کمیونٹی میں تلاش کریں

Introduction: This article has been written in form of question and answer. These questions are product of my Wahhabi mind. Questions are fairly basic and get complex as the article progresses. After question nine Wahhabi side in me kicked in and asked really tough questions and Sunni side replied with best of my knowledge and ability. Objective was that someone with basic knowledge of subject of innovation can read this and use it as a spring board for further study into subject. Question And Answer Session: Q1: What is innovation? Answer: Linguistically anything newly invented is innovation. Technically anything not explicitly stated by name/label in neither Quran nor it was by taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is innovation. Q2: Is there a Shar’ri definition of innovation as opposed to linguistic definition of innovation? Answer: Yes, there are Shar’ri definitions of innovations but these definitions depend on type of innovation. Q3: How many types of innovations are there? Answer: Islam divides innovations into two major categories; i) praiseworthy ii) and blameworthy. Praiseworthy innovation is permissible and blameworthy is prohibited. Q4: What are the definitions of these two types of innovations? Answer: The definition of praiseworthy innovation is as follows: Any innovated practice/custom which has implicit evidence from Quran/Hadith. Other side of praiseworthy innovation is: Any innovated practice/custom which is composed of acts of worship, charity, preaching, and other Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is praiseworthy innovation. Definition of blameworthy innovation is as follows: Anything innovated which does not have implicit evidence from Quran/Hadith. Other side of reprehensible innovation is: Any innovated practice/custom which is composed of Shirk, or Kufr, or engaging in Haram, or eating Haram, or any sinful activity is blameworthy innovation. Q5: What is implicit/indirect evidence in context of subject of innovation? Answer: Implicit/Indirect evidence fundamentally is corroborating activities in a custom/practice from Quran and Hadith. A properly corroborated practice/custom will be amalgamation of various Islamicly sanctioned practices. Q6: What type innovation is permissible? Answer: If an innovated practice is composed of, acts of worship, charity and other Islamicly sanctioned activities then it is permissible Q7: What type of innovation is prohibited? Answer: If an innovated practice is composed of acts which lead to Shirk/Kufr, engaging in or eating Haram and other sinful activities then the innovation is reprehensible. Q8: Will there be reward for engaging in praiseworthy innovations and punishment for blameworthy? Answer: Yes, there will be reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for engaging in praiseworthy innovations and punishment for acting upon blameworthy innovations. Q9: If an innovation is composed of islamicly sanctioned activities and Islamicly condemned activities then what would be the judgment regarding the innovation? Answer: The polytheists of Makkah performed Tawaf of Kabah naked and chanted a polytheistic Talbiyah. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the companions to perform Tawaf with Ihram and corrected the Talbiyah to conform to Tawheed. Hence it would be appropriate to remove the aspects which contradict teaching of Islam and practice it with aspects which conform to teaching of Islam. Q10: Hadith indicates; every innovation is misguidance, [1] therefore Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not reward innovations/misguidance. Question is how can there be reward for [praiseworthy] innovation? Answer: Hadith of every innovation is misguidance is in context of misguiding innovation.[2] Misguiding innovations are those which contradicts teaching of Islam and every innovation which is composed of polytheistic, sinful, activities is [evil, reprehensible, blameworthy, erroneous, and] misguiding innovation. Reward is not based on the name of innovation but based on what it is composed of. Praiseworthy innovations are composed of Islamicly sanctioned activities such as Dua (i.e. supplication), Nawafil (i.e. optional prayers), Tilawah (i.e. recitation of Quran), Sadqah (i.e. optional charity), Bayanaat (i.e. speeches), and distribution of food to poor, family and friends. These are practices which are Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence reward is guaranteed. Engaging in these Sunnahs under a new name (i.e. Urs, Milad, and Khatam) does not make the practice of them a sinful activity. Q11: You have restricted the application of every invention is innovation [and] every innovation is misguidance, in context of blameworthy innovation. Is there any evidence for this interpretation of Hadith? Answer: The evidence for this Takhsees/interpretation is found in another Hadith where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And whoever introduces a سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. reprehensible practice) that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] In another Hadith the word innovation (i.e. bidda) is used: "And whoever introduces an ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e. reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] Based on these Ahadith it is clear that Islam recognises blameworthy innovations/practices. Hence in the Hadith of every invention is innovation, every innovation is misguidance, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was stating about innovations which are Dhalalah/Say’yah. Only reprehensible innovations which are composed of Shirki/Kufri or sinful activities can earn displeasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and take the practitioner to hellfire. Q12: Is there evidence for the concept of ‘good innovation’ in religion of Islam? Answer: It has been narrated that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "Whoever introduces a good Sunnah (i.e. 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.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203/209] In the Hadith recorded in Sahih Muslim Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have explicitly stated that one who introduces good Sunnah into religion of Islam, hadith: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Note that in the above two Ahadith word Sunnah has been used but the meaning in context is obvious of innovation. To put it simply the Hadith means; he who introduced some good innovation into religion of Islam then the innovator and the followers would earn equal reward without their rewards being diminished in any way. There is Hadith in which Hazrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) gathered the companions under leadership of one Qari and remarked this was an excellent innovation: "I went out in the company of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab one night in Ramadan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying individually, or a man (i.e. Imam) praying with a small group behind him. So Umar said, in my opinion I would better collect these [people] under the leadership of one Qari. So, he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubai bin Ka'b. Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that, 'Umar remarked: هَذِهِ الْبِدْعَةُ نِعْمَ عُمَرُ قَالَ (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.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. [in those days] people used to pray in the early part of the night." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] This statement of Hazrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) goes to establish that religion of Islam has place for praiseworthy innovations on basis of which he declared his innovation as excellent. Q13: Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated regarding newly invented innovations: « من أحدث في أمرنا هذا ما ليس منه فهو ردٌّ» Translation: "Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours (i.e. Allah and RasoolAllah) that is not part of it, will have it rejected." [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266] In another Hadith it is stated: « وَمَنْ عَمِلَ عَمَلًا لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أَمْرُنَا فَهُوَ رَدٌّ » Translation: “He who does an act which we (i.e. Allah and RasoolAllah) have not commanded, will have it rejected (by Allah).” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] It is apparent from both these Ahadith that all ‘praiseworthy’ innovated practices will be rejected by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) yet you say they will be rewarded. Could you explain this contradiction? Answer: You have misunderstood the Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Suppose Yoga is made part of Islam as means of worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Would this be valid form of worship in religion of Islam? Will Yoga be accepted by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and rewarded? Yoga is not Islamicly accepted mode of worship nor it was sanctioned by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and whosoever worships Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) employing it, will have his worship rejected. Rejected on the basis that Yoga is not from the Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor it is from commandments of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Regarding which is not from commandments of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor from not his Sunnahs, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: “He who does an act which we (i.e. Allah and RasoolAllah) have not commanded, will have it rejected (by Allah).” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] "Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours (i.e. Allah and RasoolAllah) that is not part of it, will have it rejected." [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266] Now coming to the praiseworthy innovated practices, as stated earlier are composed of acts of worship such as performing of optional prayers, recitation of Quran, supplication, and fasting. In addition, they consist of acts of charity, distribution of food, and are educational. All this is established from the Quran and Hadith, and many are Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence they will not be rejected and will be rewarded because these are good deeds. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “Indeed, this Qur'an guides to that which is most suitable and gives good tidings to the believers who do righteous deeds that they will have a great reward.” [Ref: 17:9] “They believe in Allah and the Last Day, and they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and hasten to good deeds. And those are among the righteous.” [Ref: 3:114] The Saliheen (i.e. righteous) are told of good return from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Those who have believed and done righteous deeds - a good state is theirs and a good return.” [Ref: 13:29] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states those who do good Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not darken their faces nor they will be humiliated and they are people of paradise: “For them who have done good is the best [reward] and extra. No darkness will cover their faces, nor humiliation. Those are companions of paradise; they will abide therein eternally.” [Ref: 10:26] The reward on good deeds is promised by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and he has promised entry into paradise for those who do good. The innovations which are composed of acts of worship, charity, Islamic education are good deeds and will be rewarded and will be accepted in light of Quranic teaching. Q14: If one abstains from praiseworthy innovated practices is one sinful? Answer: The innovated practices such as celebration of birthday of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), wide range of Esal Al Sawab (i.e. sending of reward) practices, under various names/labels, all are optional. If one does not take part in them there is no blame of sin upon an individual. Q15: If one believes the indicated innovated practices are reprehensible is this sinful? Answer: Islam judges based on content and not on the label. These practices are made up of worship, charity and various other Sunnahs. Therefore to consider these practices sinful/blameworthy is to consider the Islamic acts of worship, charity and Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as sinful/blameworthy. If one consider these innovated practices reprehensible/sinful due to his ignorance and lack of knowledge, without understanding what the implications of his belief are then one is heretic. If one fully understands the implications of his belief and deems the entire praiseworthy innovation as blameworthy/sinful. Including name and the components which make praiseworthy innovation as whole, such as acts of worship, charity and Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then the person is guilty of disbelief, which invalidates belief in Islam. Q16: Salafism judges on label and based on the contents of practice. Both the name and components of practice have to be explicitly stated for it to be permissible. Hence if the name of practice is not found in the Quran and Hadith then according to Salafi methodology the practice is [reprehensible] innovation. How do you respond to this line of argument? Answer: Technically permissibility is not judged on explicit mention of name and methodology of an innovated practice. Explicit name and methodology of a practice is requested when one has to establish if a practice is Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) or not. Anyone asking for explicit evidence of name as well as methodology of an innovated practice to establish permissibility is foolish and unqualified to issue a judgment on aspects related to Islam. If permissibility is established based on name and the content then note that name of Sahih of Imam Bukhari (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) has not been mentioned in Quran or in any Hadith and nor there is any explicit named reference for any other Hadith book. Should we prohibit the reading of Ahadith books because these collections are [reprehensible] innovations and warn people against reading these Ahadith books just on the basis that names of these Ahadith collections have not been stated in Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? [3] The label in Islam is not essential for establishing permissibility but the components which make a practice are essential for permissibility. Moving on, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states in Quran regarding the Christian monks that they invented monasticism: “Then We sent following their footsteps Our messengers and followed [them] with Jesus, the son of Mary, and gave him the Gospel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy, and monasticism which they innovated We did not prescribe it for them except [that they did so] seeking the approval of Allah. But they did not observe it with due observance. So We gave the ones who believed among them their reward, but many of them are defiantly disobedient.” [Ref: 57:27] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) goes on to state, the monks invented it to please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but they did not act upon their innovation as they should have. From among those who practiced monasticism and believed in the message of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) were rewarded by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This interpretation is supported by Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “(Then We caused Our messengers) one after the other (to follow in their footsteps) to follow Noah and Abraham from their respective offspring; (and We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow) these Messengers, (and gave him the Gospel, and placed compassion and mercy) towards each other (in the hearts of those who followed him). (But monasticism they invented) they built monasteries and cloisters to escape the sedition of Paul, the Jew. (We ordained it not for them) We did not enjoin monasticism upon them. (Only seeking Allah's pleasure) they did not invent it except to seek Allah's good pleasure, (and) had We enjoined it upon them (they observed it not with right observance) they would not have given it its right due. (So We give those of them who believe) among the monks (their reward) double for their faith and worship; these are the ones who did not contravene against the religion of Jesus. 24 among these were in the Yemen and when they heard of the Prophet (pbuh) they believed in him and joined his religion, (but many of them) of the monks (are evil-livers) disbelievers, these are the ones who went against the religion of Jesus.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Abbas, 57:27] This goes on to establish that the name and the practice of monasticism was innovated by the followers of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) still rewarded those who engaged in monasticism and still believed in teaching of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam). Here we have approval of a practice which was not taught by Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) with name or by method and yet those who adhered to it were rewarded. So based on this precedent we can judge that teaching of a practice by name is not fundamental to establish legitimacy. The verse establishes that if a practice (i.e. monasticism) is not taught [by name or methodology] neither prohibited [by name or methodology] and it is invented to please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and observed correctly the reward will be granted by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Q17: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated the religion of Islam has been completed: “This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. But whoever is forced by severe hunger with no inclination to sin - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” [Ref: 5:3] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: "Whoever innovates something in this matter (i.e. religion) of ours (i.e. Allah and RasoolAllah) that is not part of it, will have it rejected." [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266] The religion of Islam has been perfected and this means nothing else is required for guidance other than what is revealed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has informed that innovation would be rejected. Considering this evidence, how can it be correct to believe that one can introduce a practice into Islam which would be rewarded? Answer: Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Therefore one cannot negate the permissibility of reward worthy innovations into Islam and to negate it is heretical and an innovation. Indeed the religion of Islam has been perfected and completed. One must understand that religion of Islam was perfected and completed with the Hadith which states an individual who introduces into Islam a good Sunnah will earn equal reward to those who follow his innovation. The perfection of Islam is not harmed by introduction of good Sunnahs into Islam and if it was affected in any way then the Messenger of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would not have stated contrary to it. Innovations are recognized as later additions and it known that they were/are not part fundamental Islam which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught in his life time. It is also understood that these are not compulsory nor Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Q18: Now question is, why are they said to be part of Islam when it is given that they are not part of [fundamental teaching of] Islam which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught? Answer: Answer to this question has got to do with [logical] semantics therefore it is important one understands the forthcoming point properly. In Arabic language if something (i.e. y) attaches to a part then y would be referred as the part with which it is attached. As an example, Arabs say, his head turned grey, and by this the implied meaning is, his hair turned grey. Even Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used this method. A sign of judgment day is that thigh/leg would speak to a person. Note: the mobile phone is placed in trouser pockets hence it refers to it. Wahhabi sect’s true followers known as ISIS have called their Khariji state as an Islamic state. Question is why have they named it Islamic state? Did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) label it ISIS in His book? Or did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permit the bloodshed, rape, pillage and destruction of lands of Muslims in His book? Or did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) appoint Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi as Khalifah in His book? So why is it labelled Islamic State of Iraq and Syria? What is Islamic about it? A supporter of these people would argue it is called Islamic because it is based on precepts of Islam. [4] Demonstration of this principle is also obvious in regards to Qadiyanism also known as Ahmadiyyah. Qadiyaniyyah believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (lanatulillah) as Prophet and therefore are out of fold of Islam. Technically Qadiyanism is an independent religion. Yet they are counted amongst the deviants sects of Islam and example of this is at IslamQA Wahhabi website. From these examples we have a principle, y which is connected to or based on z is considered part of z. Using the principle we come to understanding that, innovations are said to be part of Islam because they are based on teaching of Islam and connected to teaching of Islam due to practices which make up an innovation. Hence it is clear that praiseworthy innovations are not part of fundamental Islam which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught but are said to be part of Islam because the foundation of activities is from Islam. Hence these innovated practices do not go against the belief that Islam is perfected and completed. Q19: And what need is there for [praiseworthy] innovations when all that we need to enter paradise is what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught? Answer: It must be said that the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is enough for guidance and success in this earthly life and in hereafter. Q20: So then there is no need for [praiseworthy] innovations, is it? Answer: Note, all praiseworthy innovations are composed of Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are an example of good deed which he has set to follow, and evidence of this is: "Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah, a good example [of deeds] has been set for the one who seeks Allah, and the Last Day, and [for one who] thinks constantly about Allah." [Ref: 33:21] Emulating Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) itself is a good deed and Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are good deeds with which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is pleased with. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated that Muslims should do good deeds properly, sincerely and moderately, evidence of it is this: “Narrated Aisha: The Prophet said, "Do good deeds properly, sincerely and moderately, and receive good news, because one's good deeds will not make him enter Paradise." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H474] Also in another Hadith he instructed to do good deeds within ones capacity because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) rewards without tiring, and following Hadith is evidence: “Do [good] deeds within your capacity because Allah never gets tired of giving rewards till you get tired of doing good deeds." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H251] Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are part of praiseworthy innovations and his Sunnahs are examples of good deeds, and we are instructed to do good deeds. There is no fundamental need for praiseworthy innovations but these innovations serve an important purpose and that is of accumulating good deeds. Q21: Is there a Shar’ri obligation to act on these [praiseworthy] innovations? Answer: There is absolutely no Shar’ri obligation upon any Muslim to take part in praiseworthy innovations. These praiseworthy innovations are optional practices if practiced then praiseworthy innovations bring reward if avoided bring no blame. Q22: So when there is no need for praiseworthy innovations, nor there is any Shar’ri obligation to act on them, and we can go to paradise without engaging in these [praiseworthy] innovations then why should we create them and why would Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) create room for[praiseworthy] innovations? Answer: I will begin by answering your last question first. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were aware that no religion remains pure and eventually the teachings of Prophets are distorted as time progresses. As such principles were introduced into Islam and part of these principles is principle of good innovation in Islam being rewarded, and bad innovations being sinful. Based on which his followers can take part in reward worthy practices that emerge after him and discard the sinful innovations. Coming to your first question, even though Muslims do recognize the concept of introducing praiseworthy innovations into Islam yet we do not introduce praiseworthy innovations into Islam at will. If we acted on the principle as given by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then there would have been countless praiseworthy innovations composed of Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). So even we the Muslims recognize the need to holding to Islam which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught in his life time and understand there is no need for praiseworthy innovations. Incase a praiseworthy innovation is introduced we judge based on the principle which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught and as a matter of principle we do not reject praiseworthy innovations because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has told of reward for engaging in them. In short, we should not introduce praiseworthy innovations and our focus should be the fundamental Islam which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught. If a praiseworthy innovations is introduced then as Muslims we should not oppose it because as told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), it is reward worthy. Q23: Coming to those [praiseworthy] innovations which have been passed on by our ancestors such as celebrating the birthday of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Why is so much emphasis put on these [praiseworthy] innovations? Answer: The Khawarij oppose the Muslims because they deem the praiseworthy innovations to be reprehensible innovations and tell Muslims that if they engage in the praiseworthy innovations they will burn in hell. Yet Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has told of equal reward for the one who introduces and those who follow his footsteps. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah.” [Ref: 3:110] One can forbid wrong in three ways, use physical force, speak out against it, or declare it in heart to be wrong. Note, the Khawarij prohibit praiseworthy innovations and declare them as sinful and this is wrong because they oppose what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught.[5] We are obliged by the verse of Quran to forbid the Khawarij from declaring something good to be sinful. So we the Muslims speak out against the heretical methodology of Khawarij and their heretical understandings. Sign of best nation from mankind is that they enjoin what is good and we also partake in the right/good innovations because taking part in such innovations also a form of opposition to the Khawarij. Q24: How can the dispute about [praiseworthy] innovations be resolved in your understanding? Answer: Idealistic absolute reconciliation is not possible between the Muslims and Khawarij due to fundamental differences in methodology. If Khawarij accept that the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) have jawami al kalim (i.e. short phrase bearing widest meanings) nature and if their understanding of Ahadith on subject of innovation is corrected then the dispute with Khawarij can be resolved in favor of Muslims. Q25: You don’t believe the definitions of innovation have something to do with the differences? Answer: The Muslims divide innovation into two major categories: praiseworthy and blameworthy. Praiseworthy is which is based on teaching of Quran and Sunnah, and blameworthy is which contradicts the teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Muslim scholars also purposed the definition of innovation which now is bench mark of Khawarij. In this methodology of innovation anything which is not supported from teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with explicit or implied evidence was an innovation. Note in their terminology when a practice is declared as an innovation, it means reprehensible innovation, and praiseworthy innovations were declared as Sunnahs in this methodology.[6] The Khawarij removed condition of implicit evidence (i.e. Ijthadi evidence) and made explicit evidence as the criteria for judging permissibility especially against Muslims. Therefore with minor adjustments this definition can be reconciled with Islamic methodology but in Khariji belief system there is no room for introducing good Sunnah into Islam hence the definition will not be altered to conform to definition of early Islamic scholarship. The difference in definitions of innovations by itself is really significant. The understanding of Ahadith relating to subject of innovation is cause of these definitions and depending on how Ahadith are understood the definition and principles surrounding are derived. So for correct definition the proper understanding of Ahadith relating to subject of innovation is fundamental requirement. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “Jabir b. Abdullah said: When Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him) delivered the sermon, his eyes became red, his voice rose, and his anger increased so that he was like one giving a warning against the enemy and saying: "The enemy has made a morning attack on you and in the evening too." He would also say: "The Last Hour and I have been sent like these two." And he would join his forefinger and middle finger; and would further say: "The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." He would further say: I am more dear to a Muslim even than his self; and he who left behind property that is for his family; and he who dies under debt or leaves children (in helplessness), the responsibility (of paying his debt and bringing up his children) lies on me." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] - [2] "And whoever introduces an ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e. reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] - [3] Please note, permissibility is stated to be only established if name and content both are stated if one of the two is missing then according to Salafi methodology the innovated practice is [reprehensible] innovation. - [4] Note, these people have nothing do with religion of Islam. Wahhabi’s are all upon the methodology of Khawarij and about Khawarij Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said they are people of Kufr. - [5] “That is because they opposed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever opposes Allah - then indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.” [Ref: 59:4] “Do they not know that whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger - that for him is the fire of Hell, wherein he will abide eternally? That is the great disgrace.” [Ref: 9:63] - [6] Not Sunnah in meaning of Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but Sunnah in meaning of good reward worthy Sunnah: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466]

Introduction: Shaikh Abu Rumaysah wrote an extensive article in which he presented his sects Khariji understanding on subject of innovation. Part of this article is dedicated to refuting arguments which Muslims present to refute his understanding of innovation. At explanation number three he attempts to explain the Hadith from Sahih of Imam Muslim (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) regarding followers of good Sunnah being rewarded equal to one who introduced it. Briefly, his position on this Hadith is to be understood according to context, and that charity was already part of Islam hence the phrase was uttered for sake of reviving a Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and this principle is not for introduction of praiseworthy innovations. His position will be judged from Islamic perspective so the truth of matter is revealed for the Muslims. An Invitation To Access Evidence And Dialogue: In the beginning of the article the writer/compiler Abu Hanna wrote why this article was penned. There is mention of many accusations hurled against them, which is of no interest of servant. The author of first statement continued to write: “We ask the brothers and sisters to look for the 'clear argument', to consider the evidence that is provided herein. Do not let this article be a cause for creating more fitna (trials), but instead an opportunity to see a way forward for some reconciliation.” He continues to write: “If you do disagree with this article, then let this be a chance to start a dialogue between us and you rather than a war of words. You know our evidence, please show us yours and let us approach the issue with the scholastic behavior of our predecessors.” As a Muslim one cannot agree with the content of article because it contradicts words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and is based on distortion of clear and emphatic teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hence it is in spirit of fair academic sincere dialogue, servant will present the Islamic approach to understanding the set of Ahadith in question. We are commanded to change the evil in following ways: “Whoever among you sees an evil action and can change it with his hand (by taking action), let him change it with his hand. If he cannot do that, then with his tongue (by speaking out); and if he cannot do that, then with his heart (by hating it and feeling that it is wrong), and that is the weakest of faith.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4013] And if writing can be considered internet form of speech then the most befitting way to rectify the misguidance is by writing a response pointing to misguidance. The objective is, to guide to path of Islam, neither to humiliate nor to hurt the feelings of those who follow the path contrary to Prophetic teaching. Effort has been made to maintain an academic decorum, but if there is slip, then servant humbly requests; you bare it knowing companions suffered far greater for sake of religion of Islam then a stinging word. Servant ends with: “Remember that at times, due its inherent power the truth can be somewhat painful at first, but acceptance and submission to it is ultimately the objective of every sincere student of knowledge. As Allah the Truth says (what means), "Nay, we fling down the truth against falsehood so it smashes through its mind, and behold, it vanishes." “[Ref: Surah al-Anbiya 21:18] If Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) permits the author of this article will be notified and given opportunity to respond. Any beneficial developments will be published on the forum. Articles On This Subject Which Support Islamic Position: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave many principles in numerous Ahadith which are in a specific context but those principles are generally applied by Muslims and Khawarij to judge all modern issues. The following article shows Khariji sectarian bias remains in regards to Ahadith of good Sunnah but the generality of Ahadith is maintained in other Ahadith, here. Yet Khawarij only restrict the principles given in the Ahadith of good Sunnah to their context because these Ahadith establish legitimacy of introducing praiseworthy innovations into Islam and tell of reward for emulating these Sunnahs. Next one demonstrates that the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can be taken literally and interpreted, and both methodologies are valid, and presents Islamic position, here. Also by contextualizing Ahadith can negate the generality and this means all principles which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are according to the context and cannot be used as a guiding principle outside of contextual relevance as demonstrated, here. It is established from Hadith that word Sunnah is being used in meaning of innovation and the benefit of this is that it eliminates the argument; the Ahadith of good Sunnah are about reviving Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), here. Lastly another article argues words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are part of revelation and regarding revelation Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said that it is jawami al kalim in nature (i.e. meaning shortest expression with vast meanings). Therefore the principles which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave in Ahadith of good Sunnah and bad Sunnah are short but express vast meanings. For these principles to be in line with jawami al kalim nature they must not be restricted to context but all valid interpretations must be accepted. May they be historical, contextual, and intertextual, here. Full Explanation Of Shaikh Abu Rumaysah: The Hadith: “He who sets a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards; and he who sets in Islam an evil Sunnah, there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2219] The evidence that they derive from this hadith is that people can invent new practices in Islam which are either good or bad. Of course, if they were to take the hadith in its full context then it is not possible to derive this meaning. The context of the hadith states that a group of poor people came to the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) so he asked those around him to give charity, but no one came forward - so much so that signs of anger could be discerned on the face of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), so one of the companions stepped forward and gave charity, so the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said the above hadith. Firstly, the word 'Sunnah' which is used in this hadith cannot be understood to mean the Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), because that would imply that there is something bad in the Sunnah; rather it is to be understood in its linguistic meaning of 'practice’. Secondly, this action the companion did was not something new in Islam, since giving charity was already legislated from the very first days of Islam; rather he was simply implementing it, so the statement of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) "a good Sunnah" was said at a time when the people were reluctant to give charity, so one man started to give the charity and others followed him in it. Thus, he revived a Sunnah at a time when the people were reluctant to practice it, and this is the meaning of "a good Sunnah” Hence, in the early works of 'Aqeedah, this hadith was included under the chapter headings, "The reward of the one who renews the Sunnah." [For example Sharh Usool I'tiqaad 1/50] The meaning of "a bad Sunnah" is similar. It is renewing or starting something that the Shari’ah has already declared to be bad, and the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) gave the example of the two sons of Adam (alayhis salaam wa 'alaa nabiyina), one killing the other. So upon the murderer was the sin of the killing and the sin of all those that killed after him, without their sins being reduced. Thirdly, the hadith uses the terms 'good' and 'bad', and the Shari’ah has already defined in its totality all that is good and all that is bad. This is what is pointed to in the statement of Imam ash-Shaafi'ee in his refutation of Istihsaan (declaring something to be good) when he said, "Whoever declares something to be good, he has declared it part of Shari’ah." [Ref: ar-Risala][!] [Ref: MuslimConverts] The Hadith In Discussion: “Jarir bin Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woolen clothes came to Allah's Messenger. He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger said: He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Key Points Of Shaikh Abu Rumaysah’s Explanation: i) Statement of Hadith in discussion is to be understood in the context of historical event. ii) Word Sunnah is not in meaning of Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but in linguistic meaning of practice. iii) The charity was part of Islam even before the event took place. iv) Companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) implemented the charity when people were reluctant. v) He revived a Sunnah/the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by giving charity. Key Points Of Hadith Of Sahih Muslim: i) Poor people came to Masjid Nabvi belonging to tribe of Mudar. ii) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave khutbah (i.e. speech) reminding the companions about their bond with one another through Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam)[1] and exhorted them to give charity. iii) Companions were reluctant which angered Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and signs of it showed on his face. iv) A companion came with purse of silver and donated it. This started a chain reaction and all companions contributed according to their capacity. This continued until signs of happiness Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were visible on his face. v) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of equal reward for one who sets/introduces a good Sunnah in Islam and those who follow this good Sunnah. Meaning Of Word Sunnah In Hadith Of Good And Bad Sunnah: Both of us agree, word Sunnah in Hadith of bad Sunnah in literally means way and practice. Shaikh Abu Rumaysah has stated: “… the word 'Sunnah' which is used in this hadith cannot be understood to mean the Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), because that would imply that there is something bad in the Sunnah; rather it is to be understood in its linguistic meaning of 'practice’.” If the word Sunnah is considered in context of the phrase, he who introduced a bad Sunnah into Islam, then implication of this is; bearing of burden being told is for something which is not already part of Islam. Note innovation is not part of Islam hence the word way/practice is in meaning of innovation. A Hadith from Tirmadhi which has exactly same meaning uses the word Bid’ah (i.e. innovation) instead of Sunnah (i.e. practice), here: “ And if anyone introduces a misguiding innovation with which Allah and His Messenger are not pleased then he gets a sin like the sins of those who observe it and nothing is deducted from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] This establishes part of Hadith of Muslim (i.e. bad Sunnah) is about innovation and note both parts of Hadith of Muslim (i.e. good Sunnah and bad Sunnah) are grammatically exactly same apart from words which give each principle a distinctive meaning. Therefore in the Hadith of Muslim the word Sunnah phrase, good Sunnah, is in meaning of innovation. To strengthen the Islamic position note, if the word Sunnah is considered in context of the phrase, he who introduced a good Sunnah into Islam, then implication of this is; reward being told is for something which is not already part of Islam innovation is not part of Islam hence the word way/practice is in meaning of innovation. Good Sunnah Is Reviving Which Is Already Part Of Islam: Considering the following part of quote: “Second, this action the companion did was not something new in Islam, since giving charity was already legislated from the very first days of Islam; rather he was simply implementing it, so the statement of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) "a good Sunnah" was said at a time when the people were reluctant to give charity, so one man started to give the charity and others followed him in it. Thus, he revived a Sunnah at a time when the people were reluctant to practice it, and this is the meaning of "a good Sunnah.” And considering the following: “The meaning of "a bad Sunnah" is similar [to good Sunnah]. It is renewing or starting something that the Shari’ah has already declared to be bad …” I have come to conclusion that brief position of Shaikh Abu Rumaysah would be two possibilities: i) Meaning of a good Sunnah is renewing or reviving something that the Shari’ah has already declared to be good. ii) Meaning of a good Sunnah is renewing or reviving something that the Shari’ah has already made part of Islam. Question for Shaikh, is reciting Salat (i.e. sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) after mentioning Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) a good Sunnah? You will agree it is good Sunnah. Did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) declare this as good Sunnah? Is reciting Salat after mentioning Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) part of Islam? No it isn’t! Yet you agreed it is a good Sunnah. The people of knowledge know; reciting Salat after mentioning of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was started by Imam Ma’lik (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) and this practiced continued to be enjoined by Muslims ever since. There is reward for Imam Ma’lik (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) due to starting this good Sunnah and those who follow his example, according to following: “He who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Point to note is, your definition of good Sunnah is invalid. Introducing good Sunnah into Islam does not mean reviving a prophetic Sunnah rather it means something which was not part of Islam but is made part of Islam via Ijtihad. Claiming Of Reviving Prophetic Sunnah Of Charity: Ahadith record Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) exhorted the companions to give charity, here: “Jarir bin Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woolen clothes came to Allah's Messenger. He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] There was no need of reviving of prophetic Sunnah of charity. It was alive amongst them, and Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was alive, encouraging good and forbidding evil. Reviving is of those prophetic Sunnahs which have been erased from the memory of Muslims, and reviving of prophetic Sunnahs is only after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), here: "I am ready to know O Messenger of Allah!" He said: "That indeed whoever revives a Sunnah from my Sunnah which has died after me, then for him is a reward similar to whoever acts upon it without diminishing anything from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Whoever revives a Sunnah of mine that dies out after I am gone, he will have a reward equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210] Shaykh interpreted the reluctance of companions to give charity has death of prophet Sunnah. Reluctance of companions to give charity cannot be interpreted to mean prophetic Sunnah of giving charity was dead amongst them and which needed reviving. Burden of proof is upon Shaykh to establish; prophetic Sunnah of giving charity was forgotten/dead in life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which was being revived by companion. As for the Islamic position, servant has already established it with evidence. Note, there was no need for reviving the prophet Sunnah of giving charity because it was known to companions and by establishing this position the basis of Abu Rumaysah’s argument has been refuted. Hence the literal meaning of prophet words in Hadith of, whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, stands: “He who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Companion Introduced Nothing New Into Islam: He writes: “…this action the companion did was not something new in Islam, since giving charity was already legislated from the very first days of Islam; rather he was simply implementing it …” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] So my question is, the first person who initiated the donation process what was his contribution to Islam? Note, the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are clear that one who introduces a good practice in Islam he will get reward equal to those who follow his Sunnah. By giving charity he merely initiated a process of giving charity and he did not introduce this practice into Islam because charity and giving charity was already part of Islam. Companion Revived A Prophetic Sunnah: He writes further: “… so the statement of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) "a good Sunnah" was said at a time when the people were reluctant to give charity, so one man started to give the charity and others followed him in it. Thus, he revived a Sunnah at a time when the people were reluctant to practice it …” Abu Rumaysah saying that he revived a Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by being the first one to donate does not fit the statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were, he who introduces a good Sunnah of Islam, then the context would fit the statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are: he who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam. Note the Hadith states, one who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam and implication of which is; the Sunnah being introduced into Islam is not part of it already. Therefore the arguments that this statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was about reviving the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is incorrect. The position of Abu Rumaysah; this statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is to be understood in the historical context is proven wrong. It is wrong on the basis that this statement is about which is not part of Islam and the companion only initiated charity which was part of Islam. Hadith Was Part Of Reviving A Sunnah: He wrote: “Thus, he revived a Sunnah at a time when the people were reluctant to practice it, and this is the meaning of "a good Sunnah” Hence, in the early works of 'Aqeedah, this hadith was included under the chapter headings, "The reward of the one who renews the Sunnah." [For example Sharh Usool I'tiqaad 1/50] Answer to this is; there are two components of the following Hadith, one is introducing into Islam [which is not part of it already] and the other is connected with reviving good/bad innovated Sunnah, here: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The Hadith has an innovating component and reviving component, and it was part of reviving corpus cause of reviving component. It is due to foolishness that one ignores the following part of Hadith: “… He who introduced some good practice in Islam …”, and is only focusing at the following part only: “… which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect, …” Also note, reviving component of the Hadith is connected with innovating component of Hadith hence it means, those who revive the newly introduced practice into Islam will have equal reward to one who introduced it. Hence it was part of reviving corpus not because of reviving Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but it was in such collections due to reviving newly introduced Sunnah into Islam. Bad Sunnah Is Renewing Which Is Already Declared Bad: He wrote: “The meaning of "a bad Sunnah" is similar. It is renewing or starting something that the Shari’ah has already declared to be bad …” According to Shaikh Abu Rumaysah meaning of bad Sunnah is renewing something which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) already declared sinful/bad. Question for Shaikh, could you guide me to a verse of Quran or Hadith in which pole dancing almost naked in presence of none family males is declared bad/sinful? No! I didn’t think you could quote me a Hadith or Ayah either but is watching pole dancing bad/sinful or not? Sinful! Has the Shari’ah already declared it bad? An honest answer is, no! Point here is pole dancing is not renewing which Shari’ah has declared bad/sinful but it is still bad and this refutes your position, quoted above. Another question, was oral ###### declared bad by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or by Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? No! Is oral ###### bad or not? Bad![2] Has the Shari’ah declared oral ######, bad? Another honest and truthful answer is, no! The point is renewing or starting something Shari’ah has already declared to be bad is not the definition of bad Sunnah. Engaging in something which Shari’ah has declared bad, is sinful. Bad Sunnah is, a Sunnah which is introduced into religion of Islam and is composed religious/non-religious activities but component of which is engaging in Haram, or Shirk, or Kufr. To explain this with an example, filthy rich money-Shaikh goes to perform Hajj. He takes with him the finest quality wine bottles, 20k a piece. An imported infidel butler and the money-Shaikh is accompanied by 10 of the sluttiest sluts of Europe in sluttiest clothes possible. Monkey-Shaikh is fit as a fiddle but he is carried by these sluttiest sluts on a throne made out of gold thread embroidery and on his head is diamond crown. His sluts carry him around the Kabah for first Tawaf, and the butler pours the fine wine in glass for him. He sips bit by bit until second Tawaf begins and butler being professional pours the second glass of cold fine wine. The money-Shaikh ends his seventh Tawaf with his seven glass of fine wine. His behavior becomes a yardstick for filthy rich Arabs and all emulate his Sunnah closely as they can. Now question is, is this renewing or starting something which Shari’ah has declared bad, or is it a new bad Sunnah? It is a new bad Sunnah into religion of Islam. Will money-Shaikh earn the equal sin of those who follow his newly invented reprehensible Sunnah? Damn right he will because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Important point here is that principle is not just for historical context but it is to be applied generally to all new reprehensible innovations/practices. The Issue Of Relevance Of Second Sentence Of Statement: Now if the first sentence of good Sunnah in Islam was said in context of historical event then it must be that the second sentence was also in context of historical event. The second sentence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) statement is: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] What is the reprehensible Sunnah which the companions introduced which resulted in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) telling them that they will be bearing the burden of introducing evil Sunnah? Shaikh Abu Rumaysah does not answer this question but instead he interprets the Hadith out of the context. An educated estimation would be that his response would be as follows: companions were eliminating the Sunnah of giving charity in the way of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) due to their reluctance and this was evil Sunnah. Does this statement apply to all types of reprehensible Sunnahs or just the one you pointed out? If he says to all types of reprehensible Sunnahs then note he has taken this statement out of historical context. This statement was in context of reluctance to give charity according to his methodology hence it can only be applied to similar event. If he was to interpret it generally he is going against his own position of interpreting the Hadith according to context, and he did go against his own principle. He interpreted the second sentence of the Hadith in light of Hadhrat Adam’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) son murdering his brother, he wrote: “The meaning of "a bad Sunnah" is similar. It is renewing or starting something that the Shari’ah has already declared to be bad, and the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) gave the example of the two sons of Adam (alayhis salaam wa alaa nabiyina), one killing the other. So upon the murderer was the sin of the killing and the sin of all those that killed after him, without their sins being reduced.” This establishes that Shaikh Abu Rumaysah interpreted the Hadith and went against what he complained about in the beginning of his response (i.e. words of Hadith are interpreted out of context). If the context was so fundamental to understanding the statements of Hadith in discussion why would he leave it and interpret it with Hadith of son of Adam (alayhis salaam)? Point here is; context is important but the principles are not limited restricted to the context only. Interpretation Of Bad Sunnah Critically Analyzed: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "Whenever a person is murdered unjustly, there is a share from the burden of the crime on the first son of Adam for he was the first to start the tradition of murdering." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H552] It is clear that son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) was the first person to start murder and one who follows his footsteps receives equal sin to him and this agrees with the following principle: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Note the word underlined here: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently …” This points to reprehensible Sunnah which was not part of Islam before but is being made part of Islam by son of Adam (alayhis salaam). Murder was an evil Sunnah which did not exist prior to incident mentioned in Hadith of Bukhari. In this context the meaning of Hadith of Bukhari compliments the following perfectly: And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Hence if a bad practice is introduced in Islam then continuously revived by others then all those who renew it are equally sinful for emulating it and son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) did introduce a bad Sunnah of murder which was without a precedent. Therefore this incident of Bukhari is proof of Islamic position not Khariji position because an evil Sunnah is introduced and then followed. And in part of good Sunnah the Shaikh Abu Rumaysah’s position is that nothing new was introduced only an old practice was revived. Note he wrote meaning of bad Sunnah is similar to good Sunnah: The meaning of "a bad Sunnah" is similar. It is renewing or …” If this is indeed the case then companion must have introduced a good Sunnah into Islam which was not part of it prior to the event. The Companion Introduced An Innovation Into Islam: The companion acted on the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) amongst reluctant group of people. It maybe that it was first occasion where the companions were reluctant to give charity to their fellow Muslims. Hence he is the first one to give charity amongst reluctant people, and this can be deemed as a good Sunnah, and in context of reluctance of companions, and in context of being first companion stepping up to give charity, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H6466] Implication of which would be that in context of reluctance of all companions Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) termed the action of companion as a good Sunnah in Islam. This explanation holds to the literal meaning of statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and keeps in touch with the historical event. Also note, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) introduced the concept of charity in Islam and those who follow his example will have reward. With both interpretations a Sunnah is being introduced into Islam which is followed by others or revived by others. The Issue Of Context And Generality: Sa’d bin Ubada (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is reported to have said: "If I saw a man with my wife, I would strike him (behead him) with the blade of my sword." In context of this Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "You people are astonished at Sa`d's Ghira. By Allah, I have more Ghira than he, and Allah has more Ghira than I …” He continued to inform us: “… and because of Allah's Ghira, He has made unlawful shameful deeds and sins done in open and in secret. And there is none who likes that the people should repent to Him and beg His pardon than Allah, and for this reason He sent the warners and the givers of good news.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H512] In the context of Sa’d bin Ubada’s statement the following words mean, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has prohibited adultery [which is a sin] done openly or secretly: “He has made unlawful shameful deeds and sins done in open and in secret.” Yet these words are not restricted to context but apply to all shameful deeds [according to Shari’ah] and sins. Even though the words can be interpreted according to context yet generality of these words remains intact allowing for application of these words to other shameful and sinful actions. Note, the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) quoted in Hadith do not entirely fit the context but do have some connection with context. In similar fashion the following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) have relevance to context because reviving a practice (i.e. of giving charity) by engaging in it by others is part of Hadith: “He who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H6466] This statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not entirely fit into context like statement of shameful deeds but has loose connection with context. And similar to Hadith of shameful deeds the generality of meaning of the statement cannot be negated because the statement begins with, he who introduced a good Sunnah in Islam, which is indication that reward being told further on is for a practice which is not already part of Islam. An Exhortation To One Who Distorts Prophetic Words: It was Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to give general guidance relating to an event but provide a principle on basis of which the Muslims can judge issues which are were not addressed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The principle of good Sunnah and bad Sunnah are part of these principles and to limit and restrict their understanding to an era, or a people, or event, takes away from Muslims a source of guidance. The one who negates the generality of these words, opposes what the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said about his Prophetic words: "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and …” [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H220] The principles of good and bad Sunnah carry wide range of meanings which your sectarian entrenched mind cannot comprehend and refrain from what your intellect cannot grasp and fear Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not oppose His beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated about such people: “And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers - We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination.” [Ref: 4:115] You have no excuse, neither of lack of knowledge, nor of those who are in state of oblivion and as a reminder note the following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), here: "The best speech is Allah's Book and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H120] The guidance of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is in form of principles and his guidance is best guidance. He has told of reward for one who brings into Islam good innovation and for those who follow this innovated Sunnah has declared equal reward. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "It is not fitting for the believing man nor for the believing woman, that whenever Allah and His Messenger have decided any matter, that they should have any other opinion." [Ref: 33:36] Believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as he was to believed, and accept the guidance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as it was to be accepted, and have no opinion over the verdict of Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Conclusion: It is true the statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about good Sunnah into Islam can be loosely interpreted in light of the historical context but the statement itself establishes its generality which allows multiple interpretations, including literal. To force the historical context upon a statement which is general, and to restrict the generality, and to reject the generality based on context is heretical. As matter of principle, a general statement can be interpreted in a context but it cannot be limited by the contextual interpretation, neither the generality can be altered due to contextual interpretation. The generality remains unaffected by contextual interpretations or theological expositions. Footnotes: - [1] Alterations have been made into the text. The first alteration is the text of Hadith in discussion has been inserted instead of paraphrased translation with reference. Salawat have been bracketed and some Arabic words have been capitalized and spelling of the words has been altered also. The last part of the content has been omitted because it was not connected with explanation of Hadith in discussion. There may be other alterations but none effects the original meaning of content. - [2] “Mundhir bin Jarir reported on the authority of his father: While we were in the company of the Messenger of Allah in the early hours of the morning, some people came there (who) were barefooted, naked, wearing striped woolen clothes, or cloaks, with their swords hung (around their necks). Most of them, nay, all of them, belonged to the tribe of Mudar. The color of the face of the Messenger of Allah underwent a change when he saw them in poverty. He then entered (his house) and came out and commanded Bilal (to pronounce Adhan). He pronounced Adhan and Iqima, and he (the Holy Prophet) observed prayer (along with his Companion) and then addressed (them reciting verses of the Holy Qur'an): '" 0 people, fear your Lord, Who created you from a single being" to the end of the verse," Allah is ever a Watcher over you" (iv. 1). (He then recited) a verse of Sura Hashr:" Fear Allah. and let every soul consider that which it sends forth for the morrow and fear Allah" (lix. 18). (Then the audience began to vie with one another in giving charity.) Some donated a dinar, others a dirham, still others clothes, some donated a sa' of wheat, some a sa' of dates; till he (the Holy Prophet) said: (Bring) even if it is half a date. Then a person from among the Ansar came there with a money bag which his hands could scarcely lift; in fact, they could not (lift). Then the people followed continuously, till I saw two heaps of eatables and clothes, and I saw the face of the Messenger glistening, like gold (on account of joy). The Messenger of Allah said: He who sets a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards; and he who sets in Islam an evil Sunnah, there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2219] - [3] It is bad due to implicit evidence of following Hadith: “… and because of Allah's Ghira, He has made unlawful shameful deeds and sins done in open and in secret.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H512]

Introduction: Muslims believe companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) introduced praiseworthy innovations/practices into religion of Islam. One such innovation was introduced by Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in form Taraweeh prayer during the month of Ramadhan. Our opponents believe there is no such a thing as praiseworthy innovation in Islam. Hence they argue Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) only revived/reinstated a Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Therefore the objective of this article would be to present the Islamic position in light of Islamic sources and critically examine evidence of anti-Islamic elements to demonstrate their misguided belief. Ahadith At The Centre Of Dispute: “Malik related to me from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abd al-Qari said, "I went out with Umar ibn alKhattab in Ramadhan to the mosque and the people there were spread out in groups. Some men were praying by themselves, whilst others were praying in small groups. Umar said, 'By Allah! It would be better in my opinion if these people gathered behind one reciter.' So he gathered them behind Ubayy ibn Kab. Then I went out with him another night and the people were praying behind their Qur'an reciter. Umar said, نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. How excellent this innovation is!) But what you miss while you are asleep is better than what you watch in prayer.' He meant the end of the night, and people used to watch the beginning of the night in prayer." [Ref: Muwatta Malik, B6, H3] “Abdur Rahman bin 'Abdul Qari said, "I went out in the company of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab one night in Ramadhan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying alone or a man praying with a little group behind him. So, 'Umar said, 'In my opinion I would better collect these (people) under the leadership of one Qari (Reciter)’. So, he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubai bin Ka'b. Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. 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.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] Shaikh Abu Rumaysah’s Position On The Issue: “When Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu) was the Khalifah, he collected the Muslims to pray in congregation for Tarawih prayers, and said, "What a good bid'ah this is." [bukhari] From this, they derive their belief of a good innovation. Firstly, it becomes necessary to explain the context of what happened. When the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) first emigrated to Madeenah, the Muslims prayed tarawih individually, and then for three nights they prayed in congregation behind the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam). After this, he stopped them doing so saying, "I feared that it would become obligatory upon you." So after this the Muslims would pray individually or in small congregations throughout the rule of Abu Bakr, and the beginning of Umar's (raddi Allaahu anhu) rule. Then Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu) came to the masjid and saw the Muslims praying in small groups behind different Imams, so he collected them together in one congregation behind one Imam and made the aforementioned statement [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227]. So how can this action of 'Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu) be understood to be a new act of worship when the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) did it during his lifetime? Secondly, the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) gave the reason why he stopped the congregational prayer, because revelation was still descending, and he feared that praying in congregation might become obligatory upon his nation and hence make the religion hard upon them. After the death of Rasulallaah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) revelation ceased so this concern was no longer necessary. Hence Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu) reinstated the Tarawih prayer in congregation during his rule because he knew that his action could not be made obligatory upon the Ummah. Thirdly, all the companions agreed upon this action of ‘Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu), thus there was a consensus (ijma) on it. And the scholars of Usool (fundamental principles) have stated that ijma cannot occur except when there is a clear text for it in the Sharee'ah. So what is the correct understanding of 'Umar's (raddi Allaahu anhu) words, "a good bid’ah”? The word bid'ah here is to be understood in its linguistic sense, "something new," because Tarawih in one congregation was not present during the rule of Abu Bakr (raddi Allaahu anhu) and the beginning of 'Umar's (raddi Allaahu anhu) rule, hence in that sense it was something new. The Sharee'ah sense (defined earlier) cannot be understood here because it does not fulfil the conditions of being a new act of worship. Abu Yusuf said, "I asked Abu Hanifah about the tarawih and what 'Umar did and he said, 'The tarawih is a stressed Sunnah, and 'Umar did not do that from his own opinion, nor was there in his action any innovation, and he did not enjoin it except that there was a foundation for it with him and authorization from the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam.'" (Sharh Mukhtaar as quoted from him in al- Ibdaa of Shaikh Ali Mahfooz P80) [Ref: MuslimConverts] Common Ground Between Position Of Muslims And Anti-Islam Element: It is true that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had performed Taraweeh for three days consecutively and on the fourth night did not attend the Masjid, and next day he informed the companions that he did not lead them in prayers because he felt it will be made compulsory. Following Hadith is evidence of this: "Allah's Messenger went out in the middle of the night and prayed in the mosque and some men prayed behind him. In the morning, the people spoke about it and then a large number of them gathered and prayed behind him (on the second night). In the next morning the people again talked about it and on the third night the mosque was full with a large number of people. Allah's Messenger came out and the people prayed behind him. On the fourth night the Mosque was overwhelmed with people and could not accommodate them, but the Prophet came out (only) for the morning-prayer. When the morning-prayer was finished he recited Tashah-hud and said, "Amma ba'du, your presence was not hidden from me but I was afraid lest the night prayer should be enjoined on you and you might not be able to carry it on." So, Allah's Apostle died and the situation remained like that." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H229] The last part of Hadith high-lighted indicates that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not lead the companions for Taraweeh prayers after first three days. This establishes Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to perform Taraweeh in congregation, under leadership of a Qari is for three days. Taraweeh Is Not A New Act Of Worship: Our Shaikh writes: “Then Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu) came to the masjid and saw the Muslims praying in small groups behind different Imams, so he collected them together in one congregation behind one Imam and made the aforementioned statement [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227]. So how can this action of Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu) be understood to be a new act of worship when the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) did it during his lifetime?” Did we claim that Taraweeh was new act of worship? Your question is based on your faulty understanding that we believe Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced an innovation. Saying it emphatically, we Muslims do not believe Taraweeh is new act of worship. We believe that Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) took a Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and issued it for entire month. This brought about recitation of entire Quran and Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam for entire month. This action of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was without precedent of prophetic Sunnah hence it is نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ (i.e. excellent innovation) سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ (i.e. good precedent), سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good practice), سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. righteous practice) and there is reward for one who issued it for entire month and for those who follow it.[1] Hadhrat Umar’s Reinstating Taraweeh: Our Shaikh writes: “Secondly, the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) gave the reason why he stopped the congregational prayer, because revelation was still descending, and he feared that praying in congregation might become obligatory upon his nation and hence make the religion hard upon them. After the death of Rasulallaah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) revelation ceased so this concern was no longer necessary. Hence Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu) reinstated the Tarawih prayer in congregation during his rule because he knew that his action could not be made obligatory upon the Ummah.” Firstly, it is agreed by both parties that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not wish to make religion hard for his followers therefore he abstained from Taraweeh after the initial three days. Secondly, Shaikh claims Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) reinstated a Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Reinstate, means to restore something to former position or state. He would be reinstating prophetic Sunnah of Taraweeh if the amount was three days lead by an Imam. Or if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had left instructions saying, after my departure from this world reintroduce the Qiyam/Taraweeh for entire month of Ramadhan. He took a prophetic Sunnah and increased number of days for which it is performed – entire month of Ramadhan, with an Imam leading, reciting entire Quran and declaring that he ‘reinstated’ the Taraweeh prayer in congregation is deception. Thirdly, our Shaikh should be presenting evidence to justify why Taraweeh prayer is not innovation in religion of Islam, or why Taraweeh is not innovation in terms of Shari’ah. The reason given, why Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) reintroduced Taraweeh – ceasing of revelation is relative between Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu).[2] Does this reason justify the Salafi/Wahhabi belief; Taraweeh is not an innovation in terms of Shari’ah? This point is hardly an argument in defense Salafi/Wahhabi position. Shaikh attributed to Imam Ash-Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) the following statement: "Whoever declares something to be good he has declared it part of Shari’ah." [Ref: ar-Risala] Hence it would be appropriate to respond to him with something from him. Judging on this statement one is forced to admit Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced an excellent innovation into Shari’ah. Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) had following position regarding the Taraweeh prayers being initiated for entire month: “It was narrated to us by Muhammad ibn Musa ibn al-Fadl who had it narrated to him from Abul-Abbas Al-Asam who said Rabi ibn Sulayman narrated to us from Imam ash-Shafi’s that he said, “Innovated matters in religion are of two kinds: 1) Whatever is innovated and is contradicts the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or Ijma – then this is an innovation of misguidance. 2) Whatever is innovated of good and that does not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And Umar (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) said concerning the night-prayer in the month of Ramadhan: نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what a good innovation this is!) meaning something new not previously present, and if done does not rebut anything which existed before.” [Ref: Reported by al-Bayhaqi in Manaqib ash-Shafi'I, 1/469][3] This establishes Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) believed Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had introduced an innovation but it did not contradict teaching of Islam and such innovations are considered praiseworthy innovations. Companions Agreed Upon Action Of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’al anhu): Our Shaikh wrote: “Thirdly, all the companions agreed upon this action of Umar (raddi Allaahu anhu), thus there was a consensus (ijma) on it. And the scholars of Usool (fundamental principles) have stated that ijma cannot occur except when there is a clear text for it in the Sharee'ah.” There are two points that need to be addressed here. Firstly, Ijma does not require clear text from Quran or Sunnah. Rather Ijma on something which the Muslim scholars come to agree on even if the evidence of it is implicit would be valid based on the Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which states: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] Ijma can only be beneficial if it is based on issues which are lacking strong evidence and scholars come to reconcile them via indirect evidences. There is no need for Ijma on issues which are stated in clear emphatic texts. Coming to issue of Taraweeh, it is clearly established that the Sunnah Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was to lead Taraweeh for three days as an Imam, and then Taraweeh was abandoned in single Jammat form. Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) issued it for entire month under leadership of an Imam. Considering these facts it is obvious our Shaikh is fabricating Ijma to support his position. Where is the clear text on which companions agreed upon full Ramadhan month Taraweeh deeming it to be prophetic Sunnah? Bring forward your proof if you are truthful. Absence of proof for your claim can be used to argue; Ijma of companions over full month Taraweeh was based on the fact that it is a praiseworthy innovation/practice, evidence of which has been quoted in footnote one. Word Innovation Is Used In Linguistic Sense: Shaikh has conceded that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) only performed it for three days, here: “When the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) first emigrated to Madeenah, the Muslims prayed tarawih individually, and then for three nights they prayed in congregation behind the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam). After this, he stopped them doing so saying …” Shaikh also writes that Taraweeh under single Imam was absent during time of Hadhrat Abu Bakr’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Khilafat: “… because Tarawih in one congregation was not present during the rule of Abu Bakr (raddi Allaahu anhu) and the beginning of Umar's (raddi Allaahu anhu) rule, hence in that sense it was something new.” In other words Shaikh agrees that, prophetic Sunnah of Taraweeh was three days because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) led the prayers as Imam for only three days and then it was abandoned. After which it was not performed under leadership an Imam during the Khilafat of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) neither in the beginning period of Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Khilafat. Considering meaning of innovation in linguistic sense (i.e. something new, something new which does not have a precedent), and in Shar’i sense of something new which does not have precedent from Quran or Sunnah, one is forced to conclude that Taraweeh as performed, is a praiseworthy innovation for following reasons. It is performed for entire month of Ramadhan, under leadership of an Imam/Qari, and recitation of entire Quran takes place. Therefore Shaikh’s saying that usage of نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ by Hadhrat Umar was in linguistic sense is grand lie: “The word bid'ah here is to be understood in its linguistic sense, "something new," because Tarawih in one …” Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) Said Its Not Innovation: Shaikh wrote: “The Sharee'ah sense (defined earlier) cannot be understood here because it does not fulfil the conditions of being a new act of worship. Abu Yusuf said, "I asked Abu Hanifah about the tarawih and what 'Umar did and he said, 'The tarawih is a stressed Sunnah, and 'Umar did not do that from his own opinion, nor was there in his action any innovation, and he did not enjoin it except that there was a foundation for it with him and authorization from the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam.'" [Sharh Mukhtaar as quoted from him in al- Ibdaa of Shaikh Ali Mahfooz p80] It is hard for to accept what is being attributed to Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) because Salafi’s are known for altering texts of classical books so the point of view expressed conforms to their sectarian understanding. Note my explanation is not authentication of the statement attributed to Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). My comments are valid if the statement is verified and genuinely attributed to Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). There are number of things which need to be pointed out. Firstly, Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) used a definition of innovation according to which anything which is established from indirect/implicit evidence is not innovation even if part of it is established. His definition of innovation was: Any action/belief which can be established from Quran/Sunnah via implicit or via generality is not an innovation. And the opposite was: Any action/belief of which there is no Asal (i.e. foundation - explicit or implicit evidence) such is innovation. There is clear evidence of Qiyam/Taraweeh being performed under leadership of an Imam. Imam being Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence it was prophetic Sunnah for three days. According to Imam Abu Hanifah’s (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) definition of innovation Taraweeh would not be innovation even if it was performed for entire month of Ramadhan or just three days because the foundation of it exits. Following article sheds some light onto the methodology employed by Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) and explains why he did not deem it as innovation, here. Secondly, the statement of Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) is to be understood in following meaning: “Abu Yusuf said, "I asked Abu Hanifah about the Tarawih [being Sunnah of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam] and what Umar did [in form of gathering people under one Qari] and he [Abu Hanifa] said, 'The Tarawih is a stressed Sunnah, and 'Umar did not do that from his own opinion, nor was there in his action any innovation [because Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam lead Taraweeh as an Imam for three days and companions followed him], and he did not enjoin it [for entire month of Ramadhan] except that there was a [Ijtihadi] foundation for it with him and authorization from the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam [in form of follow my Sunnah and the Sunnah of rightly guided Khulafah].” There is reason for this, Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) only commented on the concept of Taraweeh being Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He did not state Taraweeh for entire month of Ramadhan had foundation in Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Rather his statement is to be understood in light of fact that there is no evidence that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ever performed Taraweeh for entire month. Hence the foundation being stated is of Ijtihad, and Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Ijtihad to issue Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam for entire month of Ramadhan is praiseworthy innovation because prophetic Sunnah is of three days. Thirdly, did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) perform Taraweeh for entire Ramadhan? Even our Shaikh Abu Rumaysah agrees that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed it for three days. Shar’i meaning of innovation are, something which is new and without precedent in book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Entire month Ramadhan Taraweeh under leadership of a Qari is without precedent hence an innovation, and in words of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) excellent innovation. Fourthly, note the strategy used by Shaikh to strengthen his position. When it suited his interest he quoted Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) or at the least he thought so and ignored Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). He was aware that Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) used a definition of innovation according to which Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced a praiseworthy innovation. Please take note of it for the second time: “It was narrated to us by Muhammad ibn Musa ibn al-Fadl who had it narrated to him from Abul-Abbas Al-Asam who said Rabi ibn Sulayman narrated to us from Imam ash-Shafi’s that he said, “Innovated matters in religion are of two kinds: 1) Whatever is innovated and is contradicts the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or Ijma – then this is an innovation of misguidance. 2) Whatever is innovated of good and that does not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And Umar (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) said concerning the night-prayer in the month of Ramadhan: نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what a good innovation this is!) meaning something new not previously present, and if done does not rebut anything which existed before.” [Ref: Reported by al-Bayhaqi in Manaqib ash-Shafi'I, 1/469] Fifthly, after Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had introduced Taraweeh for entire month, and people had followed it hence he declared it as an excellent innovation because he knew the saying of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regarding introducing good innovations/practices: “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] And he was aware what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had stated regarding introducing evil innovations: “And whoever ابْتَدَعَ بِدْعَةً(i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, without that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] “And he who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. evil precedent in Islam), there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] So he wanted it to be known his innovation was praiseworthy and not blameworthy. Islamic Understanding Of The Matter: Hadith records Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) attended Masjid in month of Ramadhan and decided to gather the companions under Hadhrat Ubayy ibn Kab (radiallah ta’ala anhu). When he attended the Masjid again he saw the practice had taken its root amongst the companions hence he remarked it was excellent innovation. It is established Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Taraweeh as an Imam for three days. Yet Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) instructed Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam for entire month and this was excellent innovation of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Note, there are two excellent innovations, i) Taraweeh being performed for extra 26/27 days, ii) 26/27 days of Taraweeh with an Imam. Also note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) must have recited number of chapters of Quran. In 26/27 extra days of Taraweeh prayers from first Surah to last is recited, and this certainly is another excellent innovation. Hence Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) can be accredited with three excellent innovations. The Shar’ri meaning of innovation is that which does not have precedent in Quran or Sunnah. Considering the meaning of innovation and following details of Taraweeh prayers it is evident, performing Taraweeh for entire month, under leadership of a Qari, reciting entire Quran [and more], is without prophetic precedent hence it is an innovation in terms of Shari’ah. This realization leads Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to exclaim, what an excellent innovation Taraweeh prayers is. Conclusion: Servant has established Taraweeh for entire month of Ramadhan, and under leadership of a Qari, and recitation of Quran from the beginning till the end, is an excellent innovation because there was no prophetic precedent in form of Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Statement of Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) supports the position of Muslims; Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced an excellent innovation. Also according to criteria of Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) to declare something good is to make it part of Shari’ah hence Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made Taraweeh via Ijtihad a part of religion of Islam.[4] Statement of Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) has been reconciled via point of Ijtihad to Islamic position because basis of Ijtihad in this context is innovation hence outcome of Ijtihad of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was praiseworthy innovation. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. 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.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] “Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed, then for him is a reward and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] Another Hadith establishes that good Sunnah for which the reward is being told is being made part of Islam: “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] "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] - [2] Didn’t the revelation cease during the time of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu)? Did he not know that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is the last/final Prophet and Messenger, and there is no Messenger or Prophet after him? And did he not know nothing can become compulsory for the Ummah without a Prophet or Messenger? So why did he not reintroduce Prophetic Sunnah of performing Taraweeh for three days behind a Qari or introduce it for entire month? Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) knew there is no Prophet or Messenger after the last and the final Prophet and the Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and he knew nothing can be made part of religion as obligation after him. Despite knowing this he did not reintroduce Taraweeh, not three day Taraweeh under leadership of an Imam, and not of entire month. The mind set of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was demonstrated on issue of compiling Quran. When it was suggested to him by Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to compile Quran from all fragments Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) remarked: “How dare I do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] If it occurred to him to introduce Taraweeh then he abstained from it because he did not wish to do anything which Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not do. Hence it can be said that he feared it would be an innovation. - [3] Opponents of Islam have argued, Muhammad ibn Musa ibn al-Fadl is unknown hence the narration is weak and cannot be evidence of Imam Shafi’s (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) position. Unknown to them, Muhammad ibn Musa ibn Al-Fadl as-Sayrafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) has been mentioned by Imam Dhahabi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) in his, Siyar Al A’laam An-Nubala, as trustworthy and reliable narrator. Shaikh Salahud-Din as-Safadi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) in his, Kitab Al-Wafi bil-Wafiyat, stated about him; he is well known and trustworthy scholar. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits a separate article will be written to prove the reliability of these narrators. - [4] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said regarding introducing a good Sunnah into religion of Islam: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good practice 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] Knowing this Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) declared gathering Quran in a book format is good, and evidence is here: “I said to `Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" `Umar said: هَذَا وَاللَّهِ خَيْر. (i.e. By Allah, this is good.) `Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which `Umar had realized." [Ref: Bukhari, B61, H509] This was the basis on which Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) based his principle: "Whoever declares something to be good he has declared it part of Sharee'ah." [Ref: ar-Risaala]

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir Nazir. The opponents of Islam assume that Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir as well as Nazir on every spec of Earth. And this misconception has lead the opponents to present few rational arguments as refutation of Hadhri Nazir without even realising their argument does not apply to Islamic belief. So objective of this article is to explain what Hadhir Nazir mean and how Hadhir Nazir is to be understood. Meaning Of Hadhir Nazir And Its Application: Hadhir Nazir is employed instead of Shahid (i.e. witness). Hadhir is linguistically means present and means presence with a body, in line with creation’s characteristic – i.e. material and dimensions. Hadhir when it referrs to Jism (i.e. body) of RasoolAllah (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it is in literal/linguistical meanings – present with clay body. When it referrs to Ruh (i.e. soul) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it referrs to presence of Ruh with material which Ruh is made (i.e. Noor). Nazir means seeing and it referrs to seeing of eyes. When Nazir is used for bodily eyes of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it is referring to sight dependent upon sunlight. When it is used for Rooh of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it is not it is not literal/lingustical but spiritual sight and this sight is dependent upon Noor from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not sunlight. Also bare in mind Shahid is inclusive of hearing and even though hearing is not indicated linguisitcally in words Hadhir Nazir hearing should be implied by default. In context of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) supernatural and natural hearing of Jism (i.e. body) and Rooh (i.e. soul). Manner In Which One Can Be Shahid/Shaheed (Hadhir Nazir) : A person is Hadhir as far as his hands can reach and on the spot he is standing, or sitting, or resting on but he is Nazir at ranges beyond his physical reach. Therefore it would be accurate to say person is Hadhir in a place but Nazir as far his vision reaches or he can hear. Consider radar as an example it is present in a place – suppose Manchester Airport - yet it can track planes which are hundreds of miles from its physical location – suppose – France, Germany, and Spain. Even though the radar may not be at the place where the plane is currently flying but its capability of tracking the plane miles away would make it a ‘witness’. Witness in the sense; the information acquired from it will be trusted and will be used to make judgments for air traffic. Just as a actual witnesses testimony would be relied upon to make a judgment in court. Point is that a witness does not need to, and is not Hadhir, in every place with body. Rather being in close proximity to the event, or being in a position from where one can see/hear the events unfold is sufficient to be witness. And within limited capacity all living and hearing/seeing creatures are Hadhir Nazir (i.e. witness). In context of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) it means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) is Hadhir where his body/soul is Hadhir and Nazir/Sami as far as he can see and hear. In context of belief of Hadhir Nazir this translates to; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing (i.e. seeing, and hearing) of good/bad deeds of all nations before his birth and witnessing of good/bad deeds of Muslim Ummah and Jinn/Mankind. For details please see following article; here. Conclusion: Linguistic meaning of Hadhir Nazir is present and observing. It is derivative of Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness) hence it would be inclusive of hearing. Hadhir Nazir have different meanings depending upon what it referrs to. It is not essential for a Hadhir Nazir (i.e. witness) to be Hadhir at every where with body. Rather presence at a location and observing the event unfold would be suffient to fullfill the criteria of a witness. Implication of which is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not need to be present physically/spiritually all over the earth rather he can witness the deeds being at a location. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Typically it is assumed that Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be Hadhir Nazir with jismani (i.e. bodily) sense. But reality is Ahlus Sunnah believe him to be Hadhir Nazir in number of ways. And this article will shed some light on the details. Hadhir Nazir And Its Categories: Hadhir Nazir is another way of saying witness. Every kamil (i.e. perfect) witness in essences and attributes is Hadhir (i.e. present), Nazir (i.e. observing) and hearing. There are four ways in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is believed to be Hadhir Nazir: i) Nooraniyyah, ii) Roohaniyyah, iii) and Jismaniyyah. Nooraniyyah and Roohaniyyah involve continously witnessing deeds before and after birth. Jismaniyyah is connected with witnessing of the deeds by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) around him and supernaturally witnessing deeds of all of his Ummat to come till the day of judgment. Hadhir Nazir Nooraniyyah: Nooraniyyah, for lack of better word, means LIGHT. Please note, every Noor is visible light. Angels are Noor but not visible light and they are a form of light which cannot be detected and will never be detected with instruments. Nooraniyyah is referring to Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah – the reality of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) – which according to scholars of Ahlus Sunnah and Hadith is; Noor of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was the first creation created by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It was divided into four parts one was kept and other three were used to create the remaining creation. And in this sense the living and the dead matter [dead from our perception of life but in reality it is also alive and worships Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] are all connected with their source [the Noor from where they were seperated]. Ulamah explain just as a limb is connected with body and body/soul knows what the limb does in the similar sense Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is connected with the creation and he was/is aware of actions of Jinn and mankind. As well as all the happenings in the universe. Hadhir Nazir Jismaniyyah: Jismaniyyah referrs to body (i.e. jism) of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and is related to his earthly life. There are two types of witnessing: i) Natural, ii) and supernatural. Natural witnessing is seeing with eyes hearing with ears of events which take place around the person. Supernatural, as evidenced by Ahadith, is seeing all the good/bad actions of his entire Muslim Ummah during in his life time. Hadhir Nazir Roohaniyyah: Roohaniyyah is related to Ruh (i.e. soul) of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It has two components: i) Before birth, ii) and after death. First -: Soul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) existed after its creation and it observed the good/bad actions of all nations before birth of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while adressing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about past events questions: Have you not seen? Did you not see? Ulamah have explained this is because soul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has seen good/bad actions of nations before his birth. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) refferences so Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can recall events so he can closely relate the verses to events which the verses referr to. Second -: It involves observing the deeds iia) of believing Ummah iib) and Ummah to which he was sent to guide – i.e. mankind. In the case of (iia) Rooh of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) without middle observes good/bad deeds and as evidenced by Ahadith angels also present to him good/bad deeds of his Ummah after his departure from earth. With regards to (iib) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly observes their good/bad deeds [just like the first group] because he has been sent to mankind as a witness (i.e. Shahid/Shaheed) which nessceiates witnessing of good/bad actions to be a truthful witness. Conclusion: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is believed to be witness (i.e. Hadhir Nazir) over the actions of Jinn and mankind in three ways. Nooraniyyah is connected with being personally aware of deeds of mankind as one is aware of one’s limbs. Roohaniyyah is connected with witnessing of soul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of events before and after his birth and death. And Jismaniyyah is related to earthly life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) where he ordinarily and supernaturally witnessed the good/bad deeds of his Ummah. Note the evidences for each is different and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills all three categories will be explained in light of relating evidences. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Aqeedah of Hadhir Nazir is a disputed subject amongst the various factions of Muslims. A group of Muslims believe it is fully in accordance with teaching of Quran and Sunnah. The disbeleiving faction holds to position that it is against teaching of Quran/Sunnah and to believe in Hadhir Nazir is Kufr and major Shirk. And their this judgment is extremism and it only invalidates their own Islam. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills the legal rulings regarding disbeliever of Hadhir Nazir from Islamic perspective will be presented along side its status in Islamic theology. Being Sent As A Witness And It’s Implications and It’s Ruling: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated that Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as Shahid (i.e. witness) in following verses: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] Fundamentally this verse means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a hearing and seeing type of witness during his earthly life. And following verse without interpretative modifiers (i.e. other verses of Quran and Ahadith) fundamentally means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent to people of his time as a hearing/seeing witness: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] In his earthly life’s context negating his hearing and seeing of his immediate surroundings would be Kufr. With interpretative modifiers these verses expand the hearing and seeing to Muslim Ummah and mankind. Fundamental requirement to be Muslim when these verses are quoted is to affirm hearing/seeing in limited sense. Status According To Islamic Scholarship: First and foremost it is important to point out that Hadhir Nazir related to Fadhail (i.e. merits) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and it is established by Zanni evidences. It is principle of Muhaditheen to employ Daif (i.e. weak) Ahadith for Fadhail along side fair and authentic Ahadith. And this is not to say that Hadhir Nazir is established from Daif Ahadith. Rather to point out that in principle even Daif Ahadith can be used. As such it is not part of fundamental creed and it is not from essentials of Islam. The Ruling For One Who Disbelieves: Therefore rejection of Hadhir Nazir will not expel a disbeliever from Islam. But it is established soundly and it is deemed valid teaching/belief by Jamhoor (i.e. majority) of Ummah regarding which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Abu Dhār (Allah be pleased with him) reported from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that, “Two are better than one, and three better than two; so stick to the Jama'ah for verily Allah, Most Great and Glorious, will only unite my Ummah on guidance." [Ref: M.I.Ahmad, Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, H20776] “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My Ummah will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] These two Ahadith instruct the Muslims to follow the majority. Therefore by virtue of majority holding to this belief of Hadhir Nazir it is further strenthened. And this majority is of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah (i.e. people of Prophetic Sunnah and of group). And rejection of it therefore will lead to misguidance and expulsion Jammah into heresy. Conclusion: Belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is hearing and seeing witness and had witnessed events (i.e. deeds) that had taken place before his birth. And continues to oberserve the deeds of Muslims and mankind is established from Zanni and Tafsiri evidences as such rejection of it is not Kufr and does not invalidate Islam of an individual who dispbelieves in it. But Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a witness means he was hearing and seeing the events taking place around him. Rejection of this results in natural meaning of being sent as Shahid and therefore it is Kufr and it would invalidate beliefe in Islam. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated in Quran; Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness). One sent as a witness is sent to witness with eyes/ears. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to mankind hence natural conclusion is that he witnesses deeds of entire mankind. Deobandis/Salafis believe he indeed is sent as a witness to mankind but does not see/hear the actions of mankind. In other words they believe he is witness but ascribe no quality to him which establish that he is witness. Its like believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Rabb (i.e. Lord) without qualities of Rububiyah. Or believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Khaliq (i.e. Creator) without believing He creates. Affirmation of word but without believing the natural meaning. Muslims believe in the word and its implications. And as result we believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fullfils the criteria which he needs to be a witness. To put it simply he sees and hears the actions of those whom he was sent as a witness – i.e. mankind. Heretical Reasoning For Their Belief: I had stated in a discussion: “Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Shahid (i.e. witness) and a witness must posess two qualties; Hadhir (i.e. present phisically) as well as Nadhir (hearing, seeing). And without these qualities one can not be a truthful witness. Our belief is that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Hadhir in his heavenly resting place in Madinah ash'shareef but soul is able to move as soul of Musa (alayhis salam) was able to move from place to place while keeping touch with the body of Musa (alayhis salam) and Nadhir upon his Ummah. Ability of Hadhir Nadhir is a mojzaati qudrat which …” With regards to underlined a Deobandi brother with the name of Mustafvi wrote the following while discussing with me on topic of Hadhir Nazir: “It is true that your above mentioned two qualities have some weight but these two are not compulsory in all the cases. One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” [Ref: Mustafvi, Private Discussion, Publicised, Post 1.] Mustafvi brother in context of my evidences is attempting to argue that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not need to directly witness events as they happen rather he can/will bear witness upon being informed by truthful/reliable witnesses of his Ummah. This establishes hearing/seeing is not essential to be a witness rather receiving news of event is enough to bear witness. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills this position would be criticised within Shar’ri boundaries. Note arleady this quote was addressed in another response, here, and this response will focus another aspect. The Baseless Deobandi/Salafi Position: Neither Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and nor the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated in Quran or Sunnah that a witness is one who has been informed by another nor said witness can bear witness upon being informed by another. This principle of heretics is based on elevating their self to status of gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Have you seen the one who takes as his god his own desire?[1] Then would you be responsible for him?” [Ref: 25:43] And are worshiping their own whims and desires instead of submitting to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Making religion of Islam how they want it to be instead of making themselves into image of Islam. There is no evidence whatsoever which establishes or suggests - in Dunya or Aakhira - that if Zayd saw x y z happening and Zayd truthfully informs Amr of x y z then Amr would also become a witness of the event. Nor there is evidence which establishes or suggests - in Dunya or Aakhira - that Amr would be deemed as first hand witness due to receiving news from Zayd. Belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will qualify to be a witness upon being told by his Ummatis can only be valid if the mentioned rule can be established from Quran and Sunnah. Witnessing Of No-Witness And Its Worth: Take the following scenario into account: Zayd has been accused of murder. Amr and Bakr hear the news from Khalid that Zayd has murdered Akhtar. Amr and Bakr are truthful and upstanding members of community. Amr and Bakr testify in court Zayd has killed Akhtar. Note the two witnesses criteria has been met by witnessing of Amr and Bakr. In court of Shari’a will Zayd receive capital punishment or any punishment due to witnessing of Amr and Bakr? Well in light of following the head of Zayd would role like a football: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” A intelligent person even with basic understanding of Islamic judicial system will know; Zayd will not be charged or punished because of Amr and Bakr’s testimony unless Khalid bear witness and then takes an oath [to fulfill the criteria of two witnesses] that he saw Zayd committ the murder. Amr and Bakr’s testimony is nill and void in murder case. Same scenario but different dispute, with addition of Uthman: Khalid and Uthman both saw the murder taking place. Khalid wasn’t aware that Uthman witnessed the murder and saw Khalid at the crime scene. Khalid denies being at the crime scene in court. Uthman claims Khalid also witnessed the murder. In this case Amr and Bakr can truthfully testify that Khalid informed them of the murder. In other words Amr and Bakr would be coroborating the account of Uthman. Once truth of matter is established that Khalid was afraid of bearing witness but he was witness. Supportive evidence of Amr/Bakr will establish Khalid was also witness to murder then Zayd will receive punishment. But Amr’s and Bakr’s witnessing to murder on account of being informed by Khalid is nill and void. Their testimony will only become cause for Khalid to be summoned by court to give testimony but it will not serve basis for judgment of murder case. Apart from following Deobandi/Salafi rule being completely and absolutely against the established procedures of Islamic legal system: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” This rule opens door injustice: Truthful/Trustworthy members of community end up believing in town gossip [and without verifying it] report the incident to police and when incident is presented to Qadhi they testify Akhtar stole x y z. The result would be Akhtar getting his hand chopped off. Firstly in this judgment Islamic requirements of eye-witnesses werent met. Secondly being truthful/trustworthy is not sole requirement for witnessing rather the fundamental requirement is witnessing the events with eyes/ears. Islamic judicial systems first requirement is witnessing and then truthfulness trustworthiness would be considered. Thirdly the victim of crime has to exist and his complain has to be genuine. Mere testimony of truthfull and trustworthy bearded Arabic speaking Tasbih rolling Muslims is not enough against another believer/disbeliever. Prophets Will Testify Against Their Own Nations: Truthful Prophets will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they delivered the message given to them but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask them to produce witness. It is recorded in Hadith that Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that he delivered the message given to him by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to his nation. And his Ummah will negate this and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask Nuh (alayhis salam) to bring forth witness in his own defence: “Allah's Messenger said, "Noah will be brought (before Allah) on the Day of Resurrection, and will be asked: 'Did you convey the message of Allah?" He will reply: 'Yes, O Lord.' And then Noah's nation will be asked: 'Did he convey Allah's message to you?' They will reply: 'No warner came to us.' Then Noah will be asked: 'Who are your witnesses?' He will reply: 'Muhammad and his followers.' Thereupon you …” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H448] The above Hadith only gives example of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) and his Ummah. In actuality Ummah f every Prophet will be questioned and every single one of them would deny reicieving the message from their Prophet and we the Muslims and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify they delivered the message:“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 thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you. And We did not make the qiblah which you used to face except that We might make evident who would follow the Messenger from who would turn back on his heels. And indeed, it is difficult except for those whom Allah has guided. And never would Allah have caused you to lose your faith. Indeed Allah is, to the people, Kind and Merciful.” [Ref: 2:143] Please note these truthful and trustworthy Prophets of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are testifying in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they have delivered the message given to them by Him. If following rule was true then wouldn’t Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) accept the testimony of His trustworthy and truthful servants:“One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) asking His truthful and trustworthy servants the Prophets to produce a witness in support of their claim is suffient evidence to refute the invented innovated principle. There are roughly hundered twenty-four thousand Prophets/Messengers and this amounts to roughly same numbers of reasons why this principle is wrong. Conclusion: Brother Mustafvi’s statement is completely without basis. There are no textual evidences which support bearing witness without seeing/hearing the event. Islamic legal system will not use the testimony of two truthful witnesses who haven’t seen the events to which they bear witness even if they claim they have been informed by two more first hand witnesses. And the greatest evidence against brother Mustafvi’s understanding is witnessing of Prophets against their own nations and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) demanding witness from them. If truthful/trustworthy person bearing witness was legitimate concept then who would be more truthful/trustworthy then the Prophets? But despite their truthful/trustworthiness Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not accept their testimony and will demand witnesses to coroborate his testimony. Alhasil this concept of brother Mustafvi is invalid and against established teaching of Islam. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “Then Allah tells His Prophet that if Allah decrees that someone will be misguided and wretched, then no one can guide him except Allah, glory be to Him: “Have you seen him who has taken as his god his own vain desire?” Meaning whatever he admires and sees as good in his own desires becomes his religion and his way.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 25:43]

Introduction: Deobandi brother with the name of Mustafvi made a statement in order to argue against Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. This article will focus on the statement and try to understand on which basis brother Mustafvi made the statement and how his statements could be interpreted in light of creed of Hadhir Nazir. Please note he might not have intended the details derived and beliefs attributed to him from his statement [in 1.0 and refuted in 1.1 to 1.2] because it is very unlikely he would be familiar with the topic of Hadhir Nazir comprehensively as a educated believer would be. But despite possibility of lack of knowledge his statement is being interpreted as if he was fully aware of all in’s and out’s this belief and implications of his statement. Objective is to comprehensively explore all possible angles of topic of Hadhir Nazir and his statements happens to be a mean to one such detail. The only material directly related to his statement and to him is from 0.1 to 0.2. 0.0 - My And Brother Mustafvi’s Statements: In my discussion with brother Mustafvi on topic of Hadhir Nazir I had written the following: “Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Shahid (i.e. witness) and a witness must posess two qualties; Hadhir (i.e. present phisically) as well as Nadhir (hearing, seeing). And without these qualities one can not be a truthful witness. Our belief is that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Hadhir in his heavenly resting place in Madinah ash'shareef but soul is able to move as soul of Musa (alayhis salam) was able to move from place to place while keeping touch with the body of Musa (alayhis salam) and Nadhir upon his Ummah. Ability of Hadhir Nadhir is a mojzaati qudrat which …” He responded with the following: “It is true that your above mentioned two qualities have some weight but these two are not compulsory in all the cases. One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” [Ref: Mustafvi, Private Discussion, Publicised, Post 1.] 0.1 - Chain Of Transmission And Its Major Components: To be a truthful and trustworthy person witnessing of event is essential. If Bakr is truthful and trustworthy and he witnesses x y z and informs Amr x y z has happened. Then for his truthfulness and trustworthiness to be established it is important that event has taken place and that Bakr witnessed it for himself. Even though the chain of transmission of Khabr (i.e. news/report) may not from eye-witness to eye-witness but it is reiable because Bakr has witnessed it and on account of his eye-witnessing it has passed from eye-witness to truthful to truthful. This is how chain of transmission in Hadith works. A authentic Hadith via many narrators it goes back to a companion who heard and saw Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) acted in such a fashion or utter the words of Hadith. Alhasil -: A truthfull and trustworthy individual witnesses a event and then transmits this information to a truthfull person. Then this report is transmitted continously from truthful to truthful. And this report will be trustworthy and truthfull, and is to be believed.’[1] Note this is the foundation on which brother Mustafvi made his statement. 0.2 - Error In Brother Mustafvi’s Statement: Brother Mustafvi’s statement is based on valid principle from principles of Hadith but his statement is incorrect because he inserted into it his error. Firstly the very basic error is that he does not mention witnessing by an eye-witness. One who originates the Khabr must be eye witness to the event he reports otherwise he is lieing or at least spreading rumours as actual events. Secondly one who hears a Khabr does not become witness to the event nor he qualifies to testify as an eye-witness, or as a non-eye-witness. Note which he claims having truthful Khabr qualifies the knower of news as a witness and can bear witness: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” There are thousands of Sahih (i.e. authentic) Ahadith and there are Mutawatir [is grade above, authentic] Ahadith but none claims to be witness on basis of them. Nor can claim to qualify as an eye-witness of event narrated in Hadith. Being informed by another and testifying on account of it is testimony of one’s own faith.[2] And its worth in court of law is no greater then it. 1.0 - Two Contexts His Statement Can Be Interpreted: There are two ways brother Mustafvi’s statement can be interpreted: i) From Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). ii) And from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to the present. Note brother Mustafvi’s statement was written in effort to refute Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. Therefore in the 1st case it implies, brother Mustafvi believes, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) what the nations did before he was sent as last/final Nabi and he will bear witness on account of this learnt knowledge . And in the 2nd case it means, brother Mustafvi believes, we the Ummah will educate Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about what nations did after him and he will testify on account of what we tell him. In both cases Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) direct witnessing of the events has been removed and replaced with being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by his own Ummah. In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly witnessing events is being negated. 1.1 - The Error Of Brother Mustafvi’s Understanding: There is no evidence to suggest that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be bearing witness on account of being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Or in other words will be giving testimony of his faith in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This is Qiyas (i.e. analogy) based on Hadith which states Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify in defence of Prophets upon being informed by last/final Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “… It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ And he will say: ‘Yes.’ Then his people will be called and it will be said: ‘Did he convey the message to you?’ They will say: ‘No.’ Then it will be said: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] Qiyas was/is not foundation of Islamic creed. Nor there is proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify on account of being informed by his own Ummah regarding events transpired after him. Again this is also based on Qiyas and both of these are against clear emphatic teachings of Quran. 1.2 - Islamic Verdict On 1st Scenario: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “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 thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you. And We did ...” [Ref: 2:143] “Allah named you Muslims previous (scriptures) and in this (revelation) that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people.” [Ref: 22:73] The Ummah will bear witness in defence of Prophets. Note following Hadith explains what type of testimony they will give: “He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’” Then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will question the Ummah about how they know Prophets delivered the message to their nations and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed them of it: “He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] This establishes Ummats testimony is of their Iman. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not question Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Who informed you? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ensured that Muslims know Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not witnessed the events regarding which they have testified. For Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) this route is not taken and this indicates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had witnessed these events spiritually.[3] And proof of this is are those verses in which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) within context of historical events says: “Have you not seen[4] how your Lord dealt with Aad.” [Ref: 89:6] “Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with the companions/army of elephant.” [Ref: 105:1] “Have you not seen those elders of the children of Israel after the time of Moses …” [Ref: 2:246] And these verses are supported by Hadith a narrated in Musnad of Imam Ahmad (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala): “عرضات الأنبيا أممها و اتباعها من أممها” Which means: “Presented before me were [all] Prophets and their nations along side [their believing] followers.” This goes on to establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed the deeds of those before him and use of, ‘ألم تر’ , is referrence to seeing if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Alhasil the first belief of brother Mustafvi is refuted. Islamic Verdict On 2nd Scenario: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Indeed, We have sent you as a witness and a bringer of good tidings and a warner.” [Ref: 48:8] "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] And he is sent 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] He is a Prophet sent to mankind as a witness like Musa (alayhis salam) was sent to Firawn: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is sent as a hearing and seeing witness to mankind like Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) was sent to Fir’awn. Note one who is sent as a witness must witness over whom he was sent to witness and without his witnessing he is not witness. Yet Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is witness and sent as a witness. Hence his witnessing of deeds of mankind is established from ever since he was sent as last/final Prophet and Messenger. There are number of Ahadith which establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has witnessed everything: "Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol5, H3246, Tafsir Surah Sad] "Narrated Hakim Bin Nafi, Saeed Bin Sinan, narrated Abu Zahriyat, Kathir Bin Murra Abu Shajara al-Hadhrami, Ibn Umar said: 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: Kitab al-Fitan, 1st Chapter, Hadith No. 2, by Hafidh Naeem Bin Hammad al-Marwazi] On account of this knowledge Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed all that was to transpire from beginning of creation till the entering of people in paradise/hell: “Narrated Umar: One day the Prophet stood up amongst us for a long period and informed us about the beginning of creation (and talked about everything in detail) till he mentioned how the people of Paradise will enter their places and the people of Hell will enter their places. Some remembered what he had said, and some forgot it.” [Ref: Bukhari, B54, H414] Alhasil all this evidence goes on to refute the notion mentioned in second belief of brother Mustafvi. Conclusion: If brother Mustafvi’s statement is interpreted in light of science of Hadith even then it fails to meet the criteria because the originator of chain must be witness the event and then to narrate it to others. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) bore witness without witnessing himself then the rule of chain originator being first hand witness to event is broken. Yet verses of Quran and Hadith of Musnad Ahmad establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed Prophets and their nations and their beleiving followers and their actions. In light of this the chain originator is actual witness and he narrated and Ummah believed and bore witness. But whole objective of inventing ‘bearing witness without witnessing the events’ was to negate actual witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which has failed even if your philosophy of bearing witness without witnessing the event was believed. Even then it would be true for the Ummah and not for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Also if Ummah informing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about what transpired after him is considered in light of your rule then implication is Ummah has seen it and it will inform Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This was invented with objective to refute actual witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Yet the Quranic verses and quoted Ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) himself witnesses and had witnessed the deeds of all happenings till the judgment day. If we disregarding the fact Ummat informing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is without scriptural support. Even then it would imply, Ummat witnessed the events, and they informed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), who also had witnessed the events himself. Therefore scenario would be similar to angels presenting deeds of people to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) despite the fact that He is already aware of them. Or similar to, angels presenting to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam) salutations of his Ummah despite the fact that good/bad deeds were already seen by him and are seen by him. Alhasil however the ball is rolled the witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be refuted. Hence it would be better to let go of innovative concept of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) testifying for what is established from textual evidences. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] A example: Truthful and trustworthy people have transferred Quran and authentic Ahadith and on basis of information in these we believe and testify; there is no Ma’bud (i.e. deserving of worship) except Allah and Prophet Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. Note this testimony is of ones own Iman (i.e. faith) and not of an out side event. Testimony of faith only the person can express none else because one is aware of his own belief. Hence person testifying as such is first hand witness. - [2] Like it is in the case of following Hadith: “He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] Note the Ummah will testify and the Ummah of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) will question the testimony of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Ummah would be questioned who informed you and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Note He will not question Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) testifying against Ummah of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam). Ummah will bear testimony on basis of their own faith in truthfullness and trustworthiness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). - [3] Two logical conclusions can be made because of this: i) RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be testifying on account of being informed like his Ummah. And there was no difference between testimony of Ummah and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence there was no need to pursue it further. ii) Testimony of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was in result of actually witnessing the events therefore Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not pursue to negate his actual witnessing. But Ummah had testified on account of being informed by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ensured it was pointed out. Resolution -: Firstly please note Qiyas is not foundation of creed and to believe in first contention is to put faith in Qiyas. This is why I only mentioned the second contention in my main article. Secondly there are numerous places in Quran where Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentions events which had transpired long before birth of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In some cases Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while adressing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) begins the narrative with: “Did you not see!” And this is to attest that he saw and he is being reminded. From this scholars of Ahlus Sunnah assume position; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed the events prior to his brith and he is being asked to recall the events. Alhasil -: This goes on to establish the Islamic position taken in the article. - [4] The older translations of Quran in English and Urdu translated the words, ‘ألم تر’ , to denote seeing but new Wahhabi translation, Sahih International, has started the tradition of translating these verses: “Have you not considered …” The objective is to do away with the natural meaning of words due to the implications. They, insha Allah, will never succeed in distortion of Quran because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has made it clear that he saw the Prophets and their nations before him.

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is witnessing the actions of mankind and had witnessed the actions of nations before him. This belief in nutshell is called Hadhir Nazir. When concept of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) bearing witness in defence of Prophets is coupled with belief; to be truthful witness hearing/seeing of events is a fundamental requirement then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing the actions of nations before him is established. Anti-Islam element within Ummah disbelieves in this teaching of book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and to refute it present various arguments. Brother Mustafvi’s Point Three -: Ummat Hadhir Nazir: “Assalmo alilum! I am going to make a quite brief comment on your a bit long post. (i) In the Quran Prophet Muhammad and His Ummat has been called ‘Shahid’.[1/2] (ii) It has been made clear in Sahih Ahadith that in which way and sense these two (i.e. RasoolAllah and Ummat) have been called ‘Shahid’ - i.e this ummat will bear witness upon previous ummats on the basis of their knowledge provided to them by Prophet and than Prophet will testify [over] his Ummat.[3] (iii) If you keep on insisting that two abilities (i.e. hearing and seeing) are must for Shahid than you will have to accept that this whole ummat is Hadhir Nazir as it has been called Shahid.[4] (iv) now come to that verse where Prophet(saw) has been called mutlaqan Shahid i.e 33:45 for this i am going to paste what Imam razi said in his tafseer: …” [Ref: Mustafvi, Private Discussion, Hadhir Nazir Discussion, Publicised, Post 3.] Explanation Of Evidence Of Anti-Islam Element: It is recorded in book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: 2:143] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained the verse with example of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) in following Hadith: “Allah's Messenger said: “‘Noah will be brought (before Allah) on the Day of Resurrection, and will be asked: 'Did you convey the message of Allah?’ He will reply: 'Yes, O Lord.' And then Noah's nation will be asked: 'Did he convey Allah's message to you?' They will reply: 'No warner came to us.' Then Noah will be asked: 'Who are your witnesses?' He will reply: 'Muhammad and his followers.' Thereupon you will be brought and you will bear witness." Then the Prophet recited: 'And thus We have made of you a just and the best nation, that you might be witness over the nations, and the Apostle a witness over you.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H448] On basis of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) bearing witness in defence of Prophets would it be correct to conclude Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Hadhir Nazir? If not then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not witnessing the actions of nations before him. Ummah Will Bear Witness Upon Being Informed By Prophet: Hadith documented in Musnad of Imam Ahmad (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) and Sunan of Ibn Majah indicates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was intrepreting the same verse 2:143 and stated: “… It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ And he will say: ‘Yes.’ Then his people will be called and it will be said: ‘Did he convey the message to you?’ They will say: ‘No.’ Then it will be said: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] Hadith reveals Ummah will be questioned on how do they know the Prophet delievered the Message and the just Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will respond that Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has informed them that Prophets delivered the message. This establishes Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will negate being first hand witnesses to events. In light of this fact; belief of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing the actions of previous nations on account of following verses cannot be challenged because Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has negated Hadhir Nazir, witnessing the actions of previous nations by themselves: “And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: 2:143] “Allah named you Muslims before and in this (revelation) that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people.” [Ref: 22:78] Instead the Ummah affirmed that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has informed them. And there is no evidence to suggest that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has informed his Ummah after being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Or to suggest that he did not actually witness the events himself with permission and power granted by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Therefore natural conclusion would be; Hadhir Nazir ability is negated for Ummah, or in other words hearing/seeing type of witnessing is negated, for Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but not for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Conclusion: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) established in his book that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his Ummah is to be witness over nations before them. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained when the nations of earlier Prophets will deny receiving the Message given to their Prophets then the Prophets will say Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness in their defence. Ummah of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will proceed to bear witness in defence of Prophets. Upon being questioned how the knows that Prophets delivered the message to their respective nations the Ummah will respond that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has informed them. Establishing the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was/is not; Hadhir Nazir, hearing/seeing type of witness. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] (i) In the Quran Prophet Muhammad and His Ummat has been called ‘Shahid’. “Ummah of Prophet (sallalahu aalayhi was'sallam) is called Shuhada (i.e. witnesses) and not Shahid (i.e. witness). They will be called to bear witness and not because they are witness to the events: "Thus, have We made of you an Ummat justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourselves; ..." [Ref: 2:143] In another verse the same is affirmed: "How then if We brought from each people a witness, and We brought you as a witness against these people!" [Ref: 4:41] And Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) has been sent as a actual seeing/hearing type of witness upon his Ummah and previous nations: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) will be called to give testimony as a Shaheed (i.e. a witness) because he is Shahid (i.e. Witness). Where as the Ummah will be called on day of judgment as witnesses to testify in defence of Prophets. To give statement of faith demonstrating their belief, in teaching of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and truthfulness of Prophets. And this witnessing would be in meaning of; affirming their faith as the Hawariyoon of Isa (alayhis salam) affirmed their faith in being Muslims: “And when I (Allah) revealed to Al-Hawariyyun (the disciples) [of 'Îsa (Jesus)] to believe in Me and My Messenger, they said: "We believe. And bear witness that we are muslims." [Ref: 5:111] [Ref: Private Discussion, Hadhir Nazir Discussion, Publicised, Edited Post 4, by Muhammed Ali Razavi] - [2] There is not a single verse in Quran in which Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been called Ummat Shahidah (i.e. a witness nation). Or Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said: You’re witness nation. Or said: We have sent you as a witness nation. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said - note the referrence to future -: “… you’re a just nation so that you will be shuhada alan – naas (i.e. witnesses over mankind) and the Messenger will be Witness over you.” This indicates Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is currently not witness but will be in future. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained when he and his Ummah will be witness – i.e. day of judgment. On that day the Ummah will bear witness in defence of Prophets because they were informed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that Prophets delivered the message given to them. The uniqueness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in being witness is that he was as a witness in earthly life: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] This gives meaning; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been witness since he was sent as a last and final Prophet and Messenger. - [3] (ii) It has been made clear in Sahih Ahadith that in which way and sense these two (i.e. RasoolAllah and Ummat) have been called ‘Shahid’ - i.e this ummat will bear witness upon previous ummats on the basis of their knowledge provided to them by Prophet and than Prophet will testify [over] his Ummat. (ii) First of all Ummah RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) no where as been called Shahid. Can you quote me a reference for your claim, thank you. Secondly it has been established with Sahih Ahadith that Prophet's Ummat will bear witness in defence of Prophets because Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) himself has also informed them. Therefore we the Ahlus Sunnah have no objection to accepting that Ummah will bear witness on being told by Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam). But we do object to your Qiyas assumption: ‘Since Ummah of Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) will bear witness upon being told by Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) therefore it must be that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) will bear witness upon being told by truthful, trusted Muslims from his Ummah.’ Please quote me a single Sahih, definitive meaning Hadith, or verse of Quran which states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness because he will be told by truthful, trusted Muslims about what has happened after him. You believe in qiyaas instead of what Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) revealed: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] We know on what basis the Ummah will bear witness – i.e. being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that Prophets delivered the deens given to them. My question is on what basis will Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) bear witness against the previous nations? I make a educated guess and say your answers could be: (i)“On the basis of Quran in which Allah told stated that Prophets delivered their deen to their nations.” (ii)“Truthful, trusted Ummah of Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) will bear witness and on this basis Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) will bear witness.” Now if you say on the first one then my question which I have already asked: Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) used the word Shahid in following verse: “O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Shahid, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] If Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) did not mean type of Shahid who fullfils the conditions of Shahid then why did Allah use such a word? If the apparent meaning of hearing/seeing type of Shahid/Witness is rejected then the word serves no purpose whatsoever. And if your choice is second then this is the paradox of witnessing because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told the Ummat that Prophets delivered their messages to their nations. And now in hereafter, on the day of judgement, the one who informed his Ummah, will be told by the truthful and trusted Muslims, that Prophets delivered to their nations the message given to them.What a irrational, illogical, and irreligious innovation this concept of yours is. Correct interpretation of Hadith is that Ummah will say they were told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will then ask Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he will affirm that he has told his Ummah that Prophets passed the Deen given to them by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to their nations. And Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) will not ask Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Who told you prophets delivered the Deen given to them? Because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated He has sent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as a seeing/hearingwitness upon his Ummah and previous Ummahs. [Ref: Private Discussion, Hadhir Nazir Discussion, Publicised, Edited Post 4, by Muhammed Ali Razavi,] - [4] (iii) If you keep on insisting that two abilities (i.e. hearing and seeing) are must for Shahid than you will have to accept that this whole ummat is Hadhir Nazir as it has been called Shahid. (iii) I am not insisting on anything other then the established facts of Quran. Where as you my brother are arguing purely based on speculative knowledge and assumptions. And neither of these two are source of Deen. You have assumed; Ummat is Shahid because they will be witnesses in defence of Prophets. You have assumed just because Ummat has been told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that Prophets delivered the Deen given to them it nesseciates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be bearing witness based on information given to him someone truthful and trusted. Yet there is no proof either of these. Ummat is indeed Hadhir Nazir. In fact entire mankind and Jinkind is Hadhir Nazir in their limited attributes and restricted evoriments but not Hadhir Nazir in the sense that every individual of Ummat is hearing/seeing every action of Jinn and Mankind. This miralous ability is only granted to Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) by Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) because he was sent as a Shahid mutlaq: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] [Ref: Private Discussion, Hadhir Nazir Discussion, Publicised, Edited Post 4, by Muhammed Ali Razavi,]

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

Introduction: Muslims believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to Jinn and mankind as a hearing/seeing type of Witness. The opponents who disbelieve use various indirect evidences of Quran/Hadith and present a reasoned argument in attempt to discredit this Islamic teaching. They reason on account of verses of Quran, or this Hadith; if he was Hadhir Nazir then x, y and z took place and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did nothing to reveal he knows what will happen or prevent it from happening. Therefore he was not Hadhir Nazir, or in other words, he was not sent to Jinn/mankind as a hearing/seeing type of witness. A Demonstration Of One Such Argument: The heretic element states, Hafsa (radiallah ta’ala anha) and Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) schemed to prevent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) spending more time with his wife Zaynab (radiallah ta’ala anha) by saying the can smell strong odour of Honey/Mimosa from him. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Hadhir Nazir then he would have witnessed that his wives had made this plan. There are many such arguments invented to refute witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Potential Arguments Against Hadhir Nazir Number In Thousands: There are potentially thousands of such arguments which can be generated against Islamic creed of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent to Jinn and mankind as a hearing/seeing type of witness. A Muslim can devote life time arguing and counter-arguing on this point alone if correct methodology isn’t taught. And none should be involved so deeply into the topic where every objection, every argument, every point has to be refuted of opponents of Islam, so they may believe. Instead correct Islamic teaching should be taught followed by principle to follow in the next section. Building Case For Principle -: Plurals, We, Us, Our: We Muslims believe in Tawheed of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), here, and believe He is Wahid (i.e. the One) as indicated by the following verse: “Say: He is Allah, the One.” [Ref: 112:1] Despite this there are many verses of Quran where plurals, We, Our, and Us are used by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for Himself: “Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them.” [Ref: 2:3] “And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful. “ [Ref: 2:23] “And they wronged Us not - but they were wronging themselves.” [Ref: 2:57] On basis of these evidences someone argues: If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was the Only One God then plurals would not have been used. Instead Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is One supreme God and all other gods indicated by We, Our, Us are His subordinates. Is this valid argument against monotheism of Islam? And will you reject the established teaching of Islam and believe his distortion? No! Building Case For Principle -: Knower Of Unseen And Apparent: We Muslims believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is knower of Ghayb and Shahadah and this is established by many verses. Here just one is being quoted: “Say, "O Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth, knower of the unseen and the witnessed, You will judge between your servants concerning that over which they used to differ." [Ref: 32:6] A ‘true Muwahid’ of Salafism argues, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is not aware of Ghayb (i.e. hidden/unseen) and Shahadah (i.e. apparent/witnessed). He basis his logic on the following verse:“’And what is that in your right hand, O Moses?’ He said, ‘It is my staff; I lean upon it, and I bring down leaves for my sheep and I have therein other uses.’" [Ref: 20:17/18] And reasons He enquired what was in hand of Musa (alayhis salam). And Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) too believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) didn’t know what was in his hand and what function it played in his life so he educated Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had known He would not have enquired. And if Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knew he would not have informed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and educated Him about its functions. And then he goes on to reinterpret the verse, knower of unseen and the apparent, in context of revelation and in context of historical event which resulted in revleation of verse, and says this verse does not mean that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is knows all past present future. Will your belief based on the literal, apparent, clear emphatic meaning of verse be refuted: “Say, "O Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth, knower of the unseen and the witnessed, You will judge between your servants concerning that over which they used to differ." And will you believe in his Taweel? No! Because the explicit cannot be negated by reasoned argument derived from implicit evidence. Building Case For Principle -: Angel Informs About Stages Of Embrio: Muslim believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is fully aware of all that is happenings which is established from following evidence. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And with Him are the keys of the Ghayb (i.e. hidden, unseen); none knows them except Him. And He knows what is on the land and in the sea. Not a leaf falls but that He knows it. And ...” [Ref: 6:59] They keys of Ghayb are five mentioned in the following verse and one is knowledge of what is in the womb: “Indeed, (i) Allah has knowledge of the Hour (ii) and sends down the rain (iii) and knows what is in the wombs. (iv) And no soul perceives what it will earn tomorrow, (v) and no soul perceives in what land it will die. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.” [Ref: 31:34] All that in the whomb is Ghayb therefore according to following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows Ghayb of womb: “Say, "O Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth, knower of the unseen and the witnessed, You will judge between your servants concerning that over which they used to differ." [Ref: 32:6] A person believes Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows what is in the womb because the angel appointed by Him on it informs Him. He quotes the following Hadith as proof of his belief: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, "At every womb Allah appoints an angel who says, 'O Lord! A drop of semen, O Lord! A clot, O Lord! A little lump of flesh.’ Then if Allah wishes (to complete) its creation, the angel asks, (O Lord!) Will it be a male or female, a wretched or a blessed, and how much will his provision be? And what will his age be?' So all that is written while the child is still in the mother's womb." [Ref: Bukhari, B6, H315] And then he reasons, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was able to hear/see what is in the womb the angel would not inform Him of each stage. Therefore Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only knows what is in the womb because the apointed angel informs of it. Based on his belief, Hadith, and the reasoning question needs to be asked: Is his belief authentically supported by evidence of Quran and Hadith? And will you believe in his Taweel? No! Building Case For Principle -: Witnessing Of Deeds By Allah: Suppose true Salafi Muwahid believes, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only knows Ghayb when he is informed by events of Ghayb by angels. He quotes the following Ahadith: “… Why do you fast on Monday and Thursday, while you are an old man? He said: The Prophet of Allah used to fast on Monday and Thursday. When he was asked about it, he said: The works of the servants (of Allah) are presented (to Allah) on Monday and Thursday.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B13, H2430] “Those are two days in which deeds are shown to the Lord of the worlds, and I like my deeds to be shown (to Him) when I am fasting." [Ref: Nisa’i, B22, H2360] He interprets all verses of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knowing Ghayb and being Alim Ul Ghayb (i.e. Knower of Ghayb) in light of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being informed by angels. He argues if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows Ghayb by Himself then why would the angels present to Him the record of deeds! Only reasonable and justified understanding is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Himself and directly does not know what Jinn and mankind are engaged in therefore angels present to Him the record of deeds. And will you believe in his Taweel when it is evident from following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sees our actions: “Say, "Make no excuse - never will we believe you. Allah has already informed us of your news. And Allah will observe your deeds and His Messenger; then you will be taken back to the Knower of the unseen and the witnessed, and He will inform you of what you used to do." [Ref: 9:94] One word answer: No! Principle Cause Of Rejection Of Reasoned Arguments: Amongst the Islamic Scholars universally accepted principle is: Any belief or practice emphatically indicated by Quran or Hadith cannot be invalidated/refuted by a reasoned argument derived from indirect evidence. Always the clear text of Quran or Hadith will supercede any belief/practice supported by implied argument. Prophet Of Allah Sent As A Shahid/Shaeed: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "We have truly sent thee as a witness, as a bringer of glad tidings, and as warner." [Ref: 48:8] "O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a hearing/seeing type of witness – like of which was sent to Pharaoh: “We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is sent to mankind: “… concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.” [Ref: Muslim B4, H1062] Therefore he was sent as a witness upon mankind – of his time and to come. In another verse Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be brought as a witness against nations that preceded him: “How then (will the sinners fare on judgment day) when We shall bring forward witnesses from within every community, and bring thee as witness (i.e. Shaheed) against them?” [Ref: 4:41] Indicating he was witnessed the deeds of nations before him. Based On Indirect Evidence Presenting Reasoned Arguments: Unfortunately the anti-Islam element employs reasoned arguments to challenge and refute the Islamic belief of; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent to mankind as a hearing/seeing type of Shahid (i.e. Hadhir Nazir). It should be impressed upon them: Explicitly stated belief/practice cannot be invalidated/refuted by reasoned argument based on implicit evidence. Only way the explicitly stated belief/practice can be invalidated/refuted is if same belief/practice is abrogated with verse of Quran or a Hadith. And if you claim belief; Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent to Jinn/mankind as a hearing/seeing type of Shahid was abrogated then burden of proof is upon the claimant to establish his claim with backing of Quran/Hadith and scholarly evidences. Conclusion: Reasoned arguments can be presented to undermine the very foundation of Islamic belief. Such arguments should not be utilised and cannot be taken seriously when they contradict explicitly stated teachings of Islam. At times a convincing explanation can be given to refute the implied argument but when such explanation cannot be forwarded due to lack of textual evidences even then there are no proper grounds to reject a Islamic belief established from explicit text of Quran/Hadith. Some arguments presented against witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) may fall into this category but belief of Hadhir Nazir should be held with confidence because a reasoned argument derived from implicit evidence cannot refute emphatic text of Quran/Hadith. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

One: My Level Of Eduction In Pakistan: I was born into orthodox Muslim family. Both my parents were not practicing Muslims but I did receive some religious education in our village Masjid by Hafiz Barkat. Education consisted of learning how to read the Arabic script of the Quran, which I was not keen on and did the best to avoid it and despite occasional beatings. I did not learn the method of reading Arabic script. Only religious interest I had was monthly Giyarweenh Mehfil hosted in our Masjid. That too was special effort for the Math-thahi distributed after the end of Mehfil. My knowledge of deen consisted of basics of Tawheed, belief in angels, Prophet-hood of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam), judgment day, resurrection, being accountable for deeds, paradise, physical side of prayers, human-ness (i.e. Bashari’at) as well as Noorani’at of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam), finality, historical event of Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salaam), the saga of Karbala, accounts of wars in connection with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam), Apart from knowing these I had no real knowledge of my own belief. The knowledge I did possess of belief was imparted by elders and for which they did not have any evidence. It was mere repetition of what was heard from Scholars of Ahle Sunnat which they repeated and transmitted to me. Two: Immigration To England And Interest In Reading: I came to England at the age of around fourteen years but on the passport the age was lower. As a result of emigration I had English language difficulty and found it difficult to make friends. Being on my own and no real social event I began visiting my local library and began reading Urdu news paper. At that time my Urdu was very poor but regular visits to library helped me to improve my Urdu considerably. During these visits I learnt that library hosts an Urdu section of books which I explored and began borrowings books, starting with novels. Eventually I read all the novels and moved to books of history. The library hosted a very small section on Islamic history and Muslim history. I began reading these books and when this section was fully explored decided to venture into religious section. Religious section in the library does not particularly represent a particular sect rather it consisted of mixtures of books. I must point out that the library lacked books from Ahle Sunnat. Most of the books present were either written by Wahhabis, or Deobandi, or Shia, and Islamic side was not represented, if it was, I cannot recall ever reading anything which I would say represented Islamic position. Three: My Knowledge Of Other Sects: In those days my perception regarding Wahhabis was that they are insulters of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and Awliyah-Allah. They do not celebrate birthday of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and do not make dua for the deceased on every Thursday (i.e. Jumma-rat Khatam), do not believe in Awliyah-Allah, do not host monthly Giyarweenh gatherings in their Masjid. Regarding the Shia I only knew they loved Hadhrat Ali, Hadhrat Fatimah, Hadhrat Hassan, Hadhrat Hussain (Allah be pleased with them all) and that they beat themselves on every tenth Muharram. I had no knowledge of existence of Deobandi’s or Qadiyani’s or Pervezi’s nor was I aware of their beliefs. I had no idea about any other source of deen apart from Quran. My first recollection of word Hadith stems from a childhood discussion with a class fellow called Waseem, who was from Purana Akalgarh. I vaguely recall asking him are you Sunni or Wahhabi and he said I am Ahle Hadith. That’s my earliest recollection of word Hadith but I had no idea what Hadith was until after coming to England. Looking back at that time all my friends; Waseem, Naveed, Asim Khan, Saleem, Khurram Riyaz, Mehboob and Jaleel were Wahhabi’s. There was reason for this because Aziz Public School was situated first in Deep Purana Akalgarh which is Wahhabi part of Islamgarh. Then it was moved to another area called Mehtay-na Mura but again it was deep in Wahhabi territory. But I recall there was no religious discussion between us friends hence no influence. Four: Recollections Of Disputes With Wahhabis: My first recollection of discovering that there is bone to pick with Wahhabis with regards to our difference was when Asim Nazir’s father died in a car accident two more passengers. The three bodies were sent back home uncle Nazir was Muslim and resident of our village; Murra Rathiyan, but the other two who were relatives of uncle Nazir but were Wahhabis in belief. If I recall correctly they were from Hyderabad. When the bodies arrived back home the issue of funeral was contended and brothers of uncle Nazir wished his funeral not be lead by a Wahhabi Maulvi. But the relatives of the other two wished for a single funeral for the three and plans were to have the funeral in Hyderabad. Implications of which would have been Wahhabi Maulvi leading funeral prayers which the Muslims resented. Yearly Milad march started from main bazar near the GolChok and marched toward Hafiz Ishaq’s madrassa near Chungi. Then turn back toward GolChok once it reached GolChok it took right turn and via Mehtay-na Murra route went deep into Purana Akalgarh for Fatiha at a buzurg’s tomb. Purana Akalgarh being epic centre of Wahhabism in Islamgarh had problem with this visit by Muslims. There according to elders fight use to break out between Muslims and Wahhabis but this was not something which I witnessed. As a child I use to be part of the Juloos and the Juloos as accompanied by police to ensure security and harmony. There I remember being told by elders to avoid going to Purana Akalgarh with Juloos due to chance of sectarian violence. Five: Developed Interest In Islamic Literature: My religious education/interest began after I read several books from library and it was this time I became familiar with what Hadith is and what Bukhari/Muslim and other Hadith books are. Understanding what the content of these books is, I borrowed volume three of Sahih bukhari [it was only one on the shelf] all others were out. I enjoyed reading it so much that I never returned it back and still is in my possession, and as a result I had to pay for the volume. Also read other books but it caused a lot of confusion because the library hosted books of every sect and every view point. Reading all these different view points on same topics and not realizing that these view points are sectarian differences being presented by different sects, I came to reconcile the confusion with; deen is complex, cannot be understood by likes of me, i am a commoner and only top class intellects properly understand deen. Up till then I had read books of Islamic history, books of Fatwah, aqeedah, sectarian issues. Some of the books were already in the house because of my Taya Abdul Aziz [founder of Aziz Public School in Purana Akaalgarh - which I attended]. After he had passed away my Taya Muhammad Najeeb kept his older brothers books and stuff as memrobilia which managed to get my hands on and read. Up to leaving from Derby Moor Community School I relied on Pear Tree library for religious material and until then my religious leaning was non-sectarian and I was not aligned with a sectarian label. But after leaving DMCS in 1998 all this changed and my sectarian label became defined in Wilmorton College. Six: Learning About Islam And Christianity And Giving Dawah To Christians: Leaving DMCS I attended to Wilmorton College in Derby. In the college all of my friends associates were orthodox Muslims - but nothing of sectarian issues were ever discussed. This is where internet became available to me. With internet on my side the limit of research was only my imagination and ability. I cannot recall why or how I became interested in Islam and Christianity issue but i did. A lot of time was invested in researching the differences and learning to refute Christianity. Enter, late Sheikh Ahmed Deedat (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala), some how I stumbled upon website dedicated to his material - and his small book Combat Kit became my fave read and study guide along with his speeches and debates. Not being content with just listening to them I began barrowing them from Noor's shop [was close to Gurdwara in Normanton - now closed] Eventualy I started purchasing these videos from the same rental shop. Empowered with this knowledge began debating on online forums and giving dawah. With dawah came the draw back having to bear the criticism of Christians against Islam. Not being trained to process information and deduce conclusions and carry out research I was entirely on the mercy of research of others. As result I was introduced to various websites dedicated to answering christian criticism of Islam, to name few UnderstandingIslam, IslamicAwareness, MostMerciful, Bismikaallahuma, AnsweringChristianity, and a directory like website Sultan.org. These websites were the major websites but there were some less prominent ones - one of them was run by Abdul Raheem Green [a Christian convert to Wahhabism]. The field of giving dawah to christians was/is lead by Wahhabis. Two Christians I discussed often in college was Ruth/Judith [one of the two names] and Chris - drowned around 2008 without having the fortune of becoming Muslim. I would say, my internet associates, apart from Usman Sheikh [contributed articles to Bismikaallahuma on NT - long ago quit] everyone was Wahhabi but nothing was discussed between us. Seven: Crisis Of Loss Of Love And Finding New Direction: During my discussions with Christians I had to bear with a lot criticism/disrespect directed toward Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) and this had a negative effect on my love for the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) states a Muslim is not momin until he loves me more then his children, wealth, wife, parents and anything else. I came to realize that giving Dawah to Christians has removed this love from my heart. When someone insulted my parents or any member of family naturally I felt anger but when the Christians insulted/disrespected Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) my response was mute and did not contain the ghairat e imaani which a Muslim with untainted heart has. I began to think about why this changed occurred and realized that originally like all Muslims I had the fire of ghairat e imani in me but consistently being exposed to criticism and disrespect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) I have become desensitized in this regard. It was then that I decided to withdraw from preaching to Christians and preserve my Iman and purity of heart. After withdrawing from this field I decided to channel my energy into learning about Islamic creed. Note this was time when my religious knowledge about creed of Islam was bare minimum. One Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) who is not like His creation, sent Prophets, the last/final being Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). There will be judgment day, accountability, leading to hell or paradise, reward or punishment and angels. And also believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) was Noor e mujasim [i.e. Noor as Human] apart from this my knowledge of aqeedah was zero and the little i know was from word of mouth with no one ever discussing from Quran/Hadith. In this back drop I began to research material for aqeedah. At that time I had little to no knowledge of differences in creed of Muslims and assumption was all are Muslims and will have same aqeedah. Eight: My Spree Of Reading Books On Creed: With this mind set the very first book I read on aqeedah was Kitab at-Tawheed of Khariji Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab the Najdi. This book was followed by English translation of Taqwiyat Ul Iman written Ismail Dehalvi [a man who deliberately disrespected Prophets and Awliyah in this book] and published by Darussalam - Wahhabi publishers. I was advised I read the Urdu version of Taqwiyatul Iman and it was gifted to me by some brother from net. It had Taqwiyatul Iman (by Ismail Dehalvi), Takzira Al Ikhwan (by Ismail Dehalvi), and Nasihat Al Muslimeen (by Khuram Ali Bolahri). Studied, Qawaid Al Arba (i.e. Four Principles), Asool as-Salatha (i.e. Three Principles), Nawaqid Al Islam[1] (i.e. Nullifiers Of Islam), Creed Of Hamawiyyah, and Creed Of Wasatiyyah. All these books had major effect on my creed but Kitab at-Tawheed and Taqwiyatul Iman greatly effected my understanding of what ‘real’ Tawheed and Shirk are. The authors of these books expressed Tawheed and declared Shirk, in such and such a belief/creed. Another book which I read was written by Palan Haqqani's [Deobandi] book Shariah Not Ignorance [Urdu: Shariat Ya Jahalat - literally, Shariah Or Ignorance]. These three books laid the foundation of my deviation. Please note, even though these books presented a sectarian point of view. Kitab at-Tawheed employs Khariji methodology of Shirk and with its aid judges everything Shirk irrespective of if it is Shirk or not in true Islamic sense or not. Taqwiyatul Iman employed same Khariji methodology of Shirk and result was countless non-Shirk acts were declared Shirk. Despite this both these books did not declare their sectarian background nor did these books mention the sect which they are targeting. Due to absence of mention from which angle these books are being written and who is the target of these books, these books are taken by the readers as representation of Islamic belief. So what would a gullible reader know whose sectarian perspective he is reading and if this perspective is compatible with Islamic teaching or not. The gullible Muslim goes to shop with good faith and reads the name of the book and with good intentions purchases and reads it without ever realizing the misguidance he has made part of his belief. These books provide no clue to which sect is indoctrinating them and gullible Muslim is indoctrinated into Wahhabism – which is a offshoot of Kharijism. Unfortunately I was one of those gullible Muslims who fell into trap of these books and these books succeeded in indoctrinating me with Khariji methodology of determining Shirk and Kufr. Programing my self with Khariji literature I began to search for like minded people and material which compliments what I had read and to promote what I had learnt. Since I had given up the aspirations of being a preacher to Christians. I had to find a new interest and new cause with which I could promote Wahhabism as well as benefit Muslims via that cause. Nine: Jhangvi MSN Community And Discussions With Its Members: On MSN communities there was a Deobandi community named Jhangvi named after the firebrand Deobandi Haq Nawaz Jhangvi. It was here where my beliefs about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being Noor being sent as human were challenged and first time I became aware that these beliefs are not compatible with the beliefs of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and Ismail Dehalvi. I was told this is the belief of Barelwi’s and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhabm, Ismail Dehalvi etc. … were all against the Barelwi’s and informed that books Kitab at-Tawheed, Taqwiyatul Iman were written in refutation of the Shirk of Barelwi’s. I recall during a discussion I was told Barelwi’s believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not a human being but they believe he was Noor. In response to which I replied but I believed he was a human being and Noor and so did my family therefore it doesn’t make sense you saying this. But discussion dragged along and Satan made me forget and coated over the truth with falsehood. Then they quoted me verses of Quran and said, see Quran says he is human like us and the Barelwis believe he is not. I conceded the error of Barelwis on this topic and agreed with the Deobandis. Subjects of Ilm Al Ghayb and Hadhir Nazir were also discussed with the members of Jhangvi community and on both subjects I had agreed with their understanding at the end of it. Regarding different types of Tawassul my mind was already made up after I had read Kitab at-Tawheed and Taqwiyatul Iman hence there was no need to discuss. Number of points which enabled to me determine my position on these issues. Dua means to call, to invoke, to call, to supplicate. Dua is worship. Now the subjects, asking help directly from deceased – Shirk. Asking the deceased to make Dua on your behalf – Shirk. Judged to be Shirk solely on the basis that deceased is being called upon to help which makes the call as worship which is Shirk. At that time I did not have any problem with directing Dua to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but mentioning a Nabi or Wali, like: ‘O Allah grant me a son because I am your servant and I love the Prophet you sent as the last/final Prophet and I have accepted him as a Prophet from you. So O Allah I invoke you and do not disappoint me.’ But later on through discussions online I came to understand this understanding was incorrect and Ismail Dehalvi made mistake in this regard. I was told, this is also Shirk because this type of Tawassul was similar to how polytheists invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) through their idol gods. Ten: How Some Of These Books Effected My Belief: It would be good idea to actually briefly state how Kitab at-Tawheed and Taqwiyatul Iman greatly changed my world view. It is important to point out that not all the points I will mention have been explicitly stated in Kitab at-Tawheed. I quite frequented PalTalk and often discussed and listened to speeches by ‘brothers’ who explained Kitab at-Tawheed. Their explanation helped me to realize to whom the vague parts of Kitab at-Tawheed apply and anything which I state which is not mentioned is likely to be from those discussions if not then from forums. After reading Kitab at-Tawheed I came to believe to wear Taweez is Shirk and to slaughter an animal on the name of anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shirk. And it was applied upon – the common mans vow/nazr: ‘I will sacrifice a goat in the name of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani (rahimullah) if Allah granted me a son.’[2] I was told because they say they will sacrifice the animal on the name of deceased they commit Shirk and they said the meet of such animal is Haram.[3] Also to vow, to perform a act of worship/charity with intention to gift the reward to a deceased person was deemed as vow to other then Allah which was understood to be Shirk. To say: ‘O Messenger Of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)!’ Or to say: ‘O Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) help!’[4] In addition to this I came to believe that people excessively respecting/loving the pious people resulted in Muslims falling into Shirk hence the Prophets/Saliheen should be treated as they are ordinary human beings and emphasis should be placed on their being ordinary to ensure people do not make them equals with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).[5] I learnt to apply the verses revealed for polytheists upon Muslims in order to establish Shirk of Muslims. This methodology was of Khawarij according to Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and the modern Khawarij the leader of whom is Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab employed exactly same methodology in Kitab at-Tawheed. Also the concept of blocking the means to Shirk was learnt which means anything that can lead to Shirk should be discredited and destroyed if it is possible.[6] Read footnote 4 for demonstration of what was and is done to block the means to Shirk. Also came to believe that the Muslim majority is engaged in worship of idols (i.e. graves, Awliyah-Allah, Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and those who are worshipped beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are Taghoot.[7] Eleven: I Believed Muslims Worship Idols: In addition to this I also came to believe some members of Ummah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will worship idols. Even though we officially believed in some members of Ummah yet me and my co-religionist – Wahhabis lived a contradiction and those who follow this sect continue to live this contradiction. is believe majority of Muslims are guilty of [major] Shirk and they continue to do so and I fondly quoted the verse: “Most believed not in Allah except that they associate others with Him.” [12:106] Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhabi employed this verse in his Kitab at-Tawheed and Ismail Dehalvi in his Taqiwatul Iman.[8] This verse is often used to justify the charge of [major] Shirk levelled against Muslims because the Muslims. Educated Muslims argue that we believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hence we are not guilty of Shirk so Wahhabis like me quoted this verse to say, yes you do, but not without associating partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Hence you are no different from the polytheists of Makkah. Once the knowledge learnt was forgotten and I like all Wahhabis began to interpret or understand Quran by itself – taking the literal meaning of verses in discussion Wahhabis come to and I came to believe majority of Muslims were guilty of Shirk. In fact Ismail Dehalvi wrote, [belief in] actual Tawheed is a rare but most of the people do not understand meaning of Tawheed and Shirk, and yet claim to have faith but in reality are trapped in Shirk. He continues to write about various qualifies which will make a Muslim Mushrik in his warped definition and understanding of Shirk, and end with saying, someone in time of difficulty invokes the name of someone, someone in his during his speech takes an oath of another, point is that what ever a Hindu does in relation to his idols, all this is done by those false Muslims to their saints, prophets, imams, matyrs, angels and fairys, and yet claim to be Muslim. Then he writes praise be to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and writes, with that mouth and and their this claim [of being Muslim], Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said truly in Surah Yunus, and then he quotes the verse quoted above. In other words, he stated majority doesn’t know Tawheed and Shirk, yet claim to be people of faith. Implications of which in the context of chapter is that majority is only claiming to be Muslim but in reality isn’t. He then writes qualifiers which point why in his beliefe the majority is guilty of Shirk or Mushrik. He then states with their polytheistic mouth they claim to be Muslims, and reality of this majority is that most of them do not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) accept that they commit Shirk. Implication of which is obvious that according to him and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab majority of Muslims are Mushriks. In the same chaper after he quotes 12:106 he goes on to present excuses which he says Muslims present in defence of their [polytheistic] belief and in response to which he writes, in presence of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) the disbelievers said such things and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not accept nothing from them (i.e. of their excuses why they have polytheistic beliefs and actions) and Allah was displeased with them and declared them liars hence in Surah Yunus Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said, and they worship besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that which does not benefit nor does any harm and say they are our intercessors to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and say do you tell Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) which He does not know, He is unique in heavens and earth, from those which they attribute to Him. [10:18] Implication here is that Ismail Dehalvi has stated, majority of the Muslims worship others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Just from this first chapter I learnt that the majority of Muslims are unaware of what Tawheed and what Shirk is. And Majority of Muslims commits acts which nullify their belief in Islam yet despite they claim to be Muslims. I also learnt those who claim to be Muslims make excuses in defence of their belief like the polytheists made for their own beliefs and lastly but not least I learnt that majority is guilty of worshiping others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Twelve: Manual Of Takfir And Killing: Without going to too much detail about lessons learnt from his books I can summarize. Taqwiyatul Iman is basicly a gold mine for those who look for reasons to declare Muslims as Mushriks. Ismail Dehalvi wrote, qualifiers of Shirk, these qualifiers consist of everything a orthodox Muslim does. Hence every practice of Muslims is stated to be Shirk in one sense or another. And one who studies this book comes to conclusion that the [vast majority of] Muslims are in fact Mushrik and he and his co-religionists are only true monotheists. After this realisation the Takfir of [vast majority of] Muslims is easy, like one, two, three, for Phd holder. Another note worthy quality of this book is that it is a master piece of insults and disrespect directed toward Prophets and Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).[9] Once studied there is no doubt in my mind that a person would have any love and respect left for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in his heart. This book is death sentence to love and respect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And if you are involved in religious discussions on internet forums, you might have heard Wahhabi/Deobandi members equating Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to a postman, or having no greater position in deliverance of message of Islam than a postman has in delivering a letter.[10] In fact years ago, in my search for pure Islamic teaching I visited a Wahhabi website which had the following statement: “As for the authority of the Sunnah, then it must be understood that the role of the Prophet Muhammad (S) was not as a mere postman who, after delivering his letter, has no concern with it whatsoever. The Messenger was not sent just to deliver the Book of Allah, but to expound it and demonstrate a practical example of its contents.” [Ref: AllaahuAkbar.net, scribd] Note even though the author of this statement is actually refuting the: understanding that role of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was no greater then postman, he has still not done away with the postman label. Please pay attention to his words, Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not as a mere postman. In this sentence the word mere has been used in meaning of; just, only and simply. In other words according to the author he was not just/only a postman but was something else also and he states it was his duty deliver the message [as a postman] and to explain it. So note that apple hasn’t fallen further from the tree of Wahhabism and Taqwiyat Ul Iman. Shade of which is disrespect and insulting the Prophets and the friends of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). One of the most valuable and lesson learnt reading Ismail Dehalvi was from his book Tazkiratul Ikhwan and for which evidence of Quran and Ahadith was available hence I have not abandoned it. This lesson was regarding definition of innovation. In the mentioned book he explained that definition of innovation has been classifed as good innovation and evil innovation by one group of scholars and the other has determined there is only one type of innovation – without going into detail of good and bad innovation – and according to these group of scholars – innovation is evil by default hence specifics are not required. In this book he also emphatically states, To eliminate Shirk, was the reason for which the Quran had descended and the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fought the disbelievers and now in this [Shirk] Muslims have fallen into.[11] Thirteen: MAW Written Material And What It Taught Me: Coming Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s booklet, four fundamental principles. In this booklet he basicly argues polytheists against whom Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fought, they believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) despite this they were not Muslims. In second principle he states polytheists sought intercession of their gods and goes on to state intercession is of two kinds, permitted and prohibited. Permitted he states is one which is sought from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and where intercessor is permitted to interceed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) etc. Prohibited is which is sought from anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on matters which none has the ability perform except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In third principle he states, Arabs worshipped; Prophets, pious people, stones, trees[12], sun and moon. And states that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fought all of the polytheists without making distinction between any of the polytheists. Then he goes on to give proof for what he has stated. His first, second and third principles are actually a build-up to the fourth principle: “That the polytheists in our era (i.e. Muslims of Arabia and generally of entire world) are more severe in their (committing of) shirk than the first polytheists (i.e. who lived during Prophet’s time). This was since the first polytheists used to associate partners with Allah at times of ease and worship Him sincerely during times of hardship. However, the polytheist s in our era constantly commit shirk in times of ease as well as in times of hardship.” So basicly he laid the foundation of his charge of Shirk in the first three principle in fourth principle he declared the Muslims of entire world of being more strict in persuing Shirk then the polytheists of pre-Islamic era. In other words he considered the pre-Islamic era polytheists to be lesser polytheists then the Muslims of his time. Not just that, note he stated in principle three Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fought the polytheists without sparing any excuse for any of them. So now in fourth principle he has declared the Muslims of being worse in Shirk then polytheists of pre-Islamic era – what is he implying? Spare the worse type of polytheists (i.e. Muslims) or fight them without making distinction between any of the so called Muslims? It is obvious that if fighting lesser polytheists was acceptable then fighting the greater polytheists would also be acceptable. And indeed his armies ransacked cities of Muslims and killed countless Muslims on basis of his these teachings and continue to do so under various ‘terrorist’[13] organisational names – such as Al Qaidah, ISIS, Boko Haram, Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan, etc. Robbed the Muslims of their property and dishonored their women with rape because they believed these women were women of polytheists hence to enslave them and to engage in sexual intercourse with them without Nikkah is permissible. Fourteen: Palan Haqqani Of Shari’at Ya Jahalat: Palan Haqqani’s book Shari’at Ya Jahalat – is basicly a further extention of belief of Ismail Dehalvi and generally Deobandism. In which he states the Muslims are worshipers of Peers/Pirs yet affirm the belief that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is their God.[14] Also he accused the Muslims of subcontinent of not believing in Quran, or Hadith, or reliable texts of Hanafi Madhab. This is a sneaky way of Takfir of vast majority of Muslims in subcontinent and unfortunately I had swallowed all this without any objections. I also read some where in his book where he equated the majority of Muslims of subcontinent with following the footsteps of Jews and Christians. In order to justify the charge of Shirk levelled against Muslims. He stated the Muslims have common beliefs and practices which connect them with pre-Islamic Arabian polytheism and Hinduism of subcontinent. In other words he stated Muslims of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Aghanistan are polytheists. Basicly Palan Haqqani presented the beliefs of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab found in his works but did add his own material and discussed subjects controversial in subcontinent as well. From reading his book it was clear to the influence of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab on him. For example he writes, idolatory started when people made replicas of pious to remember them, later Satan incited people to worship these.[15] Yet son Qari Muhammad Tayyib and great grandson of founder of Madrassa of Deoband and author of, Seerat Pak, writes emphatically that idolatory started from Kabah because it was so deeply revered as a sanctury of god. The people of Arabia took the stones from it and shaped them, and worshipped what they created. This history of idol creation and worship author of this book attributed to Tareekh Ibn Khalidoon.[16] The point I am making is that he ignored his traditional Deobandi position due to influence of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. Over all this book reinforced my understanding of what I had read in, Kitab at-Tawheed, Taqwiyatul Iman, Tazkiratul Ikhwan. This book also pointed me to new direction – to subjects of Hadhir Nazir, Ilm Al Ghayb and due to earlier resistance and eventual surrendering of my judgment on Jhangvi MSN community regarding my understanding of these two topics. I took everything on board written on these two subjects. Also on Fiqhi subjects such as Mawlid, Urs, Isaal as-Sawab I surrendered my judgment citing lack of knowledge of Quran and Hadith, and personal lack of knowledge, and accepted his positions. Note he wrote numerous times in his book the Peer and the scholars who don’t know about Quran and Sunnah teach these things, and they are driven by earning wealth, hence they twist Quran and Hadith to promote these things to earn money. After reading this through out the book I had basically come to accept and agree with him. Imust have thought if the scholars don’t know as he is saying then what is my worth so it is best to just to accept his position. I vaguely remember reading book of Omar Bakri, leader of Al Muhajiroon organisation, [if I recall correctly] it was titled, Creed Of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. Basicly this book was composed of Wahhabi beliefs and stated which beliefs of it were in common with which sect. Reading it I came to realize according to Omar Bakri, Wahhabism has more in common with the Khawarij then any other sect. Through my studies after coming to orthodox Islam I agreed that core theology of Wahhabism which revolves around polytheism is of Khawarij. Fifteen: Confusion Regarding Dates Sorted: Readers who know about sectarian differences would have noted that I was reading books written by scholars of Deobandi and Wahhabi sects. There was a reason for this – I visisted PalTalk quite frequently where Wahhabis recommended that I read, Kitab at-Tawheed, Qawaid Al Arba, Taqwiyatul Iman in English, and Creed Of Hamawiyyah, Wasatiyyah, Kitab Al Iman, Al Ubudiyyah written by Ibn Taymiyyah. Even though I was reading books of Deobandi scholars as well but due to my associations with Wahhabis I inclined toward Wahhabism and adopted the label Wahhabi. Another point - the books I had read of Deobandi scholars did not contradict teaching of Wahhabism but rather both sects agree on the issues hence no contradiction was noticed. I took interest in disputes between orthodox Islam and Shia. Whilst carrying out research into disputes my attention was brought to Jhangvi group which hosted discussions on these subjects and this lead me to Deobandi website KR-HCY. On Jhangvi community after I had disputed with the members on some issues which I had not dealt with in the material I had read prior to this. Even though the issues were reconciled in their favour they recommended that I read, Palan Haqqani’s book; Shariah Ya Jahalat, and Urdu original of Taqwiyatul Iman. It has been over a decade – around fourteen years since I surrendered my Wahhabism in late 2001, and around ten years since I have given-up Deobandism – later part of 2005. Some aspects have confused me and I cannot place them in choronological order. Others I cannot recall precisely and I have aproximated and this includes numbers of years being influenced by Wahhabism. My hardcore Wahhabism years roughly numbered two years but if I count my two years of college then I was Wahhabi for about 4 years but this includes the roughly two years where I was naturalising Wahhabism. If I include my time spent on Jhangvi community and studying books due to the recommendation of Deobandi members till my conversion to Deobandism then time in Deobandism would be from 2000 to 2005. My official conversion to Deobandism took place sometime in 2002. Considering all this and generalising based on years then I was member of Wahhabi sect from 1998 to 2002 which amounts to four years of life being spent as Wahhabi. From official conversion which took place sometime in 2002 to leaving Deobandism sometime in 2005, my years in Deobandi sect are three. And finally from 2005 till 2016, or till of now, I have been Muslim for 10 years. Sixteen: When I Studied Material Of HT and Al Muhajiroon: Also do note, I did not investigate into matters of Fiqh/Madhab hence my Hanafi Madhab has remained constant throughout my life. Another thing, I cannot recall when I started reading material of Hizb ut-Tahrir (i.e. Khilafah Magazine) or when I studied, Constitution Of Khilafah. CoK was given to me by my associate Asif [he was/is member of Hizb ut-Tahrir] and he went through the material with me to explain ideology of HT. Hizb ut-Tahrir did not contribute anything toward my becoming Wahhabi therefore I am not going to state anything about this group. Al Muhajiroon was a Wahhabi group but I had no interest in their activities apart from their aqeedah material [by Amir and Bilal in WC] but influence of Al Muhajiroon was limited on me. So I was never really became a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir or Al Muhajiroon at any time of my life but did read material from both groups, more of Hizb ut-Tahrir then Al Muhajiroon. I found Hizb ut-Tahrir’s philosophy of establishing Khilafah interesting.[17] I also have jumbled some account. The earlier part of this account of my Wahhabism/Deobandism was intending to be brief. Just to inform readers of my past associations and sources of influence. I had no plan to write a comprehensive account so I crammed everything without putting everything in order and without specifying details. Now I have decided to write a comprehensive account hence the details contradicts the brief account and I have revised the material. I intended to finish Wahhabi and Deobandi episode on part ten, and then continue with how I became orthodox Muslim. But later decided against it and thought it would be good idea to state what I gained from Taqwiyatul Iman, and Kitab at-Tawheed. Even that I expanded to include other foundational material of Wahhabism – Qawaid Al Arba of Ibnul Wahhab and Deobandi Palan Haqqani’s, Shari’at Ya Jahalat. I do not claim this to be absolutely accurate account of my naturalization to Salafism and then to Deobandism but I have done my level best to put everything to pen truthfully and to best of my memory. Seventeen - You’re What You Eat And What You Read: As a result of reading books mentioned earlier and not mentioned I quitely engaged in preaching and promoting Wahhabist ideology over the internet but not through aggressive prostelzing but passive. I found best way of indoctrinating unsuspecting Muslims into Wahhabism was to use another cause as means of getting into a circle of people[18] and while their focus would be mutualy agreed cause I would gradually impart to them theology and philosophy of Wahhabism. Fortunately, due to passive method of prostelyzing I didn’t gain any converts to Wahhabism but must have influenced individuals with the Wahhabi thought. Those who were interested in learning about ugly side of Shiaism departed after experiencing my unreasonable amount of anti-Shia rehtoric and Takfir directed toward Shia generality and Shia scholarship. This was result of listening to likes of Mawlana Haq Nawaz Jhangvi, Mawlana Isar Ul Qasmi, Mawlana Zia ar-Rahman Farooqi, Mawlana Mohsin Raza Farooqi [he is a ex-Shia and convert to Deobandism], and Mawlana Ali Sher Haidri. A prominent feature in their lectures was to say: Kafir! Kafir! Shia Kafir! And the following was said right after the mentioned: Joh na manay voh bi Kafir! Meaning - one who does not believe [Shia are Kafir] that one is [also] Kafir. They often quoted what the Rawafiz had written in their books against mothers of believers - Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha), and Hadhrat Hafsa (radiallah ta’ala anha). Also what the Rawafiz have written regarding the companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), including Hadhrat Abu Bakr Siddeeq (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Hadhrat Umar Farooq (radiallah ta’ala anhu), and Hadhrat Uthman Ghani (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And what the Rawafiz wrote was so ugly, vile, flagrant abuse; anyone with spec of faith in their hearts would have been moved to tears and his emotions and judgment will agree with: Kafir! Kafir! Shia Kafir![19] I was also member of KR-HCY forum and to present united front against the Rawafiz we did not discuss/debate in public differences between Muslim, Deobandi, Hanbali Wahhabism and Wahhabi Ghayr Muqallideen. Eighteen – Becoming Disillusioned With Wahhabism – Group Of Satan: My becoming Wahhabi was not really a intellectual decision because circumstances and associations presented me with Wahhabi written material. Yet my decision to leave Wahhabism was based on achieving greater intellectual maturity and knowledge of Quran and Ahadith. I was first alarmed when I discovered the Ahadith about Najd which was quoted to me by a Muslim to refute me. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refusing to supplicate for region of Najd but supplicated for Syria and Yemen – stating group of Satan will emerge from Najd and afflictions will eminate from Najd. Upon investigation of Wahhabi position on these Ahadith I came to understanding Najd is in Iraq. Call it chance or Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) help. I found Hadith in which it was stated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fought in Najd, here. Implications of which were, if Najd is Iraq then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) must have fought a war in Iraq but research into matter proved that region of Iraq was not attacked by Muslims in life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor he fought in Iraq. Also I was told this Hadith was about Khawarij and they emerged from Iraq hence Najd is Iraqi city of Basrah and historically Basrh was part of Najd of Arabian Peninsula. When this was investigated, I learnt the first group of Khawarij did not emerge from Basrah but they seperated from army of Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) after battle of Siffin - 657, which took place in Syria.[20] And then in 658 Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had fought Khawarij in Iraq at Nahrawan, near capital Baghdad. Putting it simply Khawarij emerged from Syria as a sect and not from Iraq. Iraq was the place of battle between army of Amir Ul Momineen Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Khariji army. It was the Iraqis who killed the Khawarij in battle at Nahrawan and this is attested by Hadith found in Muslim and narrated by Abu Said Al Khudri (radiallah ta’ala anhu), here. Realising this argument does not hold weight either in light of established facts. Upon further investigation into the subject of, group of Satan emerging from Najd, I found Ahadith which precisely pointed to a particular direction. Ahadith stated group of Satan will emerg from direction of East. I consulted the maps and realized city of Raqqah the place of battle of Siffin from where Khawarij emerged is due North of Madinah, hence it cannot be East. Also Baghdad was long way off direction of East. I was willing to be flexible to accomadate Basrah into East but my generosity wasn’t willing to allow absolute distortion – to include Baghdad into East, it was over stretching my generosity. And as I mentioned earlier Basrah even if allowed to be in East would not suffice because Khawarij emerged as a sect at Siffin. Investigating this subject yeilded more Ahadith, group of Satan will emerge from direction of sunrise, Prophet pointed from Minbar of Masjid Nabvi toward Hadhrat Aysha’s house while pointing to direction from where the group of Satan will emerge from. The first Hadith – of sunrise – sunrises from different place every day, changing from south east to north east then returning, from north east to south east. I narrowed down the region from where the group of Satan will emerge by checking the furthest region from where the sunrises between to extremities – roughly it was from northern border of Kuwait to western boder of Oman, as demonstrated here. Hence the region of group of Satan was between the northern and southern boundaries of sunrise. The Hadith which precisely pointed to direction from where the group of Satan would emerge was of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointing toward the house of Hadhrat Aysha’s to indicate the direction of East from where it would emerge. After locating the from where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward her house, I drew a straight line from his position to her house. Note her house is where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is burried in his heavenly abode and the out come was a line pretty precisely pointing to Riyadh. My research on this Hadith years later culminated into this article, here. Eventually I had a precise direction to which I could be little flexible with and viola I had my Najd. Note, Najd was always known and indicated on maps, it was and is Najd known to all, situated in central Saudi Arabia, and surrounds area around capital Riyadh, see evidence of it, here. Importance of Najd and its location was/is crucial to understanding the origin of Wahhabism. Another argument in defence of Iraq being Najd was that, in the Hadith of Najd from where group of Satan would emerge, the word Najd (i.e. raised, elevated land) is used in linguistic meaning and not as a name of locality or region. Logical response to this was, in that case Syria and Yemen could also be linguistic usage – hence Syria, Yemen could be any land that fits the linguistic meanings of these words. Also Najd could be any land in East, such as mount K2, Everest, or even highiest battle ground, Kargil. It was irrational that a region which was known by name (i.e. Najd), location (East Of Madinah, central Arabia), was not considered Najd mentioned in Hadith of group of Satan. Nor there was a president where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ever used a name of region for linguistic usage. Also I used topological maps available on internet to see if traditional location of Najd fits into linguistic meaning of Najd or did it fit on Iraq as my Wahhabi co-religionists believed and attempted to prove. My investigation to see if linguistic meaning fitted Iraq or central Arabian province lead me to believe location of Najd is in central Arabia – region surrounded by Saudi capital Riyadh and not Iraq. This understanding was later further cemented when I carried out thorough research into matter and the fruits of that labour were published in the following article, here. Note location of Najd is important because the founder of Wahhabism was born in Najd. Wahhabi sect emerged from Najd and accused Muslims of being worst then polytheists of pre-Islamic era. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab legalised killing of Muslims under the pretext that they are disbelievers, looting of their property, and enslavement of Muslim women. Also English translation of Kitab at-Tawheed details of which I mentioned in footnote eight, on page ten claims to portray the condition of Najd[“], and on page fifteen under heading; impact of Dawah, states Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab fought struggled against Muslims of Najd until he gained victory in Najd[^]. This is explicit confirmation that Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was Najdi. Once it became apparent to me that Wahhabi sect was strong contender for being the group of Satan which was to emerge from Najd, I was disillusioned but still held to Wahhabism for reasons unknown. I guess the reason Najd is in central Arabia and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s Wahhabi sect emerged from it, must not have been concrete reason enough to leave it. Nineteen - Becoming Disillusioned With Wahhabism – Muslims Are Mushrik: Anyone who is familiar with Wahhabism will know that core teaching of its founder was; Muslims have fallen into major Shirk, they are worse in polytheism then the polytheists of Arabia, Tawheed had disapeared from Arabian Peninsula until Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab had reintroduced it. And as a result of these convictions Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab believed it is permissible to kill Muslims, take their property, enslave their men, women and children. Note even though I have used generic term ‘Muslim’ which does not specify a particular group of people. It should be noted his target was members of Ahle Sunnat - subcontinent’s equivlent is Barelwi. The foundation of all actrocities was the belief that Muslims have fallen into polytheism hence they are no longer Muslim – worse then disbelievers of pre-Islamic era. So I decided to investigate the claim that Muslims are polytheists. When I judged using the principles of Tawheed and Shirk learnt from Wahhabism I came to conclusion which these principles were primed to produce – these people were indeed Mushrik. It would be best to mentioned some principles to indicate what I mean. Words of Hadith, dua [directed to Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] is worship, distorted and applied as: [every] dua [to the dead] is worship, and we all know worship of anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is major Shirk. Another, any help sought from one who does not possesses the means to grant what is asked from him/her is Shirk. In other words, ma fawq al asbab help sought from anyone is Shirk. In light of first mentioned principle, saying ‘Ya RasoolAllah!’ is Shirk because I have used harf e nida (i.e. words of call) and I have called upon ‘dead’ Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Therefore as per Wahhabism I am guilty of worshipping Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam).[23] The second principles basicly teaches that if someone does not possess power, ability, right, to grant something and one ask from him/her then such a person is guilty of major Shirk. Suppose I ask from, a friend right to enter paradise because he does not possess the right to grant entry to paradise, I have committed major Shirk according to Wahhabism. But often this principle is applied to asking from the dead. So asking help from the dead would be major Shirk.[24] Coming back to the subject – when ever I used the principles of Wahhabism I arrived at same understanding; Sufis are Mushrik. I cannot recall how or where I read/heard the Ahle Sunnats position that Muslim Ummah as whole will not committ major Shirk. Where as position of Wahhabism was that vast majority of Muslims have fallen into major Shirk and only a minority are upon Tawheed – this minority was none other then followers of Wahhabism. As a Wahhabi my position was clear to me, Ummah has fallen into Shirk, like Jews and Christians had fallen into Shirk, based on the Ahadith of, tribes of my Ummah will worship idols, here. Based on all the Ahadith used by Wahhabis it was clear to me that Muslims will worship idols according to Ahadith. During this period it dawned on me that scholars of Ahle Sunnat read the very same Ahadith, in Arabic, yet do not agree with Wahhabi understanding of these Ahadith. Was it because all of them were insanely jealous of true understanding of these Ahadith given by Wahhabis, or were they such staunch defiers of truth that they would not accept truth because they loved prestige they have due to being scholars of heretics? I came to conclusion, you know, Ali, some might be jealous, and some from them deny the Wahhabi understanding of these Ahadith because they have a status, but surely in hundereds of thousands of Muslim scholars there would be few who were honest, truthful, sincere in finding the truth, and they exhorted all effort to learn the real meaning of these Ahadith, and after all the effort and sincere search for the truth, they found their understanding to be correct. And how do I know the understanding which I hold to is the truth after all I am just believe what was told to me. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated in Quran, obey Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), refer to people of authority, but when in dispute refer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), so based on this command of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) I decided to investigate the matter in dispute. So the very first aspect I investigated was, the Hadith referenced above, which idols does it refer to? Does it refer to deceased Saliheen, or their graves, or idols in true sense? Note, we used these Ahadith to argue the Muslims are worshiping idols and by idols we meant, graves and deceased Saliheen in those graves.[25] So I embarked upon this quest of finding the truth for my self and I was surprised. I found out that Ahadith which I have been using to mean graves and Saliheen burried in the graves, due to their generality in meaning, have been explained by other Ahadith, to mean idols such as Al-Lat, Dhi Al Khalasa, and Al Uzza. The following is article which establishes this position in light of Ahadith, here. The next was Hadith of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) following the footsteps of Jews and Christians. After bit of pondering over the meaning and relating it to current state of affairs of Muslims – how they emulate the West in eating, sleeping, dress, behavioural habbits as well as desire and aspire to follow the morality of West, it became apparent to me that Hadith did not mean emulating them in polytheism but emulating them in their way of life. Note Hadith says, emulating both Jews and Christians, and their collective achievement is Western worlds present reality. A article was dedicated to explain in detail the understanding I arrived at that juncture of my life, here. The next point of contention was, that according to Wahhabism Muslims will worship idols but the scholars of Ahle Sunnat believed non-Muslim Arabs would revert to idolatory after a sweet cool musky wind blows which will take the life of Muslims, and I found the position of Ahle Sunnat to be substantiated from evidence of Ahadith, here. The following article is in support of article linked prior to it, here. So far it was clear to me that Wahhabis misinterpret the Ahadith to fit their own agenda and it was also apparent to me that at the very least no Hadith establishes major Shirk in the majority of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Okay, addmitted the Wahhabis misinterpret the Ahadith but the correct understanding does not imply majority will not be guilty of major Shirk. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) emphatically stated that Muslims will not worship others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). When I subjected my Wahhabi understanding to test I came to realize that this is inclusive of all Muslims and not just Sahabah, here. I needed something to absolve the Arab Muslims from major Shirk. A statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in which he stated Muslims of Arabia will not worship others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This would suffice and refute the claim of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab that Arabs were steeped into major Shirk in his life time, and it would be enough to refute his entire mission and his entire invented religion of Wahhabism. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) guided me to a Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said, by Allah Satan will not be worshipped in Arabian Peninsula. When I investigated the meaning of this Hadith in light of Quran I understood that Satan worship is synonym for idol worship. In other words idols would be not be worshipped in Arabian Peninsula. Based on the Ahadith of worship of idols by Arabian tribes, I uderstood Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had made Takhsees of the general rule by stating tribes of Ummah will worship idols. Meaning idols would not be worshipped in Arabian Peninsula except until after the blowing of wind, except until after the death of all Muslims. Two articles dedicated to this understanding of Hadith of Satan not being worshipped in Arabian Peninsula are, here and here. Twenty – Why I Left Wahhabism: The entire foundation of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhabs movement was, Arabs have become Mushriks [even before the blowing of cool musky sweet wind which was to kill all Muslims] for this and these reasons. This belief of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab does not stand with teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because he has taught Arabian Peninsula will not see idol worship until after the blowing of wind and the death of all Muslims, and after this event Kuffar living in Arabia will revert to idolatory. So when I realised the contradiction between Wahhabism and teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) I decided to choose the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and gave up all teachings, all principles, of Wahhabism on which I use to judge all matters of creed. Simply because if the principle produces a teaching which goes against teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then just the teaching on its own isn’t incorrect but the principle which resulted this teaching also is incorrect. The legitimacy of Wahhabism was based on the thesis that Muslims are engaged in major Shirk in Arabian Peninsula. Yet there was to be no major Shirk in the belief of people of Arabian Peninsula until after the death of Muslims. Therefore I concluded Wahhabism was an irreligious Khariji rebellion against established Muslim tradition. After further investigation into the subject of Kharijism I learnt Wahhabi sect fulfilled all the prophecies of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regarding the group of Satan of Najd. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had foretold, the group of Satan will kill Muslims, they will spare disbelievers, they will shave their heads, and their pants would be above their ankles. Also studied history of Wahhabi sect and found them fulfilling the details, such as killing Muslims, skin-head shaving, their out word adherence to Sharia being unrivalled compared to the people of their age/locality. Once it was clear to me that Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was born in Najd, his Wahhabi band Ikhwan - original ISIS, emerged from Najd and did all the evil in Najd. I distanced my self from Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s killing of Muslims, looting property of Muslims, enslavement of Muslim men and women. As my understanding of definitions of Shirk/Tawheed developed from perspective of Ahle Sunnat and when I became familiar with various divisions in each subject my convictions became solidified – Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and his band of terrorists and those who have germinated ever since were/are a branch of Khawarij. Due to my stern and out spoken nature I condemed his, and actions of those who followed him with strongest, harshest words I could mint with combination of Takfir, on PalTalk, in a Wahhabi disscussion group.[26] As a result I fell out with my PalTalk Wahhabi buddies and I then officially renounced my Wahhabism on Understanding-Islam forum and I have never looked back to regain my faith in Wahhabism. TwentyOne – Jhangvi Community The Arena Of Sectarianism: At the time when I abandoned Wahhabism as mentioned earlier I was already part of Jhangvi community and the envoriment of the community was such that we all strived to refute the Rawafiz and this required knowledge. To help me to acquire knowledge about the disputed subjects between Muslim, Deobandi, Wahhabi and Shia I was recommended to read Urdu books such as: Tohfa Athna Ashariyyah by Shaykh Abdul Aziz Muhadith Dehalvi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) Tareekhi Dastawaiz by Maulana Zia ar-Rahman Farooqi, Rad ar-Rawafiz by Mujadid Alif Saani Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala), and Radd Ur-Rifdha by Imam Ahmad Raza (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). Hidayat Ush-Shia by Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri, and Irshad Ush-Shia by Sarfaraz Khan Safdar. Also I became embroiled in Muslim vs Deobandi, Wahhabi disputes – such as Noor & Bashr, Hadhir Nazir, Ilm Al Ghayb and these issues were resolved in favour of Deobandism. And also started to learn the legal status of disputed issues of Fiqh under guidance of Deobandis and with aid definition of innovation learnt from Wahhabis. I was told Barelwis are steeped in innovations and their practices have no evidence from Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and following issues are innovations which the Barelwis have fallen into: celebration of Mawlid, various days appointed for supplicating for the deceased relatives – Dua of Thursday (i.e. Khatam Juma-raat), Dua of 4th, Dua of 10th, Dua of 40th, Giyarweenh (i.e. Dua on 11th of every Islamic month), Urs/Barsi (i.e. commemorating life of a Wali or Aalim - yearly), Dua after funeral (i.e. Dua Bad e Janazah), Konday[27], sending blessings upon Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) before the call of prayer (i.e. Salawat/Durud Qabl Azaan), supplication of Fatihah[28], and issue of reciting Salat upon Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) using non-prophetic Durud/Salat.[29] Also upon joining Jhangvi community I had also become familiar with Qadiyanis and their teachings and realised the disputes of Ahnaf of subcontinent with Ghayr Muqallideen (i.e. non-conformist Wahhabism of subcontinent) but issues of Ahnaf vs Ghayr Muqallideen were never studied in my Deobandism years. Jhangvi community as opposed to KR-HCY forum had no restrictions on what subjects can be discussed and it was Jhangvi community opened my eyes and introduced me to different sects and allowed me to gain knowledge about these sects through the lense of Deobandism.

Introduction: Subject of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being appointed on the station of Shahid (i.e. Hadhir & Nazir) is a controversial one. Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is witness to actions of Jinn and mankind due to his appointment but the antagonists disbelieve in what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed about his station of Shahid. As such they argue against Muslims with their own evidences to refute Islamic belief. Potent Argument Against Hadhir Nazir: One of the antagonists during a with a Muslim presented the following verse of Quran: “Have you not considered that Allah knows what is in the heavens and what is on the earth? There is no private conversation between three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them, and no less than that and no more than that except He is with them wherever they are. Then He will inform them of what they did, on the Day of Resurrection. Indeed Allah is, of all things, Knowing.” [Ref: 58:7] On basis of this he argued; if there is a private conversation between three then fourth is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and if the meeting is between five participants then sixth is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Now if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was also witness to actions of Jinn-kind and mankind then the verse should have amounted to mean: If the meeting is between three fourth is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and fifth is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Or it should have amounted to: When the secret meeting is between five participants then sixth is Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and seventh is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). He also argued that the verse of Quran states: “… and no less than that and no more than that ...” therefore there can be no less present listeners nor greater than the mentioned in the verse. Hence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not Hadhir Nazir because if he was Hadhir Nazir then he would be fourth and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would be fifth yet the verse states, no less than that and no more. The Methodology To Be Employed: The argument, there cannot be more or less listeners to a private meeting except those who are present and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be dealt first. Then subject of other listeners listening to secret meeting will be discussed and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permitted position of Muslims will established in light of Quran and Hadith. Interpreting No Less Than That And No More Than That Part Of Verse: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “There is in no private conversation between three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them …” Note the verse uses three and five as an example to illustrate the point. Then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “… and no less than that and no more than except that He is with them wherever they are.” The meaning of this part of verse can be best explained as following: If there are two people engaged in secret meeting third would be Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Note, two is less than three and less than five hence the following verse applies to it: “… and no less than that (i.e. three and five) and no more than that except He is with them wherever they are.” If there are six people engaged in a secret meeting than seventh would be Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Note, six is more than three and more than five hence the following part applies to it: “… and no less than that and no more than that (i.e. three and five) except He is with them wherever they are.” Or suppose, four people are in a secret meeting than fifth is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In this example four is greater than three and less than five hence following applies to it: “… and no less than that (i.e. five) and no more than that (i.e. three) except He is with them wherever they are.” Meaning Of Verse In Simple Words And Its Implications: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “There is no private conversation between three [people] but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five [engaged in secret counsel] but that He is the sixth of them, and no less than that [i.e. three and five people] and no more than that [three and five people] except He is with them wherever they are.” [Ref: 58:7] After interpretation of this verse it should be evident to Muslims; the opponent of Muslims misconstrued the verse to mean that there cannot be more or less participant listeners to secret meeting. The verse merely means if there are more or less than three or five people engaged in secret meeting Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is also part of it. The fundamental point of the verse is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is fully aware of the secret meetings of people, as stated here: “Know they not that Allah knows their secret ideas, and their secret counsels, and that Allah is the All-Knower of the unseen.” [Ref: 9:78] Angels Also Are Part Of Secret Meetings: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “Have you not considered that Allah knows what is in the heavens and what is on the earth? There is in no private conversation between three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them, and no less than that and no more, except that He is with them wherever they are. Then He will inform them of what they did, on the Day of Resurrection. Indeed Allah is, of all things, Knowing.” [Ref: 58:7] Now read the following verse in which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “And indeed [appointed] over you are keepers. Noble and recording they know whatever you do.” [Ref: 82: 10/12] In another verse of Quran Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “[Remember] that the two receivers (recording angels) receive (each human being), one sitting on the right and one on the left (to note his or her actions).” [Ref: 50:17] In light of these two verses it is evident that the people present in the secret counsel, and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and the recording angels are witness to the events of secret counsels. This deduction is clearly stated in another verse of Quran: “Or do they think that We hear not their secrets and their private counsels and Our messengers are by them to record.” [Ref: 43:80] Potent Response To Potent Argument: It is clear that in a secret counsel apart from the, human participants, angels and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are aware of the proceedings. Yet Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “There is in no private conversation between three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them, and no less than that and no more, except that He is with them wherever they are.” This verse excludes the mention of angels being first hand witness to events of secret meeting. Hence question begs to be asked is the verse comprehensively stating who the witnesses to events of meeting or not? Of course not, the verse merely is stating that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is witness to the events of secret meetings without excluding others. Hence this verse of Quran cannot be used to refute Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) states that he has been sent as a Prophet to entire mankind: “… concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.” [Ref: Muslim B4, H1062] Hence he is witness upon entire mankind and he will be called as a witness to bear witness against the nations of previous Prophets because he is a witness: “One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring you as a witness against these (people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.” [Ref: 16:89] The verse in discussion does not state Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is witness nor does it exclude witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Just like it does not include/exclude the angels witnessing the deeds and recording in the book of deeds. We as Muslims affirm both because these are established with other verses of Quran. Conclusion: Opponent of Islam had misconstrued the meaning of verse and arrived at the understanding; none apart from the participants of secret meeting and Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) witness the events but contrary to this distorted understanding of verse it is established from explicit teaching of Quran that angels and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) are witness upon deeds of mankind. Due to witnessing angels write the deeds of mankind and Jinn-kind into book of deed, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) observes the deeds, and will be called as a witness on day of judgment. Wama Alayna Ilal Balaghul Mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Salam Alayqum In your following article; ‘Refuting Heretical Argument - Innovated Practices Are Innovations …’, under the heading following heading: ‘1.3 - Reprehensible Innovations Are Misguidance.’, you presented following Ahadith - every newly invented matter/affair is innovation and every innovation is misguidance: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] “Avoid novelties, every novelty is an innovation and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B40, H4590] Anyone who reads these two Ahadith would note; the content of these to Ahadith belies your heading. Also the following Hadith records clearly states every innovation is misguidance even if people see good in it: “Abdullaah Ibn 'Umar (radiallah ta'ala anhu) said, "Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Darimi, B1, H96, Urdu Version] Clearly these Ahadith mean to say ‘every innovation is misguidance’ and not ‘every reprehensible innovation is misguidance’. There is no proof for your Takhsees and you should fear Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). You’re distorting the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to misguide people. Saeed Imtiaz The Evidence For Takhsees and Explaining The Evidence Of Takhsees: First of all the evidence on which Takhsees was made based was quoted in following section: ‘1.2 - Prophetic Criterion Of Determining A [Reprehensible] Innovation.’ Unfortunately you did not contemplate on the previous section or at least not deep enough hence you did not realize the evidence. Assuming you did read the following Hadith but ignored it: “Whoever introduces an evil Sunnah that is followed after him, will bear the burden of sin for that and the equivalent of their burden of sin, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207] In the quoted Hadith word Sunnah has been used to mean innovation. Also the following Hadith was quoted: "And whoever introduces an erroneous Biddah with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] This part of the Hadith: “…whoever introduces an erroneous Biddah …” is evidence for Takhsees of reprehensible innovation and the following part goes on to educate how to recognize a erroneous innovation: ”… with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger …” In other words the Hadith of Tirmadhi and the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) establish; concept of reprehensible innovation is valid and it was due to it Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed how reprehensible innovation is to be recognized – i.e. which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are pleased with acts which involve, worship, charity, encouraging good and forbidding wrong, hence anything composed of these cannot be reprehensible innovation. Coming back to the subject, the words: “… with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger …” are extra addition and are not fundamental part of Hadith. At the fundamental level the Hadith is stating: "And whoever introduces an erroneous Biddah then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” This is in accordance with Hadith of Ibn Majah already quoted and in also with the following: “And whoever introduces a bad Sunnah that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] Hence it is correct to conclude; religiously the concept of reprehensible innovation is valid. ‘Every Innovation’ In Context Of ‘Whoever Introduces An Erroneous Innovation’: It is narrated that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "And whoever introduces an erroneous Biddah … 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] According to this Hadith it is clearly established; according to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) erroneous/reprehensible innovation is sinful and not just any/every innovation and reprehensible innovation is one which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hence it is only correct to interpret the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) according to his own words and based on this correct understanding of Ahadith you quoted would be: “And the most evil affairs are the [erroneous] innovations; and every [erroneous] innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] The Hadith of avoiding novelties is to be understood with similar insertion: “Avoid [erroneous] novelties, every [erroneous] novelty is an [erroneous] innovation and every [erroneous] innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B40, H4590] Coming to the Hadith of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in which he is reported to have said, every innovation is misguidance even if the people see good in the innovation, this Hadith should be understood exactly the same way: “Abdullah Ibn Umar said, "Every [erroneous] innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good ." [Ref: Darimi, B1, H96, Urdu Version] Conclusion: The Ahadith of every innovation are about reprehensible innovation and reprehensible innovation is innovation which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and such innovation is misguidance and sinful and therefore it should be avoided and remains misguidance even if people see good in it. The position of Ahle Sunnat is established from Ahadith which has been explained in detail. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has reportedly stated, one who introduces into Islam a good Sunnah he/she will be rewarded and those who act on this good Sunnah will also receive equal reward, Hadith: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] From the literal reading of the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) it is clear that it is permissible to introduce into Islam good Sunnahs/Biddahs and to follow them. If it was impermissible to introduce good Sunnahs/Biddahs into Islam then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would not have told of reward. The Muslims believe the literal implications of this Hadith and accept all interpretations that can be derived according to historical context. Prophetic teaching is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been granted ‘Jawami Al Kalim’ meaning the ability to express vast meanings in few sentences. Hence the multiple interpretations of this Hadith are in agreement with this nature of prophetic words hence all are valid. Now, the opponents of religion of Islam argue against the literal implications and interpret the Hadith in historical context in order to negate the understanding of Muslims. Their understanding is; in a gathering where people are reluctant to give charity, one who gives charity and those who follow his example all will receive equal reward. Readers should note, this is article is continuation of response given to brother Sa’id Imtiaz, here and here. Evidence For Validity Of Holding To Literal Meaning Of Prophetic Words: Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave following instruction to a group of Sahabah after returning from the battle of Al Ahzab: “None of you Muslims should offer the Asr prayer but at Banu Quraiza's place.” While they were travelling toward the tribe of Quraiza the Hadith records: “The Asr prayer became due for some of them on the way.” This divided the companions into two groups, one group said: “We will not offer it till we reach it, the place of Banu Quraiza.” While the other group said: “No, we will pray at this spot, for the Prophet did not mean that for us.” The Hadith goes on to record that the difference of opinion was brought to attention of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) who did not rebuke either group: “Later on it was mentioned to the Prophet and he did not berate any of the two groups.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H445] Position Of Both Group Of Companions On This Matter: The first group acted on the literal instructions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and did not perform Asr prayer. They second group of companions via Ijtihad came to conclusion that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not preventing them from performing Asr prayer on the way but he was instructing them to travel quickly and reach the destination before Asr prayer and then perform the Asr prayer. So they realized they will not reach destination before the Asr prayer time expires and worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is more important then reaching a destination quickly hence they decided to perform the prayers on the way: “… (Some) people being afraid that the time for prayer would expire, said their prayers before reaching the street of Banu Quraiza.” [Ref: Muslim, B19, H4374] The other group they said: “We will not offer it till we reach it, the place of Banu Quraiza.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H445] “We will not say our prayer except where the Messenger of Allah has ordered us to say it even if the time expires.” [Ref: Muslim, B19, H4374] This establishes one group of companions held to literal instructions and made no Ijtihad hence did not perform prayers on the way to destination and also establishes one group of companions did engage in Ijtihad and performed prayers on the way to said destination. Reaction Of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) To This Difference: Hadith of Bukhari and Muslim record the following words regarding this difference of opinion between the companions: ”When he learned of the difference in the view of the two groups of the people, the Messenger of Allah did not blame anyone from the two groups.” [Ref: Muslim, B19, H4374] “Later on it was mentioned to the Prophet and he did not berate any of the two groups.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H445] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) not correcting any group indicates both groups of companions were correct in their approach because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Whoever among you sees an evil action, and he is able to change it with his hand, then change it with his hand (by taking action); if he cannot, (do so) with his tongue then with his tongue (by speaking out); and if he cannot then with his heart (by hating it and feeling that it is wrong), and that is the weakest of faith.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B5, H1275] Disobedience to command of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is form of Munkir (i.e. evil/wrong) hence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have clearly pointed out the error of Ijtihad if there was any. Therefore the conclusion both groups were correct in their understanding is established. The Principle Derived From Incident Of Banu Quraiza: From this historical event it is established; literal implications of prophetic words and interpreted implications derived using tool of Ijtihad are both be correct. If any of the two interpretations of prophetic words was in contradiction with Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) teaching he would have corrected the wrong party. An important point, both groups were correct hence Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) methodology is of literal and reinterpretation. Hadith Of Good Sunnah In Light Of Approved Methodologies: Understanding the prophetic words literally and acting upon them as Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed is established. Also reinterpreting the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in light of other evidence is also established. The following prophetic words now can be understood according Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) approved methodologies: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The literal reading of Hadith establishes reward for introducing good Sunnahs/Biddahs into Islam and which is akin to establishing permissibility of introducing good Sunnahs/Biddah into Islam. The reinterpreting methodology establishes reward for engaging in prophetic Sunnahs which people are reluctant to practice and this is akin to granting permission for engaging in prophetic Sunnahs which people are reluctant to engage. Conclusion: Prophetic words are according to ‘Jawami Al Kalim’ nature hence they can be interpreted differently depending on the evidence. From the Hadith of Bani Quraiza it was deduced that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) approved the actions of two groups of companions who differed over the meaning of prophetic words. One group held to the literal meaning of words while the other reinterpreted the words and came to different understanding. As a result one group did not perform their prayers until they reached their destination while the other performed it on the way to destination. In context of objective of this article it is important to point out; the Muslims in regards to the Hadith of good Sunnah hold to the literal meaning and consider it permissible to create good Sunnah/Biddahs and introduce them into Islam with hope of gaining reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), while accepting the interpretation presented by opponents of Islam. It is important to point out, we the Muslims accept the interpretation of Hadith in discussion but not their understanding of; it is not permitted to introduce good innovations into Islam.

Introduction: In exchanges with brother Sa’id Imtiaz it was argued; Islam permits good Biddahs/Sunnahs into Islam and there is reward one who innovates a good Sunnah and those who follow them, a understanding based on the following: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] In response to my line of argument, Wahhabi brother quoted two Wahhabi scholars and one from these two was Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid, he is prominent scholar of the sect. Their methodology of interpretation was; the ‘good Sunnah’ is to be interpreted according to the context. The interpretation which they presented according to the methodology was; reviving a prophetic Sunnah is good Sunnah and all those who follow the newly revived Sunnah will earn equal reward. Comprehensively this would be as; reviving a prophetic Sunnah which has been neglected, or forgotten, or people are reluctant to practice it, is the good Sunnah and all those who follow the newly revived Sunnah will earn equal reward. Comprehensive response to this line of argument against Islam has been posted here. Methodologies And Interpretations On Trial: There is absolutely no need to dedicate time and critically examine the argument presented and therefore no effort will be made. The already written is sufficient to straighten the crooked path of heretics, if they lend it an ear. In here the methodologies employed to interpret the Ahadith in question by the Muslims and their opponents will be on trial. In an effort to determine which methodology is valid and which interpretation is valid. To properly analyze the methodologies and establish consistency in its application another set of Ahadith will be introduced into discussion which are essential part of the discourse, namely Ahadith of ‘newly invented matters’. The Methodology Of Interpretation To Be Employed: If the Ahadith of ‘newly invented matters’ are to be interpreted in the historical context which surround them and these Ahadith are not be interpreted according to generality wording then there is no need to interpret the Hadith of ‘good Sunnah’ according to generality of wording then they also should be interpreted according to their historical context. If the Ahadith of ‘newly invented matters’ are interpreted according to generality of words and these Ahadith are not restricted to their context but their generality is used then same methodology of interpretation is to be employed for Ahadith of ‘good Sunnah’ and this is to be fair and impartial. The Hadith Of Divine Decree And Adhering To Prophectic Sunnah And Predecessors: “Sufyan said (according to one chain), and Abu al-Salit said (according to another chain): A man wrote to 'Umar b. 'Abd al-Aziz asking him about Divine decree. He wrote to him: To begin with, I enjoin upon you to fear Allah, to be moderate in (obeying) His Command, to follow the Sunnah of His Prophet and to abandon the novelties which the innovators introduced after his Sunnah has been established and they were saved from its trouble; so stick to Sunnah, for it is for you, if Allah chooses a protection; then you should know that any innovation which the people introduced was refuted long before it. […] So accept for yourself what the people (in the past) had accepted for themselves for they had complete knowledge of whatever they were informed and by penetrating insight they forbade; they had more strength (than us) to disclose the matters and they were far better (than us) by virtue of their merits. If right guidance is what you are following, then you out-stripped them to it. And if you say whatever the novelty occurred after them was introduced by those who followed the way other then theirs and disliked them. It is they who actually outstripped, and talked about it sufficiently, and gave a satisfactory explanation for it. Below them there is no place for exhaustiveness, and above them there is no place for elaborating things. Some people shortened the matter more than they had done, and thus they turned away, and some people raised the matter more than they had done, and thus they exaggerated. They were on right guidance between that. You have written (to me) asking about confession of Divine decree, you have indeed approached a person who is well informed of it, with the will of Allah. I know what whatever novelty people have brought in, and whatever innovation people have introduced are not more manifest and more established than confession of Divine decree. The ignorant people in pre-Islamic times have mentioned it; they talked about it in their speeches and in their poetry. They would console themselves for what they lost, and Islam then strengthened it. The Messenger of Allah did not mention it in one or two traditions, but the Muslims heard it from him, and they talked of it from him, and they talked of it during his lifetime and after his death. They did so out of belief and submission to their Lord and thinking themselves weak. There is nothing which is not surrounded by His knowledge, and not counted by His register and not destined by His decree. Despite that, it has been strongly mentioned in His Book: from it they have derived it, and from it they have and so they also read in it what you read, and they knew its interpretation of which you are ignorant. After that they said: All this is by writing and decreeing. Distress has been written down, and what has been destined will occur; what Allah wills surely will happen and which He will not, will not occur. We have no power to harm or benefit ourselves. Then after that they showed interest (in good works) and were afraid (of bad deeds).” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4595] The Hadith Of Newly Invented Matters And Sticking To Sunnah: “It was narrated from 'Abdur-Rahman bin 'Amr As-Sulami that: He heard Al-'Irbad bin Sariyah say: "The Messenger of Allah delivered a moving speech to us which made our eyes flow with tears and made our hearts melt. We said: 'O Messenger of Allah. This is a speech of farewell. What did you enjoin upon us?' He said: 'I am leaving you upon a (path of) brightness whose night is like its day. No one will deviate from it after I am gone but one who is doomed. Whoever among you lives will see great conflict. I urge you to adhere to what you know of my Sunnah and the path of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it. And you must obey, even if (your leader is) an Abyssinian leader. For the true believer is like a camel with a ring in its nose; wherever it is driven, it complies." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H43] “Narrated Al-'Irbad bin Sariyah: "One day after the morning Salat, the Messenger of Allah exhorted us to the extent that the eyes wept and the hearts shuddered with fear. A man said: 'Indeed this is a farewell exhortation. So what do you order us O Messenger of Allah?' He said: 'I order you to have Taqwa of Allah, and to listen and obey [to your leader] even in the case of an Ethiopian slave. Indeed, who ever among you lives, he will see much difference. Beware of the newly invented matters, for indeed they are astray. Whoever among you sees that, then he must stick to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khulafa', cling to it with the molars.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B9, H2676] The Ahadith Of Introducing Good Sunnah And Reward: “It was narrated from Mundhir bin Jarir that his father said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good Sunnah that is followed, he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in their slightest. And whoever introduces a bad Sunnah that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] “Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woolen clothes came to Allah's Messenger. He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger said: He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Hadith Of ‘Divine Decree’ Contextualized: “A man wrote to 'Umar b. 'Abd al-Aziz asking him about Divine decree. He wrote to him: To begin with, I enjoin upon you to fear Allah, to be moderate in (obeying) His Command, to follow the Sunnah of His Prophet [about divine decree] and to abandon the novelties [of negating divine decree] which the innovators introduced after his Sunnah [of divine decree] has been established and they [the Sahabah] were saved from its trouble; so stick to Sunnah [in this matter of belief], for it is for you, if Allah chooses a protection; then you should know that any innovation [regarding divine decree] which the people introduced was refuted long before it. […] So accept for yourself what the people (in the past) had accepted for themselves [regarding the belief of pre-ordained destiny] for they had complete knowledge of whatever they were informed [about divine decree] and by penetrating insight they forbade [discussion regarding divine decree]; they had more strength (than us) to disclose the matters [of divine decree] and they were far better (than us) by virtue of their merits. If right guidance is [Allah has not pre-ordained all things, which is] what you are following, then you out-stripped them to it. And if you say whatever the novelty occurred [in this matter of divine decree] after them was introduced by those who followed the way other then theirs and disliked them. It is they [the predecessors] who actually outstripped and talked about it sufficiently and gave a satisfactory explanation for it. Below them there is no place for exhaustiveness [on this matter of divine decree] and above them there is no place for elaborating things [with regards to divine decree]. Some people shortened the matter [of divine decree] more than they had done, and thus they turned away [from the path predecessors], and some people raised the matter more than they had done, and thus they exaggerated [the path predecessors in this regard]. They [the predecessors] were on right guidance between that. You have written (to me) asking about confession of Divine decree, you have indeed approached a person who is well informed of it, with the will of Allah. I know what whatever novelty people have brought in [regards to the divine decree] and whatever innovation people have introduced [in connection with divine decree] are not more manifest and more established than confession of Divine decree. The ignorant people in pre-Islamic times have mentioned it; they talked about it in their speeches and in their poetry. They would console themselves for what they lost, and Islam then strengthened it [the belief in pre-ordained divine decree]. The Messenger of Allah did not mention it in one or two traditions, but the Muslims heard it from him, and they talked of it from him, and they talked of it during his lifetime and after his death. They did so out of belief and submission to their Lord and thinking themselves weak. There is nothing which is not surrounded by His knowledge, and not counted by His register and not destined by His decree. Despite that, it has been strongly mentioned in His Book: from it they have derived it, and from it they have and so they also read in it what you read, and they knew its interpretation of which you are ignorant. After that they said: All this is by writing and decreeing. Distress has been written down, and what has been destined will occur; what Allah wills surely will happen and which He will not, will not occur. We have no power to harm or benefit ourselves. Then after that they showed interest (in good works) and were afraid (of bad deeds).” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4595] Hadith Of ‘Beware Of Newly Invented Matters’ Contextualized: "One day after the morning Salat, the Messenger of Allah exhorted us to the extent that the eyes wept and the hearts shuddered with fear. A man said: 'Indeed this is a farewell exhortation. So what do you order us O Messenger of Allah?' He said: 'I order you to have Taqwa of Allah, and to listen and obey [to your leader and do not rebel against his authority] even in the case of an Ethiopian slave. Indeed, who ever among you lives, he will see much difference [leading to rebellion]. Beware of the newly invented matters [which lead to rebellion against a Khalifah because] for indeed they are misguidance. Whoever among you sees that [time of differences and rebellion], then he must stick to my Sunnah [which prohibits rebellion against Khalifah] and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khulafah, cling to it [i.e. Sunnah] with the molars." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B9, H2676] Ahadith Of ‘Good Sunnah’ Contextualized: “’Whoever introduces a good Sunnah [i.e. giving of charity by Ansari companion and] that is followed, he [the Ansari companion] 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 Sunnah [such as being stingy and not spending in the way of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and if] that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] Important Note Regarding The Forth Coming Discussion: Hadith of divine decree will not be discussed because it is too long. It is solely being presented so people understand the limitation contextualization and how such contextualization limits the understanding of Hadith and its application. Readers are more then welcome to follow the methodology used and demonstrate how the divine decree Hadith is affected and how such contextualization negates comprehensiveness of guidance contained in Ahadith. Due to Ahadith of ‘beware of the newly invented matters’ and Hadith of ‘good Sunnah’ being shorter, they will be discussed in detailed. Interpreting Hadith Of ‘Beware Of The Newly Invented Matters’ According To Context: Contextually Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) warned against innovation of rebellion/disobedience to Khalifah: “I order you to have Taqwa of Allah [i.e. fulfill your obligations, enjoin good and forbid evil] and to listen and obey [to your leader and do not rebel against his authority] even in the case of an Ethiopian slave. Indeed, who ever among you lives, he will see much difference [leading to rebellion]. Beware of the newly invented matters [which lead to rebellion against a Khalifah because] for indeed they are misguidance. Whoever among you sees that [time of differences and rebellion], then he must stick to my Sunnah [which prohibits rebellion against Khalifah] and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khulafah, cling to it [i.e. Sunnah] with the molars." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B9, H2676] Contextualizing this Hadith limits the application of this Hadith to innovations in general and it contradicts Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) words where he stated he has been granted ‘Jawami Al Kalim’. Hadith Of ‘Beware Of The Newly Invented Matters’ According To Generality Of Words: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) warned against innovation with following words: “I order you to have Taqwa of Allah, and to listen and obey [to your leader] even in the case of an Ethiopian slave. Indeed, who ever among you lives, he will see much difference. Beware of the newly invented matters, for indeed they are astray. Whoever among you sees that, then he must stick to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khulafa', cling to it with the molars.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B9, H2676] The generality of the Hadith quoted permits it to be applied to all types of innovations and the generality is in accordance with ‘Jawami Al Kalim’ nature of prophetic words. Interpreting Hadith Of ‘Who So Ever Introduces A Good Sunnah’ According To Context: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: “’Whoever introduces a good Sunnah [i.e. giving of charity by Ansari companion and] that is followed, he [the Ansari companion] 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 Sunnah [such as being stingy and not spending in the way of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and if] that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] Contextually this Hadith is about a companion and the group of companions who followed his example and acted on the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Based on the context the Hadith means when people are reluctant to give charity and the first one to start and those who follow, all will get equal reward. It also means for the modern Muslim; one who is acting on the prophetic Sunnah of giving charity then you are following the example of the Ansari companion and you will get equal reward. Hadith Of ‘Who So Ever Introduces A Good Sunnah’ According To Generality Of Words: Understanding the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in general meaning and without restricting it to historical context yields following understanding: “Whoever introduces a good [non-prophetic] Sunnah [which accords with teaching of the religion and if] that is followed [by others beside him, then] he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in their slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] Maintaining and holding to generality of words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) establishes permissibility of introducing praiseworthy Sunnahs and reward for them. Putting it into perspective of history, Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had the idea to collect the Quran in one book format. He introduced this Sunnah and Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) implemented his idea and the result of this was Quran which we possess as a single book. There is reward for him for purposing the compilation of Quran and those who follow and publish Quran. Generalizing on the historical context, one can derive the following principle: “Whoever introduces a good Sunnah [such as initiating action on prophetic Sunnah and if] that is followed [by others] he [the initiator of action on prophetic Sunnah] 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 Sunnah that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] This generalized principle in historical context can also be interpreted to mean, when people are reluctant to engage in a particular religious activity, one who starts it and those who follow his example all will get equal reward. The contextualization and the derived principle from historical context negate the ‘Jawami Al Kalim’ nature of prophetic words which have been established in this part. In short the generality of Hadith accords with prophetic teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being given ‘Jawami Al Kalim’. All Ahadith On The Subject Of Innovation Have A Historical Context: There are many Ahadith about the topic of innovation but all of them have a particular event associated with it. Even if the historical context has not been narrated it is entirely logical to assume there was a historical context. Hence all those Ahadith are also in context of historical events and cannot be taken as general principle. Even the Ahadith narrated without the historical context give instruction of rejection teachings/practices which go against the clear injunctions and the spirit/essence of Islam. Therefore even these Ahadith are restricted to the context of innovations which contradict the teaching of Islam. The Effect Of Restricting Ahadith Of Innovation To Historical Context: By interpreting the Ahadith of innovation in context of historical events we solely restrict its application to a particular event. And if all Ahadith of innovation are restricted to a context and interpreted in context of an event then we have no prophetic guidance on matters of innovations. Pay attention, if all Ahadith are restricted to a context and the generality of the meaning of sentences is negated then is there anything which prohibits innovations? If you say yes, then to be consistent in methodology Ahadith are to be interpreted in context like the Hadith of good Sunnah is interpreted in context of historical event. If this method is applied to all the Hadith then there is no Hadith which prohibits innovations. If Hadith are restricted and interpreted according to context and generality is negated then end result is; both Quran and Ahadith are silent about subject of innovations other then addressed in the Ahadith. And about issues on which Quran and Ahadith are silent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “The lawful is what Allah made lawful in His Book, the unlawful is what Allah made unlawful in his Book, and what He was silent about; then it is among that for which He has pardoned." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B22, H1726] Excused by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is allowed as favor by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “What Allah has made lawful in His Book is halal and what He has forbidden is haram, and that concerning which He is silent is allowed as His favor. So accept from Allah His favor, for Allah is not forgetful of anything. He then recited, "And thy Lord is not forgetful." [Ref: Musnad Al Bazzar] Therefore interpreting Ahadith in a particular context to negate generality of Ahadith of good Sunnah and generally of all Ahadith in connected with subject of innovation will not harm the position of Muslims. Rather our position that all innovations composed of Islamicly sanctioned acts of piety are permissible is also established from Ahadith quoted above. The Effect Of Maintaining Generality Of Ahadith Of Innovation: Holding to the generality of prophetic words about subject of innovation including the Ahadith of ‘introducing good Sunnah’ is in accordance with ‘Jawami Al Kalim’ nature of prophetic words. Result of this is that all Ahadith of innovation can be applied to every single innovation which does not accord with the teaching of Islam. This generality of words in connection with Hadith of ‘introducing good Sunnah’ establishes that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has permitted introduction of good Sunnahs into Islam and told of reward for those who engage in the newly introduced good Sunnah. In addition, the Ahadith quoted above indirectly establish the legitimacy of good Sunnahs into Islam. Conclusion: If the Ahadith of innovations and good/bad Sunnahs is interpreted in historical context of a particular event and their generality is negated even then the permissibility of engaging in actions which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not forbid but remained silent on would be established. The generality and the literal reading of the prophetic words of good Sunnah Hadith undeniably establish the position of Muslims and refute the opponents of Islam. What ever the methodology of interpretation is adopted by the opponents of Islam if that methodology is applied consistently and without practicing selectivism then the conclusion would be as explained.

Introduction: This response is continuation of dialogue with Wahhabi brother Sa’id Imtiaz and this is previous exchange has been responded to, here. His methodology is to attempt to undermine with principles what has been established clear evidence from Quran/Hadith. He does not respond to evidences used to establish arguments against his sectarian belief rather attempts to present his position while ignoring all that is piled against his position. This was the first time he actually replied to my evidence and attempted to justify his position and find fault in Islamic position. It is strongly advised that readers acquaint themselves with earlier exchange and note your own thoughts and then compare the noted thoughts as you progress through each exchange. Key Points Of Email Received From Brother Sa’id Imtiaz: While I was researching on the subject of innovation and how innovations are identified I had sought help of a student which caused the delay in response. The gist of his response is; fixing date or time or day for a particular practice and repeatedly engaging in the practice on the fixed date, time and day, causes the practice to become [reprehensible] innovation. Also if any innovated practice is performed believing that it will earn reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then it is also innovation. Based on these two principles many if not all Barelwi innovated practices/customs become innovations. Coming to the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); one who introduces into Islam a good Sunnah for him there is reward and for those who follow it, does not refer to innovations. Sheikh Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid has alluded to the correct understanding of Hadith on IslamQA website and it was explained emphatically by Sheikh Abu Rumaysah on MuslimConverts website.[1] Their explanation in nutshell is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)in the context of historical event was informing the companions; the Ansari man initiated [prophetic] Sunnah [of giving charity] and gave charity in the gathering for him and those who contributed following his example will be rewarded equally without their rewards being diminished. So in reality Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not permit introduction of good innovation in religion of Islam but he merely told of reward for engaging in his Sunnah of giving charity. The Destiny Of Ahle Sunnat Is To Dominate And Conquer: The religion of Islam and the State of Islam are destined to dominate, evidence: “It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion. And sufficient is Allah as Witness.” [Ref: 48:28] Those who establish the superiority of Islam and its state are Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. They will remain the champions of Islam and spread the authority of Islamic state on earth, evidence: “A group of people from my Ummah will continue to fight in defense of truth and remain triumphant until the Day of judgment.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, N4718] In one Hadith it is stated: “The people of the West will continue to triumphantly follow the truth until the Hour is established.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4722] “The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East (i.e. Najd) and faith is among the people of the Hijaz (i.e. it is located in West of Najd).” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H95] The Ahle Sunnat adheres to understandings of people of Hijaz and our creed is of people of Hijaz and truth of Islam is evident over falsehood of your sect. Hence even if all of the minions of Iblees of Najd were to conspire against the truth of Islam they cannot produce a worthy substitute to replace guidance of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Therefore it really does not matter whose help you solicit to respond to what is presented to you and it would be better if you keep your sources private. Just refer to me the relevant information which is connected with the issue and avoid mentioning issues which are unrelated to religion. Also as a matter of principle when you dispute you are instructed to refer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), evidence: “O you, who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.” [Ref: 4:59] Yet you referred to a student who presented you with innovated principles. 1.0 - The Issue Of Fixing Time, Day And Date Of For Innovative Practices: You stated, fixing of time, or day, or date, for an innovative practice and then consistently engaging in the innovative practice on the fixed time, or day, or date causes it to be deemed as [reprehensible] innovation. Factually, there is absolutely no basis and no evidence in Quran/Hadith where this has been stated as a criterion of determining a [reprehensible] innovation. Saying it explicitly, neither Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated; fixing a time, or day, or date to engage in a newly invented practice/custom makes it a reprehensible Biddah/Sunnah. The criterion of determining innovation is not established with evidence from Quran/Hadith therefore it cannot be used as a criterion in regards to determining innovations. 1.1 - In Dispute Refer To Allah And His Messenger: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated in Quran: “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.” [Ref: 4:59] Therefore it is expected from a proponent of the mentioned criteria to provide evidence to establish legality of this criterion within Islam.[2] A companion is reported to have said: “No people introduce an innovation into their religion, except that its like from the Sunnah is raised from them and it does not return to the people till the judgment day.” [Ref: Darimi, B1, H99, Urdu Version] Judging on this Hadith the criterion of determining [reprehensible] innovation itself is a newly invented reprehensible innovation which has raised a Sunnah criterion of determining [reprehensible] innovation from amongst Wahhabi’s. 1.2 - Prophetic Criterion Of Determining A [Reprehensible] Innovation: It is recorded that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who innovates things in our affairs for which there is no valid (reason) and these are to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266] Another translation of same Hadith is: "If somebody innovates something which is not in harmony with the principles of our religion, that thing is rejected." [Ref: Bukhari B49, H861] Similar type Hadith records: “He who did any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] A Hadith records: "And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.”[3] [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] From these Ahadith we understand that any action not established from Quran/Hadith and not in harmony with spirit of Islam and not sanctioned by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), it is to be rejected/discarded. The reason of rejection is that it will be deemed as a evil/reprehensible innovation and about which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: “Whoever introduces an evil Sunnah that is followed after him, will bear the burden of sin for that and the equivalent of their burden of sin, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207] 1.3 - Reprehensible Innovations Are Misguidance: We have established an innovation which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and does not agree with spirit of Islam is misguidance. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] In another similar Hadith instruction of avoiding newly invented practices is given along with mention of novelties being [reprehensible] innovations and being misguidance: “Avoid novelties, every novelty is an innovation and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B40, H4590] A Hadith records: “Abdullaah Ibn 'Umar (radiallah ta'ala anhu) said, "Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Darimi, B1, H96, Urdu Version] Incorporating the understanding from the previous section in here leads to the conclusion; every innovative Sunnah/Biddah which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and has not been sanctioned and goes against the spirit of Islam is misguidance. 1.4 - Innovated Principle Of Wahhabis And Correct Judgment Regarding It: Biddahs/Sunnahs which are composed of acts of worship such as; supplication, non-obligatory prayers (i.e. Nawafil), recitation of Quran, and fasting. Or composed of acts of charity or have objective of providing Islamic education are in no way opposed to Islamic teachings nor customs/practices composed of these can be source of gaining displeasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Any act which contradicts the sanctioned teaching of Islam such as engaging in impermissible activities (i.e. Haram) or polytheistic activities (i.e. Shirk) or encouraging evil and forbidding good will gain one wrath of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and displeasure of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Recitation of Quran or performing of non-obligatory prayers or engaging in supplication before or after the Adhan/Janazah, or fixing a time, or date, or day, to engage Islamicly sanctioned acts of worship (i.e. Dua, Nawafil, Tilawat) which are not explicitly established for that time, or day, or date, as Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be termed as [reprehensible] innovations on the basis that a time, a date, a day, was fixed for it to be performed. In Islam reprehensible of actions, or customs, or practices, is judged based on if they contradict the teaching of Islam and not on fixing of time, or date, or day. Yet the Wahhabi principle deems actions performed on a particular time, or date or day continuously deems it to be innovation just on the basis of fixing of time, date, and day even if these customs are Islamicly sanctioned acts of worship. 2.0 - The Hell Earned By Engaging In Islamic Acts Of Worship: Consider this scenario, a believer after performing Fajr prayers waits fifteen minutes and then recites the first chapter of Quran and recites Surah Ikhlas then raises his hands in supplication and just recites the first chapter of Quran and ends it with, Ameen! This believer engages in this practice/custom all his life knowing well that it is not Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but his own practice. Do you think this person has been committing a major sin for which he will be punished and all his good actions be rejected? Or has been engaged in worshiping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) via his supplication and for which he will be rewarded on judgment day? According to Wahhabism, just because he engaged in worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on a fixed time and performed it regularly this person has committed a crime serious enough to go to hell while having all good actions rejected – all for supplicating to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on a fix time. 2.1 - Mentioned Scenario According To Prophetic Principles Of Determining Innovation: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been reported to have stated; any act for which there is no sanction from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) it is to be rejected. Based on this principle, supplication has been sanctioned and is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed and Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught method of worship. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said; if something innovated is not in harmony with spirit of Islam it is to be rejected. Considering this, engaging in supplication [which essentially is worship of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] is perfectly in accordance with spirit of Islam so is recitation of Quran. Another states; anything for which there is not valid reason it is to be rejected. Is worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and gaining His pleasure and wanting to engage in non-obligatory acts of worship not valid reason enough? A literal translation, if anyone innovates into our affairs what is not from it, it is rejected. Is not worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) from Islam? Then how can it be deemed as a [reprehensible] innovation? Is not invocation religiously sanctioned form of worship? 2.2 - Silence Of Allah And Prophet On Issue Of Fixing Of Time, Day, Date: From all angles the mentioned scenario is a invented Sunnah/Biddah composed of acts of worship therefore it is not [reprehensible] Biddah/Sunnah and it will not be rejected nor be cause of displeasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). We have instructions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which help us identify [reprehensible] innovations and he has not stipulated fixing of time, day, and date has a principle to determine innovations. Judging according to the prophetic principles of innovation the person who supplicates to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on fixed time, day and date on regular or irregular basis is not engaging in an innovation which conflicts with prophetic principles hence the innovated practice/custom cannot be [reprehensible] innovation and cannot be rejected. We find that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are silent on the fixing of time, date, and day. We find no explicit evidence where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has permitted fixing of day, or date, or time to engage in a act of worship nor we find any prohibition for such fixing of days, dates, or time but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is silent. This silence is very important for establishing permissibility of fixing time, or day, or date. 2.3 - The Verdict On Fixing Of Time, Date, Day Based On Prophetic Teaching: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said, lawful has been declared haram has been declared and on matters which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is silent it is excused, meaning one will not be questioned regarding it, Hadith: “The lawful is what Allah made lawful in His Book, the unlawful is what Allah made unlawful in his Book, and what He was silent about; then it is among that for which He has pardoned." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B22, H1726] The underlined part is better explained in the following Hadith: “What Allah has made lawful in His Book is halal and what He has forbidden is haram, and that concerning which He is silent is allowed as His favor. So accept from Allah His favor, for Allah is not forgetful of anything. He then recited, "And thy Lord is not forgetful." [Ref: Musnad Al Bazzar] Due to silence of Quran/Hadith on the issue of fixing of time, or day, or date we can confidently say as per the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); it is permissible to fix days, time, and date to engage in acts of worship. Those who say contrary they must establish the prohibition from Quran/Hadith for fixing of time, date, and day. In contrast to prophetic guidance, we have Wahhabi principle which deems acts of worship performed on fixed time, date, and day as [reprehensible] Sunnah/Biddah. We Muslims are told: “Narrated Tariq: Abdullah said, "The best talk is Allah's Book (Qur'an), and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H120] And we choose and follow the best of guidance and reject the [reprehensible] innovation of heretics. We reject the principle which demonizes a practice/custom as [reprehensible] innovation which prophetic principle determined to be praise worthy Sunnah/Biddah. 3.0 - Reasons For Fixing Of Days And Time And Dates For Innovated Sunnahs/Biddah: Commonly a time, date, and day are fixed for religious conventions. Order is fixed, a will speak after whom b will deliver speech and then c will speak on this topic. All this is done for organizational purposes. It makes it easier for those who wish to participate to gather for the event. If it was un announced or if announced but announced as; hello people, we will randomly choose a day for religious convention and randomly grab someone to deliver a speech on random topic in random order at a randomly selected mosque in a random country and in a random city on a random time, please people ensure you all come. With this type of creating awareness for a religious convention we might avoid Wahhabi [reprehensible] Biddah charge but practically it is the stupidest invitation to join a religious convention. Who would want to come to such stupid and unplanned event and who will be able to make it even if they decide to actually attend it. Hajj is performed on every tenth of month of Hajj or at least that is the idea. What is so special about 10th of Islamic month of Hajj? Does Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) get weak on that day and Hajj strengthens Him? Its purpose is to organize to fix so all Muslims from all over the world know that we will perform Hajj as an Ummah. Prayer times are fixed and for organizational purposes all stand in row and face direction of Qibla. Alhasil the fixing of times, or day, and dates for innovated Sunnahs/Biddahs is strictly for purpose of organization. It allows people to know where the event is taking place, what date and day it has been organized and on what time it will begin and end. Knowledge of which will enable people to decide to attend. 3.1 - Performing Good Acts Regular On Fixed Times, Days, And Dates: Hadith records, mother of believers Umm Salamah (radiallah ta’ala anha) said: “And the dearest of the actions to him was the righteous action that the person does regularly, even if it were a little.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B5, H1225] Same Hadith has been narrated by mother of believers Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha), she said: “The most beloved action to Allah's Messenger was that whose doer did it continuously and regularly.” [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H469] This establishes that actions done regularly are pleasing to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Action can be regular in meaning of, daily on fixed time of day, or after a certain act, or fixed month, or fixed date of a month, or fixed day of week, or fixed to perform once in a year. As long as the aspect was fixed and regularly performed on fixed then it would be pleasing to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 3.2 - Fixing Of All Types Established From Sunnah Of Prophet and Companions: Hadith records that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) travelled on Thursday, Hadith: “Narrated Ka`b bin Malik: The Prophet set out on Thursday for the Ghazwa of Tabuk and he used to prefer to set out on Thursdays.” [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H199] And another Hadith establishes; deviation from the travel norm was a rare event: “Ka`b bin Malik used to say: "Scarcely did Allah's Messenger set out for a journey on a day other than Thursday." [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H198] It would be safe to conclude that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had fixed Thursday to travel and only on absolutely essential like Hajj or emergency cases would travel on any other day. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had made routine for visiting Masjid Quba, Hadith: “Narrated Ibn `Umar: The Prophet used to go to the Quba' mosque, sometimes walking, sometimes riding.” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H427] And the it was established this was every Saturday, Hadith: “Narrated Abdullah bin Dinar: Ibn Umar said, "The Prophet used to go to the Mosque of Quba every Saturday (sometimes) walking and (sometimes) riding." Abdullah (Ibn Umar) used to do the same.”[4] [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H284] Another Hadith records; upon reaching Masjid Quba Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used to perform two Rakat Salat ad-Duha non-obligatory prayer.[5] Hadhrat Bilal (radiallah ta’ala anhu) routinely performed Nawafil (i.e. Tahhayyatul Wudhu) each time he performed Wudhu and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) enquired from him, Hadith: “Narrated Abu Hurairah: 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, I prayed after that ablution as much as was written for me." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H250] Cutting the long Hadith short, quoting: “They said: 'A man from the Ummah of Muhammad. So I said: 'I am Muhammad, whose palace is this?' They said: ''Umar bin Al-Khattab's.' So Bilal said: 'O Allah's Messenger! I have never called the Adhan except that I prayed two Rak'ah, and I never committed Hadath (an act which invalidates ablution i.e. breaking wind) except that I performed Wudu upon that, and I considered that I owed Allah two Rak'ah. So the Messenger of Allah said: 'For those two.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B49, H4053] From Hadith of Tirmadhi it becomes apparent that Hadhrat Bilal (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed two Nawafil each time he had completed Wudhu. A Hadith narrates that women requested Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to devote a day for them where they can come and ask questions about Islam, Hadith: “Narrated Abu Sa`id: The women requested the Prophet: "Please fix a day for us." So the Prophet preached to them and said: "A woman whose three children died would be screened from the Hell Fire by them." Hearing that, a woman asked: "If two died?" The Prophet replied, "Even two (would screen her from the Fire." And Abu Hurairah added: "Those children should be below the age of puberty.” [Ref: Bukhari, B23, H341] This establishes even Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fixed days/time to engage in religious activities. 3.3 – Concluding The Discussion On Fixing Of Days, Time And Dates: It has been established; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had fixed days and even particular days of week/month to engage in a particular actions. The companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) following the footsteps also followed the prophetic examples and in some cases fixed a time and day to engage in acts of worship. Hence fixing of time, day and date or to perform an action, after a certain action, or to engage it on a particular day, on a particular place, at a particular time, of a particular month, in particular order, has got nothing to do with an action/custom or act of worship/charity becoming [reprehensible] innovation. 3.4 – True Criteria Of Determining [Reprehensible] Innovation: As a matter of fact [reprehensible] innovation is created, if one engages in an act which is against the spirit of Islam and against the teaching of worship and charity. Also if it goes against the good of Islam and consists of engaging in activities contrary to Islam [think along the lines of disco nights, plus free mixing and alcoholic drinks] then the creator of reprehensible practice is sinful. If a newly invented practice/custom is followed by others then he has created an innovation into deen of Islam[6] even though it was not intended to be made part of Islam.[7] The good/evil of innovation is determined based on what the innovation is composed of. If it was composed of dancing, consuming alcoholic beverages, free mixing of males/females, music, drugs and other unislamic activities then clubbing is Haram – because it is composed of all Haram. On other hand if the innovation is composed of recitation of Quran and other forms of worship such as Nawafil or any other permissible Islamic teaching then it is permissible. 4.0 - Invented Sunnah/Biddah Performed For Sake Of Reward Is Not [Reprehensible] Innovation: You stated: “Also if any innovated practice is performed believing that it will earn reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then it is also innovation.” It is worth noting; reward for innovated Sunnahs/Biddahs depends on what it is composed of. If the innovated Sunnah/Biddah is composed of acts of worship such a Nawafil, engaging in invocation and composed of charitable gifts and providing education about Islam then the reward gained will be based on these acts. Therefore the principle of: any innovated act performed for reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is [reprehensible] innovation, is not valid. Nor it is correct to employ this principle because it deems a praiseworthy Biddah/Sunnah as a reprehensible Sunnah/Biddah. And the principle and the results this principle produces are contrary to explicit teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because he said: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] If the innovated Sunnah/Biddah is composed of acts which Islam has sanctioned and told of reward then reward for innovated Sunnahs is established from Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and believing contrary to this is misguidance which takes to hell-fire. 5.0 – Heretical Position -Introducing Of Sunnah Does Not Mean Innovating Sunnahs/Biddahs: You presented the following defense for your sectarian position: “… Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)in the context of historical event was informing the companions; the Ansari man initiated [prophetic] Sunnah [of giving charity] and gave charity in the gathering for him and those who contributed following his example will be rewarded equally without their rewards being diminished. So in reality Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not permit introduction of good innovation in religion of Islam but he merely told of reward for engaging in his Sunnah of giving charity.” Not surprisingly this is nothing new and it has been comprehensively addressed in my numerous articles on understanding of this genre of Ahadith. The claim that the word Sunnah used in the Hadith does not mean Biddah has been addressed, here. Wahhabi argument that here reward being told is for reviving a forgotten Sunnah and your above position falls into this category and this has been addressed, here. Historical events became reasons on which the injunctions of Quran/Hadith were revealed yet the interpretation of Quran/Hadith is not limited restricted according to the context of the events. It is principle that a Mutliq (i.e. general) statement will remain general even though if it can and is interpreted specifically in light of another piece of evidence. The position of Muslims in regards to this genre of Ahadith is; the words of these Ahadith are Mutliq and any Takhseesi (i.e. specific) interpretation cannot abrogate the generality of these statements. Many Ahadith provide guiding principles which are based in a specific context but the principles are not limited and restricted to a particular context or era but their generality is not challenged nor restricted to context. The evidence for this position of Muslims and double standard employed by the opponents of Islam is established, here. The nature of Prophetic words is shortest expression bearing widest meanings and how this establishes the position of Muslims and refutes Wahhabi understanding is explained, here. The following article completely takes the sting out of Wahhabi position; guiding principle is to be understood according to the context and its generality is specific due to its context, here. And the finale article puts the Hadith of good/bad Sunnah in context of other Ahadith about [reprehensible] innovations. It also establishes how the Ahadith are connected, here. 5.2 – Principle Given In Particular Context Is Not Limited To The Context: The interpretation of event in the light of principle told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is valid but the principle cannot be restricted to a context of event. Just as the interpretation of verses of Quran revealed in particular historical context cannot be restricted to that particular context only. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was merely informing the companions; “…the Ansari man initiated [prophetic] Sunnah [of giving charity] and gave charity in the gathering for him and those who contributed following his example will be rewarded equally without their rewards being diminished …” then he would have expressed that in similar wording. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have been more specific and would not have made general statement which can be given dual interpretation. Note, the statement is general in a specific context, which gives a specific meaning in its context, but the generality of the statement remains. Scenario, ten friends none of them performed prayers, then one starts five prayers, other nine fallow him and begin to perform the five obligatory prayers. Now the question is, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” And based on this statement, the one who started performing the obligatory prayers and those who imitated him and those who imitate them will they gain reward without their reward being diminished? 5.3 – The Islamic Verdict And Verdict Of Heretics: Well according to the Wahhabi position of interpreting the Hadith according to strict historical context the answer is, no and yes. No, due to the fact; context of Hadith is about charity and here the context on which the Hadith is applied is prayers. Yes, due to a Wahhabi generalizing the teaching and judging on this principle: any Prophetic-Sunnah/Islamic-Teaching if followed by one and others follow his example, all will earn equal reward. Truly, the answer depends on which type of Wahhabi you encounter. One high on Biddah, Shirk, Kafir, Mushrik, it is permissible to kill you, will likely say no. One slightly more awake intellectually and scripturally will say yes. The no-type has held to the principle context is not same therefore no reward. The yes-type has left the historical context and has invented a principle based on that context and now judges based on that principle. He is no different from Muslims in adopting a non-contextual position but has invented a principle to maintain the status quo sectarian belief. The Islamic answer is, yes [based on yes-type Wahhabi principle] they all will be rewarded. The Muslims [and the yes-type Wahhabis] have understood from this Hadith; the principle is given in a context but not made specific to the context. 5.4 - Clear Evidence The Prophetic Principle Is Not Limited To The Context: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said after the companions had collectively gave charitable donations for the poor Muslims: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The Muslims believe this is a general principle and it permits creation of praise worthy Sunnahs/Biddahs into Islam. The opponents of Muslims argue: nope, the principle is to be interpreted in its historical context. Ignoring the disputed part of the Hadith it would be better to move on to none disputed part of Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Question for the opponent of Islam is; what connection does this part of the Hadith have with the historical events? The Ansari companion, who initiated giving of charity, and those who followed his example, will they all bear the sin of equally? If not, then this establishes; the first and the last part of Hadith were not restricted to the context but were provided as a general rule. 5.5 – The General Rule And Its Application At Present: There has been plenty of discussion on good Sunnah part of the Hadith and it is important that evil Sunnah part of the Hadith is discussed a little. Scenario, five boys decide to go out every Saturday at night and engage in listening to music, drink all types of alcoholic drinks, dance up close and personnel with girls who are Ghair-Mehram, get all touchy feely with them and bring home one whore each from that club and they call it ‘Boys Saturday Night Out’. What does Islam say about BSNO? Simple answer is nothing, no verse of Quran or Hadith says anything about BSNO. Is it permissible to engage in BSNO? If you looking for explicit evidence then; no! Go on and knock your self out engaging in BSNO Islam didn’t prohibit it. Permissibility/Impermissibility is not established on clear/explicit evidence but the question: is it part of core Islamic teaching this is settled on clear/explicit evidence. The permissibility is settled on: is it composed of Islamicly sanctioned activities. The impermissibility is decided on: does it contradict Islamic teaching in part or whole? BSNO, contradicts numerous teachings of Islam because it is composed of Haram activities. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated regarding such innovated evil practices: “And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] 5.6 – If Sanctioned Sunnahs Earn Reward Then Sanction Haram Earns Sin: Now if the following part of Hadith was for Islamicly sanctioned Sunnahs[8] and cannot be used to justifying legality of praiseworthy innovations: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Then the following part of Hadith was for Islamicly prohibited activities[9] and cannot be used to justifying impermissibility of practices which Islam hasn’t sanctioned as Haram: “And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Therefore any practice which Islam hasn’t explicitly declared Haram cannot be declared Haram. What about watching a stripper dance naked on a pole? What is the verdict on those who follow the example of y and go to watch a stripper dance? Do they engage in Islamicly sanctioned Haram? If yes, then please quote me a verse or Hadith in which it is stated: watching strippers get naked and dance on pole is Haram and those who follow y’s example all will earn equal sin.[10] 5.7 – The Islamic Position On Innovations Composed Of Islamic/Unislamic Activities: Islamic position is; any practice composed of Islamicly sanctioned Haram even if the practice has not been mentioned by name in Quran/Hadith is Haram and anyone who follows this evil Sunnah will all earn equal sin and punishment. Similarly any practice composed of Islam sanctioned acts even if the practice is not mentioned by name in Quran/Hadith it is good Sunnah and will earn reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This establishes the Islamic position which is contested by Wahhabis and that Islamic position is; the good Sunnah [and the evil Sunnah] of Hadith are general principle[s] and not specific to an era and time or to a context. 6.0 – A Muslim Innovates A Practice - All Earn Reward By Following Him: Scenario, a Muslim daily recites Surah YaSin after completing Isha prayers and then performs four Nawafil prayers and ends with invocation. According to following Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) his act is most pleasing to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because it is being performed regularly and continuously: “The most beloved action to Allah's Messenger was that whose doer did it continuously and regularly.” [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H469] Another Muslim joins this Muslim and like the first one completes Isha prayers and recites Surah YaSin and performs four Nawafil prayers and ends with the invocation. This becomes a daily routine of all the members of family and they give this practice a name ‘daily & continuously’ and gradually the practice of ‘daily & continuously’ spreads in the community. 6.1 – The Practice Of Daily & Continuously Islamic And Wahhabi Verdicts: Note in the previous scenario it was unlikely any sane heretic would say; those who performed the five prayers imitating another person’s example will not earn reward. In this scenario from the Wahhabi side there is only one verdict; the person engages in [reprehensible] innovation and he along those who follow his practice are sinful. Even though this position goes completely against following Wahhabi principle: any Prophetic-Sunnah/Islamic-Teaching if followed by one and others follow his example, all will earn equal reward. Here it is likely that a heretic may argue; Salah is established from Islamic teaching. It is commanded by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and instructed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but the practice of ‘daily & continuously’ was neither commanded nor instructed to Muslims.[11] Due to this reason it is a [reprehensible] innovation which is sin and takes to hell-fire. According to Muslims engaging in ‘daily & continuously’ is reward worthy because the practice of ‘daily & continuously’ is composed of prophetic Sunnahs and Islamic teachings and it is composed of acts of worship. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” Nothing can be better then worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hence the reward for those who engage in this practice are established. 6.2 – The Lesson Derived From This Discussion: The following derived principle: any Prophetic-Sunnah/Islamic-Teaching if followed by one and others follow his example, all will earn equal reward, is correct but the heretic’s selectively would employ it to judge issues which their hearts agree with and withdraw it from which their hearts are blackened. Even more importantly it establishes that the following words of Hadith: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” are not restricted to the historical events in which it was given. It is to be applied generally and evidence of this application is forming of general underlined principle to judge if one will earn reward if others follow one performing explicitly sanctioned acts of Islam. 7.0– Explaining The Islamic Principle With Examples From Ahadith: In the following parts of article the Wahhabi principle of; interpret guiding principles in light of the context, will be criticized and its error established. Also the Islamic principle; a general statement in a specific context remains general and does not become specific due to the context, will be explained with same Ahadith, so the truth of Islam remains dominant over the falsehood of heretics. 7.1 – Stopping Wrong With Hand, Speaking Against it And Hating It In Heart: Hadith from Sahih Muslim records that: “He who amongst you sees something abominable should modify it with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do it, then he should do it with his tongue, and if he has not strength enough to do it, (even) then he should (abhor it) from his heart, and that is the least of faith.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H79] All factions, the Muslims, Wahhabi’s, Deobandi’s, and to some degree even the Shia believe; if someone is engaged in ANY unislamic activity the best course is to physically stop it, speak out against it, or at the very least affirm its being wrong in the heart. Now chucking spanner into works come's Wahhabi methodology – interpret the Hadith in the context and limit its understanding according to it. The context is as it follows: “It is narrated on the authority of Tariq bin Shihab: It was Marwan who initiated (the practice) of delivering Khutbah before the prayer on the Eid day. A man stood up and said: Prayer should precede khutbah. He (Marwan) remarked, This (practice) has been done away with. Upon this Abu Sa'id remarked: This man has performed (his duty) laid on him.”[12] Abu Sa’id (radiallah ta’ala anhu) continued: “I heard the Messenger of Allah as saying: He who amongst you sees something abominable should modify it with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do it, then he should do it with his tongue, and if he has not strength enough to do it, (even) then he should (abhor it) from his heart, and that is the least of faith.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H79] According to the context in which the companion quoted the last part of Hadith, the Wahhabi methodology leads one to conclude that anyone giving Khutbah before the Eid prayer is the abominable act against which one should physically prevent, speak out against or detest it in heart and nothing else. Anyone insane enough to actually believe; the instruction given by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is only specific to the context in which the companion narrated it and does not refer to other wrongs? The Islamic understanding is that the context is specific but the teaching last part of Hadith applies to all unislamic activities. In other words, Islamicly we are instructed to physically stop all unislamic wrong, or to speak out against it, or detest it in our hearts. 7.2 – Death Of Two/Three Children Will Save Mother From Fire: It is recorded in the Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: "A woman whose three children died would be screened from the Hell Fire by them." Hearing that, a woman asked: "If two died?" The Prophet replied, "Even two (would screen her from the Fire)!" Should we interpret this Hadith according to Wahhabi methodology of, interpreting in the context of the women gathered on that day or should we understand; this Hadith is not specific to a group of women, in a particular era, in a gathering, in a city, in a country, but it applies to all Muslim women in all eras? Before one decides to answer this question please read the context: “Narrated Abu Sa`id: The women requested the Prophet: "Please fix a day for us." So the Prophet preached to them and said: "A woman whose three children died would be screened from the Hell Fire by them." Hearing that, a woman asked: "If two died?" The Prophet replied, "Even two (would screen her from the Fire)!" And Abu Hurairah added: "Those children should be below the age of puberty.” [Ref: Bukhari, B23, H341] According to the methodology employed by Wahhabi Sheikh’s – interpret in the context, only the women gathered and the one who asked about the death of two children will be screen from the fire everyone else, gets no exemption. We Muslims know that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Prophet sent to mankind hence his teachings are not limited and restricted to a nation, era, or group of women. Hence this teaching even though has a relevance to the women gathered and era of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) its implications and exemption isn’t just for them. What has been established here is that a teaching in particular context applies to all Ummah and its implications/meanings are not restricted to a context. 7.3– Refuting The Heretics And Summing Up Of Discussion On This Matter: The valid methodology is of Muslims – interpreting Hadith in a particular context and holding to its literal reading. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said; he has been given [ability] short expression with vast meanings and his statements are in keeping with short expression but vast meanings and the Hadith in discussion – introduction of praiseworthy Sunnahs and reward of it, contains vast meanings. Nor it could not be expected from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that he did not know the implications of his statements. As a Muslim one is to believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) provided the best of guidance. Part of his guidance is the following statement: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” Is the generality of statement part of best of guidance and according to jawami al kalim nature of his speech or those born fourteen centuries after know better then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? If the intended meaning was only what you referred to[ then would it be hard for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to express this in emphatic words? If one consistently adheres to principle of interpreting the general of statements according to their historical context then all guiding principles given become irrelevant to other contexts and this has been demonstrated in 7.1 and 7.2. Therefore the generality of a prophetic statement cannot become specific but only specific interpretation can be derived from it using a specific piece of evidence. One cannot legitimately abrogate the generality of statement by giving it a specific interpretation. Specific interpretations based on valid evidence are acceptable and the interpretation of Muslims is based on the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and no contradiction between it and Quran/Hadith has been established by the opponents of Muslims. Conclusion: The following principle of: The gist of his response is; fixing date or time or day for a particular practice and repeatedly engaging in the practice on the fixed date, time and day, causes the practice to become [reprehensible] innovation.”, presented by you is baseless for two reasons, it does not have valid Shar’ri evidence and it deems something reprehensible something which prophetic principles of judge to be innocent. In light of other teachings of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) innovations in discussion are praiseworthy the principle presented by you deems these praiseworthy acts to be reprehensible, hence it cannot be valid. Engaging in innovated acts for sake of rewards is established from explicit evidence of Hadith and this is sufficient refutation of your belief. The meaning of Hadith has been established and the generality of words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be abrogated with a contextual interpretation. Words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are shortest expression with widest meanings and the interpretation given by Muslims to refute Wahhabi heresy is valid and according to his speech containing widest of meanings. And I end with the words of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) whose teaching is the best of guidance: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “The context of the hadith states that a group of poor people came to the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) so he asked those around him to give charity, but no one came forward - so much so that signs of anger could be discerned on the face of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) so one of the companions stepped forward and gave charity, so the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said the above Hadith. [...] Secondly, this action the companion did was not something new in Islaam, since giving charity was already legislated from the very first days of Islaam; rather he was simply implementing it, so the statement of the Prophet sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam "a good sunnah" was said at a time when the people were reluctant to give charity, so one man started to give the charity and others followed him in it. Thus, he revived a Sunnah at a time when the people were reluctant to practice it, and this is the meaning of "a good sunnah." Hence, in the early works of 'aqeedah, this hadith was included under the chapter headings, "The reward of the one who renews the Sunnah." <For example Sharh Usool I'tiqaad 1/50> [Ref: MuslimConverts, Argument Of Innovators, Point 3] - [2] As a former Wahhabi and a peddler of this criterion, and now better educated and more in tune with book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would like to say; there is no such evidence if there was then there would have not been change of side on my part. It would be my pleasure and fortunes to be proven wrong in this regard. - [3] “Kathir bin Abdullah narrated from his father, that his grandfather said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Whoever revives a Sunnah of mine that dies out after I am gone, he will have a reward equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. Whoever introduces an innovation with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210] - [4] Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) also visited Masjid Quba on every Saturday by walking/riding and performed Nawafil in the Masjid. - [5] “Narrated Nafi: Ibn Umar never offered the Duha prayer except on two occasions: Whenever he reached Mecca; and he always used to reach Mecca in the forenoon. He would perform Tawaf round the Ka`ba and then offer two Rak`at at the rear of Maqam Ibrahim. Whenever he visited Quba, for he used to visit it every Saturday. When he entered the Mosque, he disliked to leave it without offering a prayer. Ibn `Umar narrated that Allah's Messenger used to visit the Mosque of Quba (sometime) walking and (sometime) riding. And he used to say, "I do only what my companions used to do and I don't forbid anybody to pray at any time during the day or night except that one should not intend to pray at sunrise or sunset." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] - [6] For which he will be blamed and punished as well as those who emulated his [reprehensible] Sunnah without the punishment and the sin being reduced in anyway. - [7] Good/Bad actions and any custom/festivity compromised of these actions are by default part of Islam. The following Ahadith reveals this principle, sinful acts become reprehensible innovations into Islam: “And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] “Whoever introduces an evil Sunnah that is followed after him, will bear the burden of sin for that and the equivalent of their burden of sin, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207] Now try to understand why Hadhrat Adam’s (alayhis salaam) son will be responsible for every murder, Hadith "Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "Whenever a person is murdered unjustly, there is a share from the burden of the crime on the first son of Adam for he was the first to start the tradition of murdering." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H552] No evidence to establish he intended his action to be part of Islam. This points to the default rule; every action is part of Islam may it be good/bad. Judging on this rule establishes how Prophet Adam’s (alayhis salaam) son’s action was judged to be part of Islam. - [8] As an example, one who feeds a poor person and those who follow his example and also feed a poor person then he and all those who followed him earn equal reward. One who fasts in the month of Ramdhan and those who follow him will all earn equal reward. Putting it simply anyone being the cause of reviving a neglected Sunnah and others following him after he establishes it with his action then they all will earn equal reward. - [9] The Shaykh of heretics Abu Rumaysah agrees with us Muslims that the second part of ‘evil Sunnah’ refers is about Islam sanctioned Haram activities and I quote: “The meaning of "a bad sunnah" is similar. It is renewing or starting something that the [Islamic] Shari’ah has already declared to be bad and the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave the example of the two sons of Adam (alayhis salaam wa 'alaa nabiyina), one killing the other. So upon the murderer was the sin of the killing and the sin of all those that killed after him, without their sins being reduced.” - [10] Part One: The heretic Shaykh Abu Ruymaysah and his co-religionists are likely to argue using option1, BSNO is composed of all activities which are against the clear teaching of Islam hence it is Haram. Or they are likely to argue with option2; we do not accept the existence of BSNO as a practice but we judge each individual act and based on all these individual acts we say these boys are engaging in sinful activities and if they are followed by others will earn them equal sin and punishment. Part Two: It doesn’t really matter what their line of argument is because the outcome is predetermined. If option1 is employed then note the principle employed by heretic is: practices which are composed of Haram activities are Haram. The opposite of this principle is: practices which are composed of Halal activities are Halal. Therefore the counter response in context of good Sunnah would be: ‘daily & continuously’ and other innovated practices are composed of acts of worship hence they are permissible. If option2 is employed then the heretic has employed: a practice not established in from Quran/Hadith is not recognized by me. This is attitude is foolishness because Islam does recognize the existence of [reprehensible] innovations but does not legitimize these innovations. Where as Mr. Idiot has climbed the high horse of: ‘I am so conscious of purity of Islam that I refuse to even entertain Islam recognizing conceptual existence of [reprehensible] innovations.’ Frankly such an individual is waste of precious minerals and chemicals with which he is made. As a intelligent man/woman one cannot acknowledge the existence of such people, therefore you must close your eyes/ears and say: Mr. Idiot doesn’t really exist, even though you should know Mr. Idiot exists. Mr. Idiot should be reminded, you don’t acknowledge existence of innovations and you judge each individual action in those ‘innovations’ individually. Now we would like you to judge each action individually in ‘daily & continuously’ and tell us your verdict and also the verdict on those who follow it. If he is bit of lesser Mr. Idiot he will be consistent with his methodology and spill the beans: we do not accept the existence of ‘daily & continuously’ as a practice but we judge each individual act and based on all these individual acts we say these people are engaging in good activities and if they are followed by others will earn them equal reward. - [11] In a nutshell, such Wahhabi is saying, Salah is explicitly established as part of [core teaching] Islam and the practice of ‘daily & continuously’ is not therefore it is innovation. To refute such foolishness you enquire from him; are the following activities explicitly established from Islam: Nawafil, recitation of Quran and invocation? Now ask him did not the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) state; a practice engaged continuously and routinely is most pleasing to him. Then how can something which pleases Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) be sinful and be punishable by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Only activities which displease Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are sinful and punishable, evidence: "And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] The people engage in daily & continuously following the good example of another Muslim and they like the originator of this practice perform it daily and continuously hence they all please Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Anyone from them with insight and wisdom will accept the Islamic verdict and only the foolish will continue to argue against Islamic position. - [12] He could be saying, Marwan done the duty entrusted upon him by removing the practice of Khutbah before Eid prayers. Or he could be saying the man has fulfilled the duty to speak out against an activity which is not established from Prophetic Sunnah. As the information stands, Marwan and the man both performed according to the Prophetic standard.

Introduction: After reading latest article a heretic supporter of Ibn Uthaymeen (lanatu lillah) wrote a response to 5.0 defend the Wahhabi Sheikh. The supporter of heresy attempted to argue; Ibn Uthaymeen’s methodology does not demonize those who use modern weapons in battle field. Rather his position his being misrepresented to erect a boogie man for purpose of refuting Salafi/Wahhabi Minhaj. Despite his claim Salih Ibn Uthaymeen position is being used unjustly to victimize Salafi Minhaj he presented no proof how my presentation of Salih Ibn Uthaymeen’s position does not truly represent his actual position. Instead he attempted to justify how modern weapons are legal in light of Quran/Hadith. 1.0 – Wahhabi Arguments - Weapons Used Were Not Part Of Islam: Firstly, Jihad is part of teaching of Islam but the weapons to be used in Jihad are not part of Islam. Secondly, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allah does know.“ [Ref: 8:60] Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) employed against the disbelievers all that was available to Muslims in his time. In our times the Mujahideen acquired modern weaponry and by employing them they are obeying the command of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because Quranic verse states; “And make ready against them all you can of power, including …” Therefore they are not guilty of any innovation but rather obeying the command of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 2.0 – Response To The Heretical Argument – Weapons Are Part Of Islam: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.” [Ref: 33:21] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) declared that the example/practice of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is excellent for one who wishes to succeed on the day of judgment. The mother of believers, Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) explains why the example/practice of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is best of example for those who wish to succeed on the day of judgment. She said Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was walking, talking, living example of Quran in action and he was indeed embodiment of Quran. Hence the weapons he used in Jihad and the weapons which he saw being used by his followers are part of Islam. How could the living example of Quran use sword, spear, bow and arrow, horse, camel, shield and these weapons not be part of written Quran/Islam? Salah is part of Islam and how it is performed demonstrated is by the living Quran. Jihad is part of Islam and the means weapons to be used were demonstrated by the living Quran. Secondly, if Jihad is part of Islam and the weapons used in it are not part of Islam then why would you make an attempt to justify the validity of using modern weapons in Jihad according to Quranic verse? Surely you consider the weapons as part of Islam as well and therefore you had to establish the legality of modern weapons in light of Quran/Hadith. If the type of weapons that can be used was not part of Islam then why would you attempt to establish the modern weapons can be used according to broad meanings of Quran? 2.1 – Allah’s Instructions To Prepare Horses Of War: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs the believers to have the war horses in ready state: “And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allah does know.“ [Ref: 8:60] Hence the use of war horses in battle is part of Islam. 2.2 – The Conclusion Of The Discussion So Far: The Wahhabis who use modern weaponry and do not employ the war horses in their terrorist activities [which they label JIHAD unjustly] and who support use of modern weapons including battle Tanks are innovators according to their own methodology. They according to Ibn Uthaymeen’s understanding are denier of perfection/completion of Islam and they indirectly insinuate they have perfected/completed the teaching of Islam which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not. 2.3 – The Muslim Position On The Weapons Of Jihad: Everything Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did was according to either Wahi Zahiri or Wahi Khaf’fi. Wahi Zahiri means apparent revelation and this is Quran. Wahi Khaf’fi means hidden revelation and this became source of Sunnah Qawli and Sunnah Fehli. Sunnah Qawli means words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Sunnah Fehli means actions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and both these reached us in form of Hadith. The following verses of Quran are evidence for both types; “Your companion has neither gone astray nor has erred. Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only a Revelation revealed.” [Ref: 53:62] “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.” [Ref: 33:21] Hence weapons used by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions are part of teaching of Islam and are part of perfection/completion of the religion of Islam and the teaching of Quran and one who teaches/believes against this has brought into religion of Islam a reprehensible innovation. 3.0 – Wahhabi Argument – Make Ready All Of Power: The heretic argued: “Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) employed against the disbelievers all that was available to Muslims in his time. In our times the Mujahideen acquired modern weaponry and by employing them they are obeying the command of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) …” The explanation and the refutation of this would be in line with the principle of Wahhabi methodology. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated in the Quran: “And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allah does know.“ [Ref: 8:60] Based on the principle that the verse states, make ready all means of power against enemies of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and no specific weapon has been mentioned. 4.0 – Incompatibility Of Wahhabi’s Argument With Wahhabi Methodology: Wahhabi methodology of interpreting the Quran/Hadith consists of interpreting Quran/Hadith according to the understanding of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Salaf As Saliheen – the companions and two succeeding generations. According to Wahhabism your understanding is a novelty. Only, when you don’t find a precedent from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then one is permitted to take route of Ijtihad according to Wahhabi methodology, isn't it? Yes, indeed Ijtihad only when there is no precedent to be followed from the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then the route of Ijtihad is to be taken on a matter. The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has interpreted the verse with his actions and has demonstrated all the means of power to threaten the enemies of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and there is a precedent to be followed regarding the type of weapons to be used in Jihad. Therefore your own interpretation contradicts the methodology you adhere to. According to your methodology the means to be prepared to threaten and to strike fear in the hearts of enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are: sword, spear, bow and arrow, shield, camel, horse, and what ever else that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions used. 4.1 – Concluding This Aspect Of Discussion: According to Wahhabi methodology Quran is to be understood and acted upon as Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) understood and acted on. And any interpretation of Quran which is not from the the practical/oral teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and of Salaf As Saliheen (i.e. pious predecessors) it is to be rejected. Hence the interpretation of 'and prepare against them all means of power' presented by the Wahhabi contradicts the Prophetic interpretation. In addition to this it also goes against Ibn Uthaymeen’s philosophy of Islam being perfected/completed and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explaining every aspect of Islam – including weapons of Jihad. According to frame work of Ibn Uthaymeen's methodology, Quran/Islam was explained in detail and anyone introducing even good Sunnah – such as modern weaponry is insinuating Islam/Quran was not completed/perfected by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 4.2 – Wahhabi’s Methodology And The Interpretation: The methodology employed by the Wahhabi and the interpretation of the following verse are correct according to Muslims: “And make ready against them all you can of power …” We the Muslims believe; Quran is written short but expresses widest possible meanings. Therefore it has capacity to validate and address all aspects of human life. In the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) horse was the fastest and best mean of charging enemy ranks. Hence we deduce prepare the best of means of threatening the enemies of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). At present the horse is obsolete as a mean weapon of war. Yet the believer is still instructed to prepare horse to strike fear in the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). At the present instruction is, prepare for Jihad even with the very least battle option – horse. When least is instructed then anything greater then it, is automatically instructed – battle tanks, APC’s etc. Hence the short expression vast meaning of speech of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) yields that as Muslims we should have whatever means possible for war - the very best means of war and the very least. 4.3 – Islamic Methodology Employed By Wahhabi: Heretic ignored the traditional Wahhabi methodology in interpreting the Quran and adopted the Islamic methodology to interpret and justify the weapons used by Wahhabi terrorists in their terrorist activities. On the basis of following verse: “And make ready against them all you can of power …” he argued the legality of modern weapons. He used the generality of meaning of verse of Quran to legalize the use of modern weapons. Based on this principle we can understand the following Hadith: “It was narrated that Abu Juhaifah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. Whoever introduces an evil practice that is followed after him, will bear the burden of sin for …" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207] The generality of Hadith establishes any good practice or custom or festivity [which incorporates Islamic acts of worship, charity, etc.] is permissible and is reward worthy. 4.4 - Triumph Of Islamic Methodology: Wahhabi employed Islamic methodology to legalize the use of modern weaponry and to defend his terrorist brothers who use these weapons in their terrorist activities. If he held to traditional Wahhabi understanding and methodology then chance of arguing against Ibn Uthaymeen’s position was zero.[1] Note to argue the case that modern weapons are permissible – he by default rejected Ibn Uthaymeen’s position that all innovations are misguidance even if the intention is good. He shifted his methodology to establish permissibility of modern weaponry.[2] This only validates Ahle Sunnat’s methodology and refutes Wahhabi and Ibn Uthaymeen’s heretical reasoning – no room for [praiseworthy] innovations. Only complete methodology which is equipped to meet the challenges of the modern world and still hold to Islam is methodology of Ahle Sunnat. Conclusions: According to Wahhabi methodology the precedent of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is to be followed because his precedent is Islam and leaving his precedent and following a new Sunnah/Biddah is misguidance. Therefore one cannot legitimately use any modern means for which there is precedent of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If someone introduces a Sunnah/Biddah then Ibn Uthaymeen’s words are enough to establish that y has become heretic according to Wahhabi methodology. Salih Ibn Uthaymeen’s and his Wahhabi ilk’s position, Islam is perfected/completed and there is no room for Sunnah/Biddah within boundaries of Sharia does not leave any room for flexible maneuvering to incorporate Ijtihad. Rather this rigid and extreme position is destructive enough to close the gates of Ijtihad.[3] Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] Wahhabi Traditional Understanding: Interpretation of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the pious predecessors is Islam and all innovations are misguidance, - [2] Please note, commonly Wahhabi arguing against a Muslim and in attempt to demonize the celebration of Prophet’s birthday as [reprehensible] Biddah/Sunnah will strictly utilize Salih Al Ibn Uthaymeen’s methodology of – Islam is perfected/completed hence no room for [praiseworthy] Biddahs/Sunnah in Islam and one is distorting the perfection of Islam by introducing [praiseworthy] Sunnahs/Biddahs into Islam. Soon as one starts criticizing their practice of – reading Quranic in Taraweeh prayers then he will change to Islamic methodology to justify its permissibility but rejects Islamic methodology and what is derived with it when it does not suite his sectarian bias. - [3] All things legalized via implicit/indirect evidence (i.e. Ijtihad) are fundamentally praiseworthy Sunnah/Biddah for which the Mujtahid reaps reward and those who follow his Ijtihad. Bottom line is without praiseworthy Sunnah/Biddah being part of Islam and implicit/indirect evidence being valid methodology of conducting Ijtihad there can be no Ijtihad and no room for dressing modern trends into Islamic garb.