MuhammedAli

Salam Alayqum, meray piyaray Sunni brothers and sisters, meray uncle Nuemonia kay infection say faut ho gahay hen. Allah ta'ala say un kee maghfirat ki dua keryeh ga. Agar kohi baee ya behan kuch paray aur isaal e sawab kay leyeh kuch millat keray toh yahan par likh deeyeh ga.

Nahin baee, tarjuma nahin apni tehqeeq likh raha hoon. Hussam kay 100 saal aur Rad Al Muhannad ka tarjuma shahid nah karoon, magar joh mozoo un meh zehr e behas ahay hen un par tafseelan likhoon ga.

Salam alayqum, Is ki asal meh nuqs heh, is leyeh is-say apnay haal par chor denh. Apna waqt zeroori kamoon par kharch karen. Jin kay leyeh Allah ta'ala nay Kufr kee maut likh deeh heh aap ussay kabi musalman nahin kar saktay. Hamari duty yahi heh kay ham Kafiroon ko Islam ka message puncha denh. Woh ham sab nay kar deeya abh is ko is kay haal par chor denh.

Is mozoo par meh nay English meh likhna shoroon keeya thah magar, sehat itni kharab heh kay dedh haftay say bistar par para hoon. English meh, is mozoo par in sha Allah tafseel say likhoon ga. Joh Wahhabi taweelat aur mangarat mafoom biyan kartay hen in sab ka rad hoga in meh. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab ka fitna e Najd hona aur Ummat e Muslimah ka Shirk e akbar say paak hona yeh do mozoo esay thay jin kee bunyad par meh nay ... Wahhabiat ko laat mari. In do mozoon par meh nay bot time sirf keeya heh. Meri speciality yahi doh mozoo hen. Seht yabi kee dua karen in sha Allah joh kuch is kitab meh nahin woh be pesh karoon ga.

Dheet bot dekhay hen magar tum hee, pehlay, dosray, tesray, number par ho. In Sawalat ka jawab darkar heh joh abhi taq mujjay nahin milla; Tum nay kaha Khatam e Bukhari Biddat nahin, zahir bat heh biddat nahin toh daleel kee bunyad par yeh fesla keeya hoga nah. Mera sawal yeh heh; - Kis Qurani o Hadith kee daleel par yeh fesla keeya kay Khatam e Bukhari Biddat nahin?

Hissa awal: - Is ka nateeja yeh huwa kay bukhari kay khatam ka jaiz hona Islam ka hissa nah honay kee bina par nahin balkay zikr e khair honay par heh? - Ya phir kam say kam, zikr e khair aur islam ka hissa nah honay kee waja say jaiz ho gaya, yahi heh nah? Tummeh is par kohi ihtiraz toh nahin nah? - Misaal kay tor par, janaza kay baad aur pehlay dua, azaan say pehlay aur baad darood shareef, teeja, chaliswan, urs (i.e. barsi), milaad un Nabi, yeh Islam ka hissa yehni Sunnat, farz, nah manay jahahen, nah din mutayyin keeya jahay, na waqt muqarrar keeya jahay, aur joh makhsoos nahin un meh sirf Quran Khawani, aur har halal par amal ho aur haram hissa nah ho toh kia yeh ZIKR E KHAIR hen ya nahin? - Agar zikr e khair toh bataho aaj tum Allah kay Nabi e kareem sallallahu alayhi was'sallam kee waladat kee kushi meh, un ke milaad kee kushi meh, sirf Surah Fatiha parh kar ansoowoon kay saath, sirat e mustaqeem par chalnay kee dua karo gay? Chalo ansoowoon kay baghayr dua karo gay hidayat kee? [Ansoowoon wala wapis leeya, muj par yeh ilzam nah ayd ho jahay kay tumara paani khatam karna chahta hoon.] Tumari taraf say yahi Milaad un Nabi kee kushi qabool ho jahay ge. Bataho esa karo ga? Hissa Dohim: Deobandi aur Wahhabi asool o zawabat kay mutabiq hissa dohim jari heh. Bukhari Shareef kay khatam ko tum nay zikr e khair bataya. Is par chand sawalat hen: - Kon si hadith ya ayaat meh zikr e khair karnay ka hokam heh? - Bukhari Shareef ko zikr e khair honay ka zikr kis hadith meh heh ya ayaat meh? - Kia sirf Bukhari hee zikr e khair heh ya Sahih Muslim, Muwatta Imam Ma'lik, Sunan Abu Dawood? - Qiyasan kehta hoon, Khatam e Bukhari, meh Bukhari shareef pari jaati hogi kay nahin? - Kia Bukhari, shareef meh zaeef Ahadith hen ya nahin? Matlab ek, do, panch, das, hen nah? - Milad shareef meh agar zaeef rawayat [halan kay zaeef rawayat fazail meh qabool hen muhaditheen kee nazr meh] pari jaati hen toh Milad haram ho jata heh, biddat ho jata heh, baqawl aap kay in zaeef rawayat kee waja say, yahi aap ka asool heh kay nahin? - Khatam Bukhari, meh toh aap Bukhari kay awal baab say leh taq aakhar taq partay hen. Aap batahen, un zaeef aur mauzu rawayat kee bina par KHATAM E BUKHARI yehni ZIKR E KHAIR, zikr e biddat o zalalat o zindiqiyat aur waseela e jahannum kesay nahin banta? - Kia aap kay apnay asool kay mutabiq Khatam e Bukhari jissay aap Zikr e Khair tehra rahay thay, zikr e shar o biddat o gumrahi nahin banta? - Kia aap kay asool o zawabat kay mutabiq Khatam e Bukhari meh zikr e khair kay ilawa joh zikr e zaeef ahadith hota heh us kee waja say Khatam e Bukhari zikr e khair kesay raha? Note: Jab taq tum Deobandi ho tummeh panch cheezen kabi nahin aa sakteen; ek; sharam, dosra; meray sawaloon ka jawab, tesra; imaandari, chotah; insaaf, panchwan aur aakhiri; haq ka saath dena aur batal kee mukhalfat karna.

Agar kohi Deobandi kahay kay Ganesha kee pooja Islam ka hissa nahin toh kia GANESHA kee pooja DEOBANDI mazhab meh jaiz ho jahy gee?

THE ALL IMPORTANT QUESTIONS ARE: 1 - WERE IMAM JALAL UD DIN SUYUTI, MULLAH ALI AL QARI INNOVATORS? 2 - WILL THESE TWO GO TO HELL OR HEAVEN ACCORDING TO THEIR INNOVATIVE BELIEF? 3 - DO YOU UNDERSTAND QURAN AND AHADITH BETTER OR THEY? 4 - Imam Suyuti rahimullah, Mullah Ali Al Qari rahimullah, did they understand the Ahadith about innovations or did you understand? 5 - Where these scholars following the 'BARELWI sect' or are we the Sunni's following what has been before us? 6 - Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) said beware Dajjals and Kazzabs they will say things which you nor your fore-fathers said before. ARE WE THE AHLE SUNNAT DAJJALS AND KAZZABS OR ARE YOU AND YOUR DEOBANDI CLAN, THE CLAN OF LIARS AND DAJJALS, FOR COMMING UP WITH SOMETHING WHICH OUR ANCESTORS DIDN'T SAY? Aynda sawaloon kay jawab sirf Quran aur Hadith say pesh karen agar tumari Deobandiat sachi heh toh, kohi be hadith, agar mardood, mawdu, joh doh din pehlay gar'ri gahi ho woh be daleel kay tor par qabool hogi, magar shart yeh heh kay saboot ho kay doh din pehlay gari gahi heh, sirf tumara kehna nahin mana jahay ga. 7a - Khatam Bukhari - Kia Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari keeya? b - Tabiyeen nay keeya? c - Taba-tabiyeen nay keeya? d - salaf kay bad khalaf nay keeya? 8 - Kia Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari Dar Ul Uloom Deoband meh kia? 9 - Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari kesay para Quran aur Hadith say daleel pesh karen? 10 - Agar Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari keeya toh bataho kay Sahih Bukhari kay kis nuskhay par Khatam para? [Deobandiyoon ka tareeka e wardat, lol. 'Powerful' Deobandi type arguments against Deobandi's. lol] I am going to add few more questions; 11 - Did the Sahabah start with bismillah when they started with the khatam of Bukhari? 12 - How many Sahabah were involved in the Khatam of Bukhari? 13 - Was the Khatam of Bukhari invitation only or anyone could join? 14 - Did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) take part in any Khatam Bukhari? I would like to congradulate all the Sunni's for victory. No Deobandi can even dare to answer my questions. I challenge a Deobandi to even contemplate about writing response to these questions. You can clearly see our opponent cannot answer these questions.

Salam alayqum, Baee chor denh maslay ko agar nahin raha ja raha toh private meh discuss keren. Meray jesa chawani ka banda kabi kissi Sunni e Aalim e Deen say 100% ittifaq nahin kar paya. Doh paray likhay banday joh shahib e ilm aur sahib e aqal aur sahib e feham o firasat hoon woh kabi 100% kissi mozoo par ittifaq nahin kar pahen gay kissi nah kissi aqeedeh ya fiqhi ya issue par ikhtilaf rakhtay hoon gay. Ikhtilafoon kay peechay nah par jaya karen, bhool janay deeya keren.

Tasweer utar lenh aur net par char denh, masjid kay naam kay saath, aur ilaqay kay saath. Taqay logoon ko pata chalay deen kistera badla jata heh.

In kay; la ilaha il Allahu ka tarjuma par be aap ihtibar nah karyeh ga. in ka tarjuma; Kohi ibadat kay lyk nahin siwahay Allah kay. Halan kay Ahle Sunnat kay nazdeeq ibadat Ila yehni khuda kee heh, is leyeh agar kissi ko khuda nahin manta toh ibadat be nahin karta, is leyeh hamara tarjumah heh, kohi khuda nahin siwahay Allah kay, jab khuda hee nahin toh ibadat kay lyk kesay ho.

THE ALL IMPORTANT QUESTIONS ARE: 1 - WERE IMAM JALAL UD DIN SUYUTI, MULLAH ALI AL QARI INNOVATORS? 2 - WILL THESE TWO GO TO HELL OR HEAVEN ACCORDING TO THEIR INNOVATIVE BELIEF? 3 - DO YOU UNDERSTAND QURAN AND AHADITH BETTER OR THEY? 4 - Imam Suyuti rahimullah, Mullah Ali Al Qari rahimullah, did they understand the Ahadith about innovations or did you understand? 5 - Where these scholars following the 'BARELWI sect' or are we the Sunni's following what has been before us? 6 - Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) said beware Dajjals and Kazzabs they will say things which you nor your fore-fathers said before. ARE WE THE AHLE SUNNAT DAJJALS AND KAZZABS OR ARE YOU AND YOUR DEOBANDI CLAN, THE CLAN OF LIARS AND DAJJALS, FOR COMMING UP WITH SOMETHING WHICH OUR ANCESTORS DIDN'T SAY? Aynda sawaloon kay jawab sirf Quran aur Hadith say pesh karen agar tumari Deobandiat sachi heh toh, kohi be hadith, agar mardood, mawdu, joh doh din pehlay gar'ri gahi ho woh be daleel kay tor par qabool hogi, magar shart yeh heh kay saboot ho kay doh din pehlay gari gahi heh, sirf tumara kehna nahin mana jahay ga. 7a - Khatam Bukhari - Kia Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari keeya? b - Tabiyeen nay keeya? c - Taba-tabiyeen nay keeya? d - salaf kay bad khalaf nay keeya? 8 - Kia Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari Dar Ul Uloom Deoband meh kia? 9 - Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari kesay para Quran aur Hadith say daleel pesh karen? 10 - Agar Sahabah nay Khatam Bukhari keeya toh bataho kay Sahih Bukhari kay kis nuskhay par Khatam para? [Deobandiyoon ka tareeka e wardat, lol. 'Powerful' Deobandi type arguments against Deobandi's. lol]

Salam alayqum wa rahmatullah wa barakat, Baee, intizar karen kissi Sunni kay jawab ka. Yeh joh ooper wali sarkar hen, in kay kissi refference aur link ka ihtibar nah karyeh ga. Yeh us mehakmay say talluq rakhtay hen joh auroon say woh kitaben mansoob kartay hen joh us nay likhi nahin. Aur saath hee kitaboon meh qaat chaat kar kay puranay zamanay kay Ulamah ko apna ham mazhab o maslak bananay meh expert hen. Kissi Sunni baee kay jawab kay muntazir rahen. Yeh joh uper wali PDF Wahhabi website par host heh is leyeh ignore kar denh.

Salam alayqum, Jazak Allah Khair moteram Khalil baee. PM kay jawab ka muntazir hoon ga.

- Allah ta'ala ka jahanimiyoon ko jannat behijna Allah ta'ala ka jhoot bolna heh ya Allah ta'ala kee rehmat? - Kia tumara khuda jhoot bolta sakta heh ya nahin? - Agar tumara khuda jhoot nah bol sakkay jistera Mirza nay Nabuwat ka dawa kar kay jhoot bola, toh kia Mirza kee quwat tumaray khuda say ziyada heh ya nahin? - Kia tumara khuda aurat kay saath zina kar sakta heh, agar nahin toh Thanvi joh bachas auratoon say ziyada say zina kar sakta heh woh behtr huwa ya tumara khuda? Joh log masla imqaan e kizb, wuqu e kizb, khalf e waad aur khalf e wa'eed, meh farq samajna chahtay hen woh is English kay article ko paren; Allah's Wa'ad, Wa'eed, Kizb In Light Of Qur’An & Sunnah.

THE ALL IMPORTANT QUESTIONS ARE; 1 - WERE IMAM JALAL UD DIN SUYUTI, MULLAH ALI AL QARI INNOVATORS SALAT AL GHAWSIYA? 2 - WILL THESE TWO GO TO HELL OR HEAVEN ACCORDING TO THEIR INNOVATIVE BELIEF? 3 - DO YOU UNDERSTAND QURAN AND AHADITH BETTER OR THEY?

Copy & Paste wali sarkar, all has been already answered, in fact you are getting more then what you bargained for; Praiseworthy-Reprehensible Sunnah- Refuting Claim Sunnah Does Not Mean Innovation. Praiseworthy & Reprehensible Sunnah Understood According To Sunnah Of Rasoolallah (Peace And Blessings Be Upon Him) Praiseworthy & Reprehensible Sunnah Understood According To Sunnah Of Rasoolallah Explaining The Hadith Of Praiseworthy & Reprehensible Practices Understanding Hadith Of Good & Evil Sunnah In Light Of Ahadith Of Reprehensible Innovation. Hadith Of Praiseworthy/reprehensible Innovation: Critical Analysis Of A Interpretation. Hadith Of Praiseworthy & Blameworthy Innovation: Few Sentences, Vast In Meaning. I am pretty much sure all the criticism you can think is already addressed in these four. Incase you or your maulvis came up something original I will adress that in new English article. What I have done, is saved that page, I will read it when i bit of time, and then if there is anything new in it, I will adress it. THE ALL IMPORTANT QUESTIONS ARE; 1 - WERE IMAM JALAL UD DIN SUYUTI, MULLAH ALI AL QARI INNOVATORS? 2 - WILL THESE TWO GO TO HELL OR HEAVEN ACCORDING TO THEIR INNOVATIVE BELIEF? 3 - DO YOU UNDERSTAND QURAN AND AHADITH BETTER OR THEY?

Salam alayqum, Meray baee, aap dakhal nah denh, yeh chahta yahi heh kay kissi tareekay say Hadhir Nazir ka yeh thread kissi aur mozoo kee niklay. Hadhir Nazir par is kay danay abhi khatam ho chukay hen. Joh yeh copy & paste kar sakka yeh kar chuka meray is response kay baad is kay pass abh kohi jawaban copy paste nahin raha.

Aadi baat karna aur adi ko chupana in ka pesha heh. Ala Hazrat kay khilaaf yeh aaj taq kohi essee baat mansoob nahin kar sakkay jis par yeh Ala Hazrat kee jaiz tor girift kar saken.

Ismail Dehalvi apni kitab meh kissi jaga likh gaya heh kay Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) har qabeeh yehni har gattiya harkat kar sakta heh aur nah kar sakkay toh makhlooq Allah ta'ala say agay bar jaati heh, is kay rad meh Ala Hazrat rahimullah alayhi ta'ala nay joh kuch likha, yeh shaytaan ka bacha us ka ek hissa quote kar raha heh. Siyaq o sabak meh baat nazria e khuda kay baray meh discussion ho rahi heh, yehni deobandiyoon kay nazria e khuda meh Allah ta'ala ka chori, zina, sharab peena, waghera zeroori heh agar nah kar sakkay toh baqaul deobandiyoon kay makhlooq Allah ta'ala kay muqabila meh ziyada taqatwar heh.

Muslim shareef aur deegir kutub e hadith meh aya heh kay Allah kay Nabi nay farmaya, kay jis nay acha tareeka ijaad keeya us kay leyeh sawab heh aur joh us par amal karay ga us par sawab heh: "It was narrated from Mundhir bin Jarir that his father said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed, he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in their slightest. And whoever introduces a bad practice that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [sunan ibn Majah, Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 203] Mullah Ali Al Qari rahimullah aur Imam Jalal Ud Din Suyuti rahimullah waghera nay is bunyad par Namaz e Ghausiya ko mana. Woh amal joh ibadat e illahi ho, woh bura nahin ho sakta.Yeh Ulamah jantay thay kay RasoolAllah nay, Sahabah nay, tabiyeen aur tabatabiyeen nay is par amal nahin keeya. Magar yeh be jantay thay kay yeh acha tareeka heh is leyeh inoon namaz e ghausiya ko qabool keeya.

Because you're imbecile not the one you copy pasted everything from. I am responding to others who wrote the material, not to the one who copy pasted it. I have elaborated the content bit more clearly. Added few words to make it clear what was intended. But Thanks for high lighting it, and I will properly respond. In detail cause my belief regarding Prophet knowing about heart is already been discussed #19 #13These should have been enough to make u realize something was wrong while writting the response, but u wanted to get ur leg up. lol.

Shut it imbecile, and let me finish my response, and then write your stupidities. You will have all time time to be stupid.

Some aspects of the discussion were ambigous and not clearly stated. Hence I added elaborative words which reveal in which context the statements were about. You copy & pasted: “Quran also rejects the idea of Prophet peace be upon him being present and watching, Allah says in Surah al-Qasas addressing the Prophet peace be upon him (44. And you were not on the western side (of the Mount), when We made clear to Musa the commandment, and you were not among the witnesses.) (45. But We created generations, and long were the ages that passed over them. And you were not a dweller among the people of Madyan, reciting Our Ayat to them. But it is We Who kept sending (Messengers).) (46. And you were not at the side of At-Tur when We called. But (you are sent) as a mercy from your Lord, to give warning to a people to whom no warner had come before you, in order that they may remember or receive admonition.) Ibn Katheer commented: Similarly, Allah told him about Maryam and her story, as Allah said: …” You quoted Surah Al Qasas [28] from 44 to verse 46, and you wish to establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was not Hadhir Nadhir. This verse is in same style of Surah Al Ma’idah [5] verse 15. Where in the beginning Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states, O people of book, there has come to you a Rasool who revealed what you use to hide and ignores the other, then Allah says; “There has come to you from Allah a Noor and clear book.” In the last part of the verse, the first part of verse is sumarized. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) reveals what they hide, noor reveals what is hidden, this is proof of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being reffered as Noor. In the context of dicussion, its proof that it is Sunnah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to sumarize the first part of verse in last part of verse. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And you were not on the Western side when We made clear to Musa the comandment ...” This indicates the verse explicitly negates physical presence at the place when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gave Musa (alayhis salaam) the commandment. If one is present physically at a event then he is witness to the event. If one is amongst the people who are present while the event is taking place then he is amongst the witnesses. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was not present while the event was taking place, but other people were present, hence he was not amongst the witnesses. Therefore the following part of the verse is emphasizing what was already stated in the first part of the verse; “… and you were not among the Shahideen.” Hence the last part of the verse was mere repition of what is stated in the beginning of the verse. In other words the last part states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was not amongst those who were present. I have already established the word Shahid [present/witness] has been used by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) as opposite of Ghayb [absent/unseen] in the supplication of funeral prayers, once again the words; “Allahum maghfirli hayyitina wa mayyitina wa shahidina wa ghaybina wa sagheerina wa kabeerina ...” The suplication translates to; “ O Allah forgive our living and our dead, and our present and absent, and our minors and elders …” The part which is my interest is underlined. Therefore the last part of the verse only states; “… and you were not amongst the present [and watching/hearing].” This verse of the Quran only negates physical presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) at the event which is mentioned in the verse. The verse does not negate spiritual witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). From the logical and rational perspective Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) could not have been present on the mount because he was not born while the events were unfolding on the Western side of the mount. We the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat do not believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was present while these events were taking place. [Note, brother Saeedi and Khalil Rana Sahib I believe have already presented Tafasir in the Urdu discussion which support this interpretation.] What is the significance of this verse? Why did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) state this? Everyone knew Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was not present at the events which took place in the life time of Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) and Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam). This is explained in the few verses later; “And you were not at the side of the mount when We called [Moses] but [Wahi i.e. Ghaybi revelation was sent to you O Prophet Muhammad] as a mercy from your Lord to warn a people to whom no warner had come before you that they might be reminded.” [Ref: 28:46] Meaning even though you was not present Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted you the knowledge of events which took place long before you, but the Wahi was sent to inform you of the events which you could not have known without being present there. In other words when you inform them of these events which you could not have known this will establish your claim of Prophet-hood. Similar type of verse states; “That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal, [O Muhammad], to you. And you were not with them when they put together their plan while they conspired.” [Ref: 12:102] And also the following verses; “That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed.” [Ref: 3:44] These two verses also establish that even though you wasn’t present your self, but Ghayb news inform of Wahi was given to you to educate you about the events. The purpose is to point out his absence from the event yet knowing them in perfect detail. Its like one person claims to be able to see through walls so to support his claim he sits out side a house and says this is happening behind this wall he describes eveything. Once he accurately describes what he should not know and cannot know without first seeing or while seeing, then he has established his ability of seeing through the wall. Similarly Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) claimed Prophet-hood and to support his Prophet-hood Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gave him knoweldge to substantiate his claim. Like he went to Jerusalem, people doubted Allah showed him everything and his visit to Jerusalem was established. So when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) described the events of Musa (alayhis salaam), Isa (alayhis salaam) without being there this established his claim of Prophet-hood. Ibn Kathir writes; “Allah points out the proof of the prophethood of Muhammad , whereby he told others about matters of the past, and spoke about them as if he were hearing and seeing them for himself. But he was an illiterate man who could not read books, and he grew up among a people who knew nothing of such things.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 28:44] [Note, I see no need to respond to remaining part of copy & paste job because all the material is harmonized with this explanation.] You wrote: “I had already explained this ayat earlier that according to some interpretations the prophets (all of them) were unaware of the full details of the conditions of their peoples’ response to them, which is why they said “We have no knowledge.”[see Tafsir Ibn Kathir] In fact, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari said in the exact place in his commentary of Mishkat: “This [witnessing] does not negate His statement: “the day when Allah will assemble the messengers and will say to them, “How were you responded to?” They will say, “We have no knowledge. Surely You alone have the full knowledge of all that is unseen” because response is different to conveying, and it (i.e. the response of their peoples) requires details , the essence of which is comprehended only by Allah, as opposed to conveying itself which is from obvious necessary knowledge).” Technically, you didn’t explain anything you just copied&pasted from, you and I know from where. To resolve this difference we have to ask a question and answer this question. Question is, did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) asked about the inner convictions or just outer affirmation with tongue, in the following verse; “[be warned of] the Day when Allah will assemble the messengers and say, "What was the response you received?" They will say, "We have no knowledge. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen" [Ref: 5:109]? If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) enquired about the inner affirmation only then it would make sense that Prophets negate knowing all details regarding the belief of their nations. But there is no clear indication that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) enquired about the inner or outer, or both, hence the interpretation is speculative. My reading of the verse tells me that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) merely enquired about the outer affirmation of faith. Meaning did your nations affirm in one-ness and your prophet-hood with their tongues, and the question of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not enquire if they inwardly, sincerely and firmly believed in the Prophets and Tawheed etc. Mullah Ali Al Qari (rahimullah) assumed that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) enquired about absolute details regarding the response which their nations gave them. Based on the assumption that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) enquired about complete absolute details regarding the response, Mullah Ali Al Qari (rahimullah) writes; “… because response is different to conveying, and it (i.e. the response of their peoples) requires details , the essence of which is comprehended only by Allah, …” I am not familiar with the exact position, nor the quote indicates exact position of Mullah Ali Al Qari (rahimullah) on the issue. It is not clear that Mullah Ali Al Qari (rahimullah) stated this due to his interpretation that Prophets out of respect/fear will say it or not knowing it. [Note, Ibn Kathir states same but he attributes it to chaos of judgment day, fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and respect of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). But my guess is Mullah Ali Al Qari’s (rahimullah) understanding will not definitely be due to ignorance because all those who proceded him have not stated this.] Ibn Kathir, presents two Tafasir, one he writes: “The statement of the Messengers here; “We have no knowledge.” [their saying this] 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, … "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.” My Tafsir of the interpretation was that Prophets will negate their knowledge out of their respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Ibn Kathir has fully supported my interpretation. Even though the route which I took to arrive at the conclusion was different but the out come is same. Coming to Tafsir Ibn Kathir, he writes it was due to the confusion and chaos of judgment day and, fear and respect of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the Prophets will say; “We have no knowledge.” Ibn Kathir like Mullah Ali Qari (rahimullah) too assumed that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) enquired about all details regarding the outer and inner faith of their followers. But he states in his Tafsir that Prophets knew the visible behaviour of the people not the inner testimony of heart; “Therefore, our knowledge only grasped the visible behavior of these people, not the secrets of their hearts.” In summary, my interpretation was that Prophets will say; “We have no knowledge.”, out of respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but in reality will have knowledge, which is supported by Ibn Kathir. Ibn Kathir stops short of saying what the Sahib e Tafsir Al Jalalayn and Tafsir Ibn Abbas wrote, that Prophets will bear witness against their communities later on; In the day when Allah gathereth together the messengers) this is on the Day of Judgement, (and saith) in some place, at the time of bedazzlement: (What was your response (from mankind)) how did people respond to you? (They say) due to the intensity of the situation, which is that place: (We have no knowledge. Lo! Thou, only Thou art the Knower of Things Hidden) i.e. that which is hidden from us of the response of people. But later, they answer and testify that they have delivered the message to their people.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Abbas] Alhasil, my interpretation that Prophets will negate their knowledge due to respect/humility of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not due to not having knowledge is supported by Ibn Kathir the very guy you quoted against me. Tafsir Ibn Abbas and Tafsir Al Jalalayn also support the position that Prophets will know [but will remember due to fear and fright of judgment day]. You quoted the verse 5:109 to establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not know what his nation did. Where as this establishes that the Prophets will know but either due to fear or due to forgetfulness caused by the sheer intensity of events, or due to respect and humility of the Prophets will say; “We have no knowledge.” If it was forgetfulness then it was only momentary and is not proof that they will not know the when they are asked about. Hence momentary forgetfulness does not mean not having knowledge. If it’s the inner faith, then we too believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) does not know absolutely everything (- i.e. inners of hearts of people) as a witness. Instead we believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is witness upon the actions NOT intentions. We believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) sees the actions and he sees actions and seeks forgiveness for sins and praises Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for good deeds of his followers. Therefore this interpretation does not refute our position either. If they said we have no knowledge due to respect then it only proves they had the knowledge but the one asking was all knower, whose knowledge is limitless and required no information, hence as humble and respectful servants they negated their own knowledge as if they didn’t have any knowledge at all. What is a drop compared to the oceans of earth, nothing. When one who is master of oceans ask master of drop, what you have, he will say nothing if he knows his worth. The Prophets knew their worth and worth of their knowledge and knew who asked them, hence they in humility said we know nothing. This does not mean their this statement is taken to mean that they have no knowledge. You yourself have affirmed that the verse means Prophets had some knowledge but not equale to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala); “I had already explained this ayat earlier that according to some interpretations the prophets (all of them) were unaware of the full details of the conditions of their peoples’ response to them, …” By stating this you have absolutely refuted your own position. If you argued that; this verse establishes that Prophets said we have NO KNOWLEDGE therefore it proves that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not have any knowledge hence he is not Hadhir Nazir, then is would have been your proof against Hadhir Nazir. Instead you have refuted the very basis of your possible argument. Apnay hathoon say apna qatal, mubarak ho. Knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is of Lawh Al Mafooz and of Al Qalam which wrote everything but not intentions. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) sees actions as a witness and NOT intentions. Hence according to Ibn Kathir if he was to say I have no knowledge it does not mean he would not have seen/heard the events, it merely means he doesn’t know the entire details regarding faith of Muslims, but only knows their actions, words, and not inner faith. This interpretation of Ibn Kathir is not detrimenal to our Aqeedah of Hadhir Nazir rather perfectly supports it. Cause we believe as a witness Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) sees, actions and is shown actions, and he has seen all that has taken place on earth from beginning to end. Therefore he knows all events but is not shown intentions of people, and inner faith of people. Last point, Ibn Kathir writes Prophets will negate knowing the faith in the heart and absolute knowledge of Ghayb compared to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala); “…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, …” In short Ibn Kathir believes actions will be known but the Prophets will negate knowing the inner eman of heart as a act of respect to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This means that in perspective of Ibn Kathir the actions of people will be seen by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) but their intentions will remain hidden. Alhasil, Ibn Kathir supports the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammats position of issue of Hadhir Nadhir – Prophets knowing the outer actions. Now coming to the belief of Ibn Kathir that Prophets will not know the inner eman of hearts. If Ibn Kathir believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) didn’t know the issues of hearts then he was clearly wrong because many Ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knew the issues of heart. The Ahadith state; "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 as I see you (while looking at you.)" [Ref: Bukhari, B8, H411] “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Messenger said, "You see me facing the Qibla; but, by Allah, nothing is hidden from me regarding your bowing and submissiveness and I see you from behind my back." [Ref: Bukhari, B12, H708] “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Messenger said, "Do you consider or see that my face is towards the Qibla? By Allah, neither your submissiveness nor your bowing is hidden from me, surely I see you from my back." [Ref: Bukhari, B8, H410] You have answered nothing and the subject is bigger then your little head can cope with. You are Deobandi who doesn’t know what would support his position, Deobandi’s have always been arguing that the verse 5:109 means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will say I have no knowledge hence he was not Hadhir Nazir. [Ref: Yunus Nomani V.S. Maulana Saeed Assad, Ilm Ghayb Debate, youtube it, and liten to Nomani arguing that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) doesn’t have any knowledge of Ghayb because 5:109 negates knowledge of Ghayb.] This verse is not your evidence, it would be only evidence if you could prove that Prophets will not know when they say; “We have no knowledge.” I laughed when I saw you quoting this in post #3 You seriously are not very bright spark. Stop copy&pasting and start using the brain and think for your self. You wrote: “Now listen!When someone Knows something but yet says out of humility that ' He DOESN'T know' then what does it mean? Now there are two options:Either the prophets were lieing(MazAllah) or they were actually unaware of all the responses.The first option is impossible and the second one is probable as supported by Mulla Ali Qari Rh.Now you need to produce incisive proof that it was due to humility or else my case stands.More on this verse later.” Your scenario entails that one is denying something which he knows and your scenario does not imply in anyway that the person doesn’t know all details, hence your scenario representation is wrong. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knows something, and he says he doesn’t know all details [according to interpretation of Mullah Ali Al Qari rahimullah] then how can this scenario which you presented be accurate representation of actual reality of knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) according to Mullah Ali Al Qari’s (rahimullah) explanation? Your scenario should have been; “When someone Knows something but yet says out of humility that, he doesn’t know all the responses then what does it mean?” You wrote; “When someone Knows something but yet says out of humility that ' He DOESN'T know' then what does it mean?” You answered the question; “Now there are two options:Either the prophets were lieing(mazallah!) or they were actually unaware of all the responses.” The scenario you presented was, someone knows something and says he doesn’t know that something [which he knows] but out of the two choices, one is; “… or they were actually unaware of all the responses.” If they know something then how can this be one of the option? Either the option should be; unaware of some of the responses; “Either the prophets were lieing (MazAllah) or they were actually unaware of some of the responses.”, or the scenario should be; “When someone knows all responses but yet says out of humility that he doesn’t know then what does it mean?” when someone knows all responses. Therefore first of all your scenario does not accurately reflect itself and it’s contradictory in details, which I don’t expect you to realize. So if you have the following; “When someone knows something but yet says out of humility that he doesn’t know then what does it mean?” then following should be part of it; “Either the prophets were lieing (MazAllah) or they were actually unaware of some of the responses.” If you have the following as the beginning; “When someone knows all responses but yet says out of humility that he doesn’t know then what does it mean?”, then this should be; “Either the prophets were lieing(mazallah!) or they were actually unaware of all the responses.” Finally, you asked: “When someone knows something but yet says out of humility that he doesn’t know then what does it mean?” Let me answer the question which you asked and failed to answer your self. When someone knows something and says he doesn’t know that something there are two options, 1) he is lieing, 2) or he is being humble. For Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) lieing is impossible therefore his saying that he doesn’t know will mean he is being humble. If someone knows something and he says he doesn’t know everything, then there is no need to say, he is lieing or being humble, that’s his reality. But if he knows something and says; I don’t know anything or says; “I have no knowledge.” Then he is either lieing, or being humble. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) doesn’t lie, no Nabi lies, therefore they were being respectfully humble about their knowledge. You also wrote: “Now you need to produce incisive proof that it was due to humility or else my case stands.More on this verse later.” My argument in my previous response was incisively argued soundly established the humility of Prophets and remains irrefutable. Ibn Kathir writes: "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 …” Showing respect to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is always with humility. We stand in prayers with hands folded its sign of respect and our humility, we bow, its sign of respect and our humility, we prostrate, its sign of respect and our humility. Rule is show of respect to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) without showing humbleness, meekness, is not possible. Ibn Kathir writes that Prophets will negate their knowledge with respect of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This automatically implies the Prophets will be respectful and humble in presence of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in state of humility and respect will deny their knowledge. [Continued ...]