and for most of their life only associated with their own tribe members. Hence there is no doubt that Dhil Quwaisirah’s companions mentioned in the Hadith were none other then his tribal associates. There is also substantial evidence in the books of history and clasical scholars which establishes, most of the Khawarij were from Banu Tamim. Battle Of Siffin And Emergence Of Khawarij: The rightly guided (i.e. closer to the truth) Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) the fourth Caliph and leader of pious believers Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) met with their respectives armies at Al-Siffin in Syria. After three days battle arbitration was agreed but Khawarij in the army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) opposed arbitration arguing, judgment is only for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Arbitration failed due to a group of Khawarij in the army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) attacking army of Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Khawarij then seperated from the main of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Following Hadith points to this discord between to companions and emergence of Khawarij: “… While the Prophet was distributing (something, 'Abdullah bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said, "Be just, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said, "Woe to you ! Who would be just if I were not?"… "Allow me to cut off his neck!" The Prophet said, " Leave him, for he has companions, … These people will appear when there will be differences among the people (Muslims)." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person (i.e., 'Abdullah bin Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tarnimi)...'” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] After the failure of arbitration Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) returned to their capitals and Khawarij camped in Iraq, in a village called Harura. These Khawarij began to massacre the surrounding population. Eventually forcing Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to face them in battle at Nehrawan and which resulted in their utter anahilation. Conclusion: It has been established, Khawarij were originaly from East of Madinah, from region of Najd, from central Arabia, beloned to the tribe of Banu Tamim. From Najd they went to Iraq, joined army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu), and marched to Syria (Al-Siffin). There they rebelled and came back to Iraq and fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and they were anahilated. These Ahadith do not indicate a single country or region rather three different regions, Arabia (Najd), Syria (Al-Siffin), Iraq (Nehrawan). This establishes that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had foretold from the tribe, region, direction, countries they would go to and rebel, and who will they fight, and who will kill the Khawarij. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold the appearance of group of Satan from Najd, and he refused to supplicate Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to bestow His blessings to Najd. Muslims believe Najd and Iraq, were and are, two different regions on earth. Iraq is what is popularly known as Iraq and Najd is central Saudi Arabia, area surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh. On contrary, the opponents of Islam argue by Najd Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) meant Iraq. According to Muslims, Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and those who followed and continue to follow his teachings are that group of Satan because his sect started and gained foot-hold in central Saudi Arabian, province of Najd. Supporters of Shaykh of Najd in an attempt to vindicate him and his followers argue the Hadith about Najd was regarding Iraq. They have produced ingenious ways to substantiate their position. This article will attempt to deal with one of their igenious methods of substantiating their un-Islamic position. Evidence Of Employed By Opponents Of Islam: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: The Prophet said, "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The People said, "And also on our Najd." He said, "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham (north)! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] “Ibn Umar reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “O Allah, bless us in our Syria. O Allah, bless us in our Yemen.” He repeated it and on the third or fourth time, they said, “O Messenger of Allah, and in our Iraq.” The Prophet said, “Verily, from there will appear upheavals and tribulations and from there will rise the group of Satan." [Ref: Tabarani, Mu’jam Al Awsaat, H4230] The Argument Of Anti-Islam Element: Anti-Islam element employing logic argues in Hadith of Bukhari Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refused to supplicate Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for Najd and we have clear evidence to establish that he refused to supplicate Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for Iraq as well. Therefore, we have interpreted Najd to mean Iraq. Monkey Interpret, Monkey See, Monkey Do: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “…they said, “O Messenger of Allah, and in our Iraq.” The Prophet said, “Verily, from there will appear upheavals and tribulations and from there will rise the group of Satan." [Ref: Tabarani, Mu’jam Al Awsaat, H4230] What did he mean by Iraq the answer is given in the following Hadith: “The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] Just like the opponent of Islam interpreted the Hadith of Najd in light Hadith of Iraq and implied, by Najd Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intended Iraq. I have done the opposite, I have interpreted the Hadith of Iraq in light of Hadith of Najd and implied, by Iraq Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) meant Najd, the Saudi province Of Najd. Ofcourse any sane people do not believe Najd is Iraq or Iraq is Najd. This was a tandeeqi (i.e. critical) response for sake demonstrating that the opposite can also be true if one follows your methodology of interpretation. Alhasil, we have established fault in methodology of interpretation because the opposite of your position is equally true. Flawed Logic Of Young And Foolish: Logically speaking, if x-information is true to Mr White, and if x-information is also true to Mr James, does it establish Mr White is actually Mr James? Mr Ali has got black hair, black hair are true to Mr Ali, is everyone with black hair Mr Ali? Barbados got its indepence in 1966, indepence of Barbados is true to 1966. Any country sharing the same year of indepence with Barbados (i.e. Botswana, Guyana, Lesotho) can we apply the logic and declare they are one and the same country? Common sense dictates, when a detail or aspect of information matches another, and if they are established as two separate places, or even if it is not established, then these two cannot be deemed as one and the same, merely on basis of sharing a single common trait. Mr Ali says, Pakistan is a beautiful country. Idiot living in UAE thinks, O I live in beautiful country, therefore I live in Pakistan aka UAE. Ordinary human beings, with an ordinary brain, untampered by foolishness of Khawarij, does not think like this, and does not conclude like this. If a detail, or trait, matches, we simply look for more traits to corroborate the sameness, or to establish differences. He’s Muhammed Ali and so is this one. But this one was born in America, and lives in America. This one was born in Azad Kashmir and lives in England. This one was professional boxer, and this one didn’t even go to boxing gym. Aah, these two are two different people. In other words we investigate, find more information, and employ the information and then determine if A is B, or A is not B. Anyhow we ordinary human beings do not declare A is B based on a single common trait. It is practice of unhealthy mind, and those who have illness in their hearts, and young and foolish individuals. The Point And Logic Of It All: My point is simple, a single common trait is not suffient enough to establish if Iraq is Najd or Najd is Iraq. We have to find more information to establish the sameness or difference. Iraq And Najd Cannot Be The One And The Same: Iraq was not even a Muslim country when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) appointed places Miqat (i.e. place of assuming state of Ihram for Hajj/Umrah), here: “Narrated 'Abdullah bin Dinar: Ibn 'Umar said, "The Prophet fixed Qarn as the Miqat for the people of Najd, and Al-Juhfa for the people of Sham, and Dhul-Hulaifa for the people of Medina." Ibn 'Umar added, "I heard this from the Prophet, and I have been informed that the Prophet said, 'The Miqat for the Yemenites is Yalamlam.' "When Iraq was mentioned, he said, "At that time it was not a Muslim country." [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H443] This Hadith establishes, first of all that Najd was a Muslim country/region because of which he apointed Qarn [Al Manazil] as place of Miqat for Najd. Secondly it establishes Iraq and Najd are two different regions/countries because the Hadith states Iraq was not a Muslim country at the time of appointing places of Miqat. In another Hadith it is recorded: “Abu Zubair heard Jabir b. 'Abdullah as saying as he was asked about (the place for entering upon the) state of Ihram: I heard (and I think he carried it directly to the Apostle of Allah) him saying: For the people of Medina Dhu'l-Hulaifa is the place for entering upon the state of Ihram, and for (the people coming through the other way, i. e. Syria) it is Juhfa; for the people of Iraq it is Dbat al-'Irq; for the people uf Najd it is Qarn and for the people of Yemen it is Yalamlam.” [Ref: Muslim, B7, H2666] Note, for Najd the Miqat is stated to be Qarn and for Iraq Hadith states its Dhat al-Irq. If Najd and Iraq were one and the same then why did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) appoint two different places of Miqat for same place? At minimum it has been established Iraq and Najd are not one and the same country/region. This so far is enough to refute teaching of our opponents. Establishing Direction And Location Of Najd: As a matter of principle, if it is established Najd is not Iraq and Najd is in East of Madinah then by default the position of Muslims would be established. Najd Is In East Of Madinah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has repoted to have said: “O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the head of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] According to another Hadith this group of Satan was to emerge from East [of Madinah]: “Ibn Umar reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying while pointing his hands towards the east: The turmoil would appear from this side; verily, the turmoil would appear from this side (he repeated it thrice) where appear the group of Satan.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6942] According to another narration Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was seated on the pulpit of [Masjid Nabvi] and said: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the side of the sun.." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] The Hadith uses the words, “… the side of the Sun …” to mean East. If I someone asks me, from which direction did you hear the sound come from? I say: From the side of the Sun, then it would imply East, the direction of sunrise, here. Also note, use of word ‘there’ indicates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward a direction. Another Hadith establishes he was pointing toward the house of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) from the pulpit: “Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's group will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] From the pulpit if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) then he would be pointing toward East. And pretty accurately toward the direction of Saudi capital Riyadh. Summing Up The Subject Of Najd: The following article depicts all this information on the map, here. All this adds to establish that Najd regarding which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold that from it will emerge group of Satan is in East of Madinah. It is impossible for him to be standing on pulpit of Masjid Nabvi and point toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) and be pointing toward Iraq. He was pointing toward Saudi capital Riyadh. The following article contains maps taken from old books which depict position of Najd in Middle East. Note these maps are not made by Muslims in fact most of these maps are made by orientalist scholars and origin of others is obscure, here. The following article deals with Najd and indicates where Najd is, but also establishes distinction between Iraq and Najd. It contains maps not shown in the previously linked article, here. It has been established where Najd is now readers are advised to consult google map and see the location of Iraq. And see if all the details fit Iraq. It will become apparent that Iraq is up North, North East, and more North then East, compared to traditional understanding where Najd is. Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab And His Movement: Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s Khariji movement started near Saudi capital Riyadh, Uyaynah and Dirriyah. And this is precisely the direction toward which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab like the Khawarij declared Muslims – companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) - to be Mushrikeen (i.e. polytheists). Like the Khawarij he considered it permissible to kill Muslims and like the Khawarij he killed the Muslims. He and his followers shaved their heads excessively – like Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold they would. They tucked up their lion cloth from waste - like Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold they would. In short, Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and his followers fullfilled all the prophecies regarding the group of Satan, hence they are from the group of Satan – i.e. Khawarij. The Hadith Of Iraq – Group Of Satan: The opponent of Islam quoted the following: “He repeated it and on the third or fourth time, they said, “O Messenger of Allah, and in our Iraq.” The Prophet said, “Verily, from there will appear upheavals and tribulations and from there will rise the group of Satan." [Ref: Tabarani, Mu’jam Al Awsaat, H4230] Another Hadith confirms; group of Satan – Khawarij, will emerge from Iraq, in the following Hadith: “Narrated Yusair bin 'Amr: I asked Sahl bin Hunaif, "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said, "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq.” There will appear in it (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats, and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body.' " [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] One has no right to distort the Ahadith of East/Najd and than apply them upon Iraq. Ahadith establish Iraq and Najd are two different regions of Middle East. One cannot put these two regions into blender of Salafism/Wahhabism, with all relevent details, and make a smoothie out of it – so they become one and the same. Warning To Those Who Believe Najd Is Iraq: Anyone who distorts the Ahadith intended for Najd and applies them upon Iraq, in order to confuse the distinction between the two, has introduced a innovation into religion of Islam. Ahadith record the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regards to one who introduces and one who follows an innovation: “And whoever introduces a سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. reprehensible practice) that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] "And whoever introduces a بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ (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] One who introduced this evil innovation/practice of interpreting Ahadith of Najd to mean Iraq, and anyone who follows this evil innovation are both equally sinful. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has also stated: “If anyone introduces an innovation, he will be responsible for it. If anyone introduces an innovation or gives shelter to a man who introduces an innovation (in religion), he is cursed by Allah, by His angels, and by all the people.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B39, H4515] Giving shelter in meaning of, housing him, or giving him shelter by defending his innovation, such a person and the innovator is cursed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), His angels, and Saliheen (i.e. righteous). Another version has underlined addition to the Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawood: “He reported the Apostle of Allah as saying “ Madinah is sacred from A’ir to Thawr so if anyone produces an innovation (in it) or gives protection to an innovator the curse of Allaah, angels and all men will fall upon him and no repentance or ransom will be accepted from him.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B10, H2029] Alhasil, the one who as started the practice of blurring the distinction between Iraq and Najd, until they are one and same, and those who followed him in by doing likewise, and one who shelters the innovator by believing his innovation then defending the innovator, they are equally sinful for it, they are under the curse of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), His angels, the Saliheen. And their good actions are rejected by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) until they hold to innovation. Conclusion: It has been established Iraq and Najd are two different regions. Both these regions have their own Miqat. And when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) appointed the places of Miqat for Hajj/Umrah Iraq was not even a Muslim country where as Najd was hence Qarn was appointed as a place of Miqat. Najd is East of Madinah and in direction of sunrise. And he pointed from pulpit toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) indicating precisely the direction of Riyadh. In addition to all this, maps of old establish precise location of Najd. And considering the location of Najd on maps, it is safe to conclude Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was born in Najd [and his short biography, part of Kitab at-Tawheed attest to this – published by Darrusalam]. All which he taught and did establishes he was the head of group of Satan. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: According to Ahadith a group of Satan was to emerge from Najd and another Hadith indicates this group was to emerge from East of Madinah. This group of Satan is unanimously agreed by all factions is the sect of Khawarij. Muslims believe Najd is in Saudi Arabia, East of Makkah and Madinah. The opponents of Islam argue, depending on the individual, Najd is in Iraq, or Najd is a place in Iraq. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab the founder of Khariji sect popularly known as the Wahhabism was born in popularly known and established central Saudi region of Najd. Hence his supporters attempt to divert criticism to vindicate the founder of Wahhabism by arguing Najd is in Iraq, or Najd is Iraq. Note, Muslims do not negate the emergence of Khawarij from Iraq. Rather we affirm that Khawarij emerged from Iraq but the Ahadith of Najd and in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the direction of East do not apply to Iraq. The Foundation Of Anti-Islam Elements Argument: “Narrated Ibn Abi Nu'm: A person asked `Abdullah bin `Umar whether a Muslim could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply). "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's Messenger. The Prophet said, They are my two sweet basils in this world." [Ref: Bukhari, B57, H96] “Narrated Ibn Abi Na'm: I was present when a man asked Ibn Umar about the blood of mosquitoes. Ibn Umar said, "From where are you?" The man replied. "From Iraq." Ibn `Umar said, "Look at that! he is asking me about the blood of Mosquitoes while they (the Iraqis ) have killed the (grand) son of the Prophet. I have heard the Prophet saying, "They (Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet-smelling flowers in this world." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H23] “Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim b. 'Abdullah b. 'Umar as saying: O people of Iraq, how strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father 'Abdullah b. 'Umar, narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily. the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another; and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said: "You killed a person but We relieved you from the grief and tried you with (many a) trial." (xx. 40). Ahmad b. Umar reported this hadith from Salim, but he did not make a mention of the words: "I heard". [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6943] Position Of Opponents Of Islam On The Hadith: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) applied the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) upon people of Iraq. This is why he adressed the Iraqi man and quoted the following part of Hadith: “…heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: …” He was in better position to understand what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) meant when he pointed toward East. Explaining The Hadith Of Iraqis – Horn of Satan Toward East: Hadith in question states: “I heard from my father 'Abdullah b. 'Umar, narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: …“ According to the Hadith, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the East to indicate the direction from which group of Satan will emerge. Another Hadith establishes Najd is the name of region from where it would emerge: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] All we need to establish is where the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was positioned to precisely know the location of Najd. If he was in Northern most boundary of Saudi Arabia then Najd is Iraq. If he was situated in UAE then the East would be Iran, Pakistani, and Afhganistan, etc. If he was in Madinah on the Minbar (i.e. pulpit) of Masjid Nabvi and he pointed toward East then he would be pointing toward region of Saudi capital Riyadh. According to the Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sitting on the pulpit of Masjid Nabvi and he stood up and pointed toward East, the direction of sunrise, and said group of Satan will emerge from that direction: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the side of the sun [rise] ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] Another Hadith establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the direction of house of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) when he informed about emergence of group of Satan. Note, house of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) is where he was laid to rest. It is stated in the Hadith: “Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's head will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] All this evidence comes togather to establish, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was seating on pulpit of masjid Nabvi, from there he pointed toward East, the direction of sunrise, the direction Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha) house to indicate the direction of Najd. If one consults google map, locates Madinah, from there gets a general direction of East, it would pretty accurately point toward Saudi capital Riyadh. And Islamic position is Najd is area surrounding the modern Saudi capital of Riyadh. Following article is crucial to understanding the direction toward which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed and where Najd is, here. The pictures and maps in this article speak more then my million words. In this case, seeing indeed is believing. Alhasil, Iraq is not East and definitely not the direction toward which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward. And it is established that Najd is in Arabia, region surrounding Riyadh and this is where Wahhabism emerged. What Abdullah Ibn Umar Actually Stated: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) stated that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East, the direction of Najd and said: “Verily. the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another.“ What Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) has stated is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had foretold about the emergence of group of Satan from Eastern side of Madinah and as a result you the Sahabah/Iraqis and the group of Satan i.e. Khawarij would engage in war, killing each other. There is nothing to indicate that he considered Iraq in East of Madinah, or Iraq as Najd. Nor there is indication that he deemed the Iraqis to be Khawarij. The opponents of Islam are misconstruing a statement of companion to make their ends meet. In fact Hadith from Sahih of Imam Muslim establishes the group closer to the truth would kill the Khawarij i.e. group of Satan. And same Hadith explicitly states the ones who have killed them are Iraqis: “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Apostle of Allah made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. The Apostle of Allah gave an example (to give their description) or he said: A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it. Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] This clearly refutes the allegation that Khawarij emerged from Iraq or the Iraqis were [the very first] Khawarij. Reality is, the Iraqis were part of army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and it was them who killed the members belonging to group of Satan in battle at Nahrawan. Khawarij Emerged From Banu Tamim Situated In East Of Madinah In Najd: Hadith which the opponent of Islam quoted is being quoted again: “Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim b. 'Abdullah b. 'Umar as saying: O people of Iraq, how strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father 'Abdullah b. 'Umar, narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily. the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another; and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said: "You killed a person but We relieved you from the grief and tried you with (many a) trial." (xx. 40). Ahmad b. Umar reported this hadith from Salim, but he did not make a mention of the words: "I heard". [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6943] Hadith indicates the Khawarij and the Muslims will strike necks of each other in battle. Following Hadith adds details: “Narrated Abu Sa'id:While the Prophet was distributing (something, 'Abdullah bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said, "Be just, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said, "Woe to you ! Who would be just if I were not?" 'Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "Allow me to cut off his neck!" The Prophet said, " Leave him, for he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with theirs, you will look down upon your prayers and fasting, in comparison to theirs. Yet they will go out of the religion as an arrow darts through the game's body in which case, … These people will appear when there will be differences among the people (Muslims)." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person (i.e., 'Abdullah bin Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tarnimi): 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] The group of Khawarij appeared when there was differences/disagreement between Muslims between Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu), and their followers. Hadith also goes on to establish, the group closer to truth, the followers of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu), killed the members of group of Satan and amongst the killed were Dhil Al Khawaisirah at-Tamimi. Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khuwaisirah, was from Banu Tamim, hence appellation, Tamimi. Hadith also points he had companions/followers. Note, following map is taken from Saudi published Atlas, it indicates where tribe of Banu Tamim was situated in East of Madinah, here. This establishes, Dhil Khuwaisirah of Banu Tamim tribe and his followers, marched from their native land of Najd, situated in central Saudi Arabia, area surrounding Riyadh, from East of Madinah, went into Iraq, fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and all died at the hands of Iraqis, including the leader, Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi, here. Overall it has been established that the man power of Khawarij (i.e. group of Satan) was from area surrounding Saudi capital, Riyadh and emerged as a distinct sect whose teaching contradicted that of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions. Conclusion: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sitting on pulpit of Masjid Nabvi, pointed toward East, Najd, toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha), pointed toward the direction of sunrise, toward the tribe of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi, and pointed toward followers of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and declared them to be horn of Satan. These minions of Iblees then marched from Najd and fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) at Nahrawan which resulted in death of all except few. In other words Najd was place of origin for Khawarij, Syria is where they earned the title Khariji, because they seperated from the Jammah of companions, and Iraq was the place where they fought and met their end. Prophet said regarding Khawarij they will continue to emerge until Dajjal appears amongst them. Due to Jawami Al Kalim (i.e. the shortest expression carrying the widest meanings) nature of prophetic words the Ahadith of Khawarij emerging from East/Najd also apply to latter group of Khawarij which was to emerged from posterity of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi. Apart from the very first sect of Khawarij – comprimised of Dhil Khuwaisirah and his followers - the Ahadith also establish emergence of another group of Satan to emerge from posterity of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and it can be read, here. This group is none other then what is popularly known as Wahhabism. Note, Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab lived was born in Najd - Uyaynah, later he moved to Dirriyah. Both these places are pretty close to the direction which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward. Najdi Shaykh, started his mission from Najd - mission of eradicating what he percieved to be polytheism and polytheists. Hence the Ahadith pointing to out the direction from which group of Satan will emerge also apply to him and his group of Shayateen. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: On IslamicAwakening forum during a discussion on subject of; ‘What Is Ibadah?’ subject of why the idols were worshiped was discussed when they had no ability to harm or benefit? Did they worship the inanimate idols or those beings which the idols represented, was brought into discussion. If I recall correctly someone quoted the following verse as evidence to argue that they worshiped idols not what those whom the idols represented: “You worship besides Allah only idols, and you only invent falsehood.” [Ref: 29:17] Why Worship Something Which Has No Ability To Harm Or Benefit: Suppose idol of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in form of a man with all humanizing details such as beard and trimmed mustache. One believes this idol of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is my Ilah (i.e. worthy of worship) and worships this idol. Even though one knows the idol is helpless and harmless and benefit-less and has no inherent capacity to hear, or see, or grant anything yet one still worshiped the idol. Question would arise, why would one worship something which has absolutely no capacity to benefit or harm? The answer is, one worships it due to whom the idol represents and that one is able to harm and benefit. Even the polytheists of Jahilliyah (i.e. pre-Islamic Arabia) and all modern polytheists knew and know; the idols are made from inanimate material are without life and as such have no ability what so ever. The polytheists believed that their Ilahs were loved by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) so much so that He elevated them as Ilah. Therefore they believed worship of them will gain them nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). You might have heard the saying; access to a man’s heart is via his stomach. Polytheists believed nearness to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is via those loved Ilahs. So they asked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) via the route of their Ilahs but in time of extreme hardship like life/death situation they directly invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In comfort the idols were invoked and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was invoked then their Ilahs were invoked with it. Prophet Ibrahim Said You Worship Idols: One might question, how did you arrive to this understanding? This understanding was realized with copious amount of contemplation over various verses of Quran. Putting the pieces of puzzle together and with help from modern forms of polytheism and bit of common sense. One must look at the polytheism of present era compare it with polytheism of hundred years ago and older more documentarily established forms of polytheisms. One will come to realize polytheism hasn’t changed only the puppets have changed and the philosophies supporting polytheism are same. They worshiped the being which the idol represented along side the idol. Some time the Zahir (i.e. apparent) is stated but what is part of it is included in it. We say the medicine cured me. A Muslim saying this, does he believe actually the Zahir (the apparent – i.e. medicine) cured or does he believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has cured via medicine? Atheist says medicine cure’s, does he only mean the Zahir, the apparent, meaning the medicine is the curer? Or is the belief about Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) curing part of it? What I am trying to point is: Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam) said they worship idols. Their worship of idols is inclusive of the being which the idol represented. Just as we the Muslims say medicine cured. Even though our statement indicates medicine cured but the Zahir has to be interpreted in light of belief of person. In this case belief of Tawheed, hence the belief about Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) curing is included when it will be interpreted. Coming back to the subject of idol worship, they worshipped the idols along side that the idols represented. Monkey See Monkey Do, And Jahil See Mushrik Do, Jahil Do: Now one might argue: Ok, I understand the point of the Batin (i.e. the hidden – i.e. beliefs etc.) being part of the Zahir (i.e. the apparent i.e. statement). My questions are, why should they create an idol to represent the being which they have taken as Ilah when there is no need to do so? Why would they worship an idol when they should only worship the being whom the idol represented? In some cases the belief of Ilahiyyah was affirmed first for a being and then Idols were created to worship them. At least in one case the idols were created first to remember the pious people. Later when the origin story in connection with the idols was forgotten the belief of Ilahiyyah was affirmed and the created idols were worshipped. Why would two groups; i) created the idols then affirmed Ilahiyyah, ii) affirmed Ilahiyyah and then created idols, then worshipped them? They simply could have like you said worshipped the beings whom the idols represented so why create the idols? Which ever group originated as a leader, it inspired the other. In those days polytheism was order of the day Tawheed was sparse. In this context; monkey see, monkey do, concept existed, it is bit like present time; world see Westerners do, world do. Alhasil, this is how the idols came to be worshipped with the beings whom they represented. Idol Worship Due To Immense Love/Respect Of Whom They Represent: This still doesn’t quite justify, why would one worship a idol with the being whom it represented when they knew, there is inherent harm or benefit from the idols? Best way this can be explained is with a scenario which relates to a Muslim’s moral compass. Suppose you have a replica of Kabah. Which now days can be purchased in shops. You are throwing some idols found in your attic belonging to previous owners of the house, coincidently they were Hindu. Along side their various Ilah-idols a replica of Kabah was part of that stash unknown to you. In your garden there is bucket of cow dung and in an act of jealousy for Tawheed and love of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), you proceed to dip each idol in the bucket of dung and each time you pronounce: ‘Bin! Bin! Bin!’ when you chuck one in bin. At the bottom there was a replica of Kabah. The question is; will you dip it in cow dung and proceed to pronounce bin upon it or will you deem it as an act of sacrilege and Kufr? If you had tiny bit of respect and in my, lets say, naïve opinion a Muslim would not even contemplate doing this. Now the question is why not? It represents something which is holy; important to symbol of your faith therefore a Muslim would treat it with respect even though it is not part of it, or piece of Kabah just a replica made from plastic imported from China. The meat of matter is; polytheists even though understood their idols are not the beings which they are suppose to be representing. They worshipped the idols along the beings because in their belief it was an act of disrespect to distinguish between the idol-representative and the being believed as their deity hence they worshiped both – the being and the idol which represented it. It is bit like why a Muslim won’t distinguish between the Kabah and the replica of Kabah when it comes to treating the latter with respect. Wama Alayna Ilal Balaghul Mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: The opponents of Islam argue in Islam there is no room for praiseworthy innovations because every innovation is reprehensible even if it is composed of Islamicly sanctioned acts of worship and charity. Muslims believe innovations/practices (i.e. bidd’at/sunnan) which are composed of Islamicly sanctioned practices are praiseworthy and acting on them will be rewarded by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). To support Islamic position various Ahadith of good Sunnah are quoted but the opponents of Islam argue these Ahadith are for the specific context indicated by Ahadith and the teaching learnt cannot be applied generally. As Muslims we believe in the contextual relevance of the principle but also hold to generality of the principle stated in Hadith. Even the opponents of Islam hold true to this rule but forsake it to protect their sectarian position which is that Islam prohibits every type of innovation. Therefore Ahadith of every innovation is error will be contextualised to negate their generality and if the opponents of Islam negate contextualised meaning of the Ahadith of every innovation then it establishes the double standard employed to protect their heresy. Note, there is already a detailed article penned on this subject which can be read, here. It discusses all aspects ignored in this article and importantly demonstrates how each methodology would impact on position of Muslims and anti-Islam elements – it is essential read for correct and comprehensive understanding on this matter. Following article also deals with the issue of generality and contextualisation of principle and goes into detail, explaining all about the Ahadith of good Sunnah, and how it goes on to establish permissbility of introducing innovated good Sunnahs, here. Note Ahadith of Good Sunnah will be explained at the last section of article. 0.0 - Reasons For Which Ahadith Of Every Innovation Will Be Contextualised: We Muslims do not believe a principle given in a context is restricted to that context. Rather we believe a principle can be and is always applicable in the context which resulted it but it also serves as a tool to judge other matters which may have not been connected contextually or historically. So we believe in generality as well as specific application. We do not negate these aspects because the nature of speech of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is that it is short sentences expressing widest possible meaning. Hence primarily contextualising Ahadith of every innovation will automatically restrict application of these Ahadith on practices which are newly invented. And this will automatically mean these Ahadith are no longer applicable to praiseworthy innovated Sunnahs. Secondly, Khawarij interpret a principle in context if its against them and maintain its generality if it aids their position. And by interpreting the Ahadith of every innovation is an error contextually they would be forced to deny/reject contextual restriction and will resort arguing generality of the principle of every innovation is misguidance/error – this will establish fault in methodology of Khawarij and expose their unscholarly practice - restrict this principle to context [because it refutes my sectarian belief]. This one supports my sectarian belief, generality is fine in this Hadith, but aah this one aids Muslims; well then Iblees my friend you’re on my side and therefore Hadith is to be interpreted in the context. Obvious dramatic exageration needs to be ignored but on serious note such pick n mix strategy is only good for a candy shop. 0.1 - Honest And Consistent Methodology Of Interpreting Principles Found In Ahadith: Islam is based on principles and these principles have to be consistent all the time, for every time. This article, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits, will go on to establish Khawarij restrict generality of a principle given by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because it contradicts their teachings. One must adopt a single methodology in interpreting the principles found in Ahadith. Islamic methodology of interpreting a principle is to maintain generality and interpret the principle in context without negating application of principle of none contextual issues – as we Muslims do. Another methodology would be to restrict generality of a principle found in Hadith to the context in which it is found and negates its generality thus negating its application to anything else except what the context allows – as opponents of Islam do on issues which contradict their belief system. Switching between methodologies of interpreting principles mentioned in Ahadith for damage control is at the very least dishonest scholarship. The only damage done by practicing such dubious scholarship is to ones ownself. One blocks the gates of guidance with a defensive wall preventing any guidances reaching him/her and only catapults arguments attacking his opponents which are breft of sincere, honest, and objective scholarship. Honest scholarship requires consistent methodology which does not change to damage control and remains the same, every time, without exceptions. 0.2 - The Crooked Path Of Heretics And Their Scholars: Heretics and their scholars only and truly require all that can delude them and those who follow them. As long as they can muster an argument in response to what damages their sectarian position and it allows them to hold to their heresy, then it is correct methodology. True is with all heretics and disbelievers, end justifies the means. To a Muslim the means and end has to be justified and therefore our methodology of interpreting principles found in Ahadith is consistent and remains the same every time, for every principle mentioned in the Ayat or Hadith. 1.0 - Ahadith Of Every Innovation Is An Error: It is recorded in Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Narrated Abdullah: The best talk (speech) is Allah's Book, and the best way is the way of Muhammad, and the evil matters are the newly invented matters; and whatever you have been promised will surely come to pass, and you cannot escape (it).” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H382] “… saying: "The enemy has made a morning attack on you and in the evening too." He would also say: "The Last Hour and I have been sent like these two." And he would join his forefinger and middle finger; and would further say: "The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error." He would further say: I am more dear to a Muslim even than his self; and he who left behind property that is for his family; and he who dies under debt or leaves children (in helplessness), the responsibility (of paying his debt and bringing up his children) lies on me." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] The above Hadith has additions: “… then he would say: 'Whomsoever Allah (SWT) guides, none can lead him astray, and whomsoever Allah sends astray, none can guide. The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.' Then he said: …. 'Whoever leaves behind wealth, it is for his family, and whoever leaves behind a debt or dependents, then these are my responsibility, and I am the most entitled to take care of the believers.'” [Ref: Nisa’i, B19, H1579] There are two more Ahadith on this subject which will not be contextualised for two reasons; one of the Hadith is extensive and the other is short but leaving it for readers to practice this new art of contextualising. And they can be found in the footnote.[1] 1.1 - Contextualising Hadith Of Bukhari 382 - Promised Will Surely Come To Pass: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa alaihi was’sallam) is reported to have said; all which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and he foretold will come to pass, and we cannot escape what has been destined by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “… and whatever you have been promised will surely come to pass, and you cannot escape (it).” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H382] In this context Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “The best talk (speech) is Allah's Book, and the best way is the way of Muhammad, and the evil matters are the newly invented matters …” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H382] Implying the foretold events which are yet to take place are best of guidance/way and part of truthful speech of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and these events will take place as foretold. And anyone who tells you contrary to what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has informed or what he has informed then such a individual has lied and introduced an evil matter. If someone says, so was prophecised but it will not take place – Ummah will not split into seventy-three sects, or Dajjal will not appear, or sun will not rise from West, or idols (i.e. Dhil Al Khalasa, Al-Lat, Al-Uzza) will not be worshiped, then these teachings would be contrary to Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and these teaching are the evil matters, because these teaching are new and do not conform to old/original teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 1.2 - Contextualising Hadith Of Muslim 1885 – Three Key Points Mentioned In Hadith: Firstly, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "The Last Hour and I have been sent like these two.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) joined two fingers togather to indicate nearness of end of time. It also indicated; between him and end of time there is no Prophet. Inclusion of another finger would have indicated there is another Prophet between him and day of judgment. Note, Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will be an Ummati (i.e. follower) of Sharia and religion of Islam bought by our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Then the Hadith continues and narrates the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “…and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error.” This indicates, on issues which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) provided guidance by joining his two fingers - nearness of end of time, no Prophet between him and end of time, is the best of guidance, and anyone who says contrary to this or has introduced an innovation, and most evil affairs are innovations in regards to which Prophet has provided guidance, and any teaching contrary to nearness of end of time and contrary to finality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is innovative misguidance/error. Secondly, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "Say: 'If it be that your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your mates, or your kindred; the wealth that you have gained; the commerce in which you fear a decline: or the dwellings in which you delight - are dearer to you than Allah, or His Messenger, or the striving in His cause;- then wait until Allah brings about His decision: and Allah guides not the rebellious." [Ref: 9:24] In other, words anyone who says, he loves the mentioned more then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger, and Jihad, then wait for Allah’s judgment, this judgment is that anyone not loving Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger more then the mentioned will not be guided by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Based on this verse Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Narated By Anas : The Prophet said "None of you will have faith till he loves me more than his father, his children and all mankind." [Ref: Bukhari, B2, H14] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said in the Hadith in discussion, Hadith 1885: “I am more dear to a Momin (i.e. pious Muslim) even than his self …” This indicates, a Momin loves and holds Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) more dear, and more worthy then anything else on the earth, and this is sign of firm and correct belief and piety. And in context of ma-qabl (i.e. which is before it) – "The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error." It means teaching of loving Allah and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) more anything on earth/creation is part of speech of Allah, and part of best guidance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and one who teaches anything contrary to these teachings has introduced an evil/sinful matter which is evil/sinful innovation if it is followed. Thirdly, Allah (subhanahau wa ta’ala) stated: “The Prophet is closer to the believers than their ownselves, and his wives are their (believer’s) mothers.” [Ref: 33:6] Based on the quoted verse Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “The Prophet said, "I am closer to the believers than their selves in this world and in the Hereafter, and if you like, you can read Allah's Statement: "The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves." So, if a true believer (i.e. Momin) dies and leaves behind some property, it will be for his inheritors (from the father's side), and if he leaves behind some debt to be paid or needy offspring, then they should come to me as I am the guardian of the deceased." [Ref: Bukhari, B41, H584] Why he is the guardian of the deceased in the world [and in the hereafter]? This question is answered by the Hadith in disucssion 1885: “… and he who dies under debt or leaves children (in helplessness), the responsibility (of paying his debt and bringing up his children) lies on me." In this context the following principle was narrated: "The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error." Implying, the speech of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) saying, Prophet is closer/beloved to Momineen their ownselves is best of speech, and Prophet (sallallahu wa alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being the guardian, and being responsible for supporting offsprings of deceased parents, and paying off the debt of deceased, are best of guidance. And any teaching contradicting these teachings is an evil/sinful affair being introduced and an evil/sinful innovation. 1.3 Contextualising Hadith Of Nisa’i 1579 – Two Points: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “He whom Allah guides, he is the rightly guided; but he whom He sends astray, for him you will find no Wali (guiding friend) to lead him (to the right Path).” [Ref: 18:17] “Allah sends astray whom He wills and He guides on the Straight Path whom He wills.” [Ref: 6:39] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has also stated: “And whoever Allah guides - for him there is no misleader. Is not Allah Exalted in Might and Owner of Retribution?” [Ref: 39:37] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is reported to have said: “Do you want to guide him whom Allah has made to go astray? And he whom Allah has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance).” [Ref: 4:88] “Is not Allah sufficient for His Servant? And [yet], they threaten you with those [they worship] other than Him. And whoever Allah leaves astray - for him there is no guide.” [Ref: 39:36] “Whomsoever Allah sends astray, none can guide him; and He lets them wander blindly in their transgressions.” [Ref: 7:186] When the underlined part of verses are assembled as a single sentence we get: “And whoever Allah guides – for him there is no misleader.” “Whomsoever Allah sends astray, none can guide him.” And it was based on these two verses of Quran; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) composed following sentence, which is quoted in Hadith 1579: “Whomsoever Allah guides, none can lead him astray, and whomsoever Allah sends astray, none can guide.” This composition is followed by the statement: “The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” Implying that the sentence he employed is from truest book – the speech of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And best of guidance is that, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) composed two diametric opposites which are related, as day is related to night, guidance to misguidance, Islam to Kufr. In context of statement of innovation, it means the related verses of Quran, and composition of two parts as one are best of guidance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and anyone believing contrary has introduced a reprehensible innovation. 1.4 - Contexualising The Ahadith Of Innovation In Context Of Islam: In context of entire religion of Islam, the best speech is book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) – Quran. And the best way to practice religion of Islam is way of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And worst matters are the newly invented matters which do not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): "And whoever introduces a بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ (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 as Hadith indicates matters which do not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa ala) are misguiding/evil innovations. And misguiding innovations are composed of Haram, or Shirk, or composed of activities which are sinful. And that which is composed of Islamic goodness is praiseworthy/good Sunnah for which there is reward for one who innovates it into Islam and for those who follow it as stated in the 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] 2.0 - Generality Or Specificness – Muslims Loose Nothing: Depending on how the opponents of Islam attempt to play the ‘game’ Islamic response should be and is accordingly. Eye for any eye, tooth for tooth, contextual specificness for contextual specificness, and generality of principle for generality of principle. If contextual specificness is methodology employed by opponent of Islam and even if we agree to this methodology we loose nothing as long as contextual specificness maintained by opponent of Islam as a principle. The Ahadith of innovation should be contextualised to what ever the context they are found in to negate their generality. Implications of this is that now the Ahadith of innovation cannot be applied upon praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddas. This would lead to natural position Quran and Sunnah are silent about matters on which the opponents of Islam contend with us. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “The lawful is what Allah made lawful in His Book, the unlawful is what Allah made unlawful in his Book, and what He was silent about; then it is among that for which He has excused." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B22, H1726] Excused, in meaning of exampt – Meaning, one is at liberty to engage in what has not be clearly made unlawful. If the generality of principles is maintained by opponent of Islam then we have the above Hadith to blunt his charge against us and in addition to this the Ahadith of good Sunnah – discussion regarding will follow. 2.1 - Placement Of Principle In Various Contexts Indicates Generality Not Contextuality: Firstly, generality of principles establishes jawami al kalim nature of prophetic words, and contextualisation negates it. Principles mentioned in Bukhari 1885, Muslim 382, and Nisa’i 1579, are being narrated in different contexts. And this itself is proof; these and in general all principles are can be applied to many different matters contextually as well as matters/issues which are not directly connected to context. Hence correct methdology is to maintain generality while interpreting the principle according to context. Without negating the generality and without negating permissibility of applying the principle to issues which maybe not directly connected historically to incident which resulted the principle. 3.0 - Ahadith Of Good Sunnah: It is recorded: "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] “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 are numerous similar Ahadith only two are being quoted to keep it brief. 3.1 - Refuting Anti-Islamic Element’s Understanding Of Good Sunnah With Part Of Evil Sunnah: It is recorded in Hadith: "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] Another version has the following wording:“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] Based on various Ahadith the opponents of Islam contextualise this Hadith to historical context and based on this context attempt to restrict it in an attempt to negate its generality. Or others attempt to restrict it to the context of Islam. Meaning they argue, this principle refers to Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa alaihi was’sallam) which are already part of Islam. Hence it means anyone introduces a Sunnah which was forgotten or introduces a Sunnah into a community which did not know it and they practiced this prophetic Sunnah then they and the one who introduced it into the community will earn equal reward. But the following part belies their interpretation: “And whoever introduces a سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. reprehensible practice) that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] “And he who introduces an فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. 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, B34, H6466] What would be the meaning of this part of Hadith if it is to be understood according to the context? Would it be that anyone who introduces evil prophetic Sunnahs to a people who didn’t know them? Or would it be, anyone who revives an evil prophetic Sunnah for him is the and those who follow it will have equal sin? How can prophetic Sunnahs be evil when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated he is the best example to follow? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "Indeed, in the messenger of Allah a good example has been set for the one who seeks Allah and the Last Day and thinks constantly about Allah." [Ref: 33:21] The later part of Hadith has belied your earlier parts interpretation. The later part has established that here the Sunnah isn’t refering to Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but to Sunnah of evil Sunnah innovator. And this goes on to establish Sunnah in the earlier part is not Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but Sunnah of good Sunnah innovator. 3.2 - Explaning The Hadith Permitting Innovated Sunnahs With Ahadith: Hadith of Ibn Majah states: “And whoever introduces a سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. reprehensible practice) that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] And Hadith from Muslim indicates the ’sunnah sayyah’ is introduced in Islam: “And he who introduces an فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. 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, B34, H6466] Similar meaning is conveyed in another Hadith, recorded in Tirmadhi, where the wording differs, instead of ‘sunnah sayyah’ the words are ‘biddah dhalalah’ -: "And whoever introduces a بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ (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] Ibn Majah has the same text in his Sunan:“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] The Ahadith of ‘biddah dhalalah’ explain Ahadith of sunnah sayyah and establish; the difference is of words but the basic meaning conveyed in Ahadith of ‘sunnah sayyah’ comes into category of innovation. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And he who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. 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, B34, H6466] That which is not already part of Islam and is being made part of Islam is innovation and in the context of quoted Hadith, innovated evil/sinful Sunnah. Now the basic meaning has been established and we have definitive proof that Hadith means; whosoever introduces a reprehensible innovation/practice (i.e. biddah/sunnah) into Islam for him is the blame and those who will follow it without blame reducing. The wording of Ahadith of good Sunnah is similar hence the meaning would be automatically similar. It is recorded in Hadith that: “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] Another Hadith gives the same meaning but employs word Sunnah Saliha: "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] Imam Muslim recorded another version with addition of ‘in Islam’ (i.e. fil Islam) – implying the Sunnah being introduced into Islam will earn the introducer with rewarded like those who follow it:“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] This establishes that good innovation/practices (i.e. bidda/sunnah) can be introduced into Islam and will be rewarded by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Innovation is not part of Islam and when a Sunnah is being made part of Islam then Sunnah being made part of Islam, gives meaning of inovated Sunnah and in the context of Hadith good innovated Sunnah. Conclusion: According to autheticated Ahadith expression of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is short but contains comprehensive meaning and for this generality of a principle is essential. Portion of Hadith about innovation being narrated in different contexts is proof itself that the principle itself and all principles in general have contexual relevance and generality is maintained. Negating generality and contexualising a principle found in Hadith is not detrimental to theology of Ahlus Sunnah because it also restricts application of Ahadith of innovation to issues mentioned in the context. It is established that opponents of Islam also maintain generality of a principle mentioned in Ahadith until it hurts their sectarian understanding and demonstration of this selectivism is on Ahadith of good Sunnah. From Ahadith it is established that these Ahadith point to innovated Sunnahs (i.e. practices) which are introduced in Islam as good or sinful, and depending of the type of Sunnah being introduced reward/punishmed is earned by the one who has introduced it into Islam and those who follow it. Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] The following Hadith has four major points: “… the Messenger of Allah said: "Verily there are two things - words and guidance. The best words are the words of Allah, and the best guidance in the guidance of Muhammad. Beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a going-stray. Do not let the desire for a long life causes your hearts to grow hard. That which is bound to happen is close to you, and the only thing that is far away is that which is not going to happen. (1) The one who is doomed to Hell is doomed from his mother's womb, and the one who is destined for Paradise is the one who learns from the lessons of others. (2) Killing a believer constitutes Kufr and verbally abusing him is immorality (i.e. Fusuq). (3) It is not permissible for a Muslim to forsake his brother for more than three days. (4) Beware of lying, for lying is never good, whether it is done seriously or in jest. A man should not make a promise to a child that he will not keep. Lying leads to immorality and immorality leads to Hell. Truthfulness leads to righteousness and righteousness leads to Paradise. It will be said of the truthful person: 'He spoke the truth and was righteous', and it will be said of the liar, 'He told lies and was immoral.' "For a person continues to tell lies until he is recorded with Allah as a liar." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H46] In the following Hadith there are three major points "One day after the morning Salat, the Messenger of Allah exhorted us to the extent that the eyes wept and the hearts shuddered with fear. A man said: 'Indeed this is a farewell exhortation. [so what] do you order us O Messenger of Allah?' He said: (1) 'I order you to have Taqwa of Allah,(2) and to listen and obey, even in the case of an Ethiopian slave.(3) Indeed, whomever among you lives, he will see much difference. Beware of the newly invented matters, for indeed they are astray. Whoever among you sees that, then he must stick to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khulafa', cling to it with the molars.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2676] All these require contexual explanation and their relationship to innovation elaborated.

Introduction: Najdiyyah divide monotheism into three, Ulluhiyyah (i.e. godhood), Rububiyyah (i.e. lordship), and Asma Wal Sifaat (i.e. names and attributes). They believe Uluhiyyah consists of believing, a Ma’bud (i.e. worthy of worship) is only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) - direct all acts of worship to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Rububiyyah consists believing all matters related to maintaining, creating, sustaining creation are in power of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) alone. Due to which Khawarij believe Ulluhiyyah and Rububiyyah are not connected in meaning and to believe in one is not to believe in the other. As a result of this understanding they believe polytheists did commit Shirk in Tawheed Al Ulluhiyyah but did not believe in powers of Rububiyyah for their idol-gods nor committed Shirk in Rububiyyah. And the polytheists believed in Tawheed in Rububiyyah. Contrary to their belief, the Muslims believe the polytheists did believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) having control over and running the major affairs of universe mentioned in the Quran and not their gods. But this does not mean they believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. It should be pointed out; the beliefs and actions connected with Ulluhiyyah and Rububiyyah by Khawarij are certainly Islamicly sanctioned. Just the exclusion of Rububiyyah from Ulluhiyyah and belief that polytheists believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is heretical. Islamicly Ulluhiyah consists of Rububiyyah therefore to believe in an Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is to believe in Rabb beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Rububiyyah Is Part Of Ilahiyyah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Yet they have taken besides Him other gods (i.e. alihah) who created nothing but are themselves created, and possess neither harm nor benefit for themselves, and possess no power (of causing) death, nor (of giving) life, nor of raising the dead.” [Ref: 25:3] This verse indicates an Ilah is also Rabb because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated the gods of polytheists are unable to creat anything – creating a creation is characteristic of Rububiyyah. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) connected act of creating with Ilahiyyah because it is inherently/naturally part of it. In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any god. (Had there been gods or son-gods beside Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) then each god would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe (concerning Him).” [Ref: 23:91] In this verse act of creating creation is connected with Ilahiyyah because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated, each god would have segregated what was created by him and out of these gods some would have attempted to over throw the Lordship of another god in order to be the god/lord of another gods dominion. Alhasil, Ilahiyyah is inclusive of Rububiyyah and it was for this reason Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed these verses mentioning charactristics of Rububiyyah while using the words Aaliha/Ilah. Consequence Of Many Gods/Lords Ruling Universe: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both but glory to Allah, the Lord of the Kursi: above what they attribute to Him!” [Ref: 21:22] Why would there be confusion in space and on earth? Each god would have wished to exercise authority over the creation and would have desired for things to take place when he wished. One would have commanded the clouds to produce rain. The other would have wished for rain but not for few more days. Angels charged with producing rain from clouds would be confused regarding whose order to follow. Or the angels asigned the task of watching over womb of pregnant women. O Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)! Is this a male or female? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Male! Krishna: Female! Manat: Not male or female, deprive him of both. And angel incharge of womb would be confused. If an angels did according to command of a god out of many then disputes would break out. In the following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gives a parable to indicate the disputes which would break out between gods: “Allah puts forth a similitude: a (slave) man belonging to many partners disputing with one another, and a (slave) man belonging entirely to one master. Are those two equal in comparison? All the praises and thanks be to Allah! But most of them know not.” [Ref: 39:29] The implication is a servant under the command of a master is better and a universe and earth and its inhabitants are better under command of One God. And all the harmony in universe and earth points to existance of One God not many gods. Alhasil: Ilahiyyah is inclusive of Rububiyyah and it was on this basis Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated if there were in space and earth other lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then there would be chaos and confusion because each lord would wish the universe and earth to be governed his way. The Dispute Between Gods Would Lead To War Between Gods: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentioned in following verse that if there were many gods then they would have disputed with each other: “Allah puts forth a similitude: a (slave) man belonging to many partners disputing with one another, and a (slave) man belonging entirely to one master. Are those two equal in comparison? All the praises and thanks be to Allah! But most of them know not.” [Ref: 39:29] Where would these dispute lead these gods? This question is answered in the following verse: “Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any god. (Had there been gods or son-gods beside Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) then each god would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe (concerning Him).” [Ref: 23:91] Then some gods would have attempted to over power other gods to extend their dominion and to solve the dispute with another god. This comes under the category of Rububiyyah because a god is said to attempt to manage an affair/matter but it is mentioned in context of Ilahiyyah. Also creation of creation by a god is trait of Rububiyyah but it is mentioned in context of Ilahiyyah. Alhasil: Ilahiyyah is inclusive of Rububiyyah because because due to this fact Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated traits of Rububiyyah in context of Ilahiyyah. Mushrikeen Believed In Powers Of Rububiyyah For Their Idols: Many verses of Quran connect punishment with attribute of Lordship. Following are number of examples: “And (remember) when your lord proclaimed: "If you give thanks, I will give you more (of My blessings); but if you are thankless (i.e. disbelievers), verily My punishment is indeed severe." [Ref: 14:7] “And indeed We seized them with punishment, but they humbled not themselves to their lord, nor did they invoke (to Allah) with submission to Him.” [Ref: 23:76] “Nothing is said to you except what was said to the Messengers before you. Verily, your lord is the Possessor of Forgiveness, and (also) the Possessor of Painful punishment.“ [Ref: 41:43] These verses establish; inflicting punishment is characteristic of Lordship and polytheists believed their gods possessed this power of Lordship. In the following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states that the polytheists attempted to scare the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) into silence with threat of punishment from their gods:“Is not Allah enough for his Servant? But they try to frighten thee with other besides Him! For such as Allah leaves to stray, there can be no guide.” [Ref: 39:36] This indicates the polytheists believed their gods had powers of harm/punishment – or in other words a characteristic of Lordship. And this is similar to when nation of Prophet Hud (alayhis salaam) said about their gods inflicting Prophet Hud (alayhis salaam) with stupidity, and evidence of this is in the following verse: "We say nothing but that (perhaps) some of our gods may have seized thee with imbecility. “He said: "I call Allah to witness, and do ye bear witness, that I am free from the sin of ascribing, to Him." [Ref: 11:54] This indicates throughout ages polytheists believed in their gods having powers of Rububiyyah and in context of discussion power of inflicting harm as an instrument of punishment. Lat, Uzza, And Manat As Lords Beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] What else did those people believe about the angels apart from believing them to be lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? This question is answered in the following vers of Quran – it reveals they believed these angels were daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Has then your Lord distinguished/honoured you by (giving you) sons, and taken unto Himself daughters in the guise of angels? Verily, you are uttering a dreadful saying!” [Ref: 17:40] “Have you seen Lat and Uzza? And another, the third Manat? What! for you the male ######, and for Him, the female?” [Ref: 53:19/21] It was the polytheists of Arabia who believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had three daughters. This establishes the polytheists of Arabia believed Lat, Uzza, Manat to be Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because the polytheists believed these three are angels and hence daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and proof of them taking these daughter-angels as Lords is in the following verse: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] And in response to their attribution of angel-daughters as lord partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe.” [Ref: 6:100] And in another verse questions how they have come to know if the angels were female in the following verse: “And they have made the angels, who are servants of the Most Merciful, females. Did they witness their creation? Their testimony will be recorded, and they will be questioned.” [Ref: 43:16] Indicating the entire philosophy of polytheism is made-up and has no foundation other then their own desires. Shirk Al Ilahiyyah Is Inclusive Of Shirk Al Rububiyyah: Islamicly Ilahiyyah is inclusive of Rububiyyah therefore fundamentaly if one believes in many Ilahs beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then one is guilty of associating that many lords with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And if one attributes lord partners to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but not Ilah partners even then one would be guilty of Shirk in Ilahiyyah because Ilahiyyah is fundmental prequisite for Rububiyyah. Without Ilahiyyah there is no Rububiyyah. And any individual guilty of Shirk in Tawheed Al Ilahiyyah cannot be believer in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. By attributing god/lord partners to Him [in other words committing Shirk Al-Ilahiyyah] by default one negates Tawheed Asma Wal Sifaat (One-ness Of Names & Attributes) even if one believes the attributes/names of action are limited for the appointed deity. This belief would only indicate; the individual believes Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has partner gods/lords who possesse, limited and restricted, attributes and actions. And this would still be Shirk in Ilahiyyah and Rububiyyah. Shirk In Lordship Is Also Shirk Of Attributes: Rabb (i.e. Lord) is a Ism Khas (i.e.special name) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and it is connected to some of attributes and an actions (i.e. Afaal) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). If one was to affirms the title of rabb for a deity, one has also affirmed all the attributes and actions connected with being a rabb for their deity. Polytheists affirmed the lordship for their gods – Lat, Uzza, Manat - and in this sense also affirmed the attributes and actions connected to lordship. And if one commits Shirk in Lordship, by by default he has comitted Shirk in all those attributes and actions which are connected with Lordship. Hence they would also be guilty of Shirk Al As-Sifaat (i.e. attributes) not just in Rububiyyah. Conclusion: It has been firmly established that polytheists believed in qualities of Rububiyyah for their gods. With regards to Lat, Uzza and Manat we have clear evidence which establishes they were deemed to be Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is established that Ilahiyyah is inclusive of Rububiyyah. And it is also established from many verses of Quran that polytheists believed in many gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). According to Hadith there were some 360 idols of various gods of polytheists in and around Kabah. Hence polytheists were not only guilty in Shirk of Ilahiyyah but they were also guilty of Shirk of Rububiyyah. Rububiyyah is inclusive of attributes such as Khaliq (i.e. Creator), Raziq (i.e. Sustainer) and many others therefore Shirk in Rububiyyah is also Shirk of Sifaat. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Objection: You stated in your explanation of the verse 12:106 that it was only revealed for polytheists and not Muslims. The majority indicates minority – minority is Muslim because they do not commit Shirk. Therefore the verse is inclusive of Muslims and not exclusive of Muslims. If your position is valid then it would imply; some polytheists do believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without Shirk but majority of them believe with Shirk. Also note the only real disagreement between Muslims and Mushrikeen was issue of Tawheed. If some of them believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without Shirk then they were Muslims. The Fundamental Disagreement: The least important aspect requiring some reaction and response will be dealt in the following discussion. You stated: “Also note the only real disagreement between Muslims and Mushrikeen was issue of Tawheed. If some of them believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without Shirk then they were Muslims.” There were many disputes and disagreements between RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and all were real and important in terms of having belief which reflected teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). You used the word real and I assume you intended fundamental. If I was to pin point a real/fundamental disagreement between RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and polytheists, and between companions and polytheists, I would state the Nabuwat of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was fundamental disagreement and dispute. Had the polytheists believed in his Prophet-hood and believed he is Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) they would not have opposed his teaching nor rejected any of his teachings. They attempted to discredit Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by various means all in vain efforts to discredit his Nabuwat (i.e. Prophet-hoot). Anyhow, there is no definitive position, all disputes are connected and relative to each other. Secondly, even if the polytheists came to believe in Tawheed they could not have become Muslims by accepting Tawheed. Entry into Islam requires that an individual believes in all fundamental teachings and Tawheed is one of such. Verse 12:106 Is Indeed Revealed For Polytheists: You wrote: “You stated in your explanation of the verse 12:106 that it was only revealed for polytheists and not Muslims. The majority indicates minority – minority is Muslim because they do not commit Shirk. Therefore the verse is inclusive of Muslims and not exclusive of Muslims.” The clear emphatic text of the verse points to majority which is polytheistic in belief. The verse is about the majority. The verse does not state anything about the belief of minority, here take note: And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Hence monotheists are not included in the verse. By judging the diametric opposite, majority indicates minority and deducing; majority is polyteistic in belief and by default minority does not commit Shirk. Based on this deduction you cannot legitimately and correctly argue the verse is inclusive of Muslims because the verse has not mentioned minority. Had Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated, minority does but the majority of the people believe not in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) except with associating partners, or in a similar type statement then it could be argued that minority the verse was inclusive of Muwahideen (i.e. monotheists) and maybe Muslims. Based on the text of verse which does not mention anything about minority – the verse was revealed with regards to polytheists. Some Polytheists Do Believe In Allah Without Shirk: You wrote: “If your position is valid then it would imply; some polytheists do believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without Shirk but majority of them believe with Shirk.” This is a brillant point which is likely to occur in minds of many but it is invalid. The verse is not about entire polytheis- kind. It did not have basis on: Entire polytheist-kind is believer in Allah And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] If the verse was about entire polytheistic-kind then your argument would be valid, because majority believing in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with Shirk by default implies, a minority from among the ‘polytheists’ is from Muwahideen (i.e. monotheists). You have made a Mutliq (i.e. general) undeclared assumption into a Muqayyid (i.e. specific) undeclared assumption. Meaning you have restricted the undeclared assumption for only polytheists. The undeclared assumption is the green writing before the actual verse. It is undeclared because it is not part of the verse. It is assumption because it is logical assumed basis on which the verse clarifies itself. In reality it is about entire mankind on basis of following undeclared logical assumption: Entire mankind is believer in Allah And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] In the following section the undeclared assumption; out of entire mankind most do not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without associating god-partners with Him, will be established to give authority to Islamic understanding. Most Of Mankind Believe Not In Allah Except With Shirk: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me.” [Ref: 51:56] But mankind deviated from Tawheed and took others as Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and worshiped them. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) addressing mankind states: “O mankind, remember the favor of Allah upon you. Is there any creator other than Allah who provides for you from the heaven and earth? There is no deity except Him, so how are you deluded?” [Ref: 35:3] The questioning is to establish there is no Deity beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the One and the Only Deity. The verse reveals mankind took deities beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) this is why Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states, there is no deity except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Note, it is matter of principle, where ever entirity is mentioned in Quran/Ahadith, either the entirity or majority is intended. We have example of Iblees (the Jinn) being ordered along side the angels to prostrate to Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam). Yet the explicit command was given to angels. Returning to discussion, the verse 35:3 is addressesing entire mankind, indicating entire or majority of mankind is guilty of associating god partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). To answer the ambiguity of majority of or entirity of mankind, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Meaning most of mankind believe not in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) except that they committ Shirk. In another verse of Quran it is stated: “They will say, "Exalted are You! You are our benefactor not them. Rather, they used to worship the Jinn; most of them were believers in them." [Ref: 34:41] Conclusion: A Muslim is one who accepts all fundamental doctrines of Islam and not just one who believes in Tawheed alone. The verse assumes, out of mankind most do not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without associating a god partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Also the verse 12:106 was revealed for polytheists because explicit mention of a minority is not made in the text of verse. Rather it is deduced via judging based on diametric opposite and what is not part of verse cannot be made part of text of verse even if it is logically, rationally deduced. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Recently I have made available online personal story of, how I was misguided and how Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) guided to orthodox Islam, here. In section eleven I stated Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab believed majority of Muslims are polytheists. An admirer of Shaykh and follower of his brand of Kharijism contacted me and stated Shaykh did not believe most of Muslims are Mushrikeen, but believed some Muslims are polytheists. The admirer of Shaykh said, his understanding was; if so and so belief is held, or so and so action was performed, by an individual then according to their belief one would be guilty of major Shirk. Instead of responding to his Email he was invited to Yahoo Messenger for a little discussion. There I presented my position; according to teaching of Khariji cheif, most Muslims are polytheists. Al-hamdu lillah he realised the point and evidence behind it. Promised me, he will investigate and get back to me. I judged the evidence employed to establish my understanding was important and should be made public so others can benefit. The Issue Of Disagreement And My Position: The active proponents of Kharijism know the half truth regarding their teaching; some Muslims are guilty of major Shirk if they affirm x, y, or z polytheistic beleifs. This half truth makes them believe only a minority amongst Muslims is guilty of major Shirk. Cautious Khariji - says: We will not deem them Mushrik until correct understanding of Tawheed and Shirk has been presented to Mushrik-Muslims. There is another Khariji breed – reckless Khariji – who believes, Muslims are polytheist if they affirm such beliefs, even if they have not been presented true teaching of Tawheed. Both types of Khawarij are in agreement; Shirk has occurred but they differ on application of principle of Takfir. After much thinking and research over the evidence used by Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and the types of beliefs he deemed major Shirk I came to conclusion Shaykh of Najd would deem majority of Muslims as polytheists. The Objective To Be Established: Khawarij do not believe as they claim; SOME Muslims can be polytheists if they affirm x, y, or z beliefs, nor they believe; SOME Muslims are polytheists. Evidence employed by Khawarij indicates, MOST of Muslims are polytheists and their major scholars have stated, and it can be deduced from their writings; they believe most of Muslims are/were Mushrikeen The Foundation Of Charge Against Shaykh Of Najd: Verse in question is part of Hadith narrated by Ibn Abi Hatim: “Ibn Abi Hatim reported about Hudhaifah (radiallah ta’ala anhu): He saw a man with piece of twine on his hand (as protection or cure from fever) so he cut the twine and read the verse: “Most of them believe in Allah and still practise Shirk (polytheism).” [Ref: Kitab at-Tawheed, Chapter 7, published by: Darussalam in year 1996, First Edition, page 44] On the following page (p45), Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab acknowledges the verse was revealed about major Shirk. He has indirectly admitted the verse was revealed for polytheist opponents of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by saying this. He considers it permissible for a verse revealed with regards to polytheists, and in context of major Shirk, to be applied upon Muslims on a matter which according to Shaykh is an issue of minor Shirk: “Hudhaifah’s reciting the verse of Quran is a clear-cut proof that companions used to recite the verses dealing with the major shirk to condemn minor Shirk. As Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did by reciting the verse from Surah Al-Baqarah (2:165).” Clarifying The Issue Of Hadith And Refutation Of His Positions: First of all, the Hadith of Ibn Abi Hatim is disconnected (i.e. Munqati’). Meaning there is break in chain of transmission, hence the Hadith is classed as Da’if (i.e. weak), and it cannot be proof of any valid Islamic understanding. A authentic Hadith states: “... and the Mulhidun (heretical) after the establishment of firm proof against them:"And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.' And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.” [Ref: Bukhari, V9, P49, Chap6: Killing The Khawarij] This Hadith establishes, a verse revealed for Mushrikeen applied upon Muslims, is trait of Khawarij, and they are worst creatures in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Secondly, with regards to reciting of chapter 2 verse 165: “And [yet], among the people are those who take other than Allah as equals [to Him]. They love them as they [should] love Allah . But those who believe are stronger in love for Allah . And if only they who have wronged would consider [that] when they see the punishment, [they will be certain] that all power belongs to Allah and that Allah is severe in punishment.” [Ref: 2:165] According to Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) the verse was revealed in context of polytheists; that they loved their idols like they should have loved Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In light of first interpretation it is evident the verse was revealed regarding major Shirk. And second interpretation he has given is, that hypocrites loved their gold/silver as they should have loved Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Third interpretation is, the polytheists took their leaders as gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The first interpretation is established from the text of Quran and the second interpretation is has no basis in Quran or Hadith. Third interpretation is similar to how Quran states Jews took their Rabbi’s as Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). First and third are established for disbelievers and second is without valid basis or chain of transmission which can establish its attribution to Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And absence of chain of transmission is enough to establish its weakness and invalidity, and therefore it cannot be used for valid understanding. Fourthly, if one was to disregard the issue of chain of transmission and lack of evidence which establishes its validity and just judges based on the text even then it contradicts established Hadith of Sahih Bukhari, according to which applying upon the Muslims the verses of Quran revealed for polytheists, is characteristic of worst creatures in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) - Khawarij. Lastly, even though Shaykh has used a weak Hadith to establish that a verse revealed for major Shirk can be utilized for minor Shirk. The fact is Shaykh also believes verses revealed in context of beliefs and actions of polytheists can be applied upon Muslims and I present Kitab at-Tawheed [and everything else he has written] as an evidence of his this methodology. Book Kitab At-Tawheed VS Real Belief: Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab titled chapter 23, “Some People Of This Ummah Will Worship Idols.” This was presented as proof that Shaykh did not consider the majority of Muslims are polytheists. Maybe earlier in life the Shaykh held to this understanding but when his other writtings are considered it becomes obvious he considered himself and only those who followed him as Muslims. Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab wrote in his first principle of Qawaid Al Arba; polytheists believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and despite they were not Muslims. In principle four he stated, polytheists of his era are worse polytheists in comparision to Prophetic era polytheists. Alhasil he considered the Muslims of his era worse in polytheism then actual disbelievers of Prophetic era. This establishes, he believes the following part of verse applies to Muslims: "And most of them [Muslims] believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." I have crossed out MOST because it is yet to be established and inserted MUSLIMS because Shaykh believes Muslims of his time are worst type of polytheists. Please read the following carefully because this will establish the MOST part of the verse: “And I inform you about myself – I swear by Allah whom there is none worthy to worship except Him – I have sought knowledge and those who knew me believed that I had knowledge while I did not know the meaning of, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah, at that time and did not know the religion of Islam before this grace that Allah favored. As well as my shaikhs (teachers) no one among them knew that. And if someone from the scholars of al-Arid (i.e. the lands of Najd and surrounding areas) claims that he knew the meaning of, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah, or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims on behalf of his teachers that someone from them knew that, then he has lied and said falsehood and deceived people and praised himself with something he does not possess.“ [Ref: Ar-Rasa`il ash-Shakhsiyyah] His claim none beside him knew meaning of, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) except him. How can those Muslims living in his time and those before him be Muslims if they did not know meaning of, there is no Deity worthy of worship excet Allah, and if they did not know what the religion of Islam is? Note in his understanding Islam is, Tawheed. They cannot be Muslim and he did not believe they were Muslim. I present my argument that, even though in chapter 7, page 44, he used the verse in context of minor Shirk but he also did believe it is applicable on issues of major Shirk of which he accused Muslim Ummah. Implication of which would be; Shaykh believed, MOST Muslims have not believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) except with Shirk. This is strenthened when one considers, Shaykh believed he was the sole Muwahid [and subsequently those who followed his teachings were monotheists] because none knew meaning of Kalima, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah. This naturally implies Shaykh believed all Muslims apart from him and his followers were polytheists. Through deduction it has been established Shaykh actually believed that MOST of the Muslims are Mushrikeen. This reveals Shaykh even though directly did not employ the following verse as an evidence of major Shirk in Ummah he did believe in its implications: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Also considering Shaykh’s methodology of, applying verses with indicate major polytheism in belief of polytheists and applying it for minor ‘polytheism’ of Muslims. And Shaykh applying verses which indicate major Shirk of polytheists as if they were about beliefs and actions of Muslims, all add to establish; Shaykh would employ the verse 12:106 in context of Muslims as proof that most Muslims do not believe in Tawheed [except ‘Tawheed’ believed by polytheists]. Shah Ismail Dehalvi Reflecting The Darkness Of Shaykh Of Najd: Maulvi Shah Ismail Dehalvi learnt Wahhabism during his Hajj pilgrimage. When he returned he penned his Wahhabism and teaching of Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab in his own words and published them as Taqwiyatul Iman. Anyone who has had oppurtunity of reading Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and Maulvi Shah Ismail Dehalvi will be struck by extra-ordinary similarity of thought and content in their books. Due to extra ordinary agreement between the teaching of these two Shaykhs of Khawarij, the epic centre in propogation of Kharijism - Darussalam Publishers have published Taqwiyatul Iman. This indicates there is absolute agreement between the teaching of Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and teaching of Maulvi Shah Ismail Dehalvi. Maulvi Shah Ismail Dehalvi writes: “First one should listen to is; a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and actual Tawheed is rare. Yet most people do not understand the meaning of Tawheed and Shirk and claim to have Eman (i.e. faith) but in reality are caught in Shirk. So firstly meaning of Tawheed and Shirk should be understood so good and bad from perspective of Quran and Hadith can be known. One should listen, that most people in time of their hardship call upon Pirs and Prophets, Imams and matyrs, angels and fairies, and seek from them their desired, and vows for them, and for fullfilment of their needs give Nazr and Niaz, and for the dispelling of evil attributes their sons to them. One (from amongst polytheistic masses) names his son Abdul Nabi, one Ali Baksh, one Hussain Baksh, one Peer Baksh, one Madar Baksh, one Salar Baksh, one Ghulam Mohy Al-Din, one Ghulam Mohayn Al-Din, and to ensure their survival (of their sons) one keeps hair-lock in name of so, and one wears bracelet/neclace, one dresses up in particular clothes, one puts a chain (around the wrist), one dedicates an animal for someone, one invokes in time of difficulty, one takes an oath (of by name of human) in discussions, conclusion – all that which the Hindus enact for their idols so do these masquerading Muslims enact for saints, Prophets, leaders (i.e. Imams), Matyrs, angels and fairies. And yet continue to claim to be Muslims, subhan-Allah, (from) this mouth, and such a claim (of being Muslim), honourable Allah truthfully said in chapter Yusuf: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Then if there was someone to explain to them and says to them, you claim to have Eman and engage in actions of Shirk, so why do you combine these two paths (of Tawheed and Shirk)? They respond to him, we do not committ Shirk …” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, Chapter (1) Explanation Of Tawheed And Shirk, Page 8/9, Rendered to English by Muhammed Ali Razavi] Please note, Maulvi Shah Ismail Dehalvi has employed the verse which Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab used. The difference between them - Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab employed it in context of minor Shirk and his Indian prodigy Maulvi Shah Ismail Dehalvi used it in context of major and minor Shirk. Also note; Maulvi Shah Ismail Dehalvi has stated majority of Muslims are not real Muslims because he used the word ‘jhootay Musalman’ which was translated to mean ‘masquerading Muslims’. In the beginning of quoted paragraph he emphatically has stated most Muslims do not understand what Tawheed or Shirk is. Implication of which alone are enough and obvious for anyone with basic knowledge of Islam and ability to reason to figure out what he has accused Muslims of. And one yet has not considered the total number of ‘major/minor’ Shirks he has accused Muslims of engaging in. This Is Our Belief, By Abu Al Fudayl Nasir Ad-Din An-Nuaymi: The author writes: “These types [of Shirk] have all become normal and widespread on all places of earth, in countries that ascribe themselves to Islam and other than these. And most of those who say, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah and claim [for themselves religion] of Islam, have verily fallen into one of these [types of Shirk].” [Ref: This Is Our Belief, page 20, elucidated by Muhammed Ali Razavi – square brackets] To sum up the words of author, most Muslims are guilty of major Shirk. In the following quote he states most of the Muslims have blurred the clear distinction between Islam – the religion of all Prophets – and polytheistic religions. Implication of which is, the majority of Muslims are upon a religion which is contaminated with polytheism. He goes on to state the reality of the Muslims is that they’re types of disbelievers who have never entered Islam: “And most of those [who] say it [There is no Diety worthy of worship except Allah, Muhammad is Messenger of Allah.] in last centuries have not entered nor known Islam, and they have not distinguished [in practice and in belief]between the religion of Prophets and the religion of the polytheists. They have also not known [Tawheed is] the distinguishing and seperating border between the disbelievers and the Muslims. This kind of person is Kafir-Asli, who has never entered Islam.” [Ref: This Is Our Belief, page 38, elucidated by Muhammed Ali Razavi – square brackets] Grandson Of Shaykh Of Najd On Reflecting Teaching Of His GrandFather: Shaykh Abdur Rahman [the son of] Hassan [the son of] Shaykh Muhammad [the son of] Abdul Wahhab, the grandson of Shaykh of Najd wrote a commentary on Kitab at-Tawheed. He wrote the following: في قرة العيون: فصارت هذه الأصنام بهذا التصوير على صور الصالحين سلما إلى عبادتها. وكل ما عبد من دون الله, من قبر أو مشهد, أو صنم, أو طاغوت، فالأصل في عبادته هو الغلو. كما لا يخفى على ذوي البصائر. كما جرى لأهل مصر وغيرهم؛ فإن أعظم آلهتهم أحمد البدوي، وهو لا يعرف له أصل ولا فضل ولا علم ولا عبادة. ومع هذا فصار أعظم آلهتهم مع أنه لا يعرف إلا أنه دخل المسجد يوم الجمعة فبال فيه ثم خرج ولم يصل. ذكره السخاوي عن أبي حيان. فزين لهم الشيطان عبادته فاعتقدوا أنه يتصرف في الكون، ويطفئ الحريق وينجي الغريق, وصرفوا له الإلهية والربوبية وعلم الغيب, وكانوا يعتقدون أنه يسمعهم ويستجيب لهم من الديار البعيدة. وفيهم من يسجد على عتبة حضرته. وكان أهل العراق ومن حولهم كأهل عمان يعتقدون في عبد القادر الجيلاني; كما يعتقد أهل مصر في البدوي. وعبد القادر من متأخري الحنابلة وله كتاب الغنية, وغيره ممن قبله وبعده من الحنابلة أفضل منه في العلم والزهد, لكن فيه زهد وعبادة, وفتنوا به أعظم فتنة. كما جرى من الرافضة مع أهل البيت. وسبب ذلك الغلو دعوى أن له كرامات، وقد جرت الكرامات لمن هو خير منه وأفضل كبعض الصحابة والتابعين, وهكذا حال أهل الشرك مع من فتنوا به. وأعظم من هذا عبادة أهل الشام لابن عربي، وهو إمام أهل الوحدة الذين هم أكفر أهل الأرض وأكثر من يعتقد فيه هؤلاء لا فضل له ولا دين كأناس بمصر وغيره, وجرى في نجد قبل هذه الدعوة مثل هذا. وفي الحجاز واليمن وغيرها من عبادة الطواغيت والأشجار والأحجار والقبور ما عمت به البلوى, كعبادتهم للجن وطلبهم للشفاعة منهم. والأصل في ذلك الغلو تزيين الشيطان. وذكر أهل السير أن التلبية من عهد إبراهيم - عليه السلام -: "لبيك اللهم لبيك لا شريك لك لبيك"، حتى كان عمرو بن لحي الخزاعي فبينما هو يلبي تمثل له الشيطان في صورة شيخ يلبي معه فقال: "لبيك لا شريك لك"، فقال الشيخ: "إلا شريكا هو لك". فأنكر ذلك عمرو وقال ما هذا؟ فقال الشيخ: "تملكه وما ملك". فإنه لا بأس بهذا. فقالها عمرو. فدانت بها العرب- [Fath Al Majeed – Sharh Kitab At-Tawheed, Chapter (19) Cause Of Disbelief In Bani Adam And Abandonment Of Religion Is Due To Excessive Veneration Of Pious, page 227] In this long statement, Shaykh of Khawarij states, people of Egypt are disbelievers because they worship Shaykh Ahmad Al Badawi (rahimullah) people of Iraq are disbelievers for worshiping Shaykh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani (rahimullah), Muslims of Syria are disbelievers because they worship Shaykh Ibn Arabi (rahimullah). He also stated that Muslims of Hijaz and Yemen worshipped, trees, stones, idols, graves and Jinn, and sought their intercession. Please note, he has demonised whole countries and not a minority from these lands of Muslims. In another part of his commentary he wrote the following: قوله: "إن أخوف ما أخاف عليكم الشرك الأصغر" هذا من شفقته صلي الله عليه وسلم بأمته ورحمته ورأفته بهم، فلا خير إلا دلهم عليه وأمرهم به، ولا شر إلا بينه لهم وأخبرهم به ونهاهم عنه; كما قال صلي الله عليه وسلم فيما صح عنه: " ما بعث الله من نبي إلا كان حقا عليه أن يدل أمته على خير ما يعلمه لهم - الحديث ". فإذا كان الشرك الأصغر مخوفا على أصحاب رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم مع كمال علمهم وقوة إيمانهم، فكيف لا يخافه وما فوقه من هو دونهم في العلم والإيمان بمراتب؟ خصوصا إذا عرف أن أكثر علماء الأمصار اليوم لا يعرفون من التوحيد إلا ما أقر به المشركون، وما عرفوا معنى الإلهية التي نفتها كلمة الإخلاص عن كل ما سوى الله- [Fath Al Majeed – Sharh Kitab At-Tawheed, Chapter (4) Fear Of Shirk, page 76] Underlined has been translated: "Specially if it is known that today the majority of scholars from different (muslim) countries do not know from tawhid except what mushriks (of Makkah) approved and they did not know the meaning of "al-ilahiyya" that "kalimatul-ikhlas" denied its attribution to anything other than Allah.” ‘Tawheed’ approved by Mushrikeen of Makkah according to chief of Khawarij and his followers was ‘Tawheed Al Rububiyyah’. Knowledge of correct understanding of Tawheed is pre-requisite for imparting true teaching of Tawheed to others. Implications of his allegations are serious, if the majority scholarship of Muslim world did not know and do not know true Tawheed then whatever these Muslim scholars taught to [the majority of] Muslims cannot be true teaching of Tawheed. Hence according to understanding of Shaykh Abdur Rahman, like the majority of Muslim scholarship, the majority of Muslim laymen were ignorant of true understanding of Tawheed, and they only know ‘Tawheed’ which was known to polytheists of Arabia. Note that Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab having faith in ‘Tawheed’ of Mushrikeen of Makkah isn’t enough to be from Muslims: “That you know the Kuffaar who the Messenger fought used to affirm that Allah Ta’aala, was the Creator and the Disposer of all the affairs (i.e. Tawheed Al Rububiyyah) but that didn’t enter them into Islam and the proof is the saying of the Most High: ”Say: Who provides for you from the sky and from the earth? Or who owns hearing and sight? And Who brings out the living from the dead and brings out the dead from the living? They will say: “Allah”. Say: Will you not then be afraid of Allah’s punishment (i.e.-for setting up partners with Allah)?” [Ref: Qawaid Al Arba, 1st Principle, by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab] Alhasil – according to Shaykh Abdur Rahman Ibn Hassan the grandson of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab most of Muslim scholars [and consequently those who learnt from these scholars - most of laymen] were/are polytheists. Finally, Shaykh of Khawarij wrote polytheists believed in Tawheed [of Lordship]. This belief and statement of his is a lie, and a distortion of Quranic teaching, and clear Kufr to those who know Islam. What Is Established So Far: It has been established the Khawarij employ the following verse to deem the majority of Muslims as Mushrikeen: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Shaykh Shah Ismail Dehalvi used it to charge that most of Muslims are engaged in major/minor Shirk. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab used it in context of minor Shirk. But considering his methodology; of applying verses revealed for major Shirk upon Muslims it can be concluded Shaykh would employ the verse in context of Muslims. All matters which Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab deemed as major Shirk were/are practiced by over whelming majority of Muslims, throughout the world. Considering this fact it becomes apparent why his successors declared the majority of Muslims as Mushrikeen. So even though Shaykh may not be explicitly stated majority of Muslims are Mushrikeen nor applied the verse 12:106 upon Muslims in context of major Shirk the matter of fact is Shaykh’s teaching produced the belief majority of Muslims are Mushrikeen. Also it has been revealed a man from group (i.e. qarn) of Iblees (i.e. Shaykh Shah Ismail Dehalvi) did employ the verse 12:106 upon Muslims charging them of major Shirk. Note, Shaykh Shah Ismail Dehalvi is claimed and deemed to be prominent scholar of Ahle Hadith [version of Wahhabism from Indian subcontinent] and Deobandis. And even Arabian Wahhabis [Hanbali Wahhabis] employ his works indicating they consider him to be authorative scholar who is representing core Wahhabi teachings in his books. Implications Of Evidence Employed By Khawarij: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Rhis verse states; most of people who believe in Allah believe in Him while assosociating others as [sons, daughters, Prophet, Jinn, angels, idols] as partners. This reveals MOST of those who believe in Allah are not Muslims because being guilty of major Shirk is major Kufr and it invalidates belief in Islam. This understanding is validate by the preceding verse which states: “And most of the people as much as you wish, will not believe.” [Ref: 12:103] The verse 103 indicates; MOST people are disbelievers and will not convert to religion of Islam. Verse 106 indicates; MOST will not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without associating partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Both verses indicate the ones about whom the verses are about are disbelieving polytheists and not Muslims. Point to note is the verse states, most people are disbelievers/polytheists. It does not say, will be polytheists/disbelievers, or some are polytheists/disbelievers. Truth Has Come And Falsehood Has Perished: Anyone who employs this verse and applies it upon Muslims, know that he/she does not believe; some Muslims are guilty of polytheism. Or does not believe; some Muslims can be polytheists if they express x, y, or z belief. Such a person believes MOST of Muslims are guilty of major Kufr/Shirk. Such a person has disbelieved in teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) who has taught; Muslim Ummah as whole, the majority will not fall into major Shirk: "... and by Allah, I am not afraid that you will worship others besides Allah after me, but I am afraid that you will strive and struggle against each other over these treasures of the world." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H590] "... I am not afraid that you would associate anything with Allah after me, but I am afraid that you may be (allured) by the world and (vie) with one another (in possessing material wealth) and begin killing one another, and you would be destroyed ..." [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5689] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “The thing that I fear most for my Ummah is associating others with Allah. I do not say that they will worship the sun or the moon or idols, but deeds done for the sake of anyone other than Allah, and hidden desires.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, Vol.1 B37, H4205] Note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) completely negated that his Ummah will worship idols, or moon, or sun. He feared that his Ummah would fall into hidden Shirk (i.e. Shirk Khaf’fi) and this only nullifies good deeds not belief in Islam. It is important to mention that when the word Ummah (i.e. nation) or Jammah (i.e. group) is used in context of Hadith it means majority of people making the Ummah/Jammah. In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not fear major Shirk for majority of Muslims. In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My Ummah will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] When the majority of Muslims/Ulamah are/were upon the teaching of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the Muslims to follow the majority on issues of dispute then how can the majority be guilty of major Shirk? Should not the Muslims be with the majority of Muslims? How is it that you claim to be Muslim, and disbelieve in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and deem the majority of Muslims to be polytheists? Conclusion: The truth regarding their belief is; the Wahhabiyyah, modern equals of Khawarij, believe vast majority of Muslims are Mushrikeen. And this is evident from their writtings as well as from the evidence (i.e. 12:106) they employ in their works. Anyone who employs this verse 12:106 in context of major/minor Shirk and applies it upon Muslims, he/she is upon the methodology of group of Iblees (i.e. qarn ash-shaytan) – the Khawarij. Its application upon Muslims also reveals that one believes most/majority of Muslims are polytheistic disbelievers and one who tells you otherwise has concealed his true belief and attempted to fool you into believing he/she takes you as his Muslim friend. They are the worst of creatures in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because they distort the actual application of a verse and apply it upon believing Muslim. They are from and of the disbelieving sect to emerge from East about which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold and described. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Khawarij believe the polytheists in the pre-Islamic and during the life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) believed in Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah (i.e. One-ness Of Lordship). Meaning they believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was the Only One Lord and beside Him there was no other Lord. Muslims believe polytheists were guilty of Shirk ar-Rububiyyah (i.e. polytheism in Lordship). The Scholars Of Khawarij: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab wrote: “That you know the Kuffaar who the Messenger fought used to affirm that Allah Ta’aala, was the Creator and the Disposer of all the affairs (i.e. Tawheed Al Rububiyyah) but that didn’t enter them into Islam and the proof is the saying of the Most High: ”Say: Who provides for you from the sky and from the earth? Or who owns hearing and sight? And Who brings out the living from the dead and brings out the dead from the living? They will say: “Allah”. Say: Will you not then be afraid of Allah’s punishment (i.e.-for setting up partners with Allah)?” [Ref: Qawaid Al Arba, 1st Principle, by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab] Khariji scholar Shaykh Salih Ibn Al Fawzan explains the underlined part as: “The disbelievers whom the Messenger fought affirmed Tawheed ar-Rububiyah (Oneness of Allah's Lordship), yet their affirmation of Tawheed ar-Rububiyah did not enter them into Islam and did not sanctify their blood or wealth.” [Ref: Explanation Of Four Fundamental Principles, by Shaykh Salih Ibn Al Fawzan, Page 30, Published by: QSEP] This reveals two facts i) Tawheed Al Rububiyyah according to Khawarij is; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Creator and Disposer of all affairs in the creation, ii) and it the disbelievers whom the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fought affirmed this Tawheed. The grandson of Ibnul Wahhab in his commentary of Kitab at-Tawheed known as Fath Al Majeed states: "Specially if it is known that today the majority of scholars from different (muslim) countries do not know from tawhid except what mushriks (of Makkah) approved and they did not know the meaning of "al-ilahiyya" that "kalimatul-ikhlas" denied its attribution to anything other than Allah.” [Ref: Fath Al Majeed – Sharh Kitab At-Tawheed, Chapter (4) Fear Of Shirk, page 76] Here the Khariji Shaykh is pointing to what Shaykh Salih termed as Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah. In other words he has stated, majority of Muslim scholars of the world do not know Tawheed except the Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah, which was also agreed by the Mushrikeen of Makkah. Al-hasil, these Shuyukh of Khawarij agree that Mushrikeen of Makkah and Arabia in general believed in Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah. The Position Of Khawarij: Wahhabiyyah argue, the polytheists did not believe; their gods were providers, sustainser, creators, and destroyers.They believed all these are in control of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and their gods were not incharge of these duties. The Islamic Understanding: Islamicly to believe in Tawheed (i.e. One-ness) of Lordship, the fundamental prequisite is to believe in Wahdaniyyah (i.e. One-ness), and without believing in Wahdaniyyah of the Ilah (i.e. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) it is impossible to believe in Tawheed of Lordship. One who believes others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are gods cannot believe in Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah. Ilahiyyah Is Inclusive Of Rububiyyah: One who believes a creation is an Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Such person cannot be believer in Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah because Ilahiyyah does not exclude Rububiyyah but it is inclusive of it. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Yet they have taken besides Him other gods (i.e. alihah) who created nothing but are themselves created, and possess neither harm nor benefit for themselves, and possess no power (of causing) death, nor (of giving) life, nor of raising the dead.” [Ref: 25:3] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated, polytheists took beside Him gods who have not created anything, neither do their gods have ability of harm/benefit, nor control over life or death. Implying they should have taken Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as their only God, who has created everything, and possesses the ability of harm/benefit, and is in full control of life and death. This reveals act of creating and managing affairs of creation are in control of an Ilah, and should be in control of one who is believed to be an Ilah. In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any god. (Had there been gods or son-gods beside Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) then each god would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him].” [Ref: 23:91] In this verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has indicated; God creates and if there were other gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then each god would have created a seperated universe for their creation and ruled over them as lords of their creation and some would have attempted to expand their rule over creation of other gods by defeating the lord god ruling over them. In these verses Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) indicated; Ilahiyyah is inclusive of Rububiyyah and not separate from it. Hence if one was to believe in an Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then he/she cannot be free from Shirk ar’Rububiyyah. Refutation Of Khariji Understanding: Suppose there is valid basis for belief of Khawarij; polytheists did not believe their gods as Lords and they believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as their sole Lord. Question needs to be asked, did they believe their gods have ability/capacity to do all in power of lord? And did they believe their gods have powers of lordship in limited and restricted sense? A man who is able bodied and is asked for help but does not help – do we negate the possession of the attribute, the capacity, the ability for him? Or do we affirm the ability is in him but he did not help or does not help? When the gods of polytheists were: men, angels, Jinn, then they have limited, restricted capacity of lordship and it cannot be denied. And when the gods of polytheists were deemed to be sons and daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then how could the polytheists believe their gods do not have the capability of their father! Possessing ability of lordship but not employing it - for whatever reason - does not translate into not having ability of lordship. It is fundamental; the polytheists believe in their gods with capability of lordship and only foolish will deny it. Even if one does not worship the false deity just to believe another beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is worthy of worship (i.e. Ilah) is Shirk of Illahiyyah. In the similar manner, to believe a god beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has the capability of lordship is Shirk ar-Rububiyyah, even if one does believe their god does not perform the actions in category of lordship. The Belief Of Polytheists About Their Gods: Polytheists believed their gods have been given duties and each god performs duty assigned to the god by the supreme Deity. Arabis believed Al Uzza was goddess of fertility, Al-Lat was believed to be goddess of earth hence worshipped for sake of good crop harvest, Al Manat was considered to be goddess of fate, god Wadd mentioned in Quran (71:23) was god of heaven/space. Point is polytheists believed each god had a role assigned to them and they acted according to their roles. Being assigned a role, a job, a duty, and carrying out this duty does not mean one is not able to do another. A taxi driver is just not only a taxi driver, he can be a excellent footballer, or cricket baller, or batsman, or martial artist. Similarly the polytheists believed, their gods have been assigned duties. Polytheists did not believe; gods do not possesses the capability of lordship. And as explained earlier, polytheists believing their gods have ability of lordship is enough to warrant Shirk of lordship. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

في قرة العيون: فصارت هذه الأصنام بهذا التصوير على صور الصالحين سلما إلى عبادتها. وكل ما عبد من دون الله, من قبر أو مشهد, أو صنم, أو طاغوت، فالأصل في عبادته هو الغلو. كما لا يخفى على ذوي البصائر. كما جرى لأهل مصر وغيرهم؛ فإن أعظم آلهتهم أحمد البدوي، وهو لا يعرف له أصل ولا فضل ولا علم ولا عبادة. ومع هذا فصار أعظم آلهتهم مع أنه لا يعرف إلا أنه دخل المسجد يوم الجمعة فبال فيه ثم خرج ولم يصل. ذكره السخاوي عن أبي حيان. فزين لهم الشيطان عبادته فاعتقدوا أنه يتصرف في الكون، ويطفئ الحريق وينجي الغريق, وصرفوا له الإلهية والربوبية وعلم الغيب, وكانوا يعتقدون أنه يسمعهم ويستجيب لهم من الديار البعيدة. وفيهم من يسجد على عتبة حضرته. وكان أهل العراق ومن حولهم كأهل عمان يعتقدون في عبد القادر الجيلاني; كما يعتقد أهل مصر في البدوي. وعبد القادر من متأخري الحنابلة وله كتاب الغنية, وغيره ممن قبله وبعده من الحنابلة أفضل منه في العلم والزهد, لكن فيه زهد وعبادة, وفتنوا به أعظم فتنة. كما جرى من الرافضة مع أهل البيت. وسبب ذلك الغلو دعوى أن له كرامات، وقد جرت الكرامات لمن هو خير منه وأفضل كبعض الصحابة والتابعين, وهكذا حال أهل الشرك مع من فتنوا به. وأعظم من هذا عبادة أهل الشام لابن عربي، وهو إمام أهل الوحدة الذين هم أكفر أهل الأرض وأكثر من يعتقد فيه هؤلاء لا فضل له ولا دين كأناس بمصر وغيره, وجرى في نجد قبل هذه الدعوة مثل هذا. وفي الحجاز واليمن وغيرها من عبادة الطواغيت والأشجار والأحجار والقبور ما عمت به البلوى, كعبادتهم للجن وطلبهم للشفاعة منهم. والأصل في ذلك الغلو تزيين الشيطان. وذكر أهل السير أن التلبية من عهد إبراهيم - عليه السلام -: "لبيك اللهم لبيك لا شريك لك لبيك"، حتى كان عمرو بن لحي الخزاعي فبينما هو يلبي تمثل له الشيطان في صورة شيخ يلبي معه فقال: "لبيك لا شريك لك"، فقال الشيخ: "إلا شريكا هو لك". فأنكر ذلك عمرو وقال ما هذا؟ فقال الشيخ: "تملكه وما ملك". فإنه لا بأس بهذا. فقالها عمرو. فدانت بها العرب-

Salam alayqum, Syed Muhammed Ali Sahib, upar wali ayaat ki tafsir tafseel say pesh e khidmat heh - zeroor paren: A Comprehensive Explanation Of Quranic Verse: “And Most Believed Not In Allah Except They Associate Others With Him.”

Introduction: Modern day Khawarij characterized by followers often quote the verse of Quran indicated in the heading to argue most Muslims are polytheists. It should be noted that prominent scholars of heterodoxy – like of Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and Shaykh Shah Ismail Dehalvi and subsequently it has been employed by all those who espouse and promote their brands of ‘pure/true’ Islam. Hence it is imperative this verse is explained in the light of Quran and Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) so the actual meaning of the verse is realised and distortion of heretics is exposed. Considering the context where this verse is employed by heretics the correct understanding will ultimately vindicate majority of Muslims who have been accused of polytheism. Quranic Verse – Most Believe Not In Allah Except With Shirk: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits, an explanation of 12:106 will consist of evidence which establishes that polytheists believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in Ilahs besides Him. It will be followed by demonstration of what some of them believed about their idol-god partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And then how their belief manifested in their daily life. And finally contextual and intertextual explanations will solidify and stenthen exstablished understanding of Muslims. The route taken to explain the verse in question will be long but if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits it will be the straight path to its proper understanding. So please ensure everything is read and understood until the last part is nipped in the bud. Polytheists Believed In Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) poses rhetorical questions to polytheists. The first of which is: "...who is it that sustains you (in life) from the sky and from earth?” It is followed by: “Or who is it that has power over hearing and sight?” Then enquires from them: “And who is it that brings the living from the dead and the dead from the living?” The last one in the verse is: “And who is it that rules and regulates all affairs?” Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knowing what the polytheists of Arabia believed stated: “They will quickly say: Allah. Say : Will you not then show piety to Him'' [Ref: 10:31] The following verse also is in similar style to previous. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) questions the polytheists of Arabia and answers on their behalf: “Say: Unto Whom (belongeth) the earth and whosoever is therein, if ye have knowledge? They will say: Unto Allah. Say: Will ye not then remember?” The next question is about Lordship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala):” Say: Who is Lord of the seven heavens, and Lord of the Tremendous Arsh? They will say: Unto Allah. Say: Will ye not then keep duty (unto Him)?” Next question in the verse is about control of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) over His creation: “Say: In Whose hand is the dominion over all things and He protecteth, while against Him there is no protection, if ye have knowledge? They will say: Unto Allah. Say: How then are ye bewitched?“ [Ref: 23:84-89] Another verse of Quran indicates polytheists of Arabia believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created heavens and earth: “And if you were to ask them who created the heavens and the earth, they would surely say: ‘Allah!’” [Ref: 29:61] “If thou shouldst ask them: Who created the heavens and the earth? They would answer: ‘Allah!’ Say: Praise be to Allah! But most of them know not.” [Ref: 31:25] In the following verse question about creation of earth and universe is repeated: "If indeed, you ask them who is it that created the heavens and the earth? They would be sure to say: 'Allah!'. Say : See you then the things that you invoke besides Allah? Can they, if Allah wills some penalty for me, remove His penalty? Or if He will some grace for me, can they keep back His grace?" [Ref: 39:38] About rain Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) asks the polytheists and Himself states what they actually believe: “And if thou wert to ask them: Who causeth water to come down from the sky, and therewith reviveth the earth after its death? They verily would say: ‘Allah!’ Say: Praise be to Allah! But most of them have no sense.” [Ref: 29:63] Polytheists Believed In Their Idols As Gods Beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states, do the polytheists associate with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gods who cannot create anything and in matter of fact they are themselves created [by those who worship them], and these idol-gods cannot help anyone, not even themselves: “Do they associate with Him those who create nothing and they are (themselves) created? And they are unable to (give) them help, nor can they help themselves.” [Ref: 7:191/192] Verses 191/192 are explained by following verse of Quran where Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) explicitly indicates what He has stated is about the idol-gods of polytheists, and adds further detail to what has already been stated in verses 191/192: “Yet they have taken besides Him other gods (i.e. alihah) who created nothing but are themselves created, and possess neither harm nor benefit for themselves, and possess no power (of causing) death, nor (of giving) life, nor of raising the dead.” [Ref: 25:3] Polytheists believed in various gods hoping that this god would give them honour and dignity: “And they have taken gods besides Allah, that they might give them honor.“ [Ref: 19:81] But Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says they on the day of judgment will disown each other: “No Indeed! Soon they will disown their worship, and they will be their opponents.” [Ref: 1982] Other verses also indicate that polytheists believed in many gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In one such verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) quotes what the polytheists said regarding Prophet Muhammad and their desire to hold to polytheistic belief: “And (they) said: "Are we going to abandon our gods for the sake of a mad poet?" [Ref: 37:36] In the following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) quotes what they said rhetorically to each other – indicating they looked down upon Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), considering him to be too insignificant to invalidate their belief and their gods: “And when those who disbelieved see you they take you not except for mockery (saying): "Is this the one who talks (badly) about your gods?" [Ref: 21:36] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had warned the polytheists of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) punishment if they did not repented from their polytheism and accepted religion of Islam. The polytheists in response to this said: "Have you come to turn us away from our alihah (gods)? Then bring us that with which you threaten us, if you are one of the truthful!" [Ref: 46:22] The polytheists also said that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has nearly lead them astray but their patience and worship of their gods ensured they remained attach to their gods: "He would have nearly misled us from our gods, had it not been that we were patient and constant in their worship!" [Ref: 25:42] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) also quoted words of polytheists which indicate they accused Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of being magician due to his miracles: “And they wonder that there has come to them a warner from among themselves. And the disbelievers say, "This is a magician and a liar.” [Ref: 38:4] They accused him of being liar because he said he is the Prophet and the Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and because he taught there is no other god beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and none deserves the worship except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). They found it strange that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) went against the established tradition of his polytheistic society and taught monotheism: “Has he made the gods [only] one God? Indeed, this is a weird thing." [Ref: 38:5] Due to the monotheistic teaching of Islam the people of influence reached to their polytheistic communities and advised them to be patient: “And the eminent among them went forth (saying): "Continue, and be patient over your gods. Indeed, this is a thing intended.” [Ref: 38:6] They gave this advice it was expected that Islam is a passing phenomenon and after burning bright it will fizzle away and darkness will again reign supreme. Also the following verse indicates that polytheists had experienced many innovated religions – polytheists of Arabia had created true multicultural and multi-polytheistic religious society with tolerance glore – but Islam was new religion with new idea. It also indicates that many beliefs were invented in Arabia but they all had effect of polytheism and these beliefs did not go against the polytheistic grain of society hence they were tolerated, and polytheism was the criteria to judge true and false religion. But with emergence of Islam, and its teaching of monotheism they had no response but to say based on their system of belief: “We have not heard of this in[any of] the latest religion. This is not but a fabrication.” [Ref: 38:7] When all the efforts of polytheists failed, they said their gods might inflict punishment upon Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In response Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) narrates what the people of Prophet Hud (alayhis salaam) said to him: "We say nothing but that (perhaps) some of our gods may have seized thee with imbecility. “He said: "I call Allah to witness, and do ye bear witness, that I am free from the sin of ascribing, to Him." [Ref: 11:54] Purpose of narrating the story of past was to show to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is that he is not alone in experiencing these things Prophets before him had same things said to them. In response to what they said Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Is not Allah enough for His servant? But they try to frighten you with other besides Him for such as Allah leaves to stray, there can be no guide.” [Ref: 39:36] Finally, when they heard the teaching of monotheism indicated in the following verses: “Your Ilah (i.e. god) is One Ilah (i.e. god). But for those who believe not in the Hereafter, their hearts deny [the belief in Unity Of Allah] and they are proud.” [Ref: 16:22] “He is the Living (One): There is no god but He: Call upon Him, giving Him sincere worship. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds!” [Ref: 40:65] The polytheists were surprised and found it strange: “Has he made the gods (all) into one God? Truly this is a strange thing!” [Ref: 38:4/5] Please bare in mind that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not teach that all gods have combined into the One God. Rather it was their misunderstanding and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only quoted what they said. In reality Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has taught that there were and are no gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hence there was/is and cannot be combining of gods into the One God. The Fundamental Proof - They Believed In Allah But With Shirk: It was established that polytheists of Arabia believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). They believed, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the creator of universe and earth. It is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) who sustains with crops and with rain. It is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) who sends down rain. He gives life to the dead and death to the living. He brings the crops out of dead earth and causes death of living. Shortened – they believed all major affairs regarding governance of universe are in control of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Arabian polytheists also believed in many gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This is fundamental proof that polytheists believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but associated partners with Him in Ilahiyyah (i.e. God-hood) and it is confirmation of what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated in th following verse: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] And following is demonstration of polytheists believing in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but not without associating partners with Him in worship: “And when Allah Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who believe not in the Hereafter are filled with disgust when those besides Him are mentioned, behold, they rejoice!” [Ref: 39:45] The following two section will give example of what sort of belief some polytheists had about their idol-gods. Angels Are Daughters And Partners Of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states regarding their attribution of partners with Him: “Yet, they assign to some of His slaves a share with Him. Verily, man is indeed a manifest ingrate!” [Ref: 43:15] Birth of daughter was unwelcomed during pre-Islamic era and during life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Proof of it is as follows: “They assign to Allah that which they dislike (for themselves), and their tongues assert the falsehood that the better things will be theirs. No doubt for them is the Fire, and they will be the first to be hastened on into it, and left there neglected.” [Ref: 16:62] “And if one of them is informed of the news of (the birth of a girl) that which he sets forth as a parable to the Most Gracious (Allah), his face becomes dark, and he is filled with grief!” [Ref: 43:17] The preceeding verse questions the polytheists to challenge their moral compass: “Or has He taken daughters out of what He has created, and He has selected for you sons?” [Ref: 43:16] In this verse there is indication that polytheists attributed daughters to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and this is also attested by another verse: “And they assign daughters unto Allah! - Glorified (and Exalted) is He above all that they associate with Him! And unto themselves what they desire.” [Ref: 16:57] The slaves whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentined and about whom polytheists believed to be daughter-partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) were angels: “And they make the angels who themselves are slaves of the Most Gracious (Allah) females. Did they witness their creation? Their testimony will be recorded, and they will be questioned!” [Ref: 43:19] This is attested by the following verse in which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) questions the polytheists regarding granting them sons but having for himself daughters [which the polytheists disliked having]: “Has then your Lord preferred for you sons and taken for Himself from among the angels daughters? Verily you indeed utter an awful saying.” [Ref: 17:40] This explanation was a demonstration of: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Intercessor Ilah Partners Associated With Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And they worship besides Allah things that harm them not, nor profit them, and they say: "These are our intercessors with Allah." And Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) refutes their claim: “Say: "Do ye indeed inform Allah of something He knows not, in the heavens or on earth?Glory to Him! And far is He above the partners they ascribe (to Him)!" [Ref: 10:18] This verse reveals the polytheists worshiped things beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and believed beside Allah are their intercessors who intercede to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on behalf of polytheists. In the following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to bare witness; there is no other Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and he is innocent of gods they worship: “Can you (polytheists) verily bear witness that besides Allah there are other Alihah (i.e. gods)?" Say (O polytheist - ): "I bear no (such) witness!" Say (O Prophet - ): "But in truth He is the only one Ilah. And truly I (Prophet Muhammad) am innocent of what you join in worship with Him." [Ref: 6:19] This reveals the intercessors the polytheists worshiped were their gods and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) freed himself from their polytheism and so is established from following discussion: “And ask those of Our Messengers whom We sent before you: "Did We ever appoint Alihah to be worshipped besides the Most Gracious?" [Ref: 43:45] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) answers this question Himself in the following verse: “Say, "Indeed, I have been forbidden to worship those you invoke besides Allah." Say, "I will not follow your desires, for I would then have gone astray, and I would not be of the [rightly] guided." [Ref: 6:56] This has established worship of gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was forbidden and indirectly establishes appointing of an Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was also forbidden because Ilah in Arabic is in meaning of, one who is worshipped. Coming back to the verse 10:18, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states the intercessors they worship beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are things which cannot harm or benefit. Question arises who are these beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) which neither harm nor benefit and answer is in the following verse: “But they have taken besides Him gods which create nothing, while they are created, and possess not for themselves any harm or benefit and possess not (power over) death or life or resurrection.” [Ref: 25:3] The gods of polytheists were idols and this is established from following verse: “You only worship, besides Allah, idols, and you produce a falsehood. Indeed, those you worship besides Allah do not possess for you [the power of] provision. So seek from Allah provision and worship Him and be grateful to Him. To Him you will be returned." [Ref: 29:17] The reason of their appointing creation as gods and worshipping them is stated in the following verse: “Surely the religion is for Allah only. And those who take protectors besides Him (say): "We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah." Verily Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ. Truly, Allah guides not him who is a liar, and a disbeliever.” [Ref: 39:3] Alhasil, it is soundly established that polytheists took Ilah-partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and worshipped them, and believed their idol-gods are their intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and these intercessor-Ilahs make them closer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This was another example of: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] The following three sections will explain how their polytheistic belief of many gods translated into actions in their daily lives. Removal Of Aflictions And Affirming Polytheistic Belief: Polytheists believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and when they went on the journey of the sea they sought protection from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), indicated by the following verse: “And when they board a ship, they supplicate Allah, sincere to Him in religion. But when He delivers them to the land, at once they associate others with Him.” [Ref: 29:65] Yet when they get off the vessel safely they associate others with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by thanking/praising their gods along with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for their safe return to land. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reminds the polytheists about their behavior of sincerely and only invoking Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) when they are in stressful situation at sea: “And when adversity touches you at sea, lost are (all) those you invoke except for Him. But when He delivers you to the land, you turn away (from Him). And ever is man ungrateful.” [Ref: 17:67] “And when adversity touches the people, they call upon their Lord, turning in repentance to Him. Then when He lets them taste mercy from Him, at once a party of them associate others with their Lord.” [Ref: 30:33] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states the mind set of polytheists at sea when their lives are in danger: “Say, "Who rescues you from the darknesses of the land and sea [when] you call upon Him imploring [aloud] and privately, 'If He should save us from this [crisis], we will surely be among the thankful?'" [Ref: 6:63] And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then tells them who saves them and what they end up doing soon as they are safely on land: “Say, ‘It is Allah who saves you from it and from every distress; then you [still] associate others with Him.’" [Ref: 6:64] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) addresses the polytheists saying you seek His help but then some of you commit Shirk: “And whatever of blessings and good things you have, it is from Allah. Then, when harm touches you, unto Him you cry aloud for help. Then, when He has removed the harm from you: Behold! some of you associate others in worship with their Lord.” [Ref: 16:53/54] Child And Affirming Polytheistic Creed After Deliverance Of Child: Moving away from theme of calamity – Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states that polytheists invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) during pregnancy saying: “It is He who created you from one soul and created from it its mate that he might dwell in security with her. And when he covers her, she carries a light burden and continues therein. And when it becomes heavy, they both invoke Allah , their Lord, "If You should give us a good [child], we will surely be among the grateful." [Ref: 7:189] Following verse reveals when the child is granted, they attribute its birth, and good character, and healt,h to blessing of their idol-gods. And give the child names of their idol gods – such as servant of Lat, or servant of Uzza - and due to which they become guilty of additional acts of Shirk with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “But when He gives them a good [child], they ascribe partners to Him concerning that which He has given them. Exalted is Allah above what they associate with Him.” [Ref: 7:190] The following Sections Actions, Crops And Animals, For Sake Of Idols: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And they assign a portion of that which We have provided them unto what they know not. By Allah, you shall certainly be questioned about (all) that you used to fabricate.” [Ref: 16:56] This verse is explained in detail by the following:“And they assign to Allah a share of the tilth and cattle which He has created and they say: "This is for Allah according to their claim, and this is for our (Allah's so-called) partners. But the share of their "partners" reaches not Allah, while the share of Allah reaches their partners!” Evil is the way they judge!” [Ref: 6:136] A long Hadith details what sort of practices polytheists engaged in and how they assigned share from their animals for idols: “Narrated Sa`id bin Al-Musaiyab: Bahira is a she-camel whose milk is kept for the idols and nobody is allowed to milk it. Sa'iba was the she-camel which they used to set free for their gods and nothing was allowed to be carried on it. Abu Huraira said: Allah's Messenger said: ‘I saw Amr bin Amir Al-Khuza`i (in a dream) dragging his intestines in the Fire, and he was the first person to establish the tradition of setting free the animals (for the sake of their deities).’ Wasila is the she-camel which gives birth to a she-camel as its first delivery, and then gives birth to another she-camel as its second delivery. People used to let that she camel loose for their idols if it gave birth to two she-camels successively without giving birth to a male camel in between. 'Ham' was the male camel which was used for copulation. When it had finished the number of copulations assigned for it, they would let it loose for their idols and excuse it from burdens so that nothing would be carried on it, and they called it the 'Hami.' Abu Huraira said, "I heard the Prophet saying so.” [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H147] Similary another Hadith indicates how the polytheists made their idol-gods partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Neither Fara nor Atira (is permissible): Al-Fara nor Atira (is permissible):" Al- Fara was the first offspring (of camels or sheep) which the pagans used to offer (as a sacrifice) to their idols. And Al-Atira was (a sheep which was to be slaughtered) during the month of Rajab.” [Ref: Bukhari, B66, H382] Following Hadith adds bit more detail to previous: “Narrated 'Aishah: The Messenger of Allah used to sacrifice goat out of every fifty goats. Abu Dawud said: Fara means the first baby camel born (to the Arabs). They used to sacrifice it for their idols, and then eat it, and its skin was thrown on a tree. Atira was a sacrifice made during the first ten days of Rajab.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B15, H2827] Summary Of How Their Polytheistic Belief Impacted Their Life: When they travelled on journey at sea/land or when any calamity touched them, or when they desired something, they solely invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted them safety and granted them what they desired they then gave credit of it to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and to their idol-gods during their worship. In addition to this, the polytheists attributed portions of their crops to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and assigned it to to their idols. They also had various customs such as, Bahira, Saiba, Wasila, Ham, Al Fara, and Atira. All these customs involed doing something for their idol-gods. Alhasil, Polytheists of Arabia believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in their idol-gods, and demonstrated their belief by performing actions for them. This is demonstration of how the polytheists believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but not without Shirk: “"And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Intertextual Understanding Of – Most Believe In Allah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states mankind sets partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “And among the people are those who take other than Allah as equals (to Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala). They love them as they (should) love Allah. But those who believe are stronger in love for Allah . And if only they who have wronged would consider [that] when they see the punishment, [they will be certain] that all power belongs to Allah and that Allah is severe in punishment.” [Ref: 2:165] In the following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) indicates; out of all those who believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) – mankind - most do not believe in Him without major Shirk: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] This reveals that out of mankind most were polytheists at the time of revelation of the verse. In another verse it is stated Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will enquire from angels: “And (mention) the Day when He will gather them all and then say to the angels, "Did these (people) used to worship you?" They will say: "Exalted are You! You [O Allah ] are our benefactor not them. Rather, they used to worship the Jinn; most of them were sincere believers in them." [Ref: 34:41/42] This verse indicates most of polytheists sincerely believed in angels to be their Ilahs but on the judgment day they will find out; in reality they worshiped the Jinn. It is for this reason Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] With regards to those who preceeded the Message of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "Say: "Travel in the land and see what was the end of those before (you)! Most of them were Mushrikoon." [Ref: 30:42] When punishment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was to descend upon a nation who had disbelieved in message of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for sake of maintaining their polytheistic beliefs they affirmed belief in One-ness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and distanced themselves from Shirk: “And when they saw Our punishment, they said," We believe in Allah alone. And disbelieve (in our polytheistic religion) in that which we were Mushrikeen." [Ref: 40:84] They believed in many gods but when the signs of punishment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) became apparent, as apparent as rising of the sun from West, then they repented from their polytheistic belief and affirmed in belief of One Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The preceding verse reveals that their repentence and belief was rejected, just as the belief and good actions will be rejected after the appearnce of ten signs. In simple words verse 40:84 connects polytheistic religion with belief in many gods, and this establishes that crime of polytheists was associating with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) many gods, and in verses 2:165, 34:41/42, 30:42, and 12:106 the sin being committed was associating with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) many gods and disbelieve in His One-ness. Alhasil, most of mankind at the time of revelation of verse 12:106, and those who preceeded the message of Islam, and most of mankind at present, were/are polytheists. They believed/believe in many gods and disbelieved/disbeliev in One-ness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Contextual Understanding Of - Most Believe In Allah: The context reveals this verse was revealed for disbelievers -Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “And most of the people as much as you wish will not believe.” [Ref: 12:103] In the next two verses the subject matter changes but in verse 106 Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Interpreting 103 and 106 with each other gives the meaning; most of the people believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but not without major Shirk and [due to their polytheistic religion they] will not accept religion of Islam even though Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) wishes they do. Both verses come togather to explain each other. In verse 103, people about whom it is said; will not believe, are the same one who are said to be Mushrikoon because they associate with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) other gods. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Had there been therein Alihah (i.e. gods) besides Allah then verily both would have been ruined. Glorified be Allah, the Lord of the Throne, (High is He) above all that (evil) they associate with Him!” [Ref: 21:22] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to address the polytheists with: “Say: "Only I am man like you. It has been revealed to me that your Ilah is One Ilah. So whoever hopes for the meeting with his Lord, let him work righteousness and associate none as a partner in the worship of his Lord." [Ref: 18:110] Historical Context Of – Most Believe In Allah: Muslims were a minority in Arabian Peninsula and polytheists were a great majority which was composed of traditional Arabian polytheism and Christian Trinitarian polytheism. Muslims and the polytheists, or monotheists and polytheists both groups believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In this historical context Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Indirect implication is only a minority – which was composed of Muslims – believes in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without associating god-partners to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). On global level, Trinitarian Christians [inclusive of Protestants and Catholics], Hindus, Buddhists, and other religions, all are polytheistic. These religions teach and adherents believe in some sort of supreme Diety but associate with Him some sort of gods. There are roughly seven billion people on earth in total and out of which 1.7 are Muslims. In this modern context the polytheists out number Muslims. In ever four people three are polytheists and one is monotheist. Considering Wahhabi/Deobandi beliefs about what is Shirk and how it is warranted then there are less then hundred million monotheists exist. Everyone not belonging to these two monstrosities is Mushrik. This further increases the gap between world monotheists and polytheist. Based on all this information it can be said the verse is true representation of modern situation as well: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Khawarij The Worst In Creatures In Creation Of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): The first sect of Khawarij which emerged when two companions and their followers clashed – Hadhrat Ali and Hadhrat Muawiyah – when arbitration was agreed they protested against arbitration. The party of Hadhrat Ali killed them in Iraq and only ten of them survived the battle. They are the worst of creatures and all this is established from following Hadith: Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] A more detailed Hadith has following information; they would recite Quran but it would not go beyond their throats - meaning it will not impact their hearts: “Abu Dharr reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Verily there would arise from my Ummah after me or soon after me a group (of people) who would recite the Qur'an, but it would not go beyond their throats, and they would pass clean through their religion just as the arrow passes through the prey, and they would never come back to it. They would be the worst among the creation and the creatures.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2335] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said they will continue to appear until last of them joins with army of Al Masih Al Dajjal – established from following Hadith: "A people will come at the end of time; as if he is one of them (i.e. Muslims), reciting the Qur'an without it passing beyond their throats. They will go through Islam just as the arrow goes through the target. Their distinction will be shaving. They will not cease to appear until the last of them comes with Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal. So when you meet them, then kill them, they are the worst of created beings." [Ref: Nasai, Vol5, B37, H4108] These people about whom it is said, they worst in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and who are to appear in every age - who are these people in our times? What are the signs from which we can recognise these people? There are many signs recorded in Ahadith by which they can be recognised but Hadith one pin points to their heretical methodology. It is recorded that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said: “... and the Mulhidun (heretical) after the establishment of firm proof against them:"And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.' And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.” [Ref: Bukhari, V9, P49, Chap6: Killing The Khawarij] Conclusion: It was established the vast majority of people of Arabian Peninsula believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). But the polytheists who formed the majority believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is in control of Amoor Al Azaam (i.e. major affairs) in creation and their idol-gods are means of getting closer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and accquiring His favour. The polytheists believed their god-partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are their intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and offered worship to these gods to appease them so they can intercede for them to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Polytheists were a majority and monotheists (i.e. Muslims) were a minority and both groups believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated out of all people who believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) most of people in Arabian Peninsula believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with a deity of some sort. In addition to this, the verses 103 and 106 of chapter Yusuf both explain each other. By interpreting one with the other, it is clear the verse 106 was revealed with regards to disbelievers, and specificly polytheists. Hence a verse revealed incontext of Arab polytheists interpreted and applied to Muslims in any sense – in meaning of major Shirk or minor Shirk - is distortion of speech of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is characteristic of Khawarij, the worst in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Those who adopt their methodology, and follow their footsteps are from Khawarij, and are not from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi