MuhammedAli

Bandar ki kitab Tafreeh Al Khawatir Fi Radd Tanweer Al Khawatir, ka jawab kissi nay likha heh ya nahin?

"It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia] Khadam ko is quote ka poora reference darkar heh, scanned page kay saath front cover, jis par nashar kee details hoon, aur baqi tarjuma o ibarat ...

Salam aalayqum Musnad Imam Ahmad, Musnad Abu Yala, Mustadrik Imam Hakim, in teenoon kay scanned pages, bab number o name, Hadith number, darkar hen.

Mustaq bahi Allah ta'ala aap ko aur tofeeq deh aur aap Islam ki khoob khidmat karen, hammen aap jesay sunniyoon ki mehnat ki zeroorat heh. Yeh sari kitab hee jhoot ka majmua heh, Ala Hazrat nay Sajda e Tazeemi ko haram likha heh aur yeh Ibn Ubai, Ala Hazrat say Sajdah Nabi o Wali ko najaat ka basat likh raha heh. Tahir Giyawi nay is kitab ki taqreez likhi, is Tahir Giyawi jesa dunya meh kohi chawal aur kameena banda nahin. Taqreez likhnay walay ko dekh kar kitab ka pata chal gaya kay donoon ek number kay beghayrat banday aur jhoot meh Dajjal ko maat denay walay hen. Allah esay Kafiroon ko gharq karay, ameen.

Hindu Devi ko Ilah manay, niyat ibadat say sajda baja lata heh. Is leyeh heh woh Mushrik, hamesha jahanum uska thakana heh. Jahil musalman kay amal e sajda e tazeemi ko kafir nay shirk bataya batana heh. Musalman nay ghair kay Sajda tazeemi ko haram mana bataya batana na samjana heh. Aqalmandoon kay leyeh is shair meh ishara teer ka nishana heh. warna Abu Lahab ko abh kis nay kalmah parwa kar musalman bana heh. Rah e insaaf agar choroon toh tera ilzaam tuj ko lotana heh. Masjid e haram meh heh tera buht, wohi tera buht khana heh. Kabah simt nah ho, nahin hoti teri pooja, kia yeh ajab drama heh. Istera toh ho tum be Mushrik, Tawheed ka kia khoob bahana heh. Tera Sajda Kabah simt, amal yeh ibadat ka mushrikana heh. Yeh hen ihtirazat teray feham pay jin say tujjay deen samjana heh. Musalman, Ilah la shareek jissay manay, niyat ibadat sajda baja lata heh. Cha-hay moon samnay asnam mushrikeen niyat ibadat khiyal dil meh na lata heh. Murtaqib kabair, amaal e haram, say Tawheed meh kuch nah farq ata heh Jhoota Kafir Dajjal heh, joh khilaaf is haq kay, kuch batata heh.

Another version

Salam alayqum, Khadim nay, yeh sharah abhi page 200 taq pari heh, us meh ek ghalti heh, musanaf nay bod ko baad likha heh ... kasrat bod killat pay aksar darood izzat bod zillat pay lakhoon salam yehni: qasrat baghair killat pay aksar darood izzat baghair zillat pay lakhoon salam Musanaf ka farmana heh kay izzat bod zillat kee jaga chand nuskhoon meh tal'at bad zulmat istimal huwa heh ...

Introduction: This article is being dedicated to one of the most popular arguments against Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being hearing and seeing type of Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness, or Hadhir Nazir). Objective here would be to comprehensively respond to the argument in light of Quran and Ahadith. 0A – Argument Of Opponents Against Hadhir And Nazir: Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "You will be gathered, bare-footed, naked and not circumcised." He then recited: “As We began the first creation, We, shall repeat it: A Promise We have undertaken: Truly we shall do it.” (21:104) He added, "The first to be dressed on the day of resurrection will be Abraham, and some of my companions will be taken towards the left side and I will say: My companions! My companions! It will be said: 'They renegade from Islam after you left them.' Then I will say as the pious slave of Allah said: 'And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things. If you punish them they are your slaves. And if you forgive them, Verily you, only you are the all-Mighty, the all-Wise." (5:117) [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] This proves just as Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) was not witness over his Ummah Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is also not Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. Hadhir Nazir) over his own Ummah. 0B - Ahadith Connected With Hadith In Discussion: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) giving Khutbah said: “The Prophet said, "You will be gathered bare-footed, naked and not circumcised." He then recited: “As We began the first creation, We, shall repeat it: A Promise We have undertaken: Truly we shall do it.” (21:104) He added, "The first to be dressed on the day of resurrection will be Abraham, …” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] " The Prophet said, "While I was sleeping[1], a group [of my followers were brought close to me] and when I recognized them, a man (i.e. an angel) came out from amongst me and them, he said (to them): Come along.” [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] I asked: Where? He said: To the fire, by Allah." [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] “… and some of my companions will be taken towards the left side and I will say: My companions! My companions! [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] “I asked: What is wrong with them? He said: They turned apostate as renegades after you left. So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd." [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] It will be said: 'They renegade from Islam after you left them.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] “So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd." [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] “Then I will say as the pious slave of Allah [Isa the son of Mary][2] said: ”And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up, you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things."[3] (5:117) [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] “Narrated Quaggas, "Those were the apostates who renegade from Islam during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr who fought them.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H656] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will disown them and the apostates will be taken to hellfire. 0C - The Connection Between The Hadith And Verse Of Quran: Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will be questioned about those people who became apostates by taking him and his mother as gods and worshipping them. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will question Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) if he instructed his followers to appoint him and his mother as gods and worship them in the following verse: "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah?'" [Ref: 5:16] Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will respond the question by saying: "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within me, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen. I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things. If you punish them they are your slaves. And if you forgive them, Verily you, only you are the all-Mighty, the all-Wise." [Ref: 5:116/117] When Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will remember about the apostasy of his own follower’s response he too will say: And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things.[4] If you punish them they are your slaves. And if you forgive them, Verily you, only you are the all-Mighty, the all-Wise." [Ref: 5:117] In short Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will disown the apostates of his Ummah like Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 1A - Prophets Will Say Deny Their Knowledge: Prophets will deny their own knowledge even though they know how their nations received them and how they responded to their call but when questioned they will say - bold: "On the Day when Allah will gather the Messengers together and say to them: "What was the response you received (from men to your teaching)?" They will say: "We have no knowledge, verily, only You are the All-Knower of all that is hidden (or unseen)." [Ref: 5:109] This will be out of humility, and respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and confusion/forgetfulness caused out of fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).[5] Similarly when Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will be asked if he instructed his followers to take him and his mother as gods besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and instructed them to worship them. Out of confusion and forgetfulness caused by fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will adopt humility and in state of humility and respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will deny his being Shaheed (i.e. witness) over his followers: “I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a witness to all things. If you punish them they are your slaves. And if you forgive them, Verily you, only you are the all-Mighty, the all-Wise." [Ref: 5:117] Note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated he will say [selected phrase] as a pious servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said them. In this context, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) denying his status of Shaheed (i.e. witness), would be due to confusion/forgetfulness caused by fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and also due to respect and humility. And will praise Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by affirming the Shaheed (i.e. witness) status of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and with emphasis on Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being witness to all things. 1B - Prior Knowledge, Confusion And Forgetfulness On Day Of Judgment: In previous section it was argued, Prophets negated their knowledge (5:109) due to state of fear, confusion, and humility as well as respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will utter the words of verse 5:117 for similar reasons. It needs to be established that there was confusion, forgetfulness due to fear, or both, as well as prior knowledge about the apostasy of men being taken toward left side toward hell for this to be valid. Confusion and forgetfulness is established from the following facts, Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) recognizes the apostates: " The Prophet said, "While I was sleeping, a group [of my followers were brought close to me] and when I recognized them, a man (i.e. an angel) came out from amongst me and them, he said (to them): Come along.” [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) recognized them and also knew during this life on earth that these people were apostates because he was the one who had informed us: “I asked: What is wrong with them? He said: They turned apostate as renegades after you left. So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd." [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] He will due to forgetfulness/confusion will address the apostates as companions and evidence of it as follows: “… and some of my companions will be taken towards the left side and I will say: My companions! My companions! [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] The angels will retort to bring to his attention what he already knows: “Then some men from among my Ummah will be brought and will be taken toward the left. I will say: 'O Lord, my companions.' It will be said: 'Do you not know what they innovated after you were gone?’[6] And I shall say what the righteous slave said: 'And I was witness over …” [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H2089] And the angel will remind him by telling him: “He said: They turned apostate as renegades after you left. So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd." [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] Once he remembers they are apostates and angels revise his memory he will negate being Shaheed out of humility and respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) just like the way Prophets denied knowledge, by saying: “And I was a Shaheed (i.e. witness) over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a witness to all things. If you punish them they are your slaves. And if you forgive them, Verily you, only you are the all-Mighty, the all-Wise." [Ref: 5:117] Alhasil, Prophets knew how their nations received them but when they are put on spot, fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will cause temporarily confusion/forgetfulness and they in state of humility, will completely negate their own knowledge. Similarly Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in state of humility and respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will completely negate being Shaheed. 2A - Words Change Meaning Depending On Context Example From Verse 5:117: Words in Quran are not always used in same meaning and example of this is in the verse 5:117 where word توفي has been used. In many places it has been used in meaning of rising of soul after death and it also has been used rising of soul in state of sleep. In this particular verse it has been used to mean rising of living body. In other words Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) raised Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) alive to save him from death. Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) being raised alive is attested in the following verse: “And their saying: "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.” [Ref: 4:157] This establishes Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) used توفي word to imply being raised alive. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will also use exactly the same word. Question begs to be asked, has Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used the word in the same meaning for which Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) used it? Was Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) raised alive like Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam)? You would agree Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) departed this world like many Prophets before him therefore he has not used the word توفي in the same meaning in which Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) used. If it is in context of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) then it should be translated to denote, Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) has been raised alive. If it is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then the meaning should reflect his reality of death. In short, in Quran words are not always used in same meanings sometimes the context determines what meaning words are used in.[7] We have established that meaning of words can change depending on who uses it and in what context it is used in. Note this point was established because it has connection with how the word Shaheed has been used in chapter five verse hundred-seventeen. We also have established the detail of verse does not fully fit Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 2B - Prophet Isa Will Be Aware What His Ummah Did After Him: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states that from every nation (i.e. Ummat) a witness will be brought forward who will be asked to bear witness against their nations and the evidence of this is as follows: “So how [will it be] when We bring from every nation a witness and we bring you, [O Muhammad] against these [people] as a witness?” [Ref: 4:41] “And We shall take out from every nation a witness, and We shall say: "Bring your proof." Then they shall know that the truth is with Allah (Alone), and the lies (false gods) which they invented will disappear from them.” [Ref: 28:75] “And (remember) the Day when We shall raise up from every nation a witness against them from amongst themselves. And We shall bring you as a witness against these. And We have sent down to you the Book as an exposition of everything, a guidance …” [Ref: 16:89] Note the verse 16:89 states from every Ummah a witness will be called to bear witness against his own Ummah. If Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) was witness over immediate followers and not those who came after him then he is not witness over vast majority of his Ummah. He would be witness over some members of his Ummah and yet the Quran states witness called will be witness upon entire Ummah. In context of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) it means he must be witness upon his entire Ummah: - witness over Ummah before being raised and witness over Ummah after he was raised. Otherwise he is not witness upon his Ummah as the Quran states. This meaning is confirmed in another verse: “And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in Jesus before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection he will be against them a witness.” [Ref: 4:159] To be a truthful witness one must hear and see the events to one is going to bear witness about otherwise the testimony is invalid. His Ummah were the Jews and Christians and he will be witness upon all of them. Therefore Shaheed in verse 5:117 is not in its popular meaning of witness. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills, the exact meaning of Shaheed in verse 5:117 will be determined in forth coming discourse. 3A - Meaning In Which Prophet Used The Shaheed: On the day of judgment people who had accepted religion of Islam and then left Islam for another religion will be recognized by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he will be told they became apostates after him he will then say: ”And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up [after death] you were the Watcher over them and you are a Shaheed to all things." [Ref: 5:117] Note, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will say: “When you took me up [after death], you were the Watcher over them and …”, implying before death Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was raqeeb (i.e. watcher). Hence in the following verse Shaheed has been used in meaning of raqeeb: ”And I was a watcher over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up [after death], you were the Watcher over them and you are a Shaheed to all things." He was watcher over them in two meanings; i) seeing their actions, ii) acted as a guardian to protect their Eman by providing guidance of Islam. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) equated the going astray of apostates to camels without shepherd/guide: “So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd." [Ref: Book 76, Hadith 587] Shepherd does not only herd the sheep to grazing fields but he guides them, protects them, and stands guards over them. Hence comprehensively watcher here means guardian who protects through guidance. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will say to the apostates: And I was a watcher [as a guardian] over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up [after death], you were the Watcher over them and you are a Shaheed to all things." Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not been sent as guardian of disbelievers and apostates: “He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah; but those who turn away - We have not sent you over them as a guardian.” [Ref: 4:80] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is commanded to say that he is not guardian over the disbelievers and apostates in the following verse: “There has come to you enlightenment from your Lord. So whoever will see does so for [the benefit of] his soul, and whoever is blind [does harm] against it. And [say], "I am not a guardian over you." [Ref: 6:104] And due to this instruction in earthly life, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will say to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) regarding those who had become apostates after accepting Islam and after his death; ”And I was a raqeeb over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up [after death], you were the Watcher over them and you are a Shaheed to all things." This establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not raqeeb over apostates just as Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) was not raqeeb over apostates of his Ummah (i.e. nation). 3B - How The Commentators Explained The Verse 5:118: Scholars have understood Shaheed in meaning of Hafeez (i.e. protector, guardian). Hafeez, is from the root h-f-z which has the following classical Arabic connotations: to preserve, guard, protect, to keep, retain, take care of, tend, to prevent from perishing or becoming lost, to be watchful, mindful, attentive, vigilant [Ref: Wahiduddin.net]. Imam Qurtubi (rahimullah) explained it as follows: قوله تعالى: { وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيداً } أي حفيظاً بما أمرتهم، { مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ } «ما» في موضع نصب أي وقت دوامي فيهم. { فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ } قيل: هذا يدل على أن الله عز وجل توفاه قبل أن يرفعه؛ وليس بشيء؛ لأن الأخبار تظاهرت برفعه، وأنه في السماء حي، وأنه ينزل ويقتل الدَّجَّال ـ على ما يأتي بيانه ـ وإنما المعنى فلما رفعتني إلى السماء. قال الحسن: الوفاة في كتاب الله عز وجل على ثلاثة أوجه: وفاة الموت. وذلك قوله تعالى [Ref: Tafsir Qurtubi,5:117] Scholars have understood Shaheed to in mean raqeeb (i.e. watcher/observer). Raqeeb, is from the root r-q-b which has the following classical Arabic connotations: to look, watch, be vigilant; to expect, anticipate, await; to keep an eye on, detect, observe; to be mindful of; to be a spy, scout, observer; to regard, hold in consideration, respect. [Ref: Wahiduddin.net] Tafsir of Imam Jalal Ud-din Suyuti (rahimullah) and Imam Jalal Ud-din Muhalli (rahimullah) has taken the word Shaheed to mean raqeeb in their Tafsir: مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ إِلاَّ مآ أَمَرْتَنِى بِهِ } وهو { أَنِ ٱعْبُدُواْ ٱللَّهَ رَبِّى وَرَبَّكُمْ وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيداً } رقيباً أمنعهم مما يقولون { مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِى } قبضتني بالرفع إلى السماء { كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ } الحفيظ لأعمالهم { وَأَنتَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَىْءٍ } من قولي لهم وقولهم بعدي وغير ذلك { شَهِيدٌ } مطلع عالم به [Ref: Tafsir Al Jalalayn, 5:117] Also Imam Abdullah bin Umar bin Muhammad al-Baydawi (rahimullah) also took Shaheed to mean raqeeb: مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ إِلاَّ مَا أَمَرْتَنِي بِهِ } تصريح بنفي المستفهم عنه بعد تقديم ما يدل عليه. { أَنِ ٱعْبُدُواْ ٱللَّهَ رَبّي وَرَبَّكُمْ } عطف بيان للضمير في به، أو بدل منه وليس من شرط البدل جواز طرح المبدل منه مطلقاً ليلزم بقاء الموصول بلا راجع، أو خبر مضمر أو مفعوله مثل هو أو أعني، ولا يجوز إبداله من ما أمرتني به فإن المصدر لا يكون مفعول القول ولا أن تكون أن مفسرة لأن الأمر مسند إلى الله سبحانه وتعالى، وهو لا يقول اعبدوا الله ربي وربكم والقول لا يفسر بل الجملة تحكي بعده إلا أن يؤول القول بالأمر فكأن قيل: ما أمرتهم إلا بما أمرتني به أن { ٱعْبُدُواْ ٱللَّهَ }. { وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيداً مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ } أي رقيباً عليهم أمنعهم أن يقولوا ذلك ويعتقدوه، أو مشاهداً لأحوالهم من كفر وإيمان [Ref: Tafsir Baydawi, 5:117] Muhammad ash-Shawkani who is a Yemeni Wahhabi scholar, in his Tafsir understood Shaheed to mean raqeeb and Hafeez in his Tafsir: قوله: { مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ إِلاَّ مَا أَمَرْتَنِى بِهِ } هذه جملة مقرّرة لمضمون ما تقدّم، أي ما أمرتهم إلا بما أمرتني: { أَنِ ٱعْبُدُواْ ٱللَّهَ رَبّى وَرَبَّكُمْ } هذا تفسير لمعنى { مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ } أي ما أمرتهم، وقيل: عطف بيان للمضمر في { بِهِ } وقيل بدل منه { وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيداً } أي حفيظاً ورقيباً أرعى أحوالهم وأمنعهم عن مخالفة أمرك { مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ } أي مدّة دوامي فيهم { فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِى } قيل: هذا يدل على أن الله سبحانه توفاه قبل أن يرفعه، وليس بشيء لأن الأخبار قد تضافرت بأنه لم يمت، وأنه باق في السماء على الحياة التي كان عليها في الدنيا، حتى ينزل إلى الأرض آخر الزمان، وإنما المعنى: فلما رفعتني إلى السماء [Ref: Tafsir Al Qadeer, by Shawqani, 5:117] This is enough to establish the position of Muslims and to refute the literal reading of Shaheed (i.e. witness). 3C - One Who Claims To Be God Will Be Put Into Fire: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And whoever of them should say, "indeed, i am a god besides Him" - that one We would recompense with hell. Thus do We recompense the wrongdoers.” [Ref: 21:29] Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) is being asked if he was the one who taught his followers to worship him and his mother, and to take himself and his mother as gods besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah?'" [Ref: 5:16] This was to demonstrate to all his followers that he is not responsible for the apostasy of his followers. And he would respond to question by saying: "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within me, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen. I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a Shaheed (i.e. raqeeb/Hafeez) over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed (i.e. witness) to all things. If you punish them they are your slaves. And if you forgive them, Verily you, only you are the all-Mighty, the all-Wise." [Ref: 5:116/117] In other words, Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) rejects that he told them to elevate partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and will state he was Hafeez/raqeeb over his Ummah until he was amongst them after he had been raised he was not Hafeez/raqeeb over them. Hence he cannot be held responsible for what they invented after he was raised. In this sense Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has refused to take responsibility for the apostasy of those who apostatized from Islam by saying: “Then I will say as the pious slave of Allah [Isa the son of Mary] said: ”And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up, you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things." (5:117) [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] In other words he states, I was Shaheed [in meaning of Hafeez/raqeeb] over them while I was amongst them and after his death O Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) you was Raqeeb/Hafeez over them. 4A – Enacting Sunnahs: Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam) left his wife Hajara (radiallah ta’ala anha) and his Prophet Ismail (alayhis salaam) in the vicinity of present Masjid Al Haram. She ran out of water, and in search of help and water she ran from Safa to Marwa seven times.[8] This is the origin of running between Safa and Marwa. Note, Hadhrat Hajara (radiallah ta’ala anha) ran between the mountains in search of help and water. We Muslims also run between Safa and Marwa to enact her Sunnah, and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) approved this action: “Verily! As-Safa and Al-Marwa are among the symbols of Allah, and whoever performs the Hajj to the Kaba or performs Umra it is not harmful for him to perform Tawaf between them (i.e. Safa and Marwa).” [Ref: 2.158] This is despite the obvious fact that we are not in dire need of help nor water. We are performing this action merely due to the fact that it was her Sunnah and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) approved of it. So we have precedent of enacting Sunnah of another even when the historical reality of Sunnah has no bearing upon us. Due to this servant is of opinion that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be enacting the Sunnah of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) by saying: “Then I will say as the pious slave of Allah [Isa the son of Mary] said: “And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up, you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] The reality on which Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will utter these words will have no real connection with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). One proof of this is that it was established in -2A- that word توفي could not have been used by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in same meaning which Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) used it. Another proof is in following section. 4B – Prophet Muhammad Witness Like Prophet Musa: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states in the following verse that He has sent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as a Messenger to mankind: "Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you is from yourself. And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness." [Ref: 4:79] And this is attested by following Hadith: “… I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.” [Ref: Muslim B4, H1062] His Messenger-ship is for mankind hence his witnessing is over mankind also: “O Prophet! Truly We have sent you [mankind] as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] “Indeed, We have sent to you a Messenger as a witness upon you [mankind] just as We sent to Pharaoh a Messenger.” [Ref: 73:15] Ibn Kathir states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to witness the deeds/actions: “Then addresses the disbelievers of the Quraysh, and along with them the rest of mankind: “Verily, We have sent to you a Messenger to be a witness over you …” Meaning, witnessing your deeds.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 73:15] Note, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been stated to be witness like Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) was sent to Pharaoh. This proves Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is hearing and seeing type of witness upon mankind like Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) was sent as a hearing/seeing type of witness to Pharaoh. This goes on to establish that literalism of words uttered by Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) has no connection with reality of Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 4C – Performing Of Sai Between Safa And Marwa: Hadhrat Hajara (radiallah ta’ala anha) ran between Safa and Marwa for sake of help and water but in Islam this practice has taken a new significance. It is narrated: "The Messenger of Allah only performed the Sa'i of the House and of As-Safa and Al-Marwah to show his strength to the idolaters." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B4, H863] In another Hadith it is narrated that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "Stoning the Jimari and Sa'i between As-Safa and Al-Marwah are only done for the establishment of Allah's remembrance." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B4, H902] So running between Safa Marwa is for sake of showing strength to polytheists and to remember Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This establishes that a pre-Islamic era Sunnah of a pious woman has taken new significance in Sharia of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Using this as a precedent, servant purposes that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will utter the words of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) to praise and glorify Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while being humble about his knowledge and his status of Shaheed to fulfill the Sunnah of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam). The literalism of these words is not connected with him just as reality of Sunnah of Hajara (radiallah ta’ala anha) is not relevant to us. Conclusion: Words are not always used in same meaning. Word Shaheed used in meaning of witness then negation of being Shaheed is due to temporary forgetfulness and when he is reminded he will adopt humility and negate his own knowledge and being witness because the One asking is knower of all and Shaheed over all things. Shaheed in meaning of Raqeeb (i.e. watcher) or Hafeez (i.e. guardian) means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was nor protector of apostates but he was Raqeeb and Hafeez of believers.[9] He is not Raqeeb and Hafeez over apostates because they have gone out of Ummah Islamiyah hence they severed their own link from him.[10] Prophets will negate their knowledge when they are questioned about how their nations received them in state of humility and respect. And similarly his negation of his station of Shaheed is due to humility and respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is stated in Quran that Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will be witness upon the Jew and Christians on judgment day. Therefore the words of 5:117 cannot negate his witnessing of his Ummah and witnessing to their deeds on judgment day. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is established as a hearing seeing type of witness upon entire mankind and this includes believers, non-believers and apostates. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi - [1] There is two versions of this Hadith, in one the word is qa’im (i.e. standing) and in the other na’im (i.e. sleeping). The difference was noted in hand written copies of Sahih Bukhari and this difference has been faithfully been transmitted depending publishers using a particular copy. It can be concluded from reading the Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is telling of a dream. Hence the na’im wording seems to be most correct. Allah knows better. - [2] “Narrated Ibn Abbas: Allah's Apostle said, "You will be resurrected (and assembled) bare-footed, naked and uncircumcised." The Prophet then recited the Divine Verse:-- "As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it: A promise We have undertaken. Truly we shall do it." (21.104) He added, "The first to be dressed will be Abraham. Then some of my companions will take to the right and to the left. I will say: 'My companions! 'It will be said, 'They had been renegades since you left them.' I will then say what the Pious Slave Jesus the son of Mary said: 'And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them; when You did take me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a witness to all things. If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if you forgive them, You, only You are the All-Mighty the All-Wise.' " (5.117-118) Narrated Quaggas, ""Those were the apostates who renegade from Islam during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr who fought them." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H656] - [3] “I only said to them that which You commanded me, to [say], and that is: “Worship God, my Lord and your Lord.” And I was a witness, a watcher, over them, preventing them from [saying] what they used to say, whilst I was amongst them; but when You took me [to You], [when] You raised me up to the heaven, You were Yourself the Watcher over them, the Observer of their deeds, and You Yourself are Witness over all things, Aware and knowing them, including what I said to them and what they said after me, and whatever else.” [Ref: Tafsir Al Jalalayn, 5:117] “(I spake unto them) in the life of this world (only that which Thou commandedst me, (saying): Worship Allah) declare Allah's divine Oneness and obey Him, (my Lord and your Lord) He is my Lord and yours. (I was a witness of them) by conveying the message (while I dwelt among them, and when Thou tookest me) when you raised me from amongst them (Thou wast the Watcher over them) You were the Protector and Witness of them. (Thou art Witness over all things) of what I said and what they said.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Abbas, 5:117] - [4] Note the words of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam), he will say that, O Allah when you took me up you were watcher over them and you are Shaheed to all things, here: “And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things. If you punish them they are your slaves. And if you forgive them, Verily you, only you are the all-Mighty, the all-Wise." [Ref: 5:117] It should be noted that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was not the alone watcher over the actions of Ummah of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) because angels are on duty to record the deeds. Yet Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) stated o Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) you are raqeeb (i.e. watcher). Why would he only singled out Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and ignore other watchers of deeds? Answer to this question is; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shaheed (i.e. witness) and Raqeeb (i.e. observer) over all things, here: “And I was a Shaheed over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you took me up you were the Watcher over them, and you are a Shaheed to all things." [Ref: 5:117] “Not lawful to you, [O Muhammad], are [any additional] women after [this], nor [is it] for you to exchange them for [other] wives, even if their beauty were to please you, except what your right hand possesses. And ever is Allah , over all things, an Observer.” [Ref: 33:52] Hence the One who is witness over all things and watcher over all things does not need to be told what the Christians did after him. He knows all which is in the preserved tablet, and all that happens, and will happen, and has happened. Therefore there is no need to mention himself or anyone else because creation has been given a limited restricted ability of witnessing. This establishes that Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) did not intend to completely deny witnessing of anyone but merely wished to state; O Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) your Raqeeb and Shaheed without limit and restriction and I was only Shaheed over them while I was amongst them hence you know better. - [5] ”The statement of the Messengers here: “We have no knowledge …” is the result of the horror of that Day. According to Mujahid, Al-Hasan Al-Basri and As-Suddi: Abdur-Razzaq narrated that Ath-Thawri said that Al-A`mash said that Mujahid said about the Ayah: “On the Day when Allah will gather the Messengers together and say to them: "What was the response you received?'' They will become afraid and reply: “We have no knowledge ...” Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim also recorded this explanation. `Ali bin Abi Talhah said that Ibn `Abbas commented on the Ayah: “On the Day when Allah will gather the Messengers together and say to them: "What was the response you received (from men to your teaching) They will say: "We have no knowledge, verily, only You are the Knower of all that is hidden.'' "They will say to the Lord, Most Honored; “We have no knowledge beyond what we know, and even that, You have more knowledge of them than us.'' This response is out of respect before the Lord, Most Honored, and it means, we have no knowledge compared to Your encompassing knowledge. Therefore, our knowledge only grasped the visible behavior of these people, not the secrets of their hearts. You are the Knower of everything, Who has encompassing knowledge of all things, and our knowledge compared to Your knowledge is similar to not having any knowledge at all, for only; “You are the Knower of all that is hidden.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 5:109] - [6] Part One: ‏ ‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ ‏"‏ يُجَاءُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَقَالَ وَهْبٌ وَوَكِيعٌ ‏"‏ سَيُؤْتَى بِرِجَالٍ مِنْ أُمَّتِي فَيُؤْخَذُ بِهِمْ ذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ فَأَقُولُ رَبِّ أَصْحَابِي ‏.‏ فَيُقَالُ إِنَّكَ لاَ تَدْرِي مَا أَحْدَثُوا بَعْدَكَ فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ ‏{‏ وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي ‏}‏ إِلَى قَوْلِهِ ‏{‏ وَإِنْ تَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ ‏}‏ الآيَةَ فَيُقَالُ إِنَّ هَؤُلاَءِ لَمْ يَزَالُوا مُدْبِرِينَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ ‏"‏ مُرْتَدِّينَ عَلَى أَعْقَابِهِمْ مُنْذُ فَارَقْتَهُمْ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H2089] Note that under alif of in’naka is hamza istifham which changes the meaning of: ‘You do not know.’ to: ‘Do you not know?’ Implication of first is that one making statement is negating knowledge about whom the statement is made. Implication of second is that, one making statement believes, one about whom the statement is being made does have knowledge but cannot recall … hence being question to revise memory. Part Two: Take note of another fact, the people who will be taken toward the left will be those who created sects of innovation and this is gathered from the following words: “Do you not know what they innovated after you were gone?” [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H2089] And in the following Hadith it is established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) possessed complete knowledge about apostates: “I swear by Allah that the Apostle of Allah did not omit a leader of a wrong belief (fitnah )up to the end of the world--whose followers reach the number of three hundred and upwards but he mentioned to us his name, his father's name and the name of his tribe.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B35, H4231] This goes on to establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was aware of who the people were genealogically and [as the other Hadith indicates] recognized them also from their faces. - [7] In chapter 33 verse 33 of Quran, the addressed are wives of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but the language is masculine plural such as ankum (i.e. from you), yutahiruqum (i.e. purify you). Based on the masculine plurals the Shia argues: Wives of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are not part of Ahli Bayt (i.e. people of house) of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Shias aim to negate the purity of wives of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by arguing this position. We Muslims argue even though the words are masculine plurals but their usage is not limited/restricted for male only because the context indicates wives are being addressed in the verse and no male has been mentioned. This establishes that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ignored Haqiqi usage of to convey a particular meaning. Example of ignoring linguistic usage in English would be someone saying: Kaif is football virgin. Here the popular linguistic usage of virgin has been ignored to convey meaning of, Kaif has never played football. - [8] “The first lady to use a girdle was the mother of Ishmael. She used a girdle so that she might hide her tracks from Sarah. Abraham brought her and her son Ishmael while she was suckling him, to a place near the Ka`ba under a tree on the spot of Zamzam, at the highest place in the mosque. During those days there was nobody in Mecca, nor was there any water So he made them sit over there and placed near them a leather bag containing some dates, and a small water-skin containing some water, and set out homeward. Ishmael's mother followed him saying, "O Abraham! Where are you going, leaving us in this valley where there is no person whose company we may enjoy, nor is there anything (to enjoy)?" She repeated that to him many times, but he did not look back at her. Then she asked him, "Has Allah ordered you to do so?" He said, "Yes." She said, "Then He will not neglect us," and returned while Abraham proceeded onwards, and on reaching the Thaniya where they could not see him, he faced the Ka`ba, and raising both hands, invoked Allah saying the following prayers: 'O our Lord! I have made some of my offspring dwell in a valley without cultivation, by Your Sacred House (Ka`ba at Mecca) in order, O our Lord, that they may offer prayer perfectly. So fill some hearts among men with love towards them, and (O Allah) provide them with fruits, so that they may give thanks.' (14.37) Ishmael's mother went on suckling Ishmael and drinking from the water (she had). When the water in the water-skin had all been used up, she became thirsty and her child also became thirsty. She started looking at him (i.e. Ishmael) tossing in agony; She left him, for she could not endure looking at him, and found that the mountain of Safa was the nearest mountain to her on that land. She stood on it and started looking at the valley keenly so that she might see somebody, but she could not see anybody. Then she descended from Safa and when she reached the valley, she tucked up her robe and ran in the valley like a person in distress and trouble, till she crossed the valley and reached the Marwa mountain where she stood and started looking, expecting to see somebody, but she could not see anybody. She repeated that seven times." The Prophet said, "This is the source of the tradition of the walking of people between them. When she reached the Marwa (for the last time) she heard a voice and she asked herself to be quiet and listened attentively. She heard the voice again and said, 'O (whoever you may be)! You have made me hear your voice; have you got something to help me?" And behold! She saw an angel at the place of Zamzam, digging the earth with his heel (or his wing), till water flowed from that place. She started to make something like a basin around it, using her hand in this way, and started filling her water-skin with water with her hands, and the water was flowing out after she had scooped some of it." The Prophet added, "May Allah bestows Mercy on Ishmael's mother! Had she let the Zamzam (flow without trying to control it) (or had she not scooped from that water to fill her water-skin) Zamzam would have been a stream flowing on the surface of the earth." The Prophet further added, "Then she drank and suckled her child. The angel said to her, 'Don't be afraid of being neglected, for this is the House of Allah which will be built by this boy and his father, and Allah never neglects His people.' The House at that time was on a high place resembling a hillock, and when torrents came, they flowed to its right and left.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H583] - [9] One meaning of Hafeez is, to prevent from perishing, and in light of this Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) guards his Ummatis from hell by invoking Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to forgive their sins and praises Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) when his Ummatis do good: “My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you." [Ref: Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra (2: 194); ‘Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma‘-uz-zawa’id - 9:24] - [10] “It is not (proper) for the Prophet and those who believe to ask Allah’s forgiveness for the Mushrikoon, even though they be of kin, after it has become clear to them that they are the dwellers of the Fire (because they died in a state of disbelief)” [Ref: 9:113]

Shab Bashi ka mafoom raat guzarna, raat ko kissi kay gar rehna, yahan par image upload ki heh dekh lenh. here. Is ka mafoom hambistri nahin heh.

In kutub kay jawab meh joh kutub likhi gahi hen darkar hen: - Charagh e Sunnat, by Syed Firdos Shah [deobandi] [meray mojood heh] - Gulshan e Tauheed o Gulistan e Risalat Bajawab Gulistan e Tauheed o Risalat, Abu Ayoob Qadri [Deobandi] Ek yeh Kitab heh jawab meh magar pdf nahin milli: Charagh e Hidayat Bajawab e Sunnat [sunni] In Kitaboon kay ilawah aur kutub joh Deobandiyoon kay Jawab meh likhi gahi hoon un ka zikr karen aur ho sakta heh toh link send kar denh. Shukria.

Jazakallah Khair, Allah aap bhaiyoon ko salamat rakhay.

Salam alayqum Baee, mujjay Urdu meh Urdu likhna nahin aata sirf par sakta hoon aur roman Urdu meh likh sakta hoon. Meh nay English meh likhna is leyeh shoroon keeya keun kay hamaray Sunniyoon kay leyeh English meh quality material nahin. Aur mera irada heh kay meh apnay likhay huway material ko kitabi shakal meh publish karoon. Is meh shahid chand saal lagen, magar in sha Allah English meh Wahhabiyoon aur Deobandiyoon kay khilaaf yeh Kitab woh hasiyat ikhtiyar karay ge joh Ja Al Haq nay Urdu meh ikhtiyar kee heh. Aur in sha allah koshish karoon ga kay kitab ka tarjuma urdu meh be publish ho. Dua karen Allah ta'ala mujjay is kaam meh meri asaani karay.

Salam alayqum Baray achay aur saleekay say biyaan keeya. Allah ta'ala Ulama e Ahle Sunnat ko esa andaaz apnanay ki towfeeq deh, ameen.

Quran meh Nabiyyil Ummi ka lafz istimal huwa heh, Ummi ba mana walida be istimal huwa heh ... Is lehaz say, Nabi e kareem ka awal khalq hona be sabat hota heh ... waghera ...

Ma sha Allah. Allah ta'ala aap kay ilm amal iman o ishq meh barkat deh. ameen.

Discussions On Subject Of Istighathah And On Hadith, O Servants Of Allah Help Me. Introduction: Istighathah is an act in which a believer requests help from living righteous servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or from soul of deceased righteous servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Commonly only the second aspect of Istighathah, seeking help of deceased Awliyah, is debated and seeking help from living, some, might not even consider it Istighathah but it is Istighathah. In both cases intention is to act on Ahadith which teach servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) should be asked for assistance when no other help is available. Hence belief is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has appointed angels, righteous living servants and has granted power, authority, ability to souls of Awliyah to provide help. Wahhabis consider this practice, even though it is established from Ahadith, as major Shirk and say practice of it warrants expulsion from Islam and legitimises murder of anyone practicing it. In their Wahhabis killed tens of thousands of Sunni Muslims in Arabia. They have acted on murderous teaching and continue to do so ever since they have appeared in Najd. Shaykh al-Najd deemed entire population of Arabia and world other than his own followers as Mushrikeen. Here let a disgruntled Wahhabi tell you the barbarity and whole sale expulsion of Muslims from Islam and their murder, here. Abusing a Muslim is Fisq (i.e. act of disobedience) and killing him is act of disbelief and unjustly charging Muslim of disbelief is act of disbelief. Sunni scholarship of past going back to companion and present judged Istighathah as permissible. At odds are not just Wahhabis and Sunnis, and at stake is not just practice of Istighathah, life, property, Iman, Islam of Muslims but also two corner stones of Islam. Tawheed and Shirk. To make Istighathah Shirk and against Tawheed Wahhabis invented their own versions Tawheed and Shirk, and their own methodology to determine each. In this discussion Wahhabi version of Tawheed/Shirk and their methodology has been exposed and established there is no Tawheed in their definition Tawheed and there is no Shirk in their definition of Shirk. And it is established beyond shadow of doubt Wahhabism has no evidence in Quran/Sunnah to support their methodology of determining Tawheed/Shirk. In a subsequent discussion nearly a decade later Wahhabi brother Umar repented, here. Third discussion on the same topic took place between me and brother Umar’s closest friend brother Abdullah, here. The Initial Discussion And Background Information About It: Quite a while back in 2011 I quite regularly frequented PalTalk Islamic public Rooms for exchange of ideas. During one of the visit, I heard a Wahhabi (i.e. brother Umar) making Takfir of Muslims due to practice of Istighathah. After waiting for bit of time, I raised my hand in the Room, and eventually had chance to speak on microphone. There I categorically stated Istighathah is not Shirk and only the Khawarij or those influenced by them charge the Muslims of committing Shirk. He challenged saying; there was not a single verse of Qur’an or a Hadith which proves practice of Istighathah. I responded, I would be under the burden of establishing Istighathah with explicit evidences from Qur’anic or Hadith IF I had stated/claimed Istighathah was commanded by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Qur’an or it is Sunnah of beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). I merely believe Istighathah is not Shirk and those who engage in this practice are Muslims. I said since you made the claim Istighathah is Shirk please quote me a single verse of the Qur’an or a single Hadith which establishes Istighathah is Shirk. Second Chance And His Best Effort To Establish His Allegation: This time around he attempted to justify his Takfir with arguments bereft of textual proofs: (1) dead cannot help therefore it is Shirk, (2) asking from a creation what is not in power of creation is Shirk, (3) asking the dead to help you is Dua, Dua is worship, worship directed to creation is Shirk. After waiting for about ten minutes I took the microphone again and I asked; where is the proof from Qur’an and Ahadith that Istighathah is Shirk, one Ayat or Hadith. Also where did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) say in Qur’an or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said which is recorded in Hadith that dead cannot help therefore seeking their help is Shirk? Can I have evidence from Qur’an and Hadith which establishes that asking from creation what is not in power of creation is Shirk? Lastly, where did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) say or Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says asking the dead to help you is Dua? Isn’t asking the living Dua as well? Do you not ask Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the Living for your needs and is that not Dua? Asking the living to give you something is also in linguistic sense Dua (i.e. calling) of help. You believe calling the dead to help is Shirk because it is Dua yet the calling the living to help is also Dua so why will you not make Takfir of those who call the living to help? Last Attempt To Establish His Stance Ends In Failure: He took the microphone again but did not answer the four points. Instead he tried to justify why he does not make Takfir of those who call the living to help. He said something in line with, help sought and provided is from living and by living is in means available to creation therefore neither seeking help, nor granting help warrants Shirk. Eventually I took the microphone and repeated the demand of evidence and answer to my questions. And informed him and the listeners that the principles on which Wahhabi is judging Muslims to be polytheists are without a basis in religion of Islam. They are reprehensible innovations which have no backing of book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or Sunnah of beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And in regards to his defence that seeker seeks and giver provides help of type which is available to creation therefore it is not Shirk: I said his defence is totally irrelevant and does not remove actual Shirk. Tawheed/Shirk is judged on basis of ascribing Ilah/Rabb partners. Once Ilahiyyah, or Rububiyyah is affirmed for a creation then even IF help sought from that creation and help given is according to means available to help giver still Shirk has been committed. Shirk isn’t determined on what type of help has been sought but equality with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Ilahiyyah, Rububiyyah, and His Asma Wal Sifat warrants Shirk. And seeking of natural or supernatural help from any creation believed as a non-Ilah, non-Rabb entity in anyway does not establish required equality in Ilahiyyah, or Rububiyyah, or in Asma Wal Sifat of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to warrant charge of major Shirk. Admin Team Intervenes And Saves The Day For Wahhabism: (i) Room I was discussing was controlled by Wahhabis and the embarrassment he caused them and to himself forced the Admin team to intervene. I cannot recall correctly IF he was part of Admin/Mod team, or he just was prominent member of PalTalk group. They red-dotted me and my Wahhabi opponent (i.e. took away the access to microphone) on the pretext of both of us were hogging the microphone and preventing others from engaging in constructive dialogue. My Wahhabi opponent contacted me via private-message wishing to continue our dialogue to which I agreed but requested the dialogue should be in written format but with certain conditions. (ii) The PalTalk discussion narrated above is enough to demonstrate absence of evidence for his belief that Istighathah is Shirk and Takfir. Yet this method of argumentation limits/restricts discussion from developing into meaningful dialogue so I decided to abandon this methodology of refutation by establishing lack of evidence. Instead I opted to target the principles of Wahhabism on which the belief and Takfir was based on and to do this I needed to break connection with PalTalk discussion. Implemented Rules And Controls For Healthy Discussion: Sunni: Discussion format agreed was cross-examination style. There were certain rules suggested by me in order to keep the discussion limited. One will examine other and other will respond than roles will be reversed. One will question and other will answer. Given answer will be brief and direct to the point. Answer will not contain any direct quotes but evidences must be paraphrased unless evidence is asked for. Every question asked must be answered. One being cross-examined is under no obligation to answer any question immediately but three days will be given or else he will have to accept advice/Nasihah on how to answer the question. Discussion will not proceed until question is answered IF cross-examiner judges so. Cross-examiner can offer conclusion based on questions but cross-examined will not be permitted to rebut the conclusion. When citing evidence no referring to opinion of scholars but instead evidence from Quran/Sunnah. Tafsir of Quran with Quran and Hadith is to be preferred. Tafsir of Mufassireen can be utilized as back-up when interpretation of verse is disputed. Preference to a particular interpretation over another commentator’s Tafsir is not allowed. An interpretation of verse/Hadith by any commentator can only be rejected IF it contradicts clear explicit text of Quran and Hadith. Any principle not agreed upon both sides needs to be supported with evidence IF demand is made. Tafsir of verse/verses which is norm in Tafasir will be valid evidence even IF it seems to go against apparent text. Already agreed upon principles by both Sunni and Salafi scholarship will not be brought into dispute and when this happens party will have to return to principles held by his Jammah unless there is disagreement. Not allowed to quote evidence to merely contradict quoted evidence of opposing party but both sets of evidences have to be harmonised with each other according to conventions. Rare infringement of rules will be tolerated. Interjections which contribute material not related to discussions can be omitted IF material is posted internet. No content will be altered in a fashion which alters the meaning. Other alterations such as spelling/punctuation allowed. Names or others details which might assist to identify the individuals involved will be withheld unless permission is secured or revealing own personal information. Wahhabi: I agree with these rules but you will cross-examine Salafi creed than I will do likewise. Some Insight Regarding Why Wahhabi Chose To Be Cross Examined First: Salafi brother wished to be cross-examined first because I he wanted to cross-examine Sunni beliefs to be cross-examined last. This is preferred by seasoned debaters and works well in conventional debate formats but in regular conversation type discussion/debate I am not too sure how it would have benefitted him. His motive behind examining Sunni creed regarding Istighathah I assume was that he will control discussion. And he will be able to conclude after questioning but I will not be able to respond to his conclusions hence readers would have his say the last thing on their minds. We did not fix how long the examination of first party will last which meant examination can continue indefinitely as it happened. I cross-examined his creed and teachings for nearly six months and end was not in sight. Discussions and turns to speak should be limited by minutes, or hours, or sessions, or meetings and some way. Even IF he had chance to cross-examine Sunni teachings it wouldn’t have made any difference because I would have denied him the conclusion he wanted to reach by answering questions in accordance with Quran/Sunnah. That would have prevented him from concluding in accordance with teaching of Wahhabism. Something About Earlier Versions Of Discussions Accounts: Original discussion took place near the end of November 2010 and ended around May 2011. The earliest version was published in the same year of discussion. Objective was that most important and relevant content to subject of Istighathah will be given priority. Over time incremental additions will made until entire discussion is published than all discussion will be structured in order of development. Work on first stage continued to till the end of 2013 but sometime in January of 2014 PC’s Hard Disk Drive data was corrupted which I mentioned, here. I had to format HDD and reinstall windows. As a consequence all unpublished content stored including discussion on Istighathah was lost. In 4th August 2015 all content spread in many posts was compiled together, given appropriate headings and published, here. Some content of discussion as stored on USB and it was published a year later in 1st and 18th August 2016. Recently a very close and a dear friend of mine took interest in learning about Tawheed, Shirk, Istighathah, and Wahhabi and Sunni teachings about each of these topics. And I encouraged him to read the discussion during Ramadhan March 2022. As he is new learning about Islam I went through the entire discussion with him spelling out meanings of technical jargon and drawing his attention to various parts so he can understand discussion better. As we were reading the discussion I realized quite a lot of content has been lost. And as I was once again in contact with brother Umar because we had second discussion on the same subject, here, I enquired IF he had contents of our original discussion saved. He came back saying raw copy of discussion is in his possession. I have used the raw copy provided by brother Umar to compile this account of discussion. Nothing of original discussion is being omitted except contents related to attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentioned in section 24 of this discussion. This leaves me with, why didn’t you ask brother Umar earlier IF he has got copy saved? There is no doubt he/I saved and shared copies of discussions with each other the problem was how this discussion ended, very badly. And not badly as I and him abusing each other but way worse than this. Read sections 89 to 92 than section 99 to 100. As a result of what transpired I had completely broken all contact with brother Umar and could not and did not contact him again until he did so. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “Never will I allow to be lost the work of any of you, be he male or female.” [Ref: 3:195] 01 - The Hadith Which Started This Discussion: (i) “Narrated Hussain bin Ishaq Tustari, narrated Yahya As-Soofi, narrated Abdur Rahman bin Sahl, narrates from his father, Abdullah bin Isa, from Zaid bin Ali, from Utbah bin Ghazwan, from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). He said: ‘When one of you loses something or desires assistance while in a land where no person of assistance (is available) he should say “O slaves of Allah! Assist me; help me” for indeed Allah has many slaves who we do not see.” And this [Hadith] has been acted upon. [Ref: Tabarani, Mu'jam Al Kabeer, 17/177 - online Hadith 5469] (ii) “Abdullah bin Ahmed bin Hanbal (rah) said that he heard his father (Imam Ahmed) who said: I performed Hajj 5 times, thrice on foot and twice on ride or he said thrice on ride and twice on foot, once when I was on foot I lost my way hence I started to exclaim this: O Allah’s servants show me the way I kept on repeating this until I came back on track.” [Ref: Shu’ayb ul Iman, Vol6, P128, H7697] (iii) “Musa Ibn Ishaq related to us from Manjab Ibn Al-Harith, Hatim Ibn Isma’il related to us from Usamah Ibn Zayd from Aban Ibn Salih from Mujahid from Ibn Abbas that the Messenger of Allah said: ‘Indeed Allah possesses Angels besides the Hafazah (the Angels of Protection) who write (of even) the leaf which falls from a tree so when one of you suffers a limp in a deserted land he should call “Assist (me) O slaves of Allah.”’ [Ref: Musnad al-Bazzar, Volume 11, Musnad Ibn Abbas, H4922, Page181, here, scribd here.] This last Hadith from Musnad al-Bazzar was employed by my than Wahhabi opponent in section 55 of this discussion except he referenced it from Shuayb ul-Iman. At the time I did not know but all the narrators of this Hadith are Thiqa i.e. trustworthy. Visit scribd link to see what Muhaditheen have said about it. Details about third Hadith are being added, 4th May 2022. 02 - Discussion On Authenticity Of Hadith Of Servant Of Allah: He said: I do not want to discuss the Hadith until its Sanad is authenticated. The Hadith you presented is Daif. I said: Are you referring to the following Ahadith: “Narrated Hussain bin Ishaq Tustari, narrated Yahya As-Soofi, narrated Abdur Rahman bin Sahl, narrates from his father, Abdullah bin Isa, from Zaid bin Ali, from Utbah bin Ghazwan, from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). He said: ‘When one of you loses something or desires assistance while in a land where no person of assistance (is available) he should say “O slaves of Allah! Assist me; help me” for indeed Allah has many slaves who we do not see.” And this [Hadith] has been acted upon. [Ref: Tabarani, Mu'jam Al Kabeer, 17/177 - online Hadith 5469] Wahhabi: Yes! Sunni: I acknowledge Hadith has weakness in Sanad but there are few important points which you have noted considered. Imam Hakim in his Mustadrak - [1/320] – and Imam Bayhaqi in his Sunan Al Kubra - [3/52] - stated; when a Hadith is acted upon [by a Muhaddith, Mujtahid, Mujaddid, Muhaddith, and Mufassir] then Marfu Hadith is strengthened and is elevated to status of Hassan. In this case, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal has been reported to have acted on this Hadith: “Abdullah bin Ahmed bin Hanbal (rah) said that he heard his father (Imam Ahmed) who said: I performed Hajj 5 times, thrice on foot and twice on ride or he said thrice on ride and twice on foot, once when I was on foot I lost my way hence I started to exclaim this: O Allah’s servants show me the way I kept on repeating this until I came back on track.” [Ref: Shu’ayb ul Iman, Vol6, P128, H7697] Sunni: According to Muhaditheen, a weak Hadith elevated to status of Hassan Li’Ghayrihi IF it is corroborated from authentic Ahadith. In this regard we have Hadith from Sahih Bukhari. Seeking help from servants of Allah is corroborated from following Hadith: “When she reached the Marwa (for the last time) she heard a voice and she asked herself to be quiet and listened attentively. She heard the voice again and said, 'O, (whoever you may be)! You have made me hear your voice; have you got something to help me?" And behold! She saw an angel at the place of Zamzam, digging the earth with his heel (or his wing), till water flowed from that place.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H583] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) took oath from Prophets that they will aid Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) : “And when Allah took the covenant of the prophets, "Whatever I give you of the Scripture and wisdom and then there comes to you a messenger confirming what is with you, you [must] believe in him and support him." [Allah] said, "Have you acknowledged and taken upon that My commitment?" They said, "We have acknowledged it." He said, "Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses." [Ref: 3:81] Sunni: As a fulfilment of the promise made to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) aided Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from reducing the prayers from fifty to five. This also corroborates the Hadith of, servants of Allah, and establishes the servants of Allah are not just the angels. In addition to this, Muhaditheen have stated, a Hadith reaching the status of Talaqqi Bil Qubul is authentic - because Ummah will not agree upon error. According to another rule, multiple chains of narration, even if weak, together elevate the strength of a Hadith because it is unlikely all lied, or made same mistake. And we have multiple chains available. Scores of jurists have utilised and employed these Ahadith in their commentaries despite criticising the Isnad of these Ahadith. And according to the principles laid by Muhaditheen, we have good ground to argue these Ahadith are Hassan (i.e. fair, good) and actable. Wahhabi: Brother the Isnad of these Ahadith are weak then how can these be acted on? Sunni: I do not want to reason. IF you can provide evidence of contradiction – meaning the Muhaditheen have stated, Hadith doesn’t become Hassan Li’Ghayrihi even if this condition is fulfilled, isn’t actable even IF Talaqqi Bil Qubul, multiple chains do not elevate the strength of Hadith, Muhaditheen acting upon weak Ahadith do not strengthen them, then present it. Otherwise your protest alone is not worth considering. Wahhabi: This needs to be investigated and I do not have the means to verify all these details. Therefore I will have to say, we have to agree to disagree to these principles. Sunni: So be it. 03 - Brother Is Reluctant To Discuss Text Of Hadith Of Servants Of Allah: Sunni: Shall we proceed to discuss the Matan (i.e. text) of the Hadith? Wahhabi: There is no need to discuss the text of the Hadith when it is agreed that Hadith is weak. Sunni: Have not commentators explained countless Ahadith which they deemed Daif? Is it not practice of scholars to classify a Hadith as Daif yet still comment on its text? We have scholarly precedent to do so. Wahhabi: That is fine by me but whatever is established from this Hadith it cannot be acted upon nor it would be evidence against me. Sunni: Decision would be yours. 04 - What’s Shirk In Wahhabism, Belief, Action Or Both, And Refutation: Sunni: What is your position on this Hadith? Wahhabi: The Hadith is for desert and help sought from angels therefore it’s not Shirk. Sunni: Suppose a Wahhabi loses his way in desert. (i) Seeks help from the angel. Is he monotheist or polytheist? Wahhabi: A monotheist! Sunni: (ii) What IF he seeks help from the angel believing the angel is god-partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Is he polytheist or monotheist? Wahhabi: Polytheist because he takes angel as partner in God-hood! Sunni: Is he polytheist due to belief or action? Wahhabi: Action and belief! Sunni: Which action made him polytheist? Wahhabi: He invoked the angel for help and this is worshipping therefore Shirk. Sunni: OK! Wahhabi: He is polytheist for action of worship and guilty of Shirk for attesting to belief of god-hood for an angel. Do you agree? Sunni: I agree that he is polytheist due to belief and his action. I want to contextualize what we discussed. Sunni: In the scenario (i) the angel wasn’t taken as a god hence his request for help from angel wasn’t worship but in scenario (ii) the angel was taken as a god therefore the request of help was interpreted to mean worship. Sunni: What was the primary factor which polluted Tawheed the action or belief? Wahhabi: Both. Sunni: What is primary factor which nullified belief of Tawheed? Wahhabi: I said belief and action. Sunni: I am asking about fundamental cause of Shirk. Wahhabi: I don’t know what you mean. Sunni: The primary factor of Shirk was belief in god-hood of angel and it was this factor which leads them to action of seeking help from angel-god – into worship and into Shirk. 05 - What IF Shirki Aspects Of Belief Were Removed From Actions: Sunni: What IF the polluting factor was removed will it then be Shirk? Wahhabi: No! I see no reason for it to be Shirk. Sunni: What IF belief of Tawheed is not changed as it was the case of seeking help from angel with Tawheedi belief but the place, the servant, and the help sought is different? Then will he be monotheist or polytheist? Wahhabi: I don’t understand what you’re intending to say. Sunni: The servant from whom the help is sought is Shaykh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). The place is city of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the help sought is regarding loss of a shoe. Will the person be polytheist or monotheist? Wahhabi: Polytheist! Sunni: In the scenario it was explicitly stated that Tawheed is not changed but; the servant, the help, and the place, are changed yet you declared it Shirk. One seeks help from a servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) upholding Tawheed and he is still polytheist, this makes no sense. Sunni: Is he polytheist because he sought help from a deceased human or polytheist due seeking help out of desert and in city Madinah, or polytheist for asking for the shoe? Wahhabi: Polytheist due to seeking help from a dead person and polytheist due to seeking a shoe from dead person. Sunni: What about his seeking help in Madinah, Shirk or not? Wahhabi: It’s an innovation. Sunni: Why is it an innovation? Wahhabi: Because help is sought outside of legislated and permitted area. Sunni: So help from Ibadullah (i.e. servants of Allah) should only be sought when in the desert? Wahhabi: Yes! Sunni: Coming back to the topic of Shirk. Why is the person polytheist? Wahhabi: He will be polytheist because he seeks shoe from someone who has no power to grant him or aid him to find it. Sunni: Even IF one believes help given is with permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Wahhabi: Polytheist even if one believed the help is with permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Sunni: Thanks for helping me understand your point of view better. Few minutes ago you said person is polytheist because he seeks help from dead, and also polytheist due to seeking shoe from dead, and you also said, it is Shirk because he seeks help from one who does not have power to help: “Polytheist due to seeking help from a dead person and polytheist due to seeking a shoe from dead person.” I quote: “He will be polytheist because he seeks shoe from someone who has no power to grant him or aid him to find it.” What Qur’anic proof do you have that these are two criteria’s of determining Shirk? 06 - Unable To Substantiate His Claim Wahhabi Questions My Knowledge: Wahhabi: You said you are an ex-Wahhabi but your question is making me doubt you were. You don’t even know Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. How can you claim you were a dedicated Wahhabi when your knowledge of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah is so weak? I doubt your claim of Wahhabiyyah but suppose you were then clearly you didn’t know Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. You still don’t know any better. Had you known Tawheed al-Rububiyyah you would have understood the reason behind it. Sunni: My understanding of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah is very refined. Thank you very much. Wahhabi: There is not point discussing with you when an essential requirement for this discussion isn’t known to you. Sunni: I didn’t ask you for evidence for you to turn around and say, you’re asking for evidence, you don’t know Tawheed. Just because you’re in tough spot you’re acting out. Wahhabi: What conclusion is I supposed to derive from your question slash demand? Sunni: Nothing! You were supposed to comply with the demand and substantiate your claim with evidence of Quran/Sunnah, and make no other judgment. Wahhabi: I agree, I kind of hit a weird note but what am I supposed think when your questions indicate lack of basic knowledge of Tawheed. Sunni: I have told you that you have no reason to question my knowledge based on my demand that you substantiate your position with evidence of Quran/Sunnah. Wahhabi: Brother it is hard to not to question your knowledge of Tawheed when you’re asking me something which you should know without asking me. Sunni: I asked for explicit evidence not deductive and evidence which isn’t controversial itself. Wahhabi: What you mean it is controversial? Sunni: Your definition of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah itself is controversial so how can it solve the problem when it is part of the problem. Also to judge on your principles they need to be established and supported by Quran and Sunnah. Sunni: I want evidence of your principles clearly mentioned in Quran and Sunnah. And I want evidence of principle which you judge an XMan is guilty of major Shirk and therefore Mushrik because he sought help from someone [dead] who doesn’t have power to help. The demand of evidence is for principles on which the judgement is made. Wahhabi: Do you know what Tawheed al-Rububiyyah is? Sunni: This is your principle and you judge Tawheed and Shirk with it than you are liable to provide proof. That is IF you want me, or anyone else to accept your position. We Muslims are instructed to judge by what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed and refer to Him and Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in our disputes. And we are instructed to reject which is not from Him and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Prophet said: “Aisha reported Allah's Messenger as saying: He who innovated things in our affairs which is not part of it and these are to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266, here.] You substantiate your principle, or you are instructed to reject and I have already rejected. Wahhabi: I asked you earlier IF you understand Tawheed al-Rububiyyah but you didn’t answer. Do you? Sunni: Why my demand of evidence translates to mean Muhammed Ali does not know Tawheed al-Rububiyyah? Your logic has escaped my very rational minds grasp. IF you want to make a deduction about my knowledge it should be; Muhammed Ali does and did not know the evidences of principles on basis of which I judge Tawheed/Shirk and he wants evidence for it. I know your version of Tawheed and Shirk and I am capable of making judgments about matters being Tawheed/Shirk in light of your methodology. Sunni: I can only judge by what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed, and accept and judge by principles which are derived out of Quran/Sunnah. Your principle, asking the dead for help is Shirk because dead do not have any power of help, needs support of Quran/Sunnah. Once it is established I will judge by it and hold to anything which it proves. Wahhabi: Why don’t you prove you know Tawheed al-Rububiyyah, bro? Sunni: I can only judge by what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed, and accept and judge by principles which are derived out of Quran/Sunnah. Your principle, asking the dead for help is Shirk because dead do not have any power of help, needs support of Quran/Sunnah. Once it is established I will judge by it and hold to anything which it proves. Sunni: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is our creator, sustainer, giver of help, remover of adversity, gives life, takes life, keeper of balance; in universe, nature, and in bodies of living creatures. He is possessor of all treasures; be it health, wealth, food resources, grains, vegetables, and fruits. He instructs air, directs waters, nothing that moves, or exist is out of His control. This is your version of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah and in reality of al-Rububiyyah. 07 - Tawheed al-Rububiyyah Doesn’t Support Principle, Seeking Dead’s Help Is Shirk: Wahhabi: Thank You. You do know Tawheed al-Rububiyyah then. Try to understand to give share characteristics of His Rububiyyah to creation is Shirk! Istighathah is indeed Shirk in Rububiyyah as well as in Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah. Sunni: What has your version of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah got to do with the principles you employed, seeking help from dead is Shirk, and you figure this out than tell me. While you’re at it have a look what you said: “Polytheist due to seeking help from a dead person and polytheist due to seeking a shoe from dead person.” And answer my following question: “What Qur’anic proof do you have that these are two criteria’s of determining Shirk?” Wahhabi: It does support the principles because when you ask something from dead it means you have attributed characteristics of Rububiyyah to that creation and this is Shirk. Sunni: In that case asking the living also contradicts Tawheed al-Rububiyyah even IF you ask them for something which is available to them. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) al-Hayy (i.e. the Living) and He is manager of natural and super natural. He is giver of natural and supernatural, remover of all calamities as our Rabb. In this light you can see that to seek anything from anyone other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) contradicts your version of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah and establishes Shirk even IF you ask for a glass of water from someone sitting right next to you. The logic you applied to dead also equally applies to living because when you ask something from living it means you have attributed characteristics of Rububiyyah to that creation and this is Shirk. That would be Shirk according to your definition of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. Wahhabi: What are you on about brother? Asking the living for anything that is in their power is not Shirk and not against Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. You’re confused about Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. Sunni: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) our Rabb is ar-Razzaq (i.e. the provider). His Rububiyyah encompasses His Razzaqiyyah [in other words Razzaqiyyah is a sub-characteristic of Rububiyyah]. Our Rabb provides Rizq (i.e. sustenance). This Rizq takes form of bread, water, Pizza, Biryani, SFC Chicken, Donner Kebab, Sheesh, and many other edible items? Sunni: I am asking does your Rabb provide you with these items of Rizq and more or not? Wahhabi: He does indeed. Sunni: When you ask for Pizza, water, or anything else from creation how are you not committing Shirk in your version of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah? You have partially ascribed a component of Rububiyyah (i.e. Razzaqiyyah) to a creation. This is indeed Shirk isn’t it? Yet we both believe this is not Shirk. Wahhabi: You’ve got me good. Sunni: How can you support your principles on basis of your version of Tawheed/Shirk al-Rububiyyah when each in itself is a problem and produces erroneous result? I will come back to the demand I made before. You said practitioner of Istighathah is Mushrik for two reasons: “Polytheist due to seeking help from a dead person and polytheist due to seeking a shoe from dead person.” I asked: “What Qur’anic proof do you have that these are two criteria’s of determining Shirk?” I want clear explicit and emphatic evidence in support of these principles. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) perfected religion of Islam and revealed it to His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Tawheed/Shirk was explained by Him and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and IF they didn’t need your principles to explain/demonstrate Tawheed and Shirk than clearly we do not either. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Aisha reported Allah's Messenger as saying: He who innovated things in our affairs which is not part of it, these are to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266, here.] Wahhabi: I will be honest with you. I, like everyone I know, have always taken these principles for granted and I have never asked for evidence. I have discussed with many Barelwis before but I have never been challenged to produce evidence in support of these principles so you can guess I am under prepared. Its first time I have been compelled to think; maybe what I believed were incontestable principles to determine Tawheed/Shirk, are not so incontestable. I will need time to research on this development. Sunni: You agree there are no evidences in support of principles than? Wahhabi: I cannot say there are not evidences in support of these principles but I will say I don’t know any. Sunni: This admission is enough of my objectives and readers. Unlikely you will ever manage to support your principles. Been there and know it better. Wahhabi: Don’t count your chickens before they hatch. 08 - Shirk Primarily Is Warranted Due To Affirmed Beliefs And Not Actions: Sunni: Before our discussion got side tracked we discussed, what warranted Shirk belief, or action, or both, and then we started the topic if Shirk was removed from actions then will actions be Shirk? Do you remember that discussion? Wahhabi: Not exactly but it led to discussion about you demand proofs of principle on which we [Wahhabi] determine what is Tawheed/Shirk. Sunni: Correct. You basically judged Shirk on basis of action and this was something which I wanted to look into now and respond to it. You will be OK with me responding to that part here? Wahhabi: I don’t have any objections brother. Sunni: I have already established [in section 04] that Shirk is warranted primarily due to polytheistic belief. Suppose belief contains polytheistic element then the action of seeking help will be interpreted to mean worship which would amount to Shirk. Therefore seeking help from Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) to find the shoe in Madinah cannot be Shirk because the belief was not polluted with Shirk. Seeking help from him is in same category as seeking help from an angel. Wahhabi: Can I respond to this? Sunni: There is no need to respond to that because it was just a recap of what transpired before. Wahhabi: You saying you proved something which you haven’t. How can I remain silent on that? Sunni: When I exposed your error [in section 04] you had nothing to say in response. I considered that as, I proved my point. Wahhabi: I don’t know what you referring to so I cannot comment on your claim. Sunni: I will share with you the chat logs of discussions this far after that please save them. You should be saving them because you will need to look back into them to keep track of discussion and keep idea of context. Wahhabi: I will do in future. Sunni: Scenario. Suppose one seeks help believing soul of Shaykh and angel is servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Angel and soul of Shaykh will help be with permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Soul of Shaykh and angle is not partner in Uluhiyyah, Rububiyyah, or in Asma Wal Sifat of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), then how can this be Shirk? Wahhabi: It is Shirk. XMan is guilty of worshipping the dead Shaykh by asking him for his help for which there is no proof, nor there is proof the dead can hear the call of help. Sunni: Is he polytheist for seeking help from deceased Shaykh, or engaging in action for which there is no proof? Wahhabi: Both. Sunni: What is the Qur’anic proof that asking the dead Shaykh for help for which there is no evidence is Shirk? Wahhabi: “And the false deities are unable to (give) them help, nor can they help themselves.“ [Ref: 7:192] Sunni: I have already informed you that we do not we did not take angle/Shaykh as an Ilah/deity. This verse states the false deities of polytheists are not able to help polytheists nor they can help their own selves against one who wishes to inflict harm upon them. We the Muslims do not take the servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as deities but polytheists took their idols as deities partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Therefore this verse cannot be applied to Muslims who profess Tawheed and openly say; there is no deity except Allah. Sunni: This verse is not proof for the following statement and your principle; seeking help for which there is no proof is Shirk. You cannot even loosely apply it to that principle. Sunni: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed to seek help from servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Are the Awliyah not from fold of servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? You will agree they’re so the instruction to seek help from servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is inclusive of angels, Jinn and souls of Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) from Bani Adam (alayhi salaam). Hence one who seeks help from any of them without polytheistic creed has done nothing wrong. Wahhabi: What is that polytheistic creed? Sunni: To believe there is another Ilah and Rabb beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Or to believe a creation possesses fundamentally essential attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shirk. Wahhabi: What are these fundamentally essential attributes? I genuinely don’t know what attributes you’re referring to. Sunni: Uncreated, Limitless, the First, the Last, Eternal, and Immutability etc. Trinitarian Christians affirm Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah and all these characteristics and more for Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) hence they are Mushrikeen on two accounts. 09 - Dua, Invocation Directed To A Deity Is Worship: Wahhabi: You said seeking aid from soul of dead is not wrong. How can seeking aid from dead not be wrong! Seeking aid of the living is not Shirk, like angels and Jinn, but the people seek aid from the residents of graves is Shirk and very wrong. Sunni: What proof do you have for this being Shirk? Wahhabi: “And those they invoke other than Allah create nothing, and they (themselves) are created. They are (in fact) dead, not alive, and they do not perceive when they will be resurrected.” [Ref: 16:21] The dead cannot hear and one who invokes other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) forgets that they are dead not alive. As such they invoke them and make them equal with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Sunni: This verse was revealed regarding the polytheists of Arabian Peninsula. The verse is explained by another: “Yet have they taken mindu’nillah gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection.“ [Ref: 25:3] The verse states polytheists invoked upon their idol gods which create nothing but they are themselves created and they are dead and not alive. Invoking any deity requesting anything from one who is believed to be deity is worship of that deity. Therefore their invoking of their idol gods translates to worship but the primary reason of Shirk was; they invoked their idols believing them to be gods. Hence according to the verses quoted Shirk of polytheists was twofold, one they believed the idols to be gods and second they worshipped them. Sunni: This verse does not apply to Muslims because we the Muslims do not believe the Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to be gods. In context of our discussion the people do not seek aid of the deceased Awliyah-Allah believing them to be gods nor we the Muslims worship them hence there is no Shirk in belief and nor our actions. Wahhabi: Invoking a dead expecting them to hear your call of help is worship because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said invocation is worship: “Narrated An-Nu'man Ibn Bashir: The Prophet said: Supplication (Dua) is itself the worship. (He then recited) "And your Lord said: Call on Me, I will answer you." (40:60).” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B8, H1474, here.] You have heard the Hadith, haven’t you? Sunni: Yes I am familiar with Hadith, invocation is worshiped. Wahhabi: Shirk you guys engage in makes it hard to believe you have even read a verse of Quran. Sunni: I am equally perplexed that you claim Islam and have read Quran and Hadith but you still don’t know basics such as how Shirk is to be determined. Wahhabi: It is not like you guys know Tawheed, or Shirk. You’re in no position to judge us. Sunni: Suppose XMan calls a dead person without expecting the dead to hear his call then will the call to help be worship or not? 10 - Why Ask Dead, IF You Believe They Cannot Hear Your Call: Wahhabi: Why would they call dead if they believe dead cannot hear? Sunni: This is a hypothetical question. I want to examine your principles in context of different scenarios in order to better understand them. Wahhabi: Question still stands even in context this hypothetical scenario. Sunni: Oh, so you’re asking me a question? Wahhabi: It isn’t question as per se but rather a rhetorical device to force you to think but IF you can elaborate with an example that would be good too. Sunni: They might believe the angels take the report of incident to them. Hadith says Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) appointed His servants for purpose of help. To be able to help His servants need to hear help is being requested. His servants are inclusive of His Awliyah, the living and the deceased. Both groups need to know request of help is made and they either hear directly/personally, or have to be informed by angels. Ahadith record Salam is conveyed to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by angels: "It was narrated that Abdullah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Allah has angels who travel around on Earth conveying to me the Salams (i.e. salutations) of my Ummah.'" [Ref: Nisaee, B13, H1283, here.] This prophetic statement is proof that people who have departed from this earthly life can be informed of what the living have done. All I am saying is that it is theoretically possible for angels to convey the message. Wahhabi: Is there clear evidence which states deceased can be informed of what the living are doing on earth? Sunni: I don’t know. I asked you, suppose one calls a dead person’s soul without expecting the dead’s soul to hear his call then will the call to help be worship or not? Wahhabi: It won’t be worship in that case. Sunni: Will the XMan become guilty of Shirk? Wahhabi: No! Sunni: That means you agree that according to your methodology Istighathah is not Shirk. Wahhabi: Istighathah is Shirk. Sunni: How can Istighathah be Shirk when asking the dead to help with belief angels will convey the message to them is not worship according to your methodology? Wahhabi: It is still worship. Sunni: Can you be bit more expressive and share your reasons as well. You mean to say; belief angel will convey the request of help to the soul of deceased Wali, results in worship of Wali? 11 - Supplication Is Worship, I Make No Distinction, Salam Conveyed Is Shirk: Wahhabi: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said supplication is worship he made no Takhsees/distinction and I will not either. Sunni: I say; as-salamu alayka ya RasoolAllah wa sallam alayka ya Rahmata lil-Aalameen. Angels convey my salutation to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and I am Mushrik. I have got that right? Wahhabi: I wouldn’t say Mushrik but your action would be Shirk. Sunni: What about; as-salamu alayka ayyuha al-Nabiyyu wa rahmatullah wa barakaat? Wahhabi: This is in Salah how can that be Shirk? Sunni: Because your principle and methodology of Tawheed and Shirk establishes it is Shirk. Wahhabi: We will discuss this aspect another time. 12 - Belief Of Ilahiyyah And Intentions Makes Dua Worship: Sunni: We went about the long way but at the end we reached our destination and came to conclusion that in your methodology calling dead to help with belief they can and cannot hear is worship and therefore Shirk in both scenarios. Would you agree? Wahhabi: Yes! Sunni: That’s all I was trying to figure out. Sunni: In your belief call is worship and [belief in] hearing and not hearing of dead does not affect it? Wahhabi: Yeah! Sunni: I want to address what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding Dua in the Hadith. Wahhabi: You’re welcome. Sunni: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said Dua is worship and that is only when a Dua directed toward a Deity/deity. You agree that Ilah means one that is worshipped? Wahhabi: Yes. Sunni: When one invokes an Ilah, implores an Ilah, beseeches an Ilah, requests an Ilah, asks an Ilah, or when one praises an Ilah, glorifies an Ilah, or exalts an Ilah, and then such invocation is worship. For Dua to be worship, one has to believe the one to whom the Dua is directed at is an Ilah (i.e. one deserving of worship). IF a supplication is directed toward non-Ilah entity then Dua is not worship. Wahhabi: What is your evidence [for belief that Dua directed to non-Ilah entity is not worship]? Sunni: I am getting to that stage. Wait. Sunni: Evidence for this is verse do not make the calling of Prophet as calling of one another: “Do not make (your) calling of the Messenger among yourselves as the call of one of you to another. Already Allah knows those of you who slip away, concealed by others. So let those beware who dissent from the Prophet's order, lest Fitnah strike them or a painful punishment.” [Ref: 24:63] In this verse the companions are told; when they call Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from his house they should not treat the Dua/calling of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as if they are calling out one another – as they called each other: O Muhammad! Come out! Rather observe proper manners which show respect, reverence and which are befitting the status of beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In this verse the word Dua has been used to mean calling in general sense and not in sense of worship. 13 - Protest Ali You Have Misconstrued Meaning Of Verse: Wahhabi: You have misconstrued rather distorted the meaning of following part of verse: Do not make the calling of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The verse means that Dua of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not of a common person but he is held in esteem by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hence the Dua will be accepted. Sunni: This [interpretation of yours] is a valid interpretation of said verse. Wahhabi: Then your claim that Dua is not always worship is refuted. Sunni: I have agreed with the validity of interpretation because the nature of Qur’an is that it is short expression wide in meaning hence I accept and hold to both interpretations. Wahhabi: Is that a Hadith? Sunni: "Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Messenger saying, "I have been sent with Jawami al-Kalim , and I was made victorious with awe (cast into the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the earth were brought to me and were put in my hand." Muhammad said, Jawami'-al-Kalim means that Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet." [Ref: Bukhari, B87, H141, here.] Wahhabi: Hadith doesn’t matter because none from the classical scholars interpreted the verse as you have interpreted it. Sunni: Would you like me to quote the evidence of Mufassireen which establishes my interpretation? Wahhabi: Only non-Sufi Mufassireen. Sunni: We did not agree that Tafsir of non-Sufis will be utilized. Wahhabi: OK. Quote Sufi Tafsir but it has to be backed by non-Sufi Mufassireen. Sunni: Again this was not condition stated in rules but any how I had no intention to quoting Sufi Mufassireen. Rather Mufassireen who are acceptable to you will be quoted to establish interpretation. Give me bit of time and I will find them. Wahhabi: I need to make a phone call. 14 - Tafasir Of Shaykh Ibn Kathir, Imam Suyuti, And Abdullah Ibn Abbas: Sunni: Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Tafsir has this: “Make not the calling of the messenger among you …” Do not call the Prophet (peace be upon him) by his name saying: O Muhammad. “… as your calling one of another.” by name. You should rather respect him, show deference towards him, and honour him by saying: ‘O Prophet of Allah.’, or ‘O Messenger of Allah.’, or ‘O Abu'l-Qasim’. “Allah knowest those of you who sneak away …” from the mosque, (hiding themselves) the hypocrites used to leave the mosque without permission when no one could see them.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Abbas, Q24:63, here.] Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti’s (rahimullah) Tafsir agrees with Tafsir Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) - here: “’Do not among yourselves consider the calling of the Messenger to be like your calling of one another.’ By saying: ‘O Muhammad. But say ‘O Prophet of God.’ Or ‘O Messenger of God!’ Gently respectfully and in a low voice. ‘Verily God knows those of you who slip away surreptitiously.’ That is those who leave the mosque secretly during the sermon without asking leave hiding behind something …” [Ref: Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Q24:63, here.] Tafsir of Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) which is likely what you read supports my view point as well as yours: "Make not the calling of the Messenger among you as your calling one of another.” When you address him, do not say: `O Muhammad,' or `O son of `Abdullah'; rather honor him and say, `O Prophet of Allah,' or, `O Messenger of Allah.' “Make not the calling of the Messenger among you as your calling one of another." A second view concerning the meaning of the Ayah is that it means `do not think that if he prays against you it is like when anyone else prays against you, because his prayers will be answered; so beware lest he prays against you and you will be doomed.' Ibn Abi Hatim recorded this from Ibn `Abbas, Al-Hasan Al-Basri and `Atiyyah Al-`Awfi. And Allah knows best." [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q24:63, here.] Wahhabi: Then this evidence is inconclusive due to contradiction. Sunni: There is no contradiction between two interpretations. Both are valid and if there was a contradiction you think someone like Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) wouldn’t have realized. Wahhabi: I am struggling to accept that a verse might have multiple meanings. Sunni: Hadith: “… and were put in my hand." Muhammad said, Jawami'-al-Kalim means that Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet." [Ref: Bukhari, B87, H141, here.] Sunni: These two interpretations establish that according to commentators of Quran and linguists word Dua is sometimes used in Shar’ri sense where it is associated with worship. Sometimes it is used in linguistic meaning of call without warranting worship. Wahhabi: You do agree that word Dua in the Hadith is used to mean invocation/call in context of worship? Sunni: I need to complete what I started. Sunni: Duas/calls which companions called Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were/are not worship because belief [of Ilahiyyah] and intention [of worship] required to make their calls worship is missing. Whereas the Dua which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directs to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is based on belief that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the Ilah/Rabb and intention is to worship Him. You’re refusing to make distinction between different two types of Dua, linguistic, and Shar’ri. Sunni: In your literalism companions were worshipping Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said don’t worship him as you worship each other with your supplications. You have to make distinction between types of Duas on basis of belief and intention otherwise you’re in danger dying a Kafir. 15 - Why Verse Q24:63 Employed, And How It Helps Istighathah: Sunni: You asked: “You do agree that word Dua in the Hadith is used to mean invocation/call in context of worship?” How can I deny that the word Dua in Hadith is used in meaning of call of worship! Denying the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would be outrageously stupid. Wahhabi: You have established there are two different types of Duas. How does this prove Istighathah is not Shirk? The evidence of Hadith I quoted, supplication is worship, still stands because you agreed Hadith uses Dua in meaning of call-of-worship. Sunni: I didn’t present the evidence of verse [Q24:63] to prove Istighathah is not Shirk. Nor I said this verse proves Istighathah is not Shirk because supplication is of Shar’ri type and Lughvi (i.e. linguistic) type. You made that assumption. Wahhabi: Why else would you quote it then? Sunni: You said [in section 11] that I make no distinction between Duas because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said supplication is worship. Your argument in wider context of discussion was Istighathah is a Dua therefore worship and Shirk. I wanted to prove you wrong and establish that we have to make distinction between different types of Duas and this is where verse [Q24:63] in discussion came into discussion. Sunni: With it I have established we have to make distinction between Dua of Istighathah [which is a Dua in linguistic sense], and Dua mentioned in the Hadith [is of Shar’ri sense, in meaning of supplication of worship]. They are two different types of Duas and we cannot understand one in light of evidences of other because that will distort Deen. It [the verse Q24:63] was never quoted to prove Istighathah is not Shirk but the validation it provides support to understanding Istighathah is not worship of creation, and not Shirk. Wahhabi: I couldn’t remember how this started. Sunni: It is strange you argued you make no distinction between types of Duas because I know you do; calling living for help isn’t Shirk, calling dead for help is Shirk. What is that if not Takhsees (i.e. distinction)? Yet for some reason you become rigid on topic of Istighathah and you want to judge it strictly on statement in Hadith; supplication is worship. You give no quarter even though practitioner of Istighathah does not believe one whom he calls for help is Ilah/Rabb, nor intends to worship him. Sunni: The Ayah in discussion clearly and explicitly states companions directed Duas/calls to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but you still would make excuse for them, and not apply Hadith on them. In contrast absolutely none out of practitioners of Istighathah would actually say; we directed Dua of Istighathah to Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani (rahimullah). Yet you apply Shar’ri meaning of Dua on them. Wahhabi: How would you remove Shar’ri application of Dua from companions regarding whom verse Q24:63 was revealed? Sunni: I have already partly answered this question [at the end of section 14 in the last two paragraphs]. Shar’ri application only is warranted if the belief of Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah was affirmed by those who called Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and had intention of worship. A general call/Dua: O Ali come out, help me. Your dog has got me cornered come quickly, save me. Wouldn’t warrant Shar’ri application of Dua because one calling me out doesn’t believe I am an Ilah, neither does he intended to worship me. He only has called me out for help because he knows I have control and built a relationship with my dog. Dog won’t harm me as I am the owner and leader of pack so I will be able to control my dog. Sunni: Is there anything else you wish to discuss with regards to the verse [Q24:63] of Qur’an? He replied: Nothing at the moment. 16 - Tawheed/Shirk al-Uluhiyyah Is Same As Tawheed/Shirk al-Ibadah: Wahhabi: Brother you have consistently repeated: We don’t believe Shaykh is an Ilah, we call without intention of worship and therefore we commit no Shirk. To believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the One Ilah you must worship Him only. To worship anyone other beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is to disbelieve he is One Ilah. Belief in Tawheed/Shirk al-Uluhiyyah is conjoined with worship. This is the first thing you should have learnt in Kitab at-Tawheed of Shaykh ul-Islam [Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab] yet you make distinction between belief in Tawheed/Shirk Uluhiyyah and actions of Tawheed/Shirk al-Ibadah. To say we believe in Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is same as saying we only worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Belief in Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah is action of worship. Sunni: You’re basically saying Ilah means worship because you said believe in Ilah is to engage in worship. This notion is against these and other similar Ayaat: “They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the third of three." And there is no Ilah except one Ilah. And if they do not desist ...” [Ref: 5:73] “Say: ‘I am only a warner, and there is not any Ilah except Allah, the One, the Prevailing.’” [Ref: 38:65] Suppose I take your meaning than there is no worship except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Does this sound correct and right to you? Wahhabi: I didn’t say that brother. Sunni: What did you say then brother? Wahhabi: I made it clear that Tawheed and Shirk Uluhiyyah are defined as worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and worship of others beside Him. Sunni: What does al-Uluhiyyah mean in linguistic sense of word? Wahhabi: Linguistically it denotes meaning of, deserver of worship, worthy of worship but translated to mean the God-hood. Sunni: You would than agree al-Uluhiyyah is in same meaning these words then al-Ilahiyyah and al-Ma’budiyyah (i.e. worthy of worship)? Wahhabi: I got it brother. You know Arabic too. I am impressed. Now get to the point. Sunni: How come your definition of Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah goes against the meaning of word al-Uluhiyyah? You know what al-Uluhiyyah means, worthy of worship, yet you have deducted part of its meaning and defined Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah as, worthy of worship? I purpose your definition of Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah/Ilahiyyah is defective and deliberately distorted. Belief is to entertain a concept, idea, and notion in the mind after it has been adopted. Meaning of Uluhiyyah is, worthy of worship, or deserving of worship, and this understanding of, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is worthy of worship occurs as a notion, idea, concept, and creed in the mind. When it is realized and adopted, internalized it has become a belief than this belief compels to engage in actions of worship. How can you conflate Ilahiyyah/Uluhiyyah with Ibadah? Belief of Ilahiyyah brain and mental activity related and actions of worship are body and physical actions related. Your problem is your defective understanding of Tawheed al-Ilahiyyah/Uluhiyyah. Your understanding and definitions are contradicted and refuted by these verses: “They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the third of three." And there is no Ilah except one Ilah. And if they do not desist ...” [Ref: 5:73] “Say: ‘I am only a warner, and there is not any Ilah except Allah, the One, the Prevailing.’” [Ref: 38:65] You cannot make a definition of a concept based on a word which doesn’t accurately represent the definition. IF you have something to say in response you’re welcome otherwise I am done and I want to return to where I left off. 17 - Every Dua Is Not Worship Is Agreed By Both Parties: Sunni: Has that [discussion in sections 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15] not convinced you every Dua/calling is not worship? Wahhabi: I concede that every call is not worship. Sunni: Then which Dua (i.e. call) is worship? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Brother Dua directed to a dead person is worship or directed to deity worship? Wahhabi: To both! Sunni: What makes the call to dead person an act of worship if every Dua is not worship? Wahhabi: … Sunni: I can understand calling upon an Ilah/Deity is worship because one is calling on something which is believed by person to be an Ilah (i.e. one deserver of worship). I see no reason for calling of dead to be worship. What is your take on this? Wahhabi: … Sunni: OK. Brother, provide evidence for your principle that calling dead is worship. Wahhabi: … Sunni: IF calling upon dead was worship then in every prayer you recite: “As-salamu alayka ayyu han-Nabiyu wa rahmatullahi wa barakaat.” Ayyu is Harf of Nida (i.e. call), so you are saying; “Peace be upon you O Prophet …” In addition to this you read in the Qur’an; ya ayyu ar ‘Rasool, ya ayyu an’Nabi, ya ayyu al Muzammil and Mudassir. All these phrases begin with Harf of Nida hence each time you perform Salah and recite Qur’an you are invoking Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) who had departed from this world. Are you guilty of Shirk or not? Wahhabi: Brother these are proven from Qur’an and Hadith hence their usage is not Shirk. Sunni: Did you not say [in section 05] calling of the dead is Shirk? What prevents you from declaring these as Shirk? IF you abstain from declaring them Shirki then you contradict your principle and IF you declare them to be polytheistic you will become a Kafir. A polytheistic practice cannot become Tawheedi proven, or not. It will remain polytheistic but will only divide Shirk to permitted Shirk and prohibited Shirk. Wahhabi: … 18 - Khariji Implied The Belief Of Ilahiyyah From Actions: Sunni: Today I want to start our discussion by completing point I intended to make [which begins with last sentence of section 12]. You interjected [with comment in the beginning of section 13] and direction was changed but I want to share what I intended to say. Wahhabi: What was the discussion about? Sunni: It is [the contents of sections 12/13 are] bit long but you read while I make a cup of tea. I am back. Wahhabi: Still bit to go but I got gist of it so you can make your point. Sunni: Consider the following content as continuation of from where I left: In this verse the word Dua has been used to mean calling in general sense and not in sense of worship. Sunni: So [in conclusion] Calling can be worship and can be just a call and both are determined by creed and intention. Suppose XMan believes one whom he/she is calling is an Ilah/Deity (i.e. worthy of worship) and intends to worship then calling of that deity is worship. IF one does not believe one who he is calling is an Ilah and does not intend to worship the Ilah then calling is not worship. Yet you believe calling upon a dead servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is automatically worship even if the person does not believe the one being called is an Ilah (i.e. worthy of worship) nor one intends to worship with the call of help. Wahhabi: IF one does not believe a dead person to be a God/Ilah (i.e. worthy of worship) and a Rabb partner besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then why would they call the dead person for help! 19 - Judging Creed By Affirmation Of Tongue Or Actions: Sunni: One calls the dead Wali of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for help in time of difficulty on the basis of this you deduced it must be that they believe in the deceased Wali Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to be an Ilah and Rabb? Wahhabi: It is so obvious. Sunni: What is so obvious? Wahhabi: That they take the deceased Wali to be Ilah like the polytheists took their Awliyah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as deities. Sunni: So you judge the creed based on the actions and not the actions based on the creed? Wahhabi: I judge based on the creed. Those who invoke others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) do so believing their Awliyah are deities besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Sunni: Bear with me for a little while, while I establish your inconsistencies. Sunni: First of all, Muslims call the deceased Awliyah-Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for help because the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed; to ask help from the servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Therefore your saying; asking the deceased Awliyah-Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) can be for no other reason than taking Ilah/Rabb is absolutely Batil (i.e. false). We the Muslims do not take the Awliyah as Ilahs/Rabbs besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) neither we believe worship of them is permissible, nor we worship them. Coming to your claim that you judge creed of Tawheed based on creed but before I get to that stage I have to ask some questions. 20 - Judging Creed By Actions And Not By Tongue: Sunni: My creed do you know or I know? Wahhabi: You really know what you believe. I only know about your creed due to what you tell me. Sunni: Thank you! Do you have knowledge of Ghayb? Wahhabi: Now you are being ridiculous! Sunni: You agree you don’t have knowledge of Ghayb? Wahhabi: No. I don’t. I don’t see how this is related to the discussion. Sunni: Brother bear with me, I see it is related to discussion. You don’t have knowledge of Ghayb so you cannot know the Ghayb, the creed in my heart. You only know of my creed what I tell you. So when I declare to you; I do not believe in a Deity other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and I believe none has the right to be worshiped except for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), then why do you not believe me that this is indeed my creed? Wahhabi: You act contrary to what you claim to believe. On the basis of this I am forced to reject what you declare to me. Sunni: Which action is contrary to my belief? Wahhabi: Well, you invoke the dead for help, this indicates you take the deceased Wali to be an Ilah (i.e. worthy of worship), and hence your call of help is interpreted to mean worship. Sunni: Thank you very much! You have established that you judge creed based on actions and not based on what tongue affirms. Yet in Islam what the tongue affirms and what one state’s with his tongue is considered his belief. 21 - Actions Do Not Reflect The Creed Of Person: Sunni: It is recorded Hadith in which it is recorded a companion killed a person who had recited the Shahadah but the companion had killed him despite this. He made assumption that the person has pretended his conversion to Islam. He informed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about what he has done and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) repeatedly said to him, you killed him when he said; there is no god but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? He repeated this question so many times until the companion felt so ashamed of himself that he wished he had not accepted Islam before that day. Wahhabi: I don’t know any Hadith of this type. Sunni: "It is narrated on the authority of Usama b. Zaid that the Messenger of Allah sent us in a raiding party. We raided Huraqat of Juhaina in the morning. I caught hold of a man and he said: There is no god but Allah, I attacked him with a spear. It once occurred to me and I talked about it to the Apostle. The Messenger of Allah said: Did he profess" There is no god but Allah," and even then you killed him? I said: Messenger of Allah, he made a profession of it out of the fear of the weapon. He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Did you tear his heart in order to find out whether it had professed or not? And he went on repeating it to me till I wished I had embraced Islam that day. Sa'd said: By Allah …" [Ref: Muslim, B1, H176, here.] Sunni: In Islam the belief is what the tongue affirms and unless there is no clear, explicit evidence which establishes contrary to what the person claims you cannot negate the belief of a Muslim based on actions. You invalidated my belief based on pure speculative knowledge. You believe one can only seek aid for the deceased Wali if he believes the Wali is an Ilah. Sunni: In Islam an action is not proof of what person believes but you do believe action is proof of what one believes. Muslim drinks alcoholic beverages. What do we assume about him and his creed? I will assume he is sinful Muslim and those who have good nature of giving benefit of doubt will assume, maybe he doesn’t know about it being haram. Sunni: We don’t automatically assume he considers these alcoholic drinks as Halal according to clear, explicit teaching of Qur’an and Hadith. Do we? Of course we do not make such assumptions. We know the actions do not reflect the creed of person. We cannot invent reasons based on dubious speculation, reasoning, and then attribute invented creed to an individual who categorically rejects it. Sunni: XMan faces Kabah, intends to worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), prostrates in the direction of Kabah, obviously he is worshiping the Kabah because y believes Kabah is representation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Or XMan is a Muslim, he was seen in going to a pub, in the pub he was seen holding a pint of beer, he was seen drinking the beer, he believes beer is Halal according to the teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Or XMan knows the beer is Haram but XMan believes he is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in the flesh. Thus possesses the authority to abrogate all injunctions of Qur’an and Hadith. Do make such assumptions on regarding creed of Muslims? You don’t do this ordinarily but Istighathah you have made exception. Sunni: Your methodology of invalidating creed of Muslims based on their actions due to your dubious speculations is evidence of nothing less than your heretical ways. We have no authority to invent creed of people based on their actions, then attribute to them, and force them to accept it. We simply cannot weave a sectarian perspective around an action and creed of person and then take that invented sectarian perspective to be the gospel truth. 22 - I Say You Are An Anthropomorphist: Sunni: I want to ask you a question. Do you believe that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) possesses a Hand? Wahhabi: Yes, He does have a Hand but Hand of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is nothing like His creation. Hand of Allah is Haqiqi (i.e. literal) and not as Asharis claim that hand of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is metaphorical expression. Sunni: Do you believe in Yad of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or do you believe in Hand of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wahhabi: Yad is Arabic for hand. Sunni: Yes, I am familiar with Yad being English equivalent of Hand but I was insinuating do you relegate the Yad or Hand? Wahhabi: Well Yad means Hand so I relegate the meaning of Hand. Wahhabi: You believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) in His image. Is this what you believe? Sunni: Yes the Hadith attests to this so I believe it. Sunni: This tells me that you believe the Hand of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is like the hand of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created him in His image. Is this correct deduction of your creed my brother? Wahhabi: I have already stated I do not believe in the Hand of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being anything like His creation. Instead I believe meaning of Yad is known but the interpretation isn’t known. This phrase is from the ambiguous verses of Qur’an whose meaning only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only knows. Also the image and form of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is not like Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam). He is nothing like His creation. Sunni: Brother, you believe Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) was created in the image of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This indicates you believe in human-ness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Yet you say the image of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) is not like Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). What I deduce is that you believe in human-ness, Adami-ness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but you are concealing your polytheistic belief. Sunni: Brother what I deduced is not your creed regarding this subject? Wahhabi: No. Sunni: Even though I justly deduced a conclusion from what you stated. Yet you have rejected it and you have indirectly stated that you do not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) possessing hand like hand with four fingers, one thumb, nails, bones, muscle, skin, veins, arteries and blood. Would I be justified IF I charge you of Kufr on account that you attribute a human male hand to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Wahhabi: Well how is your Takfir justified when I do not believe in what you are attributing to me. Sunni: You are saying my deduction is incorrect? Wahhabi: Of course it is Batil (i.e. falsehood). Sunni: Why is it invalid? Wahhabi: Your deduction is based on false interpretation of Hadith. You have made assumption, words his image, mean His image, and not his image i.e. image of Adam (alayhis salam). Sunni: That is interpretation of Ahlus Sunnah Jammah. The Ashari and Maturidi scholarship explained the Hadith in this way. Wahhabi scholarship actually holds it is His image i.e. in image of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but His image is unique to Him and not like His creation and His image is in accordance with Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Majesty. Wahhabi: IF you can cite a reliable source I will reconsider. Sunni: I don’t want you to reconsider your understanding of Hadith so I am dropping the subject. I rather be a liar [by not quoting evidence of my claim] then become a party in your misguidance. Wahhabi: I rest my case. Sunni: Here you go, here. I will return to the real issue. 23 - Drawing Result From Exchange: Sunni: Should I abandon my investigated position because you deny what was deduced? Wahhabi: I certainly do not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) having male hand therefore it makes no difference to me so you can do as you please. Sunni: Brother, you attributed to Muslims that they take the Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Ilahs besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). We have categorically been refuting and rejecting this charge but you have consistently stated we the Muslims take the Awliyah-Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Ilahs besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and charged that we worship them. Sunni: I have attempted to explain that the actions of people are not evidence of what they believe; rather their creed is what they affirm with tongue and believe in heart. You, on other hand have warped methodology of determining what a Muslim believes. You judge belief by looking at action - in this context from action of Istighathah. Just as what I attribute to you regarding Yad of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) cannot be what you actually believe about the Yad of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In the same manner, what you falsely attribute to us Muslims regarding us taking Awliyah-Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Ilahs besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) cannot be true representation of our creed. Its value is nothing but a Khariji sectarian narrative weaved around an innocent action until it becomes repugnant little monster of Shirk. We the Muslims do not judge the creed of Muslims from their actions this was the methodology of the Khawarij. We believe the creed of Muslim is based on iqrarum bil lisaani wa tasdeequm bil qalb (i.e. affirmation with tongue and confirmation from heart). 24 – Why Stance Against Istighathah Justified, Why We Not Anthropomorphist’s: Wahhabi: Asharis and Maturidis charge that we Salafis are branch of anthropomorphist sects Hashawiyyah, and Karamiyyah [popularly referred to as Mujassimah, Mushabbihah]. We have nothing common with Hashawiyyah, or Karamiyyah because we do not believe in corporeality of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) where has both these sects did. We assign to Him attributes which are in accordance with His Majesty. We say nothing more than what Quran/Hadith record about His attributes and we do not say anything less than what is recorded Quran/Hadith. Wahhabi: Content omitted … Wahhabi: You keep saying that Barelwis/Sufis don’t believe Awliyah are Ilahs/deities but truth is to engage in worship of creation warrants affirmation of belief in Uluhiyyah by default. Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah which you call Tawheed al-Ilahiyyah is to worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Shirk al-Uluhiyyah is to worship others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Part of worship is Dua because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said supplication is worship. Istighathah is supplication to others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by its very nature therefore it is worship of others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wahhabi: Had you thought about it you would have realized that believing in Tawheed/Shirk Uluhiyyah is same engaging in worship. This is why we don’t make distinction between belief and worship. You’re unaware of proper understanding and definition of Tawheed/Shirk Uluhiyyah. We judge you Mushrik due to practice of Istighathah on basis correct and proper understanding of Tawheed/Shirk al-Uluhiyyah. Sunni: Wama alayna ilal balagh ul-mubeen. 25 - Incident Of Bani Jadhima Narrated In Ahadith: Wahhabi: Earlier you made the point [in section 23] that creed is what tongue professes and what heart confirms. This is not true. Actions which contradict Tawheed (such as Istighathah) have to be judged on the apparent. Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) killed a members of Bani Jadhima because they openly did not profess Islam by saying, aslamna (i.e. we submitted to Allah in Islam), instead they said, saba’na (i.e. we change our religion) so this action was contrary to norm of accepting Islam and against command issued by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “The Bedouins say: "We believe." Say: "You believe not but you only say, 'We have surrendered (in Islam),' for Faith has not yet entered your hearts. But if you obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not decrease anything in reward for your deeds. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." [Ref: 49:14] He therefore took their words as denial of accepting Islam even though they seemed to be professing Islam and ordered them to be killed. Similarly those who profess Islam but they act contrary to teaching of Islam we have right to judge them to be disbelievers like Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) doubted the conversion of members of Bani Jadhima. Sunni: I am not aware of the incident you’re referring to. Can you provide referrence? Wahhabi: Sure. You will have to wait a bit. Sunni: Not an issue. Wahhabi: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam)," but they started saying "Saba'na! Saba'na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another)." Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H628, here.] Sunni: That is strange Hadith because killing captives is not allowed especially when they seem to be professing conversion to Islam. It contradicts prophetic guidance indicated here: "It is narrated on the authority of Usama b. Zaid that the Messenger of Allah sent us in a raiding party. We raided Huraqat of Juhaina in the morning. I caught hold of a man and he said: There is no god but Allah, I attacked him with a spear. It once occurred to me and I talked about it to the Apostle. The Messenger of Allah said: Did he profess" There is no god but Allah," and even then you killed him? I said: Messenger of Allah, he made a profession of it out of the fear of the weapon. He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Did you tear his heart in order to find out whether it had professed or not? And he went on repeating it to me till I wished I had embraced Islam that day. Sa'd said: By Allah …" [Ref: Muslim, B1, H176, here.] We simply have no right to kill anyone who professes Islam, or seems to attest Islam. I will need time to investigate Sanad of this Hadith and look for other versions to see they shed light onto the incident. I will get back to you with regards to Hadith of Banu Jadhima after investigating event narrated. 26 - Investigating To Determine Intentions And Motives Of Wahhabi: Sunni: How did you encounter this Hadith? Wahhabi: I discussed with a brother on issue of permissibility/impermissibility of killing captives and he quoted this Hadith reason Islam allows killing of captives. Sunni: Brother Islam does allow killing of captives in certain conditions this is not a disputed issue. Killing is allowed IF a captive has committed action before/after capture which warrants Shar’ri capital punishment. Had indiscriminate killing been part of Islam than day of conquest of Makkah would have meant blood bath and slaughter of entire population of Makkah. What we saw is greatest act of zero-retribution upon people who had inflicted senseless violence upon Muslims. What inspired this discussion Wahhabi: Discussion I had brother was in regards to killing captives even if they haven’t committed any crime. He quoted this Hadith in an attempt to justify this stance. Discussion started because of Syrians rising against Assad’s regime. Sunni: Have you read the entire Hadith record incident of Banu Jadhima? Wahhabi: I haven’t but isn’t what I quoted entire Hadith? Sunni: It isn’t. Reason I asked you how you became aware of this Hadith is because I suspected you deliberately concealed the contents but your contextualization how you encountered reveals you wasn’t. Wahhabi: Wallahi bro I did not conceal anything and passed on what came to me. Sunni: I believe you brother but you should have checked the referrence. IF you recall you quoted [in section 25] this Hadith: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam)," but they started saying "Saba'na! Saba'na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another)." Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H628, here.] You reasoned since the members of Banu Jadhima did not properly profess conversion to Islam and acted against teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) their claim to Islam was rejected by Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and thus he ordered them killed. You went on to say: “Similarly those who profess Islam but they act contrary to teaching of Islam we have right to judge them to be disbelievers like Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) doubted the conversion of members of Bani Jadhima.” Sorry I had pre-written this content to reduce the wait. Wahhabi: Not to worry bro. 27 - Establishing Wahhabi’s Understanding Based On Selected Portion: Sunni: Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) indeed carried out the killings and did not accept their conversion to Islam but in the same Hadith, when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was informed of his actions Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did say: "O “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam)," but they started saying "Saba'na! Saba'na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another)." Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive. I said, "By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive." When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet raised both his hands and said twice, "O Allah! I am free from what Khalid has done." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H628, here.] This establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) disapproved of his, attempt of forced conversion, murder of innocent people, and disapproved of his act of discrediting the acceptance of Islam by members of Bani Jadhima. There was and is no compulsion in religion of Islam. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said, la iqra fid-deen (i.e. there is no compulsion in religion) therefore Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) rejected his compulsion. Sunni: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) validated the Islam of persons whom companion [Khalid Ibn Walid radiallah ta’ala anhu] killed. Proving that once words which denote meaning, acceptance of Islam are used by anyone then their Islam is to be accepted. Members of Bani Jadhima did use words which denoted their conversion [but not what verse instructs i.e. Aslamna, we submitted]. There was no reason for the Bedouins to use word Aslamna because the verse quoted by you [in section 25] was instructing the Muslims to use words Aslamna not non-Muslim. The Bedouins were non-Muslims to expect them to know the instruction of Ayah is way too much. I didn’t even know the verse existed until you quoted it. Therefore Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) disproved the actions of Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Killing of anyone professing Islam is forbidden and therefore Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) rejected his actions. This is not valid evidence of your position because the methodology of judgement employed by Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was rejected by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and is rejected by me also. Wahhabi: … 28 - Three Ahadith Prohibiting Killing Of One Who Professes Tawheed/Islam: Sunni: Earlier in our discussion [section 21 and 25] I quoted following Hadith: "It is narrated on the authority of Usama b. Zaid that the Messenger of Allah sent us in a raiding party. We raided Huraqat of Juhaina in the morning. I caught hold of a man and he said: There is no god but Allah, I attacked him with a spear. It once occurred to me and I talked about it to the Apostle. The Messenger of Allah said: Did he profess" There is no god but Allah," and even then you killed him? I said: Messenger of Allah, he made a profession of it out of the fear of the weapon. He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Did you tear his heart in order to find out whether it had professed or not? And he went on repeating it to me till I wished I had embraced Islam that day. Sa'd said: By Allah …" [Ref: Muslim, B1, H176, here.] The objective was to prove one who professes Islam with his tongue his claim is to be upheld even IF it seems his conversion to Islam is due to ulterior motives. We are commanded to accord him same rights and provide same as other Muslims. I want to share some more content with you in this regard if that is OK with you. Wahhabi: IF it is something you want to say than I rather not hear it. Sunni: I won’t add much but the Ahadith are important to our discussion so I would rather share. Wahhabi: OK. Sunni: “It was narrated that An-Nu'man bin Bashir said: "We were with the Messenger of Allah [SAW] and a man came and whispered to him. He said: 'Kill him.' Then he said: 'Does he bear witness to, there is none worthy of worship except Allah?' He said: 'Yes, but he is only saying it to protect himself.' The Messenger of Allah said: 'Do not kill him, for I have been commanded to fight the people until they say there is none worthy of worship except Allah, and if they say it, their blood and their wealth are safe from me, except for a right that is due, and their reckoning will be with Allah.'” [Ref: Nisaee, B37, H3984, here.] Sunni: “They (Azraqi Kharijis) said: ‘Did you (really) hear it from the Messenger of Allah?’ He (Imran Bin Hussain) said: ‘Yes. I was with the Messenger of Allah and he had sent an army of the Muslims to the idolaters. When they met them they fought them fiercely, and they (the idolaters) gave them their shoulders (i.e., turned and fled). A man among my kin attacked an idolater man with a spear, and when he was defeated he said: “I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, I am a Muslim.” But he stabbed him and killed him. He came to the Messenger of Allah and said: “O Messenger of Allah, I am doomed.” He said one or two times, “What is it that you have done?” He told him what he had done. The Messenger of Allah said to him: “Why didn’t you cut open his belly and find out what was in his heart?” He said: “O Messenger of Allah, I wish I had cut open his belly and could have known what was in his heart.” He (Messenger of Allah) said: “You did not accept what he said, and you could not have known what was in his heart!” The Messenger of Allah remained silent concerning him (that man), and a short while later he died. We buried him, but the following morning he was on the surface of the earth. They said: “Perhaps an enemy of his disinterred him.” So we buried him (again) and told our slaves to stand guard. But the following morning he was on the surface of the earth again then we said: ‘Perhaps the slaves dozed off.’ So we buried him (again) and stood guard ourselves, but the following morning he was on the surface of the earth (again). So we threw him into one of these mountain passes.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3930, here.] Sunni: “There got up a man with sunken eyes, raised cheek bones, raised forehead, a thick beard, a shaven head and a waist sheet that was tucked up and he said, "O Allah's Messenger! Be afraid of Allah." The Prophet said, "Woe to you! Am I not of all the people of the earth the most entitled to fear Allah?" Then that man went away. Khalid bin Al-Walid said, "O Allah's Messenger! Shall I chop his neck off?" The Prophet said, "No, for he may offer prayers." Khalid said, "Numerous are those who offer prayers and say by their tongues (i.e. mouths) what is not in their hearts." Allah's Messenger said, "I have not been ordered (by Allah) to search the hearts of the people or cut open their bellies." Then the Prophet looked at him (i.e. that man) while the latter was going away and said, "From the offspring of this (man there will come out (people) who will recite the ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H638, here.] Sunni: These Ahadith establish once someone professes Islam either by saying I am Muslim, or by saying there is none worthy of worship except Allah, or by performing Salah than we have no right to harm him. His life, property, and dignity including of his wives, and daughters is protected under Islam. Wahhabis on other hand totally disregard the teaching of these Ahadith and consequence is that Muslims were/are being killed with total disregard injunctions of Shari’ah. 29 - Wahhabi To Me, You’re Concealing Part Of Hadith, It Refutes Propaganda: Wahhabi: You only quoted selected portion second Hadith. Why didn’t you quote all of it? Sunni: Because I didn’t need entire Hadith and because the point I was making was found in quoted part. It is for the same reason I didn’t quote the third Hadith in full. Wahhabi: You concealed that part of Hadith because it quoted Ayah which exposes your propaganda against Salafiyyah. I will quote the Ayah and then the Hadith. Sunni: Quote the Hadith first and then the Ayah which you allege I concealed. I am waiting. Wahhabi: “It was narrated from Sumait bin Sumair, that ‘Imran bin Husain said: “(The leader of Azraqi Kharijis) Nafi Bin Azraq and his (Khariji) companions came. And said: ‘You are doomed, O Imran!’ He (Imran) said: ‘I am not doomed.’ They said: ‘Yes you are.’ I said: ‘Why am I doomed?’ They said: ‘Allah says: “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah, and the religion will be all for Allah Alone.” (Q8:39) He (Imran Bin Hussain) said: ‘We fought them (the Mushrikeen of Arabia) until they were defeated and the religion was all for Allah Alone. If you wish, I will tell you a Hadith that I heard from the Messenger of Allah.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3930, here.] “And fight them (the Mushrikeen of Arabia) until there is no more Fitnah, and the religion will be all for Allah Alone.” [Ref: 8:39] Sunni: What is your point on this part of Hadith/Ayah? Why was I concealing it? It has to have some kind of detrimental effect on Sunni position due to which I must have concealed and it must somehow prove something you believe. Wahhabi: Sufi Arabs were engaged in same practices of major Shirk which Barelwis are taking part in. The Ayah establishes killing of non-Muslims is allowed until there is no more Fitnah. Fitnah in this Ayah is referrence to Shirk. Hence fighting Mushrikeen is allowed until they become Muslim. Jihad waged Shaykh ul-Islam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab waged against Shirk was justified and we don’t care who he killed as long as they were Mushrikeen. Sunni: I need to do some research on the verse and I will come back to you after I am ready. Wahhabi: You haven’t heard of this verse before and you claim you were Salafi. Sunni: In the Ayah Fitnah means oppression, fighting/war, Shirk/Kufr, tribulation, rebellion. These are five valid interpretations of this verse I am aware and each I can backup with evidences of Quran/Hadith but I need to get them which is time consuming. You haven’t thought about the content of Hadith and how it restricts application of Ayah you quoted. Hadith actually has checkmated your argument but I will get to that later. 30 - Demonstrating Fitnah Means Fighting/War, Oppression And Shirk/Kufr: Sunni: You quoted following verse to justify the killings of Muslims by Wahhabis: “And fight them until there is no Fitnah and (until) the religion, all of it, is for Allah. And if they cease then indeed, Allah is seeing what they do.” [Ref: 8:39] You argued killing of Mushrikeen is permitted until they are upon Shirk. I and my kind are Mushriks hence killing was justified. Sunni: It has been a week so I want to make sure you remember you said this. Wahhabi: I do remember. Sunni: I will begin with presenting you an overall view of how exact variation of word Fitnah was used in the Quran, Fitnatun. Wahhabi: Please don’t turn it into an essay. Sunni: Same as above verse is repeated in the following in verse Q2:193 and in both places Fitnah is used in meaning of; fight, Shirk/Kufr, oppression. Fitnah has also been used in of tribulation and trial in following verses, Q5:71, Q8:28, Q24:63, and Q39:49. In the following verse 8:73 word Fitnah is used as a synonym of word Fasad (i.e. tyranny, corruption). Sunni: Here is a contextual analysis of verse based on what preceded verse 39. I wrote it in advance so you don’t have to wait around. Sunni: (i) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reveals Fitnah Mushrikeen are engaged in: “Indeed, those who disbelieve spend their wealth to avert (people) from the way of Allah. So they will spend it; then it will be for them (source of) regret; then they will be overcome. And those who have disbelieved - unto Hell they will be gathered.” [Ref: 8:36] Mushrikeen spent their wealth to prevent people from converting to Islam and to turn the Muslims away from Islam. In response to their Fitnah Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “And fight them until there is no Fitnah and (until) the religion, all of it, is for Allah. And if they cease then indeed, Allah is seeing what they do.” [Ref: 8:39] Sunni: (ii) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “Say to those who have disbelieved (that) if they cease, what has previously occurred will be forgiven for them. But if they return (to hostility) then the precedent of the former (rebellious) peoples has already taken place.” [Ref: 8:38] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said there will be forgiveness for Mushrikeen. Just abstaining from fighting Muslims doesn’t warrant forgiveness that will bind the Muslims to stop fighting them. Yet the verse says, stop, will earn them forgiveness and that can only be granted on condition of acceptance of Islam and rejection of Shirk. Hence the Ayah is saying IF the Mushrikeen end their fighting, repent and accept Islam there will be forgiveness for them but IF they don’t than instruction is: “And fight them until there is no Fitnah (fight) and (until) the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” [Ref: 8:39] “And fight them until there is no Fitnah (Shirk) and (until) the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” [Ref: 8:39] 31 - Commentators Of Quran And Meaning Of Fitnah: Wahhabi: I don’t want to know what you have to say on this verse but what the Salaf and mainstream scholarship has said about this verse. Plus none of this refutes what I had argued. Instead your second Tafsir validates my position and provides legitimacy to actions of Shaykh ul-Islam. Sunni: Why do I need to quote you content which is readily available to you online? Brother you can do that in your own time. Wahhabi: Anything you say on these verses has no value to me so I rather pursue content of scholars whose content I value. Wahhabi: You can read the Tafsir of Shaykh Ibn Kathir: “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah....'' Ibn Umar said: "We did that during the time of the Messenger of Allah, when Islam was weak and the man would be tried in religion, either tormented to death or being imprisoned. When Islam became stronger and widespread, there was no more Fitnah.'' […] Sa`id bin Jubayr said, "Ibn `Umar came to us and was asked, "What do you say about fighting during Fitnah'' Ibn `Umar said, "Do you know what Fitnah refers to Muhammad fighting against the idolaters, and at that time, attending (or residing with) the idolaters was a Fitnah (trial in religion). It is nothing like what you are doing, fighting to gain leadership!'' […] Ad-Dahhak reported that Ibn `Abbas said about the Ayah: “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah ...” It means: "So that there is no more Shirk.'' Similar was said by Abu Al-Aliyah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ar-Rabi bin Anas, As-Suddi, Muqatil bin Hayyan and Zayd bin Aslam. Muhammad bin Ishaq said that he was informed from Az-Zuhri, from Urwah bin Az-Zubayr and other scholars: “… until there is no more Fitnah.” The Fitnah mentioned here means, until no Muslim is persecuted so that he abandons his religion.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q8:39, here.] Sunni: Shaykh Ibn Kathir has explained word Fitnah is used in meaning of persecution, oppression, Shirk, and war. You haven’t read it or IF you have only part that interested your views. Wahhabi: I genuinely believed Fitnah in the verse is exclusively about Shirk. Sunni: “And fight them …” Meaning: The disbelievers of Mecca. “… until Fitnah …” Meaning: Disbelief, idolatry, idol worship and fighting against Muhammad in the Sacred Precinct. “… is no more, and religion …” Meaning: In the Sacred Precinct as well as worship (is all for Allah) such that none remains except the Religion of Islam. “But if they cease …” Meaning: Disbelief, idolatry, idol worship and fighting the Prophet. “… then lo! Allah is Seer of what they do.” of good and evil.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Abbas, 8:39, here.] According to Tafsir Ibn Abbas Fitnah is inclusive of, idolatry, idol-worship, and fighting against Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in Masjid al-Haram. Sunni: “And fight them until sedition, idolatry exists no more and religion is all for God alone none other being worshipped; then if they desist from unbelief surely God sees what they do and will requite them for it.” [Ref: Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Q8:39, here.] According to Tafsir of two Jalal’s Fitnah means idolatry and rebellion/sedition. 32 - Fighting Due To Fitnah, Demonstrating Set Limits By Allah And Messenger: Sunni: Your argument, Arabs during Shaykh al-Najd’s time were guilty of major Shirk therefore killing them due Shirk was allowed until they repented, was actually refuted in Tafsir (ii). Wahhabi: I don’t understand how you can say that the verse supports your view point. Sunni: I have wider perspective on the Ayah and belief that Quran is Jawami al-Kalim. Wahhabi: Maybe but meanings you’re deducing are not in the Ayah. Sunni: My understanding is part of Ayah but you cannot grasp it so instead let me deal with it in light of Hadith I have mentioned. I will first paste what I wrote earlier. Sunni: (i) It is recorded: “The Messenger of Allah said: 'Do not kill him, for I have been commanded to fight the people until they say there is none worthy of worship except Allah, and if they say it, their blood and their wealth are safe from me, except for a right that is due, and their reckoning will be with Allah.'” [Ref: Nisaee, B37, H3984, here.] This Hadith is proof of no fighting/killing of a person who has professed and demonstrated his Islam. Islam of Dhul Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi was known this was why his killing was disallowed even though insulting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Kufr and warrants capital punishment but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not invalidate his Islam due to an action. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stopped Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) because of Ayah: “And fight them until there is no Fitnah and (until) the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” [Ref: 8:39] Sunni: (ii) Following Hadith establishes that war against non-Muslims is allowed until they are upon Fitnah i.e. Fighting and Shirk/Kufr: “The Messenger of Allah said: Did he profess" There is no god but Allah," and even then you killed him? I said: Messenger of Allah, he made a profession of it out of the fear of the weapon. He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Did you tear his heart in order to find out whether it had professed or not? And he went on repeating it to me till I wished I had embraced Islam that day. Sa'd said: By Allah …" [Ref: Muslim, B1, H176, here.] Killed man had stopped fighting and this warranted end of all violence planned against him. He also professed, there is no Ilah except Allah, and this was another reason violence against should have stopped because he had entered in protection of Islam. Hence killing anyone one who enters Islam even in pretend isn’t allowed because of Ayah: “And fight them until there is no Fitnah and (until) the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” [Ref: 8:39] Sunni: I have more to say, a lot more to say to be honest so permit to write it in your absence. Wahhabi: Bro you made rule that answers won’t exceed five lines yourself and now you’re changing it. Sunni: It is solely needed. Please. Wahhabi: OK. 33 - Exposing Carnage Wahhabis Imposed On Muslims: Sunni: This establishes killing anyone who professes I am Muslim, or recites Shahadatayn, or performs Salah isn’t allowed. The Ahadith I quoted above demonstrated that one who recited Shahadah even in pretend due to fear of being killed has entered into protection offered by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In one Hadith even act of pick up arms against Muslims expels from being part of best of Ummah in mankind: “It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever bears weapons against us is not one of us.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B20, H2575, here.] Yet your theological ancestors unsheathed their swords, aimed their arrows, pointed their British rifles and canons against Muslims and killed them. In another Hadith it is recorded Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) expressly said one who kills righteous and zealous practitioners of Islam is not from amongst us:"... and whosoever from my followers attacks my followers (indiscriminately) killing the righteous and the wicked of them, sparing not (even) those staunch in faith and fulfilling not his obligation towards them who have been given a pledge (of security), is not from me (i.e. is not my follower)." [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4557, here.] What did the Wahhabis do? Killed all Muslims indiscriminately and didn’t spare even on account of Shahadatayn, or Salah, or anything else. Sunni: How lost does one has to be to engage in killing of Muslims, support one who has engaged in killing Muslims and then apply verse revealed regarding Mushrikeen upon Muslims to justify criminal actions? IF you take into account the prohibition of bearing weapons, killing anyone who remotely demonstrates belief in Islam than you would realize this Ayah cannot be applied to Muslims of any sectarian persuasion. Muslims demonstrate their Islam in many more ways than man who professed; there is no Ilah except Allah, under the shadow of falling sword. And if this statement in that context protected his life than … Sunni: … one who lives Islam, pronounces la ilaha il-Allah Muhammadur RasoolAllah, loves Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), performs Salah, gives Zakat, performs Hajj, recites Quran, Fasts in month of Ramadhan, is hurt when Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is insulted, feels the pain of Muslims when they are suffering, slaughters in the name of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), partakes in the festivals of Islam, supplicates to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), preaches Tawheed, prohibits Shirk, performs Tawaf and does way more in peace and security of his home … Sunni: … than what that man uttered under shadow of sword and due to fear of death. Yet your kind will not grant them the security which one statement should have granted. And you apply upon them Hukm of a verse which doesn’t even begin to apply to them because they professed and acted all which prohibits fighting against them. It says: “And fight them until there is no Fitnah and (until) the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” [Ref: 8:39] How can you fight those people who engage so much of Islam and when they have no Fitnah in them to begin with? Any misapprehensions you developed should have been removed by their profession of la ilaha il-Allah and adherence to practices of Islam. Even IF you didn’t believe in Islam of Muslims you should have stopped and considered the prophetic teaching. Yet you and your Wahhabis completely removed the limits of Shari’ah and engaged in slaughter of Muslims and you’re justifying and supporting Shaykh al-Najd. By Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)! You and your kind did not any right to kill us but you did and you will be responsible for it on the judgement day. 34 - Wahhabi Brothers Admission And Fairness: Wahhabi: Why you saying I killed someone? I didn’t kill anyone. Sunni: I didn’t mean actual killing. It is a metaphoric expression mentioned in Hadith. Wahhabi: What Hadith? Sunni: I read it in some Urdu book. Making Takfir of and abusing a Muslim is as IF one has killed them: “Imran Ibn Husain reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If a man declares his brother to be an unbeliever, it is as if he has killed him. Cursing a believer is like killing him.” [Ref: Musnad Bazzar, Vol2, P448, Ha3138, here.] Wahhabi: Quote me the reference of Hadith? Sunni: I am totally blanked with regards to where I read it when I recall I will share it. Wahhabi: Please do share it. It is something important to know. Sunni: I will. Can you comment on what I wrote in response? Wahhabi: I will be honest with you. I am in no position to challenge what you have argued above. This is scholarly level content and only qualified scholar will be able to respond. Sunni: Do you really believe what I wrote can be refuted? Wahhabi: Maybe I don’t believe that but someone might bring Ahadith which might add another dimension to what you wrote. Sunni: Well, n good. 35 - Explaining Hadith Of Azraqi Kharijis, Incident Imran Bin Hussain: Sunni: I still need to address the Hadith which you alleged I concealed the content of. Can I start? Wahhabi: Nothing long brother. Sunni: Azraqiyyah, or Azraqa were a sect of Kharijis and they were the most extreme out of all Khariji sects. They killed all men, women, children, young, old, combatants, and non-combatants, no one was spared. They accused companions of committing major Shirk. Nafi Bin Azraq controlled an area of Iraq called Ahwaz and later they controlled large part of Iran and Iraq. Sunni: The leader of Azraqa and his followers came to the companion: “It was narrated from Sumait bin Sumair, that ‘Imran bin Husain said: “(The leader of Azraqi Kharijis) Nafi Bin Azraq and his (Khariji) companions came. And said: ‘You are doomed, O Imran!’ He (Imran) said: ‘I am not doomed.’ They said: ‘Yes you are.’ I said: ‘Why am I doomed?’ They said: ‘Allah says: “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah, and the religion will be all for Allah Alone.” They said to him that he is doomed indicating they are about kill him due to Shirk. When they cited the verse of Quran trying to justify why killing him is permitted he explained to them how the verse is supposed to be understood: “He (Imran Bin Hussain) said: ‘We fought them (the Mushrikeen of Arabia) until they were defeated and the religion was all for Allah Alone. If you wish, I will tell you a Hadith that I heard from the Messenger of Allah.’ They (Azraqi Kharijis) said: ‘Did you (really) hear it from the Messenger of Allah?’ He (Imran Bin Hussain) said: ‘Yes.” He argued that the verse is not applicable to him because it was with regards to Mushrikeen of Arabia whom he fought against. He then offers to narrate them a Hadith which would refute their understanding of verse and become instrumental in saving his life. Sunni: He narrates: “I was with the Messenger of Allah and he had sent an army of the Muslims to the idolaters. When they met them they fought them fiercely, and they (the idolaters) gave them their shoulders (i.e., turned and fled). A man among my kin attacked an idolater man with a spear, and when he was defeated he said: “I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, I am a Muslim.” But he stabbed him and killed him. He came to the Messenger of Allah and said: “O Messenger of Allah, I am doomed.” He said one or two times, “What is it that you have done?” He told him what he had done. The Messenger of Allah said to him: “Why didn’t you cut open his belly and find out what was in his heart?” He said: “O Messenger of Allah, I wish I had cut open his belly and could have known what was in his heart.” He (Messenger of Allah) said: “You did not accept what he said, and you could not have known what was in his heart!” The Messenger of Allah remained silent concerning him (that man), and a short while later he died. We buried him, but the following morning he was on the surface of the earth. They said: “Perhaps an enemy of his disinterred him.” So we buried him (again) and told our slaves to stand guard. But the following morning he was on the surface of the earth again then we said: ‘Perhaps the slaves dozed off.’ So we buried him (again) and stood guard ourselves, but the following morning he was on the surface of the earth (again). So we threw him into one of these mountain passes.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3930, here.] Sunni: He tells them that a man killed a person who professed Islam just as he was about to be killed but the killer did not stop and killed him despite the words of acceptance of Islam. Killers excuse was that conversion to Islam was just to save his life and killed had no real intentions of becoming Muslims. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was displeased with this killing and accepted no excuse. Killer died sometime after the killing, he was buried but earth rejected his body, and eventually he was thrown in some valley. This narrating Hadith saved life of Imran Ibn Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) because it established to them that IF killing someone who had just accepted Islam outwardly was prohibited and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) punished the killer than killing Imran Ibn Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is way more worse than that because his knowledge, Taqwa, and Islam was established. 36 - Kharijis Apply Verses Revealed For Disbelievers Upon Believers, and Wahhabis: Sunni: Now I have question to ask you. Wahhabi: Sure. Sunni: What did I conceal that was beneficial to you and detrimental to my position? Wahhabi: I can’t even remember what your position was. What was it? Sunni: This discussion on Ahadith started when I argued [in sections 18, 19, 20, 21, 25] belief is what is professed by tongue and confirmed in heart of individual. You argued if actions make belief suspect than belief is rejected and you quoted Hadith of Banu Jadhima. This added another dimension to already discussed point; IF it permissible or impermissible to kill one who professes Islam in anyway. Sunni: I ask again, what did I conceal of Hadith that was helping your cause and refuting mine? Wahhabi: I have nothing to say. Sunni: I left the Ayah out and you applied the Ayah upon us Muslims and justified our killing through it just like Azraqa applied it upon companion Imran Ibn Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and insinuated to him he is about to be killed. Just like him I explained to you that this Ayah is not applicable Muslims. And just like Imran Ibn Hussain’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) explained I explained to you killing one whose Islam is established is worse, way worse that one who converts to Islam under the shadow of falling sword. Imran Ibn Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) established that belief is what is professed by tongue and we have to respect it and proved that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) accepted words of belief uttered with tongue without questioning them. In the same way I established and reasoned what a Muslim professes with his tongue has precedence over what we deduce and his belief is what Muslim professes with his tongue. Sunni: What did I hide that was beneficial to your cause? Sunni: This is the part of Hadith I allegedly concealed: “It was narrated from Sumait bin Sumair, that ‘Imran bin Husain said: “(The leader of Azraqi Kharijis) Nafi Bin Azraq and his (Khariji) companions came. And said: ‘You are doomed, O Imran!’ He (Imran) said: ‘I am not doomed.’ They said: ‘Yes you are.’ I said: ‘Why am I doomed?’ They said: ‘Allah says: “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah, and the religion will be all for Allah Alone. He (Imran Bin Hussain) said: ‘We fought them (the Mushrikeen of Arabia) until they were defeated and the religion was all for Allah Alone. If you wish …” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3930, here.] Looking at the omitted part it is clear that Kharijis applied the verse upon him to argue killing him is permissible because he was upon Fitnah/Shirk. They applied a verse revealed for disbelievers upon a Muslim. Which you shouldn’t be surprised is exactly what Wahhabis have been doing and you just did. Your trait is to apply verses revealed for Mushriks upon Muslims like Azraqa did and following is what Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had to say about you: "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, Book 88, Book Apostates, Chapter 6:Killing al-Khawarij and Mulhideen, here, scribd here.] Sunni: Did I wrong you by omitting it initially or benefit you? I wronged you but not because what you think. I wronged you because I disregarded something which could have been beneficial for you. Wahhabi: May Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reward you for the good. I have to leave. Sunni: Salam Alaykum.

Allah kay ilawa kissi kay leyeh Alim Ul Ghayb ka itlaq jaiz nahin. Magar zameer ko lota kar mafoom nikala ja sakta heh Alim Ul Ghayb zahir nahin karta apna ghayb kissi ek par magar chunay huway rasool par... abh agar ghayb ki zameer ko alim ul ghayb kee taraf lotaya jahay toh phir tarjuma banay ga ... alim ul ghayb zahir nahin karta apna [mansub e aalim ul] ghayb magar chunay huway rasool par ... Kuch is tera ka mafoom Maulana Abdul Tawab Saddeeqi nay Sadiq Kohati kay jawab meh biyan keeya thah ... Magar khadam is ilfaaz aalim ul ghayb ka itlaq rasoolAllah kay leyeh jaiz nahin samajta.

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir Nazir (i.e. hearing/seeing type of Shahid). The opponents of Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not hearing/seeing type of Shahid (i.e. Hadhir Nazir). Commonly held misconception amongst the heretics is that Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir (i.e. present) with body, or soul at every place. Yet the Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir with his body in his heavenly resting place in Madinah Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Due to their misconception the heretics construct various arguments to refute the Qur’anic belief. Objective of this article is to refute one such argument to establish the truth of Islam over falsehood. Anti-Islamic Argument Against The Belief Of Hadhir Nazir: It is recorded in a Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “Let the one who has most knowledge of the Book of Allah lead the people in prayer. If they are equal in terms of knowledge of the Qur'an, let the one who emigrated first (lead them). If they are equal in terms of emigration, let the one who has more knowledge of the Sunnah, (lead them). If they are equal in terms of knowledge of the Sunnah, let the one who is oldest (lead them).” [Ref: Sunan Nisa’i, B10, H781] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is the most knowledgeable of Quran. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is the most prominent immigrant because he has abstained from all Haram (i.e. prohibited).[1] Without doubt he is/was the foremost in knowledge of his Sunnah. The opponents argue, considering the Hadith if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir and Nazir then it is not correct for a Barelwi or any Imam on earth to lead prayers when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is present amongst them. Alternatively if he is not Hadhir Nazir only then leading prayers can be legitimate. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the Muslims to lead prayers hence he is not Hadhir Nazir.[2] The Basis Of This Argument And Its Refutation: The basis of argument against Hadhir Nazir is; out of the present, the one with most knowledge of Quran and Sunnah … should lead the prayers. The argument pre-supposes; the Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir (i.e. present) all over the earth. We Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is present in his heavenly resting place with his body in the city of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Therefore the argument against Hadhir Nazir is by default invalid on this account. The correct understanding of Hadith is; out of the ones present to perform prayers, the one with most knowledge of Quran and Sunnah … should lead the prayers. Two Important Questions On Subject Of Prayers: It would be appropriate to ask, if someone leading prayers in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was to observe it, will the prayers be valid? If someone was leading the prayers and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was to perform the prayers under leadership of one who is inferior to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in knowledge of Quran and prophetic Sunnah, then would the prayers of Imam and the people involved and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) be valid? Note, answer to these two questions is important to explain the objection on Hadhir Nazir. Answering The Two Questions: Answering the first questions, it is recorded in the following Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) saw Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) leading the prayers and he instructed him to complete the prayers: “While Abu Bakr was leading the people in the morning prayer on a Monday, the Prophet came towards them suddenly having lifted the curtain of 'Aisha's house, and looked at them as they were standing in rows and smiled. Abu Bakr tried to come back thinking; Allah's Apostle wanted to come out for the prayer. The attention of the Muslims was diverted from the prayer because they were delighted to see the Prophet. The Prophet waved his hand to them to complete their prayer, then he went back into the room and let down the curtain. The Prophet expired on that very day.” [Ref: Bukhari, B22, H297] If the prayers were invalidated due to presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have informed the companions of it and if it was absolutely compulsory that most senior in knowledge of Quran and Sunnah lead the prayers then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have led the prayers. Answering second question, it is recorded in Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed prayer under leadership of companion: “… went to push his hands out of the sleeves of his garment, but could not do so because of their narrowness. So he brought them out from underneath his garment. Then he washed his arms, wiped his head and wiped over his leather socks. The Messenger of Allah returned and Abdar Rahman ibn Awf was leading the people in prayer, and he had already finished one Rakah with them. The Messenger of Allah prayed the remaining Rakah with them to everyone's concern. When the Messenger of Allah finished he said, 'You have acted correctly.'" [Ref: M.I.Malik, B2, H42] Hadhrat Abdur Rahman Ibn Awf (radiallah ta’ala anhu) leading the prayers and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing it under his leadership, did this effect the prayers of companions or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Refutation Of Argument Against Hadhir Nazir: The anti-Islamic elements argument is based on the following principle: out of present the one most knowledgeable should lead the prayers. Yet the Imams of Muslims lead prayers in Masajid (i.e. Mosques) so Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not Hadhir Nazir. If he was Hadhir Nazir then Muslims would not lead prayers but follow the prayers lead by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). We say, when it is established the prayer was led by a companion and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed prayer under his leadership. Also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) leading the prayer. Yet the prayers were not affected in anyway nor it became compulsory for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to lead the prayers, nor did this negatively affected the status of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then how can the belief of Hadhir Nazir be negated/refuted or even challenged with this anti-Hadhir Nazir argument? And this argument does not pose a valid challenge, nor it can negate, or refute the belief of Hadhir Nazir and one who believes contrary to this is ignorant of true teaching of Islam. Refuting Anti Hadhir Nazir Argument With Rule Of Leading Prayers: Being Hadhir (i.e. present), did and does, not necessitate the one Hadhir with most knowledge of Quran and prophetic Sunnah should lead the prayers. Rather one most knowledgeable about Quran and Sunnah should lead the congregation in prayers if he desires to worship with others but if he chooses to not to take part in prayers then most senior in knowledge from congregation should lead the prayers. We have example of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) who saw Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) lead the prayers but did not remove him from leadership nor told them that it was right of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to lead the prayers because he was the most knowledgeable of Quran and prophetic Sunnah. Instead allowed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to complete the prayers because Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was part of congregation performing prayers and he was the most knowledgeable of Quran and Sunnah. Note this establishes the position of Muslims that, out of ones present to perform prayers, the most knowledgeable should be leading prayers. And we the Muslims appoint the most knowledgeable one from amongst us as an Imam to lead us in prayer. Hence the principle, on which the argument of anti-Islamic element is invalid and the argument based upon it does not apply to Hadhir Nazir because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not present all over the earth. The Islamic principle is applied by Muslims and prophetic Sunnah of appointing most knowledgeable for prayers is adhered to. The True Argument Against Anti-Islamic Element: The argument against Hadhir Nazir is flawed for another reason because it is based on anti-Islamic elements misconception, which leads them to assume that, we Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) body/soul encompasses and permeates universe. We Muslims do not even believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) encompasses the earth or universe spiritually or bodily. Or his soul/body fills the earth/universe as a vessel is filled with water. In other words we do not believe that the soul/body of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fills the earth/universe. Instead our belief is that blessed body of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir in his blessed resting place in Madinah, and his soul is present in his body, and he is alive[3], and from there he sees the actions of mankind/Jinn-kind with powers granted by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is clear that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not Hadhir (i.e. present) upon every part of earth nor this is the belief of Muslims therefore the argument is invalid. The argument does not impact negatively upon the Muslims leading the prayers in congregation throughout the earth nor refutes creed of Hadhir Nazir. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) As A Witness: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) addresses Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) saying: “O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you is from yourself. And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness." [Ref: 4:79] Following Hadith also attests to messenger-ship of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be for entire mankind: “… I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.” [Ref: Muslim B4, H1062] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states, saying to mankind: “Indeed, We have sent to you a Messenger as a witness upon you [mankind] just as We sent to Pharaoh a Messenger.” [Ref: 73:15] Ibn Kathir states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to witness the deeds/actions: “Then addresses the disbelievers of the Quraysh, and along with them the rest of mankind: “Verily, We have sent to you a Messenger to be a witness over you …” Meaning, witnessing your deeds.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 73:15] Witnessing of deeds by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is with seeing/hearing and being present. To be able to witness over deed one must be Hadhir (i.e. present) and Nazir (i.e. seeing). Without these two fundamental qualities one cannot be termed as a witness. Witnessing Of Deeds Is Of Two Types: Firstly, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) himself is sent as a witness, to mankind, to witness their deeds: “O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] His witnessing is connected with being sent and he was sent as a Prophet and Bashr (i.e. human) therefore the witnessing is of eyes/hearing. In his life time he saw with eyes and heard with ears therefore was witness upon actions in real. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and ..." [Ref: 4:79] “Indeed We have sent to you a Messenger as a witness upon you [mankind] just as We sent to Pharaoh a Messenger.” [Ref: 73:15] Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) was sent as a witness to Pharaoh directly to guide him, with ability of hearing and seeing [with host of other abilities] and witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been likened to Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam). This implies, witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) upon mankind is as Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) was hearing and seeing type of witness sent of Pharaoh. Hence the first type of witnessing is of direct hearing and seeing of actions of mankind this includes actions of Muslims and non-Muslims. Following Ahadith are circumstantial evidence of this type of Hadhir Nazir: “Abu Darda said, Rasoolallah said: On Friday recite copious amount of blessings upon me, for that is day of witnessing [actions]. That day angels visit [with deeds of people]. A person does not sends blessings upon me except that his voice reaches me, where ever he maybe. We said: Even after the death? He said: Even after my death. For Allah has prohibited the earth to consume the bodies of Prophets.”[4] “At the time of the Fajr prayer the Prophet asked Bilal: "Tell me of the best deed you did after embracing Islam, for I heard your footsteps in front of me in Paradise." Bilal replied, "I did not do anything worth mentioning except that whenever I performed ablution during the day or night …” [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H250] “Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet led us in a prayer and then got up on the pulpit and said, "In your prayer and bowing, I certainly see you from my back like I see you (while looking at you.)" [Ref: Bukhari, B8, H411] “Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: I happened to pass by Moses as he was busy in saying prayer in his grave, and in the hadith transmitted on the authority of 'Isa there is an addition of these words:, I happened to pass on the occasion of the Night journey." [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5859] “Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: "Once the Prophet, while passing through one of the grave-yards of Medina or Mecca heard the voices of two persons who were being tortured in their graves. The Prophet said, "These two persons are being tortured not for a major sin (to avoid)." Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) continued and informed the companions why they were being punished: “The Prophet then added, "Yes! Indeed, one of them never saved himself from being soiled with his urine while the other used to go about with slanderous statements (to make enmity between friends). The Prophet then asked for a green leaf of a date-palm tree, broke it into two pieces and put one on each grave. On being asked why he had done so, he replied, "I hope that their torture might be lessened, till these get dried." [Ref: Bukhari, B4, H215] Now moving to second type of witnessing of deeds by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Deeds of Muslims are presented to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and following Hadith is evidence of it: “Abu Dharr reported: The Apostle of Allah said: The deeds of my people, good and bad, were presented before me, and I found the removal of something objectionable from the road among their good deeds, and the sputum mucus left unburied in the mosque among their evil deeds.” [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1126] Another Hadith records how Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) reacts to good and bad deeds of his followers: “My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you.” [Ref: Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-‘aliyah, 4: 22-3 # 3853] This establishes the second type of witnessing of deeds is connected with Muslims only and when the deeds are presented to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by angels Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) seeks forgiveness for sinners and praises Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for good deeds of his followers. Conclusion: The Deobandi Aalim did not understand know what the belief of Hadhir Nazir. He assumed like typical Deobandi Maulvis that Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is believed to be Hadhir Nazir by Muslims in meaning of encompassing and permeating earth and due to this misconception presented an argument which does not apply to belief of Hadhir Nazir. We established with evidence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) not only instructed others to lead prayers but performed prayer behind a companion. This did not affect the prayer of Imam, the followers, and did not impact negatively upon the status of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor did this refute the Shahid status of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which established in Quran. If it did not refute station of Shahid for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) at the when he was living amongst then there is no reason to believe it would affect his station of Shahid now. Note Oneness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) cannot be refuted with implied evidence[4] and just like this the belief of Hadhir Nazir cannot be refuted with implied arguments. Always the clear text of Quran will supersede interpretations which are derived from ambiguous text or contradict the obvious text of Quran. Belief of Hadhir Nazir was established from clear text of Quran and Ahadith and as Muslims we believe. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi - [1] “The Prophet said: "A Muslim is the one who avoids harming Muslims with his tongue and hands. And a Muhajir (i.e. emigrant) is the one who gives up all what Allah has forbidden." [Ref: Bukhari, B2, H9] “The Prophet said, "A Muslim is the one who avoids harming Muslims with his tongue or his hands. And a Muhajir is the one who gives up (abandons) all what Allah has forbidden." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H491] - [2] Part One: Recently on basis of this argument against Hadhir Nazir question was directed toward me: Can someone lead prayers in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Being bit more educated then regular Muslims and knowing the back ground of the person questioning me [he was Deobandi Aalim] helped me to put the question in perspective. Upon realizing he will construct argument against the Islamic belief of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being hearing/seeing witness. I answered, during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) led the prayers in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and evidence of this as follows: “... out to lead the prayer. In the meantime the condition of the Prophet improved a bit and he came out with the help of two men one on each side. As if I was observing his legs dragging on the ground owing to the disease. Abu Bakr wanted to retreat but the Prophet beckoned him to remain at his place and the Prophet was brought till he sat beside Abu Bakr." Al A'mash was asked, "Was the Prophet praying and Abu Bakr following him, and were the people following Abu Bakr in that prayer?" Al-A'mash replied in the affirmative with a nod of his head. Abu Muawiya said, "The Prophet was sitting on the left side of Abu Bakr who was praying while standing." [Ref: Bukhari, B11, H633] Following Hadith makes clear that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Imam of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was Imam of companions: “The Prophet sat on his left side. Abu Bakr was praying while standing and Allah's Apostle was leading the prayer while sitting. Abu Bakr was following the Prophet and the people were following Abu Bakr (in the prayer).” [Ref: Bukhari, B11, H681] He questioned, why did he lead the prayers? I responded, it is said; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) appointed him Khalifah by doing so. He responded, yes it was only for purpose of appointing him Khalifah. [Considering his hot-headedness and my zealotry I abandoned the discussion. In short, the permissibility of leading prayers in presence of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam was established from Hadith and his position wasn’t refuting the established permissibility.] Part Two: Ahadith are clear that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not appoint Khalifah and evidence of this is here: “It has been reported on the authority of Ibn 'Umar who said: I entered the apartment of (my sister) Hafsa. She said: Do you know that your father is not going to nominate his Khalifah (i.e. successor)? I said: He won't do that. She said: He is going to do that. The narrator said: I took an oath that I will talk to him about the matter. I kept quiet until the next morning … more serious and grave. (The dying Caliph) was moved at my … God will doubtlessly protect His religion. If I do not nominate a successor; for the Messenger of Allah did not nominate his successor. And if I nominate one, for Abu Bakr did nominate. The narrator (Ibn Umar) said: By God. when he mentioned ...” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4486] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) could have declared that Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is to be his Khalifah and the Sahabah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would have accepted and would have appointed him to be Khalifah. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) even did not deem appropriate to nominate Khalifah. Saying, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would not allow anyone else to be Khalifah instead of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “The Prophet said, "Nay, I should say, 'Oh my head!' I felt like sending for Abu Bakr and his son, and appoint him as my successor lest some people claimed something or some others wished something, but then I said (to myself), 'Allah would not allow it to be otherwise, and the Muslims would prevent it to be otherwise." [Ref: Bukhari, B70, H570] When Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) appointed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) as the Imam of companions in Masjid Nabvi Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) understood that he is being appointed as the Khalifah: "'A'isha, the wife of the Apostle of Allah said: I tried to dissuade the Messenger of Allah from it and my insistence upon it was due to the fact that I entertained apprehension in my mind that the people would not love the man who would occupy his (Prophet's) place (as Caliph) and I feared that the people would be superstitious about one who would occupy his place. I, therefore desired that the Messenger of Allah should leave Abu Bakr aside in this matter." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H835] Considering Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was nearing the end of life on earth, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) strictly enforcing Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to lead the Muslims in prayers, and that too in a Masjid where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) led the prayers, Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) deduced he is the successor of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and this was correct. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) himself did not say Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is leading prayers he is to be Khalifah it was valid understanding of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha). Part Three: Imamat at Masjid Nabvi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not sole purpose of being appointed as Khalifah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to lead the prayers and he led the prayers in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) for number of reasons. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) wished to make clear to companions that he considered Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) most senior in knowledge of Quran, and prophetic Sunnah, and to make clear to them that Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is most righteous amongst them, and to indicate indirectly his desire of appointing Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) as Khalifah. We can add to this list; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) established the permissibility of less capable leading the prayers even when seniors are present. - [3] Body of Prophets do not decay and evidence of it is in the following Hadith: “Aws b. Aws reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: Among the most excellent of your days is Friday; so invoke many blessings on me on that day, for your blessing will be submitted to me. They (the Companions) asked: Messenger of Allah, how can our blessings be submitted to you, when your body has decayed? He said: Allah has prohibited the earth from consuming the bodies of Prophets.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B8, H1526]. Prophets are alive in their graves, following are evidences of this: “Narrated on the authority of Abu Darda: Allah's Messenger said, "Invoke many blessings on me on Friday for it is witnessed. The angels are present on it, and no one will invoke a blessing on me without his blessing being submitted to me till he stops." I asked whether that applied also after his death, and he replied, "Allah has prohibited the Earth from consuming the bodies of the prophets; so Allah's prophet is alive and given provision.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B6, H1637] Life is with body and soul. Absence of soul is death. Hence life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as well as all the Prophets is of life of body. - [4] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) uses plurals for himself such as; We, Us and Our. Christians use these words to argue that Quran supports Trinity. They argue use of plurals indicates Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is compound Unity (i.e. three make One) and not absolute One. Our response to them is, plurals are for majesty and are termed majestic plurals.

Yeh kohi Shaytaan ka bacha laga heh is kism ki fabrication meh. Lagta heh kissi bot hi kameenay banday ki harkat heh. Allah ta'ala is khabees ko taba karay. Jamia Binoria waloon ko is ki khabr karni chahyeh. Mujjay maloom heh kay yeh Deobandiyoon ka madrassa heh magar is ko par kar kohi Deobandi aurat apni izzat kharab kar sakti heh aur zeroori heh kay yeh logh action lenh. Meh nay abhi Jamia Binoria Aalimiyah kay phone number par phone keeya magar kissi nay phone uthaya nahin. England meh abhi 6:15 shaam kay hen, is leyeh bot late ho gahay hen.

Salam alayqum, Woh tashbeeh jis meh ala ko adna jesa tehraya gaya aur is tasbeeh say ala ki shaan meh kami ho, es'si tashbih gustakhana heh. Misaal kay tor par, thanvi kuttay jesa heh, thanvi khazeer jesa heh, thanvi tawahif aur mushrik jesa heh. Yeh ala ko adna say tashbeeh ki ek misaal heh. Abh is meh bi ala ko adna say tasbeeh hogi magar gustakhana tashbeeh nahin hogi. Muhammad Ali Razavi sher [lion ] jesa heh. Muhammad Ali Razavi ghulaab kay phool jesa heh, Muhammed Ali Razavi toh shahid [honey] jesa heh ... meh toh ashraf al makhlooqat hoon, abh meh nay tashbih adna say deeh magar towheen nahin huwi. Mullah Ali Qari alayhi rehma ki ibarat meh agar tashbeeh heh toh yaqeenan shaan e RasoolAllah kay manafi heh aur tawheen kay pehloo say khaali nahin. Reh gahi un ki takfir ki toh woh saddiyoon pehlay fawt huway. Un ka mamla Allah kay supurd ho chooka aur in sha Allah Allah ta'ala nay un kay saad wada hasana kay mutabiq inaam deeya hoga aur un ki khata ko maaf farmaya hoga. Yeh amr muhaal nahin kay kohi sahib e imaan khilaf e adab baat kar deh aur us ki maafi be ho jahay. Allah ta'ala khatahen maaf karnay wala heh. Yeh ussee waqt taq ho sakta heh jab taq khilaf e adab baat likhnay aur bolnay walay ki tawajoh is taraf nah gahi ho. Agar ilm ho jahay toh phir toba lazam heh. Mullah Ali Qari alayhi rehma nay agar waqia hi tashbeeh deeh heh toh agar gustakhi kay pehloo ki taraf tawajoh nah gahi toh khata heh. Jistera khata meh roza kay darmiyan khaa leeya toh gunnah nahin aur roza toota nahin is'see tara khata kalma towheen likh deeya toh kufr waqia nahin hoga. Jin mardoodoon ki dokan towheen o tankees par chalay aur puray firqay ki bunyad towheen o tanqees e RasoolAllah salallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam ho aur is'see ko firogh denh aur gustakhi karnay walay apnay kufr par dat gahay hoon aur un kay mannay walay be issee kufr par datten aur dafa karen khadam esoon ko qattan musalman nahin manta. Thanvi, Gangohi, Nanotavi, Ambethvi, Dehalvi yeh panch kufr kay sattoon jaan booj kar towheen baktay rahay. In ko Ulamah e zamana nay Islam ki talimat ka bataya aur Islam ki taraf bulaya magar in kafiroon nay Islam ko qabool nah keeya aur apnay Kufroon par datta rahay aur uneeh par maray. Allah ta'ala in kafiroon ko firawn o nimrood kay saath uthahay, ameen.

Salam alayqum, Islam meh barabar ki family meh shadi ko tarjeeh heh. Yehni qawm, taleem, Amaal, khoobsoorati, dolat, magar yeh farz nahin. Agar kohi in lehaz say barabar ka rishta nah ho toh joh in lehaz say qareeb tar ho us meh kar lena behtr heh. * Qawm - Apni qawm ya joh aam tor par apni qawm say behtr jaani jaati ho us meh. * Taleem - deen ki . Aaj kal kay schoolon collegoon ki taleem ka kuch pass na hona chahyeh. Yehni rishta deeni taleem par teh hona chahyeh engineering degree par nahin. * Amaal - deen ki talimat kay mutabiq. Aaj kal ki tawahif aur kanjar type siftoon ka malik ho us ko kanjar type larki say shadi karwani chahyeh aur tawahif type larki ko tawahifoon kay shoqeen say. Asal aur bunyadi fazeelat aur aqad ka tayyun deen kay ilm aur amal par hona chahyeh baqi sab jaiz hen. Joh larka/larki naik aur sahib e shariat ho us ki shaadi us kay barabar yehni sahib e deen say karni chahyeh. Aur joh larki/larka bad-chalan hen toh phir us ki us kay barabar. Aur in mamoolat meh apnay aur parahay ka lehaz nahin karna chahyeh, chahay behan beti keun nah ho. Agar khoobsoorat o khoobseerat heh toh phir joh us ka nikkah us kay barabar meh karna chahyeh. Allah ta'ala nay Quran meh farmaya heh: kay momin mard momin aurat kay leyeh, aur khabees mard khabees aurat kay leyeh, aur tayyib mard tayyib aurat kay leyeh, hen ... [24:26

Allah ta'ala in kay ilm o amal, imaan o ishq meh barkat deh aur Ahle Sunnat kay nazriat ko khoob pehlanay kee towfeeq deh, ameen.

Introduction: Sometime ago on a Wahhabi forum someone called Mohammad Ansar was being called as Mo Ansar. Upon googling this person it became apparent his name of Mohammad Ansar and he has shortened his name to Mo. Point was made; it was disrespectful to shorten the name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Wahhabis as always lacking good Adab for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and specializing in insulting and disrespecting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) defended the use of Mo/Moe. Saying there was no disrespect if name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was shortened in such fashion. This article has been written to bring awareness regarding this subject and to prevent Muslims from falling into traps of Iblees. Articles On Subject Of Respecting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Following is short but concise article on insult and disrespect: Introduction To What Constitutes Disrespect Of Prophet & Its Punishment. Another article points out why saying Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is human being like me/us is disrespectful: Disrespecting Prophet By Saying - 'he Is Human Like Me.’ Following is a comprehensive article explaining all aspects in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can be disrespected: Determining Contempt Of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) In Light Of Quran & Hadith. It is strongly recommended these articles are read before continuing. Distorting The Name Of Prophet Muhammad: Distorting the name of an esteemed personality, or distorting it in such fashion that it is being equated to an animal, or ignoble person is disrespectful. When a name is distorted it is always to mock and disrespect the person to whom the name belongs. In Islam everything about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is worthy of respect including his name. His name is his name, even when the name Muhammad has been given to some regular Joe, and its sanctity is inviolable because the name was connected with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The Source Of Heresy And What It Would Lead To: It has been noted Muslims have started to shorten the name of our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to Mo or Moe. This innovation was started by cartoonists whose intention is to insult and disrespect Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by shortening his name to Moe/Mo. Their website hosts cartoons at their website JesusandMo.net. Knowingly or unknowingly Muslims have adopted this usage instead of proper name Muhammad. Animated series Simpsons has a character called Moe. Moe is a bartender with dubious and sleazy character. And shortening the name to Moe is obvious reference to this character. Also the name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is abbreviated to Mohd. Muslims have already evolved to stage where it is becoming common to use Moe, Mo, Mohd for each other. At the present, only the Kafirs use these short versions of name Muhammed while referring to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but sooner or later it will filter down to Muslims. Next step is Satan inciting the use of these insults for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Very likely the liberal, or moderate, or tolerant ‘Muslims’ will be the first one to actually use it and defends its use. You Will Follow The Practices Of Jews And Christians: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said in the following Hadith; the Muslims will follow the practices of Jews and Christians: “Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, "You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure, you would follow them." We said, "O Allah's Messenger! [You mean the] Jews and the Christians?" He said, "Whom else?” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H 422] Hadith states the adherence to following the footsteps of Jews and Christians would be such that you would resemble the Jews and Christians, with little to no difference between you. This Hadith guarantees the distorted forms of name Muhammad will eventually be used by ‘Muslims’ to address Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And these distortions maybe used with intention of mocking him. ‘Muslims’ mocking Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is nothing new because the Munafiqeen (i.e. hypocrites) mocked Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in his life time. Hence as Muslims we should refrain from using these shortened versions as replacement for Muhammad. Distorting The Name Of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “Indeed Allah took the covenant from the Children of Israel (Jews), and We appointed twelve leaders among them. And Allah said: "I am with you if you perform As-Salat and give Zakat and believe in My Messengers; honor and assist them, and lend a good loan to Allah, verily, I will expiate your sins and admit you to Gardens under which rivers flow (in Paradise). But if any of you after this, disbelieved, he has indeed gone astray from the Straight Path." [Ref: 5:12] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states; those who believe in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) honor/respect him and the evidence of it as follows: “Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they believe in him, honor him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him - it is those who will be the successful.” [Ref: 7:157] The name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is to be honored just like he is to be honored. Distorting the name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by shortening it to; Mo, Moe, Mohd is an evil innovation introduced by infidels whose intention is to mock him. Do not follow the footsteps of disbelievers Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “And he who introduces a evil precedent in Islam (i.e. فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً), 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] In another Hadith it is stated: "And whoever introduces erroneous innovation (i.e. بِدْعَةَ) 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] O Muslims, would Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) approve or disapprove of your distortion of name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? When your action of; using Mo/Moe as equivalent of Muhammad is shown to him would he be pleased and praise Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or saddened and seek forgiveness on your behalf? Do not follow the way of disbelievers and distort the name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) there is nothing good in it. And only sin and punishment is added to your account of deeds, therefore leave it. The Ruling Regarding Use Of Mo/Moe Instead Of Muhammad: One who uses Mo/Moe to address a certain Muhammad, be he friend, or foe, or associate, or family member, he is one of those who have followed the evil innovation. The good actions of innovator and those who follow his evil innovation are not accepted until he gives-up the innovation and they will go into fire: “It was narrated that 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Allah refuses to accept the good deeds of one who follows innovation until he gives up that innovation.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H50] “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.” [Ref: Nisa’i, B19, H1579] One who uses Mo/Moe directly for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and then he is guilty of disrespecting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and such person is guilty of Kufr. He should be reproached with correction and encouraged to repent, and some form of punishment should be given such as ten lashes. One who persists upon his usage due to effect of Western thought upon him and defends the usage of Mo, Moe, and Mohd as replacement for Muhammad then such a person is Kafir (i.e. disbeliever). He should be tried in Shar’ri court and upon proving him guilty the capital punishment should be handed. Conclusion: Distorting the name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is a reprehensible innovation. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has instructed the respect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and distorting the name of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is disrespect of the name and indirectly disrespect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Those who choose to use Mo, or Moe, or Mohd while addressing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are guilty of disrespecting him which Kufr and crime in Sharia. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: In his life time Ibn Uthaimeen was one of the leading proponents of Wahhabism/Salafism. As such his writings are esteemed by Wahhabi/Salafi throughout the world. Minions of Iblis utilize his works to base their arguments against Islam. As such it is crucial his point is addressed comprehensively as possible so the Muslims can refute any argument which stems from his work. Note his line of reasoning is similar to Ibn Fawzan’s drivel which was refuted in another article, here. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits knew material will be presented. Statement Of Ibn Uthaimeen: “And you should be amazed at a people who recognize the words of Allah's Messenger (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) are complete, comprehensive and universal, being encompassed by the strongest grammatical particle used to make a noun universal and all-encompassing i.e. qullu (i.e. every): "Beware of the newly-invented matters, for every such matter is a bid'ah and every bid'ah leads astray, and everything that leads astray is in the Fire."[1] And they know that his words: "... every bid'ah ..." And (they know that) the one who used this word he knew what this word indicated and he was the most eloquent of all and he was the sincerest of the creation towards the creation. Hence he would not use a word unless its meaning was that which he intended. Hence (they know that) when the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: “... every bid'ah leads astray ... ". He knew what he was saying and he knew its meaning. And this saying of Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) emanated as a result of complete sincerity and concern for the Ummah. (They know that) when these three characteristics were all present in his words i.e. complete sincerity and good wishes, complete clarity and eloquence, and complete knowledge and understanding. Then it is clear that what he said was what he wanted to say in order to convey his desired meaning. So (you should be amazed, that such a people, after recognizing all this) think that innovation can be of three or five categories? Can this be correct? Never! And what some scholars do claim is that there exists the good innovation. But if this is so, then they can only be referring to two cases: i) that it is not an innovation but they do consider it to be one, ii) it is an innovation, and hence it is something evil, but they do not know of its evil. (And these are the only two possibilities, bearing in mind that the Prophet, (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: "... every bid'ah leads astray ... "[2] Principles Of Making General Into Specific: i) Sometimes word ‘every’ is used (i.e. every one of you can eat …) and then generality of ‘every’ is negated by usage of ‘except’ followed by what is excepted from the generality (i.e. except those who have not washed their hands). ii) Sometimes first statement (i.e. All of you can eat now.) is followed by second statement which serves as exceptive clause even though word ‘except’ has not been employed (i.e. Those who have not washed their hands wash your hands first). iii) Sometimes missing information is added into a statement from another statement. Y says: ‘Every transgression against the Islamic law is a sin and every sin is punishable.’ Y follows this up with: ‘Whoever commits a crime type of sin, result of which another human or property of another is damaged than such a person will receive ten years of prison sentence according to the law of land.’ In the first statement Y did not state what type of sin is punishable and who will punish it but the second statement serves as an explanation for the first one. In other words, every sin of type which brings harm to a human or to property is punishable by ten years of prison sentence. In this fashion ‘every sin’ is excepted to only include those sins which result in harm to a human or property. Fancy word for this type of interpretation is intertextuality. This will be employed in next section to explain the Hadith of every innovation is misguidance. Restricting ‘Every Innovation’ With Intertextual Interpretation: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And he who introduces a evil precedent in Islam (i.e. فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً), there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The above is repeated in the following Hadith where the word سُنَّةً is replaced by بِدْعَةَ: "And whoever introduces erroneous innovation (i.e. بِدْعَةَ) 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] These two Ahadith clarify that evil/misguiding innovation in Islam incurs sin. So the following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are in context of evil/misguiding innovations: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Intertextual understanding of this Hadith is; the most evil affairs are the reprehensible/misguiding innovations[3] and every [such] evil innovation is misguidance. And he who introduces an evil precedent/innovation in Islam with which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are not pleased, then there is upon him the burden of that innovation, and the burden of those who acted upon the innovation, without any deduction from their burden. Contextualizing Hadith Of Every Innovation: No complex methodology of interpretation is required. Simple contextual placement between the two Ahadith and reading them as a single Hadith brings out the true meaning of Hadith of every innovation. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "And whoever introduces erroneous innovation (i.e. بِدْعَةَ) 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. And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance. And he who introduces an evil precedent in Islam (i.e. فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً), 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.”[4] Due to the context in which the Hadith of every innovation is found in, the meaning of every innovation is limited and restricted to every misguiding/evil innovation. What Are Innovations According To Ahadith: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Narrated Aisha: “Allah's Messenger said: "One who innovates something in this matter of ours that is not of it will have it rejected.”[5] [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] In other words an innovation into Prophetic Sunnah which alters the Prophetic Sunnah then such altered Sunnah and the innovation which altered the Sunnah is rejected. Following Hadith confirms the quoted Hadith but also adds the underlined: “Aisha reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: If any one introduces into this affair of ours anything which does not belong to it, it is rejected. Ibn `Isa said: The Prophet said: If anyone practices any action in a way other than our practice, it is rejected.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4589] In other words, if someone was to change how prophetic Sunnah (i.e. action) is performed then the altered action is to be rejected. Example of this would be, not placing your both palms on ground while performing Sajdah. Hence the Sajdah would be invalid and one invalid Sajdah invalidates the prayer being performed. Lastly it is recorded in another Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “All of them could be combined in one house; and then said: 'A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: He who acted any action not from our affair that is rejected.”[6] [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] In other words, if someone innovates into Islam an action which was not a Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and then acted upon this innovated action then the innovated action will be rejected. Explaining Hadith Of Every Innovation Comprehensively: Adding into prophetic Sunnah what was not part of Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Example of this would be addition of Yoga pose in Salah. Altering a prophetic Sunnah by performing it differently from method demonstrated by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Adding into Islam a completely knew action which was not from Islam. All of these are innovations and misguidance and all will be rejected and should be rejected. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has termed such innovations erroneous/evil innovations and has informed us of why one should not engage in such evil/erroneous innovations: "And whoever introduces erroneous innovation (i.e. بِدْعَةَ) 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 he who introduces an evil precedent in Islam (i.e. فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً), 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] Regarding such evil/reprehensible innovations Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every [erroneous/evil] innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Conclusion: O Muslims, know the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) never spoke a lie nor provided misguidance instead of guidance. Deen of Islam was explained by him and his statements were clarified by him. Judge the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) on subject of innovation as whole and do not distort Islam. When he said, every innovation is misguidance. Then know; he meant every innovation which alters prophetic Sunnah, or adds to prophetic Sunnah, or takes away from prophetic Sunnah and innovation which is composed of Haram, or Shirk, or Kufr. And he termed such innovations as erroneous innovations and evidence of it as follows: "And whoever introduces erroneous innovation (i.e. بِدْعَةَ) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger...” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] In following Hadith meaning of previous Hadith is being conveyed: “And he who introduces an evil precedent in Islam (i.e. فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً), 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] All practical aspects of fundamental Islam are prophetic Sunnahs and what is not prophetic Sunnah is not fundamental Islam but it is innovation. When he said, one who introduces an evil Sunnah into Islam there upon him is burden of sin, he has told you of burden of sin for innovating in Islam an evil Sunnah. When he tells of reward for introducing good Sunnahs into Islam then know Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has allowed the Muslims to innovate good Sunnahs (i.e. practices) into Islam and evidence of 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] Know what is being introduced into Islam is not from it and goods Sunnahs are innovations. Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced an innovation and said about it: “On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] Would you say Taraweeh of entire month under leadership of an Imam was not an innovation but a prophetic Sunnah? Would you be irrational and argue it is not an innovation but he considered it to be. In that case you claim to know better what innovation is then a companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Are you that mad? Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] Reported by Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi and others, no. 2549 in Sahih al-Jami without: " ... everything that leads astray is in the Fire ... ", and hadith no.28 in an-Nawawi's Forty Hadith. - [2] The original has been reworked to improve coherency. Some changes were made i.e. inserting words for clarification, and some material was rearranged. Nothing has been inserted or omitted to weaken the argument presented by Wahhabi Shaykh. - [3] Reprehensible innovation is which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Such innovation is reviving which is prohibited or composed of prohibited, or composed of Kufr, or Shirk, and which goes against any teaching of Islam, or amalgamation of all mentioned. - [4] The Hadith are quoted in the following order: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677, Muslim, B4, H1885, Muslim, B34, H6466. - [5] Alternative translation based on all available Ahadith on the subject: “Narrated Aisha: Allah's Messenger said: "If somebody innovates something which is not in harmony with the principles of our religion, that thing is rejected." [Ref: Bukhari, Book 49, Hadith 861] - [6] Alternative translation based on all available Ahadith on the subject: “He who did any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267]

Janab Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala nay Quran meh zikr nah keeya parday kee waja say thah. Parda Islam ki Quran ki talimat ka hissa heh, aur aurat ka naam ka zikr nah karna is ihkam kee tabeer thee. Quran mojzati kalam heh aur is kay har pehloo say hidayat milti heh. Quran kay asloob say hidayat pa saktay hen aur Hadith kay ihkam say. Quran meh Allah ta'ala farmata heh kay agar yeh Quran Allah ki taraf say nah hota toh is meh ikhtilafan kaseera yehni bot ikhtilaf hota. Abh lafz ikhtilaf Quran meh sirf ek jaga istimal huwa heh ... is leyeh ikhilaf bot nahin balkay ikhtlaf ek heh. Abh is ko ham Hadith par nahin karen gay, o Hadith meh to bees jaga par lafz ikhtilaf aya heh is leyeh yeh kalam e mustafa sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam nahin. Asooloob e Hadith say ham kuch ihkam nahin kar saktay, idhar naam aya heh toh abh auraaten be parda ho jahen. Asooloob e Quran say joh sabat heh woh wastay hidayat heh.