کمیونٹی میں تلاش کریں

ibne tammiya ko exposed krne ke liye scan pages chahiye

Yei aur badmazhab say bachnay kay leay jo mazeed ahadees , sahaba kay aqwal hain un ka scan darkar hai jaisay Sahaba kiram in kay salam ka jawab na daitay thay jazak Allah

PLEASE NOTE THAT: THIS IS A DEOBANDI SECT PERSONALITY. THERE ARE MANY MISTAKES IN HIS TRANSLATION & ONE MIGHT BECOME KAFIR AFTER READING HIS TRANSLATIONS. His tranlation can be seen here ********* Also in computer application & for smartphones iphone andriod app etc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REF#1 ------ Para No 5' date=' Surah nissa,ayyah No,142. DEOBANDI TARJUMA- Allah unko hi dhoke mai dalenge (fatah muhammad saheb jalandhari). or Allah fareb dene wale hai unhe (shah rafiuddin shshab) SUNNI TARJUMA- beshak! munafiq log apne guman mai Allah ko areb dena chchte hai or wahi(fareb) unko gafel karke marenge. REF-LINK#1= http://www.amazonint...ic=13182.0;wap2 ------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REF#2 ------ Surah Al Imraan – verse 142 DEOBANDI TARJUMA- …whereas Allah has not yet fully known those among you who will fight. (In Urdu, by Fateh Mohammed Jalandhari) …whereas until now Allah has not yet known those among you who have fought. (In Urdu, by Abdul Majid Daryabadi) …and until now Allah has not yet found out who among you will fight. (In Urdu, by Mahmood ulHassan) SUNNI TARJUMA- …while Allah has not yet tested your warriors. (Kanz-ul-Imaan, by Imam Ahmed Raza) Allah is the All Knowing. How then can He not know those who will fight or not? The translations made by others tend to show that Allah does not have this knowledge, whilst Kanz-ul-Imaan is according to proper Islamic faith. Further examples of the same kind are found in Surah Mohammed (verse 31), Surah Maidah (verse 94) and in Surah Ankabut (verse 11). REF-LINK#2= http://makashfa.word...very-important/ ------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REF#3 ------ Deobandi mazhab support for his incorrect translation. REF-LINK#3= *********** (see screenshot below) ------------- Question: 36233 Please tell me about Maulana Fateh Muhammad Jalandhari. From which maslak did he belong? I want to read his Quran translation. Is it right to read his translation? Answer: 36233 Jan 05,2012(Fatwa: 246/148/D=1433) Maulana Fateh Muhammad Jalandhari is among Ulama-e-Haq. He is indirect disciple of Shah Ishaque (رحمة الله عليه). His Urdu translation and Tafseer is authentic. You can read it. However, if during your study you are unable to understand any thing or you have any objection mark it with a pencil and consult any Alim so that you could be saved from any mistake in understanding the holy Quran and what you understand is free from doubts. Allah (Subhana Wa Ta'ala) knows Best Darul Ifta, Darul Uloom Deoband ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As salamo Alaiqum hazraat. kisi ne aitraz kia hai ke JA AL HAQ me Ambia ko nisyanan gunahe kabira o sagira ka murtaqib mana gaya hai. maine ja al haq me aisi ibarat pdi hai jo isse milti julti hai. ambia kiram kis trh gunah kr skte hai jab ke ham sunni ambia ko masoom mante hai.. aur bhuul kar gunaah karne ka aqeeda chahe sagira hi kyu na ho kya ye kisi dalil se sabit hai..? kya ye gustakhi nahi ? ummid hai is aitraz ka jawab jald se jald dekar confusion dur kia jayenga.. jazakAllah...

السلام على من اتبع الهدى Is Mazmon par InshaAllah Tafseeli guftago hogi Abhi filhall Imam jalalludin syuti ki kitab IMAN E Waldain par parish karaha hon kyun Kay Wahabi or Deobandi Hazrat Jo Kay MazAllah Nabi صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم Kay Waldain ko Kafir kehtay hen dekhya👉 Sochne Ka Maqam Hai Yeh Wahi Deobandi Wahbi Hai Jo Kafir Ko Kafir Kehne Se Hume Rokte Hai Lekin Jab Baat Nabi Alayhissalam Per I Toh Inke Walidein Ko Kafir Bolna Kya Apni Kitabo Me Likh B Diya. Ibn Taymiyah Jo 661 Hijri Me Paida Hua Mulk E Sham Me ,Isne Ek Kitab Likhi , Iktsa Us Siraate Mustaqeem, Is Kitab Me Ibn Taymiyah Ne Bada Zor Lagay K Nabi Alayhisssalam K Walidein Dono Kafir Thay Aur Unka Inteqal Kufr Per Hua . Ibn Taymiyah Ki Taqleed Karte Hue Tamam Wahbi Nabi Alayhissalam K Walidein Ko Kafir Kehte Hai , Maz ALLAH Isi Tarah Deoband K Bahut Bade Alim Guzre Hai Jinka Naam Rasheed Ahmed Gangohi Hai , Inhone B Apne Fatwe Me , Yaani Fatawa Rasheediya Me Safa 104 Per Ek Sawal K Jawab Me Kaha K Hazrat Swallallahualaihiwasallam K Walidein K Imaan Me Ikhtelaf Hai ,Hazrat Imam Sahab Ka Mazhab Yeh Hai K Inka Inteqal Halat E Kufr Me Hua Hai Faqat. Maz ALLAH. Yeh Haal Hai Deobandi Wahbi Ka Filhall Aik kitab paish karraha hon Aur InShaAllah jald Az Jald is mamlay may QURAN AUR HADEES Kay Saath wapas Aon ga AUR Sabit Karon ga Kay Wahabi AUR Deobandi jhootay hen Waldain Mustafa Momin bhe thay AUR jannati bhe لبیک لبیک لبیک یا رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم 27187818-WALDAIN-MUSTAFA-KA-ZINDA-HO-KAR-IMAN-LANA.pdf

wahabi jaga jaga yei ilzam lagatay phir rahay hain sunnio ki kitabo mai gustakhiya likhi hain syedi Bayazeed bastami kay leay bhee wo yehi bakwasat kartay phir rahay hain kay is par gustakhi ka fatwa lagaya jaiay jis mai yei aqwal un ki taraf mansoob kar rahay hain .. 1. Nabi alahisSalam ki gustkahi Maira jhanda Nabi alahisSalam kay jhanday say bara hai 2. Rab ko daikhnay ka jhota dawa hazrat ki taraf mansoob kia gaya / Moosa alaihisSalam ki gustakhi Rabb ko 2 martaba daikha (jab kay Moosa alaihisSalam ko mana hogaya tu yei kaha say daikh lia gaya) 3. Khuda ki aur Kaaba ki gustakhi Pahli bar jab kaba ko daikha tu laga kay haj maqbool nahe howa kyu kay aisay pathar tu aur bhe daikhay hain phir dosri martaba khana kaba ko bhe daikha aur sahib e khana ko bhee baki 2 ka scan mujhay dastyab nahe ho raha

اگر شیعہ سنی بن کر کسی سے نکاح کرے تو ایسے نکاح کا کیا حکم ہے ؟؟؟

Asalamo Alaiqum Hazrat. mujhe ek hadis ka hawala aur scan darkar hai jiska mafhoom kuch is tarah hai ki Hazrat umar hajre aswad ke bare me kahte hai ke tu sirf ek pathar hai kisi nafe nuqsan ka malik nahi jise sun kar hzrt ali ne frmaya ke ye qyamat k roz shafaat krke nafa pahuchayenga. is ke mutalliq kuch hawale net pr mojud hai lekin vo mai dhoond nahi paya jaise ke. -Thirmidhi, an-Nasai, al-Baihaki, at-Tabarani and al-Bukhari in his History Ghaniatul Talibeen, Abdul Qadir Jilani, Urdu Edition, page 534, published by Maktab-e-Ibrahimia, Lahore, Pakistan Sunan Ibn Majah Baab Istilaam ul Hajar Hadees no 2944 Sunan At Tirmizi Baab Maa Jaa'a fil Hajar al Aswad Hadees 961 Musnad Ahmad Hadees no 2216 Al Mustadrak Alas Saheehayn Hadees no 1723 maine kuch ek hawale chek kiye lwkin usmw hazrat ali wala portion mujhe nahi mil rha hai.. Baraye mehrbani is hdis ka proper hawala aur scan dal de . jazak Allah khair.

as salam alaikum aik wahabi / deobandi kitab mai parha tha kay gustakhana kalmat mai qail ki niyyat ka koi aaitabar nahe yei wahabio nay he likha ab wo reference naeh mil raha kisi ko yad hai tu reference aur scan bata dain jazak Allah

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold that a Khariji sect will emerge from central Saudi Arabia. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed to the direction of East and named Najd as place of its origin. In middle of 17th century this group emerged lead by Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. Seeing the prophesy was fulfilled and noting; creed of Tawheed/Shirk and deeds matched Khawarij, along side the description given by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fitted upon Shaykh of Najd, the Islamic scholarship warned the Muslims of his tribulation citing the Ahadith of Najd as proof. Supporters of Shaykh of Najd resorted to distorting the Ahadith which expose the reality of their sect. The core argument in defense is; Najd is not in Arabia but it is Iraq [or is part of Iraq]. Then they present various evidences in form of Ahadith, many of which are gross distortions of Ahadith, to establish their concocted narrative. BackGround And Way Of Response: Year and half ago a brother Syed Hammad Saifi mentioned another brother Muhammad Aamir Khan had written some articles on topic of Najd. Unfortunately I did not ask what and where these articles are. And told me that brother Abdullah, a supporter of Kharijism, from system_of_life responded to these articles, here. Brother Syed Hammad Saifi requested a response. I informed him everything which brother Abdullah has mentioned in the article comprehensively been refuted in various articles which number roughly twenty, here. And promised him something will be written in response to brother Abdullah’s distortions of Islam in future. In brother Abdullah’s article; there is material which is directly related to the topic of Najd and unrelated. Everything, related and unrelated all will be addressed in order of evidence quoted. 0.0 - Adu-Allah’s Opening Statement: “This Article is a brief response to those Sufis (Barewlis) who intentionally accusing the Ahle-Sunnah Wal-Jamaah of Hijaaz (Saudi Arabia). Abusing the great Scholars of Hijaaz (Saudi Arabia). They intentionally hide ing the Hadith related to Iraq and attributing those Ahadeeth to People of Hijaaz with intention of maligning them. Inshallah we shall expose these Liars.” [Ref: Alternative location of original article, here] 0.1 - Abdullah’s Opening Statement In Balance: He said Sufis (Barelwis) accuse and abuse the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah of Hijaz (Saudi Arabia). And we the Muslims conceal the Ahadith which indicate group of Satan will emerge from Iraq with intention of maligning the Shuyukh of Najd. It is important that the very foundation of distortion and lies is exposed for what it is. The following parts will address everything that needs to be addressed. There are numerous factual errors in what brother Abdullah wrote in his opening statement. These errors are due to absence of knowledge and by establishing them objective is to prove brother Abdullah is poorly educated. And poor education religious or secular makes poor scholars and poor scholarship. By this I do not intend to insinuate brother Abdullah is an Aalim the truth is far from it. 1.0 - Sufi And Barelwis Accuse: Readers should note there are three major factions, Sufis/Sunnis, Wahhabis, and Shia. And in between there are many shades of grey for each faction. If you take away, Wahhabis, Shias, Deobandis, from equation everyone else is Sufi and everyone of them is member of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. Even if one takes away Deobandis and Shias and puts them in pro-Wahhabi basket, this still leaves an over whelming majority of Sufi/Sunnis who are against the Wahhabis. What I am trying to get at is when he says Sufis are against his version of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. In reality he means everyone from Ummah is against his sect with exception of dozen or so Deobandis because none everyone falls into these major labels and shades of grey which originate from them. 1.1 - Identity Of Ahlus Sunnah And The Jammah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “After I am gone, you will see great conflict. I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the path of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H44] “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.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H43] Ahlus Sunnah (i.e. people of tradition) in Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah (i.e. people of tradition and main-body) referrs to those who follow the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And Wal Jammah referrs to one who holds to the Jammah (i.e. main-group) of companions and of Muslims. The identity of second is established by the following sayin of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “It was narrated from Thawban that: The Messenger of Allah said: "A group among my Ummah will continue to follow the truth and prevail, and those who oppose them will not be able to harm them, until the command of Allah comes to pass." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H10] And this taifa (i.e. group) is of majority which will be upon Haq when there are differences: “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] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said that majority is better then minority and then instructed the Muslims to stick to the Jammah: “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] From all this it is clear Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah are those who follow the prophetic Sunnah, and Jammah of companions, and Jammah of Muslim, and they are; Ummah agreeing upon guidance. And they are majority and there is continuity of theological lineage. 1.2 - Wahhabiyyah Are Ahlus Sunnah, Or Barelwis: In light of what has been established from Ahadith the Wahhabiyyah cannot be deserving of title of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah because their belief system originated in 17th century and the core principles and teaching of this sect lack continuity. Also they as whole are and the Muslims amongst them are minority in Ummah who are disputing and rejecting the beliefs of majority. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the Muslims to fallow the majority in following Hadith: “My Ummah will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] “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] Note Hadith of Musnad Imam Ahmad (rahimullah) precisely establishes the majority is Jammah and also establishes majority Jammah is Ummah. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) wouldn’t have instructed the believers to follow the majority if they were not group of truth and if they were not the Jammah. In contrast to Wahhabiyyah, Barelwism/Sufism of subcontinent alone is enough in numbers to compose a majority against the Wahhabiyyah. If one was to include Sufism of Arabian Peninsula, Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Africa, Malaysia, and other countries … They share with Barelwis, the Ashari and Maturidi heritage. Qadri, Naqshbandi, Chishti and Soharwardi Sufi paths. Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, and Maliki fiqh.[1] Despite their perpherial differences a core teaching unites all these scholars upon prophetic Sunnah and come togather to compose over whelming majority, the Jammah, and they are Ummah agreeing upon guidance. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding those who deviate from the Jammah and Ummah: "I saw the Prophet on the Minbar addressing the people. He said: 'After me there will be many calamities and much evil behavior. Whoever you see splitting away from the Jama'ah or trying to create division among the Ummah of Muhammad, then kill him, for the Hand of Allah is with the Jama'ah, and the Satan is with the one who splits away from the Ummah[2], running with him.'" [Ref: Nisai, B37, H4025] 2.0 - Saudi Arabia And Hijaz: He says Muslims accuse the scholars of Hijaaz (Saudi Arabia) … The fact is Hijaaz is not name for Saudi Arabia. Hijaz historically only composed of a small area of Arabian Peninsula and modern Saudi Arabia. Please see the following map for Hijaz, Arabia and Najd, here. This reveals brother doesn’t actually know what Hijaz is and what Arabia is. We have nothing but good to say about the scholars of al-Hijaz. We the Muslims condemn the Wahhabi/Khariji scholars of Najd, hereThe tribulation and sternness of Najdi/Wahhabi hearts is established from where they emerged and what they did to Muslims of Arabian Peninsula, including Hijaz, during their pillaging raids and conquests. They put the Wahhabi ] And out of all the Khawarij followers of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and his band of bandit Wahhabis, emerged with this distinguishing sign of shaven heads. Ref: Muslim, B5, H2338[ “Sahl b. Hunaif reported Allah's Apostle as saying: There would arise from the east a people with shaven heads.” One of tribulation was of a group of people with shaven heads:] Ref: Bukhari, B63, H217[ “Narrated Ibn Umar: I heard the Prophet saying: "Tribulationss will emerge from here." Pointing towards the East.”] Ref: Muslim, B1, H95[“The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East and faith is among the people of the Hijaz.” ) also said regarding inhabitants of Najd: sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam] Prophet (Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214[ “Narrated Ibn Umar: The Prophet said: … He said: "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham (i.e. greater Syria)! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said: "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said: "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the Qarn (i.e. horn, head, group, an era) of Satan." ) said: is in East of Madinah and regarding it Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallamNajd 2.1 - East And Najd In Ahadith: , whom he deceptively counted amoungst people of Hijaz. This will be explained in on coming parts of article in detail but here for introductory purposes somethings will be mentioned.ISIS companions to shame with their actrocities and rape and murderous rampage. And this is why the Muslim scholarship of world, except Wahhabi, condemns Wahhabism, and are totally against it. 2.2 - Hijaz In Ahadith Of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The people of the West will continue to triumphantly follow the truth until the Hour is established.”[3] [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4722] “The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East and faith is among the people of the Hijaz.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H95] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said the people of Hijaz and in other words people of Western part of Arabia will hold to truth until the day of judgment and vast majority of the Muslims of Hijaz are members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah, here. With aid of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the Muslims of Hijaz will remain upon way of Ahlus Sunnah and victorious our the group of Satan of Najd. Also note Hijaz is refuge of Islam: “That the Messenger of Allah said: "Indeed the religion with creep into the Hijaz just like a snake creeps into its hole, and the religion will cling to the Hijaz just like the female mountain goat cling to the peak of a mountain.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B38, H2630] 2.3 - The Contrast And The Deception: After noting the clear distinction and merits of people of Hijaz and truth regarding Najd and Wahhabism; the readers should imagine why the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would attempt to pass the tribulation of group of Satan and their scholars as scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and of scholars of Hijaz. Brother Adu-Allah’s attempt in the science of Hadith is would be called Tadlees. Tadlees best can be destribed in modern magic (i.e. card tricks and stuff) terms of; misdirection, sleight of hand, and concealment. Where a narrator attempts to cover-up weakness of a Hadith by praising merits of a narrator or by with-holding information in order to create positive or negative image. In other words, the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) attempted elevate Wahhabism by associating it with Hijaaz and by disassociating it from Najd. Tadlees is subtle but brother Abdullah’s attempt to make East into West is grand deception. 3.0 - Ahadith Of Iraq And Najd: Brother Abdullah said: “They intentionally hide the Hadith related to Iraq and attributing those Ahadeeth to People of Hijaaz Najd with intention of maligning them.” The truth of matter is; Ahadith which foretold emergence of group of Satan from Iraq are about Khawarij just as Ahadith of Najd are. But they are about two different locations therefore we do not mix the reports nor interpret one to mean the other. Meaning we don’t say because group of Satan emerged from Iraq therefore Najd means Iraq which the Wahhabis are attempting to do. Suppose there is report on TV: There was bomb explosion in London, Enland, university. Right after it, or week later, or month later there is another news report: In university of New Jersey, America, there was bomb explosion. Year later these two news reports are pulbished on a website. You the reader reads both of them. Due to bomb explosions in mentioned cities would you conclude; i) University of New Jersey and university of London are one and the same, ii) or knowing better you would distinguish between the two reports and believe these are two different bomb explosions in two different cities, two different countries. In context of my scenario, Abdullah, the Wahhabi enemy of knowledge and reason, is complaining why do the Muslims hide reports of London bomb attack when they attempt to find location of New Jersey. Any educated and sane person would realise nothing is being hidden. The report of London attack is not related to New Jersey attack. Hence using London attack report and its location to mean New Jersey is in fact London would be dumbness of epic proportions. See the location of Najd and Iraq, here. We leave it upon the illiterate fools to confuse/make Najd into Iraq. You can’t but appreciate for laughs the foolishness of Wahhabi logic. Group of Satan in Iraq and group of Satan in Najd means Iraq is Najd. Am educumated too, and my educumation (lol!) says if group of Satan in Iraq and group of Satan is in Najd then this means Najd is Iraq. Victory for educumation! If A is sweet and liquidy and B is sweet and liquidy then A is B. If lion is furry and has tail, and donkey is furry and with tail, donkey is lion. 4.0 - Accuse, Abuse, And Maligning Scholars Of Najd: He said the Muslims accuse the scholars of Najd. And we do indeed accuse them of being Khawarij and evidence of what vast majority of Muslims believe about them is in their own books. And world terrorism so called in the name of Islam is all Wahhabi supported and all man power is of Wahhabism except those who have been forced into joining them under pain of death as it happened in Syria under rule of Wahhabi branch of ISIS. Please listen to major scholar of Wahhabis/Salafis say ISIS are Wahhabi, here. 5.0 - Abdullah Quoting Surah Baqarah (2) Verse 42: Brother Abdullah quoted the following verse: ''Do not mix the Truth with Falsehood nor Conceal the Truth when you Know.” [Ref: 2:42] And he quoted this verse in an attempt to imply that members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah mix the falsehood (i.e. Barelwi/Sufi teachings) with truth (i.e. Hadith) and conceal the truth [about Wahhabis]. And I am not going to comment on this. I rather let the readers decide on strength of evidence and sound argumentation to determine who is mixing the falsehood with truth and who was/is Mudallis (i.e. guilty of Tadlees). But what I will do is explain the verse in light of context and other verses of Quran. Then at the end of which I will establish brother Abdullah like all his Wahhabi, Salafi and Khariji co-religionists share trait which is unique to Khawarij and worst of creation. 5.1 - Context Of Surah Baqarah Verse 42: Allah (subhanhu wa ta’ala) stated: “And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it).” [Ref: 2:42] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed this verse as part of following six verses: "O Children of Israel! Remember My favor which I have bestowed upon you and fulfill My covenant (upon you) that I will fulfill your covenant (from Me), and be afraid of Me. And believe in what I have sent down confirming that which is (already) with you, and be not the first to disbelieve in it. And do not exchange My signs for a small price, and fear Me. And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it). And establish prayer and give zakah and bow with those who bow (in worship and obedience). Do you order righteousness of the people and forget yourselves while you recite the Scripture? Then will you not reason? And seek help through patience and prayer, and indeed, it is difficult except for the humbly submissive (to Allah). Who are certain that they will meet their Lord and that they will return to Him." [Ref: 2:40/46] Context of this verse reveals it was revealed regarding the Bani Israel (i.e. Jews). 5.2 - Explanation Of Surah al-Baqarah Verse 42 In Light Of Quran: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it).” [Ref: 2:42] Now it is established verse was revealed with regards to Jews who were concealing the truth and mixing falsehood in truth. What the truth and the falsehood was; is yet to be determined. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: "Those to whom We gave the Scripture know him (i.e. Prophet Muhammad) as they know their own sons. But indeed a party of them conceal the truth while they know (it). The truth is from your Lord, so never be among the doubters." [Ref: 2:146/147] Alhasil the truth they conealed and distorted was regarding identity and Prophet-hood of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) while the Rabbai’s knew too well; Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Prophet from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “And when there came to them a Book (this Qur'an) from Allah confirming what is with them (i.e. Taurat) and the Injeel, although aforetime they had invoked Allah in order to gain victory over those who disbelieved, then when there came to them that which they had recognised, they disbelieved in it. So let the Curse of Allah be on the disbelievers.” [Ref: 2:89] They were waiting for his arrival and invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for victory through Waseela (i.e. means) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but disbelieved in his Prophet-hood and hid information from Jewish layity which would have helped them identify him as Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and mixed the truth with falsehood to hide the truth of his Prophet-hood. 5.3 - Mixing The Truth With FalseHood And Concealing The Truth: From previous two sections it would be obvious following verse was revealed with regards to Jews: “And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it).” [Ref: 2:42] And specially Jewish scholarly elitehiding information and distorting information which establishes Prophet-hood of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) even though they knew too well that he is Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Brother Abdullah applied and interpreted the verse in context of Muslims and employed it because he is of understanding; we the Muslims, the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah, mix falsehood with truth, and conceal truth. Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had following to say about those people who interpret verses revealed regarding disbelievers as if they are about Muslims: “... and the Mulhidun (heretical) after the establishment of firm proof against them:"And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.' (9:115) And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.” [Ref: Bukhari, Vol 9, Page 49, Chap 6: Killing The Khawari] Muslims now can decide; if brother Abdullah, theWahhabi, was mixing the falsehood of Wahhabi/Khariji methodology into truth of Quran, and hiding information regarding verse [to insinuate Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah are guilty of distortion and concealment] or not. With regards to insinuation that members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah hide truth and distort it readers will have to wait till the completion of article to make a finale decision. 6.0 – DIY Tafsir And Sharh Of Quran And Hadith: What was required from brother Abdullah was that he explain and demonstrate why Najd isn’t the demonstrated Najd but it is Iraq. And to support his position he should have presented evidence of Hadith and maps to demonstrate his position. Then his position would have been established and we would have been under the burden to establish Islamic position and refute his Khariji distortion. What brother Abdullah has done is; what I have pointed to in section - 3.0. What he is attempting is to interpret Hadith with Hadith but DIY (i.e. Do It Yourself!) scholar doesn’t have any idea how to interpret Hadith or Quran. His effort is laughable because he is trying to apply rules of Tafsir (i.e. exegesis) on a matter of geography. Purpose of Tafsir is to bring clarity and remove ambiguity from a verse with another verse. And correct way to manage it is to employ relating set of verses to shed light on ambiguity. DIY scholars and Mujtahideen relying on Shaykh ul-Islam Wal Muslimeen Google (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) due to zero knowledge rules of Tafsir. Are interpreting name of one region to mean another region due to commonality of detail between Iraq and Najd –: i.e. emergence of group of Satan. The commanlity of detail can be used to establish both groups are same in theology but this detail cannot legitimately be employed to argue Iraq is Najd. To do so would be foolishness however appealing and convincing it may seem to DIY scholars. If two unrelated Ahadith or verses are employed and interpreted then the out come naturally would be defective and invalid. 6.1 - Demonstrating Correct Methodology Of Tafsir: Years ago I had discussion with a extremely extremist Wahhabi [aka Usmaniyyah, Captain]. And he quoted the following verse to argued it referrs to deceased AwliyahAllah including companions and Prophets including Prophet Isa (alayhis salam): “And those they invoke mindu’nillah (i.e. other than Allah) who create nothing, and they (themselves) are created. They are (in fact) dead not alive, and they do not perceive when they will be resurrected.” [Ref: 16:21] My counter argument was the verse was revealed regarding polytheists and their idol-gods. The ambiguity was made clear via following verse: “Yet have they taken mindu’nillah gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection.“ [Ref: 25:3] Alhasil a related verse was employed to clarify the ambiguity and this is Tafsir of best type. Coming to invalid methodology of interpreting; following Hadith is proof that Satan’s group (aka Khawarij) would appear from Najd: “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] To say following Hadith clarifies ambiguity of Najd through usage of Iraq would be a monstoracity because regions and geographical locations are not interpreted to mean another through interpretation: “I asked Sahl bin Hunaif: "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said: "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq: "There will appear in it some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats, and ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] Correct way to interpret and find location and region of Najd should be something similar to following. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out." Or said: "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] Based on this Hadith following article was written to demonstrate Iraq cannot be Najd, here. And also sunrises from East hence following Hadith is related to it: “Verily, afflictions (will start) from here," pointing towards the east, "whence the side of the group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was residing on pulpit of Masjid of Nabvi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and from there he pointed toward house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) and this is precisely toward East, here, therefore following Hadith is also related to the two: “The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to Aisha's house (i.e. Eastwards): He said thrice: "Affliction (will appear from) here and from where the side of the Satan's head comes out (i.e. from the East).” [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] Maps and various Ahadith establish Najd is in Arabia and toward East of Madinah therefore it is connected with all the above Hadith: “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] Alhasil all related Ahadith to Najd and East were brought togather and explained in light of each other to establish direction of Najd and location of Najd. 6.2 - Invalid Methodology Of Tafsir Of Quran And Sharh Of Ahadith: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated:“And (remember) when Allah will say: "O Isa , son of Maryam! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?'” [Ref: 5:116] This verse indicates a group/sect of Christians worshipped Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and his mother Maryam (salamullah alayha) as gods and on the day of judgment Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will be questioned regarding it. In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Certainly you (disbelievers) and that which you are worshipping now besides Allah, are fuel for Hell! (Surely) you will enter it.” [Ref: 21:98] DIY scholar and DIY Tafsir would be prepared to send Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and his mother to hell-fire. After all one plus one is indeed adding up to hell-fire. Yet the fact is both these verses are true and both these verses are unrelated. One is regarding the idols which the polytheists of Arabia worshipped and other is about a Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and about a righteous worshipper of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). With regards Prophets Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “It is not (possible) for any human being to whom Allah has given the Book and Al-Hukm (laws of religion) and Prophethood to say to the people: "Be my worshippers rather than Allah's." On the contrary (he would say): "Be you Rabbaniyyun because you are teaching the Book, and you are studying it." [Ref: 3:79] With regards to men/women those who were worshipped during their lives or after their death Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask them if they asked the people to worship them beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and if they answer the question in affirmative then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will send them to fire: “And if any of them should say: "Verily, I am an Ilah (i.e. god deserving of worship) besides Him." Such a one We should recompense with Hell. Thus We recompense the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers).” [Ref: 21:29] If we rely on DIY scholars and DIY Tafsirs educated by Shaykh ul-Islam Google Ibn Yahoo Ibn Bing then you can imagine the destruction of Islam. Verses of Quran and Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) must correctly be paired with related Ayaat/Ahadith to derive correct understanding. 6.3 – Brother Abdullah The Enemy Of Ahadith Of RasoolAllah: Brother Abdullah is DIY scholar and DIY Mufassir and Sha’reh. As a result the readers would readers would realize how mercilessly he is decimating teaching of Islam in order to protect Wahhabism. He will take two unrelated regions and based similarity in content of Hadith he will be declaring Najd is Iraq. My objective would be to separate Iraq from Najd and Najd from Iraq. Provide convincing geographical and evidence of Hadith to prove student of Shaykh Google Ibn Yahoo Ibn Bing is out of his depth and is sinking in ignorance of pre-Islamic era. 7.0 - Abdullah Quotes Ahadith Of Satan’s Group Appearing From Iraq: "Abdullah Ibn-Umar related that once, he saw the Prophet showing Iraq with his hand, and saying: "The Fitna (i.e. affliction) is here, the Fitna is here, the Fitna is here, three times, it is from here that will appear the devil's horns [alternative; devil’s group]." (Isnad considered Sahih by the Muhaddith Ahmad Shakir al-Masry) [Ref: Musnad-e-Ahmad, Vol10, P391, H6302, H6129] "Ibn Umar reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “O Allah, bless us in our Syria. O Allah, bless us in our Yemen.” He repeated it and on the third or fourth time they said: “O Messenger of Allah and in our Iraq.” The Prophet said: “Verily, from there will appear upheavals and tribulations and from there will rise the horn of Satan [alternative; Satan’s group]." [Ref: Tabarani, al-Mujjam Awsaat, H4230] 7.1 - Commenting On Ahadith Quoted By Brother Abdullah: Ahadith state group of Satan will emerge from Najd and brother Abdullah hopes to interpret Najd with Iraq. More accurately; due to usage of Iraq in above Ahadith brother Abdullah is replacing Najd with Iraq. The logic behind it goes something like this; if from A is group of Satan and from B is group of Satan; therefore A is alphabet B. This explains the mechanism employed by brother Abdullah and simultaneously delivers a smack of sanity to his insanity. Before venturing further it is important to point out; words Satan’s group referr to Khawarij. Muslims and Wahhabis have no dispute in this regard but if anyone questions this ascription then please read the following article, here. Coming to first Hadith quoted by brother Abdullah; I will not comment on chain of narration because the over-all meaning of Hadith agrees with following authentic Hadith: “Narrated by Yusair bin 'Amr:I asked Sahl bin Hunaif: "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said: "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq: "There will appear in it some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats,and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body." [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] Even though the Hadith does not use words group (i.e. Qarn) of Satan the description is regarding Khawarij. And principle of science of Hadith is when a weak Hadith is narrated or coroborated by stronger the weakness is lifted due to stronger Hadith. The second Hadith quoted by brother Abdullah; its wording is fabricated. Meaning event described in the said Hadith never occurred. Instead one of the narrators confused Najd/East with Iraq either due to forgetfullness. Or due to events that transpired in Iraq with regards to Khawarij confused Najd Ahadith with Iraq and replaced Najd with Iraq. Ignoring the confusion/distortion of actual Hadith of Najd it has to be said over-all meaning of Khawarij appearing from Iraq is in agreement with authentic Ahadith but the event it describes never happened. 7.2 - Ahadith Establish No Dua For Najd And Dua For Iraq: From following Hadith it is clear that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refused to invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for region of Najd citing the emergence of group of Satan (aka Khawarij) for his refusal: “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] Even though Khawarij were to emerge from Iraq also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for people of Iraq: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) looked toward Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, and made the Dua: O Allah accept their hearts on your obedience and place firmly your mercy around them.” [Ref: Tabarani, Mu'jam al-Sagheer, Chptr; Alif, Name; Ishaq, H273, here] Note Najd is absent from the second Hadith. What this alludes to is Najd had a special position and played a special role in tribulation of Khawarij due to which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on behalf of Najd. And that special role will be elaborated in two following sections. 7.3 - Emergence Of Satan’s Group From Najd And From Direction Of East: Identification of historical Najd is important because group of Satan was to originate from Najd. Islamic understanding of subject and location of Najd translates to; Wahhabism being the group of Satan which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). For the uninitiated, it is adivsed to see location of Najd on maps, here. It will be evident Najd is toward East of Madinah and Makkah and is central region of Saudi Arabia and it surrounds Saudi capital Riyadh. With this basic information please read the following Ahadith: “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] “O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] Ahadith about East which tell about emergence of group of Satan from direction of East: “Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle on the pulpit saying, "Verily, afflictions (will start) from here," pointing towards the east, "whence the side of the group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] “Ibn Umar reported that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying (in a state) that he had turned his face towards the east: Behold, turmoil would appear from this side, from where the group of Satan would appear.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6938] One Hadith states East by pointing direction of sunrise: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] Alhasil the region of Najd and direction of East perfectly compliment each other. And emergence of group of Satan from Najd/East are about the same region. The only difference in one group of Ahadith direction is mentioned and in the other name of region is mentioned. Following article contains seventeen facts; if all put into perspective precisely establish the direction from where the group of Satan was to emerge, here. Alhasil all this reveals why a Wahhabi/Khariji would distort the truth and mix falsehood into Ahadith Najd. And would want Iraq to be Najd and not the land of their beloved Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. 7.4 - Group Of Satan From Iraq And Group Of Satan From Najd: Briefly; it a group of Satan was to emerge from Najd and another one from Iraq. The first Satan’s group to abandoned Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) when after arbitration at Siffin and assembled as a separate faction at Harura [alternative name for Khawarij connected with; Haruriyyah] in Iraq. These people were mostly from tribe of Banu Tamim which was/is mainly situated in central Saudi Arabia, in other words in historical Najd. Abdullah aka Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim was leader of Khawarij in Iraq - see map depicting location of Banu Tamim in Najd and evidence of Dhil Khuwaisirah being form Najd and him leading Khawarij of Iraq, here. Following article comprehensively explains in light of authentic Ahadith how and why Ahadith of Najd are connected, and how Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab is part of Khariji apostasy. To let the cat out the bag; it is not due to Iraq being Najd, here. From Ahadith of Najd and Iraq it becomes apparent there will be two [major] groups of Khawarij from Najd and both would originate from Najd: "… Messenger of Allah pointed towards Yemen with his hand and said: Verily Iman is towards this side, and harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels (i.e. Rabia and Mudar) 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] Please note locations of tribes of Rabia and Mudhar were also depicted on the maps of previous section. Moving on; there were to appear many minor off-shoots of Khawarij in light of following Hadith: "There will emerge people (i.e. Khawarij) who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go any deeper than their collarbones. Whenever a group of them appears, they should be cut off (i.e. killed)." Ibn 'Umar said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Whenever a group of them appears, they should be killed.' - More than twenty times - 'until Dajjal emerges among them.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H174] Alhasil the first group of Khawarij appeared in Iraq but the main source of man power and ideological leadership of Khawarij were from central Arabia and to be precise from province of Najd. The second major infestation of Khawarij was to appear from Najd. And when it appeared, in the beginning, almost entire man power of Khawarij was from Najd and from ranks of Bani Tamim. Please read the above linked article to properly and comprehensively understand how Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab at-Tamim the Najdi is part of earlier Khawarij yet created a unique blend of Kharijism (i.e. excessiveness characterised by Mushriking Muslims, accusing them of innovation) and Sunnism. Sooner or later articles establishing methodological and theological uniformity between Khawarij and Wahhabism will be published but following is only a starter, here. 8.0 - Abdullah Quoting Ahadith Of Flies And Mosquitoes: "Narrated Ibn Abi Nu'm: A person asked Abdullah bin Umar whether a Muslim could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply): "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's Messenger. The Prophet said: They are my two sweet basils in this world." [Ref: Al-Adab al-Mufrad, B5, H2] "Narrated Ibn Abi Na'm: I was present when a man asked Ibn Umar about the blood of mosquitoes. Ibn Umar said: "From where are you?" The man replied: "From Iraq." Ibn Umar said: "Look at that! He is asking me about the blood of Mosquitoes while they (the Iraqis ) have killed the (grand) son of the Prophet. I have heard the Prophet saying: "They (Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet-smelling flowers in this world." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H23] "Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim bin Abdullah bin Umar as saying: O people of Iraq! How strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father Abdullah bin Umar narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the East: Verily, the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another." [Ref: Muslim B41, H694] “Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim, bin Abdullah, bin Umar as saying: O people of Iraq! How strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father Abdullah bin Umar narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily. the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another; and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious said: "You killed a person but We relieved you from the grief and tried you with (many a) trial." (20:40). Ahmad bin Umar reported this hadith from Salim, but he did not make a mention of the words: "I heard". [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6943] 8.1 - Commenting On Hadith Of Killing Of Flies And Mosquitoes And Minor Sins: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) mentions death of Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and quotes a prophetic statement indicating love of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and merits of these two companions. Therefore the setting of these quoted Ahadith is after poisoning of Imam Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) which lead to his death and after the heart breaking events of Karbala had already transpired. And maybe the event of Karbala had recently transpired hence it was still fresh in mind of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) which resulted the material we read in Hadith. It is also worth noting Khawarij became a departed from Jamah in Syria but were recognised as Khawarij in Iraq. And the event of Hadith took place long after appearance of Khawarij. Note Khawarijwere recognised as a distinct sect after arbitration of Siffin and during the life and Khilafat of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Finally brother Abdullah is attempting insinuating Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) applied the Hadith of East upon people of Iraq. This Hadith has already been explained in detail in the following article, here. 8.2 - Iraqis Concerned With Minor Sins And Group Of Satan: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asked about killing of flies/masquitoes (i.e. minor sin) and he said: “O people of Iraq! How strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins?” Minor sins is killing of flies/mosquitoes and major sin is killing a believer. And in the context he is insinuating that people of Iraq you’re more concerned with minor sins yet you should be more worried about major sins in general and sin of mudering Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to be specific. 8.3 - Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) Put Into Trials Due To Unintentional Death: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) says: “…and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious said: …” Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) unintentionally killed an Egyptian. He then went on to quote the verse related to it: “(And We favored you) when your sister went and said, 'Shall I direct you to someone who will be responsible for him?' So We restored you to your mother that she might be content and not grieve. And you killed someone, but We saved you from retaliation and tried you with a (severe) trial. And you remained (some) years among the people of Madyan. Then you came (here) at the decreed time, O Moses.” [Ref: 20:40] His intention is to insinuate; people of Iraq realise for killing of one person unintentionally Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) put Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) intro trial. You people of Iraq not only intentionally killed Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) but also members of his family [brutally and barbaricly]. And Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) killed a disbeliever and he was put into trial for many years of his life; you people of Iraq killed those who were beloved to Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he quotes following prophetic words: "They (Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet-smelling flowers in this world.” Implying your trial and your suffering as result of killing of these Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would be severe and harsh. 8.4 - Prophet Pointing Toward East Satan’s Group Will Emerge From It: Hadith narrates the following Prophetic words: “… he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another and …” Note the referrence point of East is where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was located and the people whom he was with when he uttered the above words and not where Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was. Even though the words of Hadith establish Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not in Iraq but a Iraqi man had come to him [in Makkah]: “I was present when a man asked Ibn Umar about the blood of mosquitoes. Ibn Umar said: "From where are you?" The man replied: "From Iraq." Ibn Umar said: "Look at that! He is asking me about the blood of Mosquitoes while they (the Iraqis ) have killed the (grand) son of the Prophet.” [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H23] Ahadith establish he stood beside the pulpit [of Masjid Nabvi] and pointed direction of sunrise, toward East, and toward house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha): “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] “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 we have already established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East, toward Najd, and Saudi capital of Riyadh. In this context if you interpret the following words Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) then it obviously mean Muslims/companions would fight each other after the group of Satan emerges from East: “Verily the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another and …” And after the emergence of Khawarij, they murdered Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Muslims killing each other, Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) VS Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu), started. Another interpretation of same portion is that Muslims VS Khawarij will kill each other. And this will be explained in the last section. Alhasil in context of question about killing flies/mosquitoes Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is implying you should be more concerned about killing people and who you kill. 8.4 - Iraqis Were Not Group Of Satan But They In Fact Killed Khawarij: Kharijis subjected the Muslims of Iraq to barbaric murderous rampage and therefore Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) took the task of eliminating first spawns of Kharijism. In following Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained the traits of companions of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi: “... 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] “... be smeared by dung and blood. 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 (Muslims)." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person: 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.” (Surah 9:58) [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] Note this Dhil Kuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions are very same Khawarij aka Satan’s group which emerged from Najd and fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in Iraq. See following detailed article to this regard, here. Hadith establishes the group closer to truth was of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) but it was composed of Iraqis and the Iraqis had killed members of Satan’s group aka Khawarij: ”A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it. Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq. it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] 8.5 - Truth About Iraq And Falsehood Of Abdullah: Earlier it was established the Khawarij were over whelmingly from Bani Tamim. A tribe which was/is situated in Arabian Peninsula, East of Madinah, around modern Saudi capital Riyadh, which is precisely the historical Najd from which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold Satan’s group would emerge. They marched with Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army to Syria to fight Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and after arbitration became disillusioned with Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and parted his company. They then gathered in Iraq in village of Harura and due to their actrocities Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) confronted them in battle. The bulk of his army was composed of Iraqis because his capital was Baghdad. And it was the Iraqis who dealt the death blow to Khawarij [at Nahrawan]. All this establishes Iraqis were not Khawarij but the Iraqis were responsible for killing Khawarij. They in fact were from Najd and from Bani Tamim. Our brother Abdullah attempted to make Muslims believe Iraqis were Khawarij but the truth is Khawarij were outsiders who assembled in Iraq and were recognised as a new sect in Iraq. 9.0 - Hadith Of Dajjal In Iraq, Syria And In East: “We said: Yes. Thereupon he said: If it is so that is better for them that they should show obedience to him. I am going to tell you about myself and I am Dajjal and would be soon permitted to get out and so I shall get out and travel in the land, and will not spare any town where I would not stay for forty nights except Mecca and Medina as these two (places) are prohibited (areas) for me and … Behold he (Dajjal) is in the Syrian sea (Mediterranean) or the Yemen sea (Arabian sea). Nay, on the contrary, he is in the East, he is in the East, he is in the East, and he pointed with his hand towards the east.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7028] Comments:- Just take a glance at World Map,Saudi Arabia comes no where between Syria and Iraq and now read the below Hadith.“Thereupon he said: I harbor fear in regard to you in so many other things besides the Dajjal. If he comes forth while I am among you, I shall contend with him on your behalf, but if he comes forth while I am not amongst you, a man must contend on his own behalf and Allah would take care of every Muslim on my behalf. He would be a young man with twisted, contracted hair, and a blind eye. I compare him to `Abd-ul-`Uzza b. Qatan. He who amongst you would survive to see him should recite over him the opening verses of Sura Kahf (xviii). He would appear on the way between Syria and Iraq and would spread mischief right and left. O servant of Allah! adhere (to the path of Truth). We said: Allah's Messenger, how long would he stay on the earth? He said: For forty days, one day like a year and one day like a month and one day like a week and the rest of the days would be like your days.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7015] “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle while he was facing the East, saying, "Verily! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the head of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] “Thawban said: If you see the black flags coming from Khurasan then go there even if you have to crawl because there is the Khalifah of Allah, the Mahdi." [Ref: Mustadrak al-Hakim, Book Of Tribulations H8578, here] Comments:- It is crystal clear from above Ahadith that ''East'' refers to ''IRAQ''.If still Barelwi disagree 'East as Iraq',then they must go to Saudi Arabia(Hijaz) to Give Bayat to Imam Mehdi in Saudi Arabia not in Khurasan.” 9.1 - Something Related And Unrelated To Above Content: I have only quoted in above Ahadith numbered by brother Abdullah as; seven, eight, nine, and ten. Following are being omitted because they add nothing new to his point: Ahadith number eleven, fourteen, sixteen, seventeen are about tribulation of East. And Ahadith number twelve, thirteen, fifteen are about Khawarij but do not explicitly referr to East. Despite this there is no objection on my part if they are applied upon tribulation of East because they do referr to Khawarij. Brother Abdullah distorting this Hadith kind of hurt because he made me realize how desperate and degraded human can become when there is no way out. And it was first time when I raised my hands in Dua for his guidance. May Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) open our eyes, and hearts, and minds to truth of Islam and guide us to straight path of Islam. Coming to his comment; I cannot comprehend why Saudi Arabia should be between Syria and Iraq. Or how it would help his cause. I assume he misread the Hadith. It says Dajjal will appear between Syria and Iraq. And Dajjal appearing between Syria and Iraq is possible ofcourse because borders of both countries are connected. After bit of head banging I think I figured what the relationship of comment to content is. According to Ahadith Dajjal will approach and appear in Arabia from a way which is between Syria and Iraq. And in this context he is saying that information of his second Hadith doesn’t fit into it. It is very likely brother Abdullah isn’t aware that modern Syria is only about sixty percent of what it originally was. Al-Sham comprimised of Lebanon, Israel, Jordon, and parts of present day Syria. If you put all these into context then Dajjal coming to Arabia from between Syria and Iraq would become apparent. 9.2 - Commenting On Hadith Of Dajjal In Iraq And East: Brother Abdullah is insinuating Iraq is East of Madinah because Dajjal is to come from Iraq and Prophet also said Dajjal will emerge from East. Putting one and one togather with healthy dose of logic he arrived at the sum of Iraq is East [therefore by Najd intended region was Iraq and due to this Ahadith of Najd referr to Iraq]. At the end of Hadith eighteen Abdullah stated: “It is crystal clear from above Ahadith that ''East'' refers to ''Iraq''. If still Barelwi disagree 'East as Iraq',then they must go to Saudi Arabia(Hijaz) to Give Bayat to Imam Mehdi in Saudi Arabia not in Khurasan.” Glad that he wasn’t insinuating but he stated what he believed. Even though Hadith clearly establishes East is direction of sunrise. And if you recall a resident of Madinah will never and can never see sunrise from Iraq. Revisit following link to refresh your memory why that would be so; here. 9.3 - Dajjal In East And Its True Meaning Explained By Prophet: It is stated in above quoted Ahadith and underlined; Dajjal will enter/visit every [major] city of world in forty days. This points to Dajjal going to all over the world; East, West, North, and South from place of his origin but the place of Dajjals origin is East: “Nay, on the contrary, he is in the East, he is in the East, he is in the East, and he pointed with his hand towards the east.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained what he meant by East in following Ahadith: “It was narrated that Abu Bakr Siddiq said: "The Messenger of Allah told us: 'Dajjal will emerge in a land in the East called Khorasan, and will be followed by people with faces like hammered shields.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4072] “Abu Bakr As-Siddiq said: "The Messenger of Allah narrated to us, saying: 'The Dajjal shall emerge from a land in the East called Khurasan. He is followed by a people whom appear as if their f aces are shields coated with leather.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2237] 9.4 - Imam Mahdi Coming From East And Khorasan: For some weird reason brother Abdullah the DIY Shaykh decided to quote following Hadith: “Thawban said: If you see the black flags coming from Khurasan then go there even if you have to crawl because there is the Khalifah of Allah, the Mahdi." [Ref: Mustadrak al-Hakim, Book Of Tribulations H8578, here] I haven’t been able to figure out how this would have helped his cause of Najd being Iraq and Iraq being East but whatever. My objective in quoting the following Ahadith would be to only establish Khurasan is East and it is only for purpose of attesting to what was already quoted: “It was narrated from 'Abdullah bin Harith bin Jaz' Az-Zabidi that the Messenger of Allah said: "People will come from the East, paving the way for Mahdi." Meaning (paving the way) for his rule.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4088] “It was narrated from Thawban that the Messenger of Allah said: "Three will fight one another for your treasure, each one of them the son of a caliph, but none of them will gain it. Then the black banners will come from the East, and they will kill you in an unprecedented manner." Then he mentioned something that I do not remember, then he said: "When you see them, then pledge your allegiance to them even if you have to crawl over the snow, for that is the caliph of Allah, Mahdi." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4084] And Khorasan is in East of Madinah:“Thawban said: If you see the black flags coming from Khurasan then go there even if you have to crawl because there is the Khalifah of Allah, the Mahdi." [Ref: Mustadrak al-Hakim, Book Of Tribulations H8578, here] Maps in the following sections depict location of land of Khorasan and where Khorasan is in relationship to Arabia. 9.4 - Ancient Land Of Khorasan Is In East Of Madinah: 9.5 - Dajjal In East Of Madinah In Land Of Khorasan Established: All the above establishes what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) meant when he said Dajjal will emerge from East. And he then himself explained; he meant Dajjal will emerge from East a land called Khurasan. And maps perfectly establish that indeed Khorasan is in almost exactly East of Madinah. And this evidence is enough to puncture the logical conclusion of our DIY Shaykh Abdullah. It is also important to point out for fourth time; brother Abdullah’s understanding is that Iraq is East is established via logic and not from factual interpretation of Hadith with Hadith. Propositions: i) Dajjal is to emerge from East. ii) Dajjal is to emerge from Iraq. Conclusion: Therefore Iraq is in East and will emerge from Iraq. This has nothing to do with interpreting Hadith with Hadith. Its pure logic of type that you would meet in online IQ tests. Two statements of esident of Saudi Arabia: i) There will be fight in East. ii) There will be fight in England. Conclusion: There will be in England because it is in East. This way of interpreting data completely ignores geographical locations of cities, provinces, countries and cardinal directions but purely based on bad understanding of logic. Interpretation of Hadith with Hadith refutes brother Abdullah’s position. Even though he assumes he is interpreting Hadith with Ahadith in reality he is only distorting the Ahadith with his faulty logic driven interpretations. Finally following article briefly explains Hadith of Dajjal coming from East and Iraq, here. And following one comprehsively explains why Dajjal will come to Iraq/Syria and you are strongly advised to read it, here. 9.6 - Final Word On Strategy Of DIY Shaykh Abdullah: DIY Shaykh Abdullah’s strategy is to take focus of Ahadith of Najd away from Saudi/historical province of Najd and put the all negativity toward Iraq is purely for basis of protecting Wahhabism and Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. And to achieve this hook and crook is all good. This is not scholarship nor display of sincerity in studying religion. Rather this type of DIY scholarship tightly shuts the door on face of ray of guidance that had made it way to door seeker. Brother Abdullah quoted Ahadith numbered nineteen and twenty and they have already been addressed in section 7.0 to 7.4. And it is advised you referr to that section. Remaining Article Of Brother Abdullah And Its Reality: The material directly relating to making Najd into Iraq was upto mentioned Ahadith. The remaining article of brother Abdullah is basicly implying all the evil things happened in Iraq therefore Ahadith of Najd referr to Iraq. And that Banu Tamim are portrayed in positive light in some Ahadith and man of Najd was told of entry to paradise therefore Banu Tamim are not [all] Khawarij and bad. And people of Iraq are most/all are bad and most/all tribulation and Khawarij emerged from there therefore Ahadith of Najd are about Iraq. We have already demonstrated where Iraq is, and where Najd is, and how Bani Tamim of Najd were part of Iraqi Khawarij. Najd and Iraq cannot legitimately be blendered into one and same however eagerly DIY Shaykh wants it to be. The perpherial issues of brother Abdullah, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills will be addressed in second article: Response To Abdullah The Khariji Of A’du-Allah- Evil And Virtues Of Iraqis-Najdis, And What It Is Established From Them. Conclusion: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East, he mentioned direction of sunrise, and he pointed toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) to pin point direction from which Satan’s group was to emerge. In addition to all he also mentioned name of region in direction of East, toward the direction house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) as Najd. Ahadith also indicate; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Iraq and foretold emergence of Satan’s group from Iraq. Considering the name and location of Iraq and Najd it is evident both reffer to two different regions. Iraq Hadith referrs to first group of Satan and Najd Hadith referrs to second manifestation of Satan’s group from Najd. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. FootNotes: - [1] Note all Barelwis, who adhere to teaching of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) are Sufis and from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah, in principle mehodology and core teachings, but not all Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is Barelwi. Barelwism fundamentally is those to adhere to teaching of prophetic Sunnah and of Jammah under the guidance of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan al-Qadri (alayhi rahma). And those who supported Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) against the Deobandis and Ahle Hadith [a non-conformist Wahhabi sect] heresies of these sects which originated in subcontinent. The sole distinguishing feature between Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and Barelwism; is Takfir of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) of Deobandi scholars; who insulted and disrespected Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), also believe in possibility (i.e. imkan) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) lieing, stated finality of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would not be effected of another Prophet is born. To name them; Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi, Shaykh Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri, Shaykh Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, and Shaykh Muhammad Qasim Nanotavi. Even though Fatawah Hussam al-Haramayn was attestted by scholars of Arab world during the life time of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) it did not become a international controversy. The result of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat’s (alayhi rahma) fatwah greatly impacted subcontinent and the antangonism between Barelwis and Deobandis remained and was transmitted to future generations. As a result Barelwis of subcontinent have certain positions regarding Deobandis [based on core principles of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah] which non-subcontinent members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah may not hold. And this maybe due to either being misinformed by Deobandis or having absolutely no knowledge of their beliefs. But there is no doubt they would support Barelwi positions when they are informed about Deobandi beliefs like they supported Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) in his life time. - [2] The Wahhabism originated in middle of 17th century lead by Najdi Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. He split from the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and created band of bandits blundering Muslim cities and kill Muslims mercilessly because Shaykh of Najd had declared that over whelming majority of Muslims of Arabia are polytheists except his own followers. Note prior to this Wahhabism and its teaching didn’t exist. Their method of determining major Shirk was never heard before them nor did the belief; vast majority of Muslim Ummah is upon major Shirk and has fallen into innovation. Authentic Ahadith contradict both these teachings. - [3] (i) This means; Western part of Arabia, the region of Hijaz, its inhabitants will remain upon truth of Islam uptil the day of judgment. (ii) Wahhabism emerged in central Arabia, region surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh, and their leader accused the people of Makkah and Madinah and their scholars of being polytheists, and claim none other then him knows meaning of; There is none worthy of worship except Allah: “And I inform you about myself – I swear by Allah whom there is none worthy to worship except Him – I have sought knowledge and those who knew me believed that I had knowledge while I did not know the meaning of La Ilaha Illa Allah at that time and did not know the religion of Islam before this grace that Allah favored. As well as my Shaikhs (teachers) no one among them knew that. And if someone from the scholars of al-Arid (the lands of Najd and surrounding areas) claims that he knew the meaning of La Ilaha Illa Allah or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims on behalf of his teachers that someone from them knew that, then he has lied and said falsehood and deceived people and praised himself with something he does not possess.“ [Ref: al-Darur al-Saniyyah, here] And he explicitly stated this and meaning of this is that he alone knew Tawheed and implication of which is everyone but him was disbeliever because Tawheed is fundamental requirement to be a Muslim absence of which means Kufr. iii) Compare what the Hadith states and what Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab, the Iblees of Najd has stated, and think for yourself and ask: Were the people of Hijaz upon truth of Islam, or was Shaykh of Najd upon truth of Islam?

Hazrat mera sawal ya hay kya abu lahub kay azab may takhfeef wali hadees ko hum milad ki daleel kay liya paish kertay hien. ya hadees hafiz ibn e kaseer nay apni kitab may likha hay. us ka scan page chahiya tha. or is hadees ko jin jin muhadeesien nay apni kitab may likha hay. un kay references, scan page kay sath mill saktay hien? dusri baat kafir kay azab may takfeef nahi ho sakti. to aik hadees wo bhi hay jis may ghalibun abu talib kay azaab may nabi pak ki waja say taqfeef hoi thi. us hadees ka bhi scan page mill sakta hay?

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: 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.

Assalam alaikum Wahabio ka is aaitaraz ka jawab mai nay yaha parha bhe tha magar search say nahe mil raha Kay Quran mai ata hai jiska mafhooom darj zail hai: jiinhain Allah kay siwa madad kay leay etc pukara jata hai wo khajoor ki ghutli par aik bareek chilkay kay bhe malik nahe جن لوگوں کو اللہ کے سوا حاجت روا سمجھ کر پکارا جاتا ہـے۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ اللہ پاک فرماتا ہـے وہ اس چھلکے کے بھی مالک نہیں۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ * ”وَ الَّذِیۡنَ تَدۡعُوۡنَ مِنۡ دُوۡنِہٖ مَا یَمۡلِکُوۡنَ مِنۡ قِطۡمِیۡرٍ۔“ (الفاطر : 13) "جنہیں تم اس کے سوا پکار رہـے ہـو وه تو کھجور کی گٹھلی کے چھلکے کے بھی مالک نہیں۔" يا اللہ ہم سب کے دلوں میں ہدایت ڈال دیں was salam

السلام علیکم بھائیو اس اعتراض کا جواب درکار ہے۔ اخبرنی ابن رزق قال:حدیثآ احمد بن سلمان بن الفقیہ بالنجاد قال :حدیثآ عبداللہ بن احمد بن حنبل قال حدیثآ مھنی بن یحیی قال سمت احمد بن حنبل یقول ماقول ابی حنیفہ والبعر عندی الاسواء تاریخ بغداد 569/51 وسند صحیح اس کا ترجمہ جو وہابیہ نے کیا : امام احمد بن حنبل فرماتے ہیں میرے نزدیک جانوروں کی گندگی اور ابو حنیفہ کا قول یکساں ہے۔ --------------- الحمدُللہ۔ فقیر نے حوالہ تلاش کر لیا ہے۔وہابی نے جھوٹ سے کام لیا ہے۔ثابت ہوا کے وہابی جھوٹا ہے۔ ----------------- فقیر نے جو ترجمہ (لفظی نہیں محاورتاََ) کیا ہے وہ یہ ہے : اسناد مھنی تک صحیح ہے۔اور مھنی ثقہ ہے،عبد اللہ رحمہ اللہ نے یہ اپنے والد محترم سے نہیں سنا۔انہوں نے یہ مھنی سے لیا۔میں عربی میں کمزور ہوں اسلامی بھائی غلطی پر اصلاح فرمائیں۔مسئلہ تو کافی واضع ہو گیا مگر کوئی بھائی یہ بتا دے کے اسماء رجال کے تحت کیا حکم ہوگا مجھے اصول اسناد کا بھی علم نہیں ہے۔

السلام علیکم اس کا جواب درکار ہے

AZAAN E QABR SE MUTALIK EK SAWAAL KA JAWAAB BY MUFTI MUHAMMED AAQUIB QUAADRI SAQAFI SAHAB QIBLA

Tableeghi Jamaat Walon par Pabandi Lagu by Maulana Shahir Raza

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: Two principles were derived in an attempt to explain what would be linguistic and what would be legal innovation in an article responding to argument; Ibn Umars (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made statements, Salat ad-Duha is excellent/fine innovation, in linguistic sense, here. And it was argued that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not believe Salat ad-Duha was Prophetic Sunnah hence he made the statements in legal (i.e. Shar’ri sense). Later after careful consideration it was realised these statement, Salat ad-Duha is fine/excellent innovation, was made in context of Salat ad-Duha of congregation. And this prompted me to rectify my understanding, here. My opponent in the light of lattest readjustment has responded to me in the hope of refuting Islamic position – Islam has made provisions via which good innovations can be made part of Islam. An Email Arguing Against Islamic Position: In your lattest post you have acknowledged statements of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) regarding Salat ad-Duha are in context of congregation, in Masjid other than Haram/Quba, and a day on another than Saturday. This means you take the Ahadith in which Salat ad-Duha has been stated to be good/fine innovation and dear innovation to be referring to performing of Salat ad-Duha in congregation, in Masjid other than Haram/Quba, and a day on another than Saturday. And this implies you believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Salat ad-Duha in congregation and Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware of this. Your admission changes the dimensions of the discussion because it is stated in Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Salat ad-Duha in congregation: “Bilal replied in the affirmative. I said, 'Where)?' He replied: 'Between these two pillars and then he came out and offered a two rak`at prayer in front of the Ka`ba.' "Abu `Abdullah said: Abu Huraira said, "The Prophet advised me to offer two rak`at of Duha prayer. " Itban (bin Malik) said, "Allah's Messenger and Abu Bakr, came to me after sunrise and we aligned behind the Prophet and offered two rak`at."[1] [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H268] And your own principle states: “Knowing y is Quranic/Prophetic teaching but despite this saying y is excellent/fine innovation. In this context, the y practice which is being called innovation is in Lughvi (i.e. linguistic) sense.” This establishes that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) deemed Salat ad-Duha in congregation to be linguistic innovation. All I demand is, you to establish that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing Salat ad-Duha in Masjid, in congregation, and in public. If this is established by you my argument [against Islam allowing good innovations] stands refuted and if you fail your argument [of Islam permitting good/fine innovations] stands refuted. Assumption – He Was Aware Of ad-Duha In Congregation Is Prophetic Sunnah: It is heart warming to see you employ my own principle to refute Islamic arguments and this points you have granted the principle a degree of credibility. The problematic aspect is that you have assumed Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha performed in congregation is Prophetic Sunnah and despite having this knowledge he went on to Salat ad-Duha in congregation is excellent/fine innovation.You have claimed my principle substantiates your position; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made the statement Salat ad-Duha in congregation being linguistic innovation. For your argument to be valid you must establish Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being prophetic Sunnah. Merely establishing it is Prophetic Sunnah cannot proof of, and is not proof, Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) being aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah. Ibn Umar Wasn’t Aware Of It Being Prophetic Sunnah: The notion that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah is senseless. The evidence establishes; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not perform Salat ad-Duha which he termed innovation: “Narrated Muwarriq: I asked Ibn `Umar: "Do you offer the Duha prayer ?" He replied in the negative. I further asked …" [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27] And he believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his first two Khulafah did not perform it: “. I further asked, "Did `Umar use to pray it?" He (Ibn `Umar) replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did Abu Bakr use to pray it?" He replied in the negative." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27] Naturally Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would and will have no reason to object to or to not to perform Salat ad-Duha in congregation if he believed it was Prophetic Sunnah. And if he believed it was Prophetic Sunnah why would he say it was not performed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)! And why would he himself not perform it if he believed it was Prophetic Sunnah? Considering The Impossible – He Was Aware Of It Being Sunnah: Here we suppose he was aware that Salat ad-Duha in congregation was Prophetic Sunnah. Will this establish his statements about Salat ad-Duha being excellent/fine innovation were made in linguistic sense? One word answer: No! Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) not performing and his first two Khulafah not performing Salat ad-Duha would go on to force conclusion that the scholarly opinion about Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statements (i.e. Salat ad-Duha is excellent/fine innovation are with regards to Salat ad-Duha of congregation) is incorrect. The reason being for this is; otherwise if the Ahadith are understood in context of Salat ad-Duha of congregation than Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is made to say a Prophetic Sunnah was not performed by two Khulafa and himself, and by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), which would be complete non-sense. And this contradictory non-sense naturally would force the scholarship to reconcile the difficulty by forming another opinion which would lead to conclusion that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was reffering to another aspect of Salat ad-Duha as excellent/fine innovation – not Salat ad-Duha of congregation. Alhasil there is no way out of Islamic position. Only slight modification - such as Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala ahu) deemed xyz aspect of Salat ad-Duha to be fine/excellent innovation [and believed Salat ad ad-Duha of congregation to be Sunnah] would result in refutation of your position. Hence it would be in your interest to conform to following the majority aspect of Prophetic teaching because there is no alternative way out of Islamic position – i.e. Islam allows good innovations to be made part of it. Islamic Scholarship Said Ahadith Are About Ad-Duha Of Congregation: You have stated for me to refute your position all needs to be established is that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah. Note Islamic scholarship has stated that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made the following statements about Salat ad-Duha performed in congregation [with two other reasons]: “Narrated Muwarriq: I asked Ibn `Umar: "Do you offer the Duha prayer [in congregation]?" He replied in the negative. I further asked, "Did `Umar use to pray it [in congregation]?" He (Ibn `Umar) replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did Abu Bakr use to pray it [in congregation]?" He replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did the Prophet use to pray it [in congregation]?" Ibn `Umar replied, "I don't think he did." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27]“Narrated Mujahid: Urwa bin Az-Zubair and I entered the Mosque (of the Prophet) and saw Abdullah bin Umar sitting near the dwelling place of Aisha and some people were offering the Duha prayer [in congregation]. We asked him about their prayer and he replied that it [in congregation] was an innovation.” [Ref: Bukhari, B27, H4] "It is an innovation [in congregation] and what a fine innovation it is [in congregation]!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, 3] "At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer [in congregation]." [Ref: Musannaf Abd Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] If understanding of Islamic scholarship is correct and your position; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah than there is contradiction between what you assert and what is established from these Ahadith. And based on the Prophetic teaching of following Jamhoor (i.e. majority), and Sawad al Azam (i.e. group of great majority) these Ahadith are proofs as requested and they refute your position. If He Was Unaware Of It Being Prophetic Sunnah: He is reported to have stated; he does not perform Salat ad-Duha, nor did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), nor did Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and not his father – Umar Ibn al-Khattab (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed Salat ad-Duha. And if he made this statement about Salat ad-Duha in congregation than why would he consider it Prophetic Sunnah? Do you believe Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) will state a Prophetic Sunnah was not acted on by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) when he is all too well informed that it is indeed a Prophetic Sunnah? He is a Sahabi and not a Wahhabi that he will lie or distort his religion. He is from the best of Ummah and by Ijmah of Jammah of Muslims a righteous Muslim and he is above such deception. Therefore only logical conclusion can be that he genuinely did not believe Salat ad-Duha of congregation as Prophetic Sunnah. He Learnt It Was Sunnah Latter In Life: You may attempt to argue; he deemed it Salat ad-Duha of congregation as fine/excellent innovation at one stage but later learnt it was Prophetic Sunnah. Even though the assertion that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) during later period of life found out Salat ad-Duha of congregation is Prophetic Sunnah, is unestablished but I feel compelled to address it. Even if this was true you cannot interpret his earlier period position with latter awareness. Suppose a child at the age of three believed Santa Claus was real but later in his teenage years realised it wasn’t the case. Would it be correct to reinterpret his three years of age’s understanding in light of when he was fifteen? Point being made is that if Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed in his latter life, it was Prophetic Sunnah, even then his early lifes statements cannot be reinterpreted to conform to his latter lifes understanding. Rather those statements should be and would be understood in context of his knowledge/belief when he made the statements. In other words Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statement, Salat ad-Duha is excellent/fine innovation, will be interpreted in his early lifes understanding when he made them. And if he was unaware of them being Prophetic Sunnah than as per the principle his statement was made in Shar’ri sense. Instructs Earlier Statements To Be Interpreted In Light Of Latter: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware and then learnt Salat ad-Duha of congregation was Prophetic Sunnah latter in his life. And he changed his position and he then instructs everyone: Interpret my earlier statements in such a way that they conform to my latter position. This is hypothetical scenario. Will this mean Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) does not believe in Islam permitting good innovations, or Islam allowing innovation to be introduced into it? Ofcourse not because he has retracted from his erroneous position regarding Salat ad-Duha and has not rejected, disowned the basis (i.e. Islam has created room to allow good innovations to be made part of) on which he made the judgment regarding Salat ad-Duha in congregation being good innovation. Interpreting The Statements In light Of Earlier And Latter Position: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said regarding Salat ad-Duha of congregation that it is fine/excellent innovation: “Ibn Ulayyah narrated to us, Jarir narrated, al-Hakim bin A'raj narrated; I asked Muhammad about Salat ad-Duha, while he was sitting near the house of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He said: It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, 3] And out of all the innovations which originated Salat ad-Duha was most beloved to him: "At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer [of Salat ad-Duha in congregation]." [Ref: Musannaf Abd Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] If his statements are interpreted in light of latter life and his instruction, which I hypothised, then his statements would be in linguistic sense in light of my principle: “Knowing y is Quranic/Prophetic teaching but despite this saying y is excellent/fine innovation. In this context, the y practice which is being called innovation is in Lughvi (i.e. linguistic) sense.” And if his statements are interpreted in light of ealier life during which he believed Salat ad-Duha was not Prophetic Sunnah then it was Shar’ri judgment and this would be in accordance with my other principle: “Believing y is not Prophetic Sunnah and then termining it a good innovation is legal ruling [or in other words, Shar’ri judgment] about an innovation.” And fact is that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) changing his position would not refute the Islamic understanding because it merely establishes he rectified his erroneous which he had about Salat ad-Duha. In other words he still held to the notion Islam allows good innovations to be incorporated into it. And even if he had disavowed the notion that Islam allows good innovation he cannot overrule the Prophetic teaching in this regard:“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] Conclusion: It is not logical to assume, Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware Salat ad-Duha is Prophetic Sunnah, when there is no evidence to establish it and the only ‘evidence’ on which is is assumed establishes nothing other than; it is Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had changed his opinion later in his life regarding Salat ad-Duha of congregation not being innovation even then his earlier judgment would be based on Islamic understanding; Islam allows and has introduced provisions to incorporate good innovations into it. And there was/is no evidence that he disavowed this teaching of Islam. And if the, impossible, strikes than the Prophetic principle telling of reward for introducing good Sunnah in Islam is suffient proof against him. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] “Narrated Mujahid: Somebody came to the house of Ibn Umar and told him that Allah's Messenger had entered the Ka`ba. Ibn Umar said, "I went in front of the Ka`ba and found that Allah's Messenger had come out of the Ka`ba and I saw Bilal standing by the side of the gate of the Ka`ba. I said: 'O Bilal! Has Allah's Apostle prayed inside the Ka`ba?' Bilal replied in the affirmative. I said: 'Where?' He replied: 'Between these two pillars and then he came out and offered a two rak`at prayer in front of the Ka`ba.' "Abu Abdullah said: Abu Huraira said: "The Prophet advised me to offer two rak`at of Duha prayer." Itban (bin Malik) said: "Allah's Messenger and Abu Bakr came to me after sunrise and we aligned behind the Prophet and offered two rak`at." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H268]

Introduction: Muslims believe, a witness is he/she who has seen/heard the events unfold in their presence. And it is due to this we believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness on day of judgment because he would have heard/seen the events regarding which he will be called to witness. Contrary to belief of Muslims some believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness without ever having seen/heard the events. And they believe to be a truthfull witness it is not fundamentally important that a person hears/sees events. Instead one can bear witness on account of being informed by truthfull person/people. They present various evidences to justify their un-Islamic notion in order to refute Islamic belief of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a Shahid, or hearing/seeing type of witness. Please refer to the following article, it exposes the methodological error for using such evidence, here. 0.0 - Evidence Employed Anti-Islam Eliment: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever performs Wudu' and does it well, then says: " أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ" eight gates of Paradise will be opened for him, and he may enter through whichever one he wishes.'" [Ref: Nisai, B1, H148] This Hadith indicates merit of saying after Wudhu:أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ . In light of this Hadith there are Muslims who say, I bear witness none is worthy of worship except Allah and I bear witness Muhammad is His servant and Messenger. In our call to prayer (i.e. Azhan) the words narrated are – repetition ommitted -: “Allah is the Greatest! (…) I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah. (…) I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger Allah. (…) Come to the Prayer. (…) Come to the prosperity. (…) Allah is the Most Great. (…) None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B3, H709] The Mu’azzin (i.e. caller), and Muslims generally say: I bear witness none is worthy of worship except Allah (i.e. أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لَا إِلٰهَ إِلَّا ٱلله). And also testify saying: I bear witness Muhammad is Messenger of Allah (i.e. أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ ٱلله). 0.1 - Anti-Islamic Reasoning Against Station Of Shahid/Shaheed: The above evidence establishes: To be a truthful witness it is not fundamental requirement to be a first hand witness. A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted. Therefore your belief of Hadhir Nazir is refuted because it is based on principle; to be a truthful witness one must hear/see the events regarding which he will testify. 1.0 – Believing In What Allah And What Prophet Taught: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs the Muslims to believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in following verse: "Believe in Allah and His Messenger, the unlettered Prophet." [Ref:7:158] "We sent you as a witness and a bringer of good news and a warner so that they might believe in Allah and His Messenger." [Ref: 48:8/9] Other verses of Quran state Muslims are instructed to believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) and what sent down with him in form of Book: “So believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Qur'an which We have sent down. And Allah is Acquainted with what you do.” [Ref: 64:8] “O you who have believed, believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book that He sent down upon His Messenger and the Scripture which He sent down before.” [Ref: 4:136] Part of believing in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the Quran is to testify; there is no Ilah except Allah, and Prophet Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. 1.1 - The Witnessing Of Muslims To Ilahiyyah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Say: "What thing is the most great in witness?" Say: "Allah is witness between me and you. This Qur'an has been revealed to me that I may there with warn you and whomsoever it may reach. Can you verily bear witness that besides Allah there are other Alihah (i.e. gods)?" Say "I bear no (such) witness!" Say: "But in truth He is the only one Ilah. And truly I am innocent of what you join in worship with Him." [Ref: 6:19] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gives the instruction for correct answer: “There is no god but He: That is the witness of Allah, His angels, and those endued with knowledge, standing firm on justice. There is no god but He, the Exalted in Power, the Wise." [Ref: 3:18] In this verse there are two types of witnessing indicated: i) witnessing of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) about His Ilahiyyah, ii) witnessing of angels and those who have been enriched with knowledge of Prophet Muhammad revelation (i.e. Quran). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has bore witness/testified about non-existance of another god beside Him. His witnessing is of hearing/seeing type of witness because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is all-hearing and all-seeing. The angels and men enriched with knowledge they testify/witness to it because they have been instructed to believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and by the revealed book (i.e. Quran). And in this context the relevent words of call to prayer serves the objective of affirming one’s belief in uniqueness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 1.2 - The Witnessing Of Muslims To Risalah: Coming to affirmation of Messenger-ship of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Non-Muslims recited, and in following example Thumama Bin Uthal (i.e. Sumamah bin Usal) recited the following phrase to convert to Islam: "I testify that None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, and also testify that Muhammad is His Apostle!” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H658] And this is indication that testification of such type are mere affirmation of one’s belief in uniqueness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and affirmation of one’s belief; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) chose Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as His Mesenger. In the following verse it is recorded that Munafiqeen bore witness that Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), first Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) bears witness to truth of Prophet Muhammad’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) claim of Messenger-ship, and then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states they, the Munafiqeen, are lieing:“When the hypocrites come to you: They say: "We testify that you are the Messenger of Allah." And Allah knows that you are His Messenger, and Allah testifies that the hypocrites are liars.” [Ref: 63:1] 2.0 – Witnessing Is Connected With Belief: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) connected their witnessing/testifying with their belief, and to be precise lack of belief. The reason given why their testification is termed as lie is given in the following verse: “That is because they believed, and then they disbelieved; so their hearts were sealed over, and they do not understand.” [Ref: 63:3] So Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) rejects their statement, "We testify that you are the Messenger of Allah .", because they believed in Messenger-ship of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and then disbelieved in Islam but continued to pretend that they are Muslims. Expressing the same differently -: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) took their witnessing in meaning of belief as in: "We believe that you are the Messenger of Allah." Yet they had no belief to support their statement so Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said: “And Allah knows that you are His Messenger, and Allah testifies that the hypocrites are liars.” “That is because they believed, and then they disbelieved; so their hearts were sealed over, and they do not understand.” [Ref: 63:3] This establishes that bearing witness regarding Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Messengers, or anything else, or to which he/she is not, or cannot be actual eye witness, is witnessing of faith/belief of one’s belief, which we are instructed to affirm by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Muslims. This would be similar to how the Hawariyoon of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) testified of their belief: “And when I revealed to Al-Hawariyyun to believe in Me and My Messenger, they said: "We believe. And bear witness that we are muslims." [Ref: 5:111] 3.0 - Truthful Witness And False Witness: If a Muslim states the following believing he is first-hand witness (i.e. hearing/seeing type of witness) then he has bore a false witness: “I bear witness [as a first hand witness] that there is none worthy of worship except Allah. I bear witness [as a first hand witness] that Muhammad is the Messenger Allah.” Note the above statement is completely inaccurate because ‘truthful person’ is bearing witness as a first-hand witness to something which ‘truthful person’ isn’t first-hand witness because it entails hearing/seeing, all, creation, including Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and His actions.[1] If a person states the following with full knowledge of personal belief and with intention of affirming personal belief then his witnessing is truthful: “I bear witness [with full knowledge and with intention of affirming my belief] that there is none worthy of worship except Allah. I bear witness [with full knowledge and with intention of affirming my belief] that Muhammad is the Messenger Allah.” This statement is absolutely correct because truthful witness is bearing witness about his belief inteachings of Islam. And you will agree anyone who bears witness to the Shahadatayn (i.e. two witnessing) believing he/she is first-hand witness told a odious lie and such witnessing is to be rejected. Truthful witnessing is if a Muslim bears witness to own belief. Substantiating fact is that person uttering these words does not have personal knowledge to qualify him to be a hearing/seeing type of witness hence by default it should be seen as; statement of personal belief, or in other words; witnessing of personal belief. 3.1 – Refuting The Innovated Principle Of Witnessing: The evidence which you employed only establishes there are two possibilities for being a witness when affirming Shahadatayn: i) first-hand witness, ii) bearing witness of one’s own belief. And the one who bears witness to it as a first-hand witness lies and a Muslim who does so affriming his belief in Shahadatayn can only bear witness truth. I quote: “To be a truthful witness it is not fundamental requirement to be a first hand witness.” Your statement is clearly against established and reasoned position because even witnessing of Shahadatayn is first-hand witnessing. Undeniably, to be a truthful witness, one must be first-hand witness regarding events which he/she testifies of. I quote: “A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth, without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted.” First of all this principle is batil (i.e. false) because there is no corraborating evidence to establish this. And the evidence you used does not support it and this was sufficiently demonstrated. Any person, truthful/liar, can bear witness to a truth, such as Shahadatayn, without being first-hand witness and their testimony would be truthful becausee it is of person’s belief. 3.2 – Failure Of Principle – Truthful Witnesses Bearing Witness To Truth: Your principle was interpreted in light of the evidences you employed but your objective was to use this, unestablished/unsubstantiated, principle to negate the validity of Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. And this can only be done if your, unestablished/unsubstantiated, principle is for general use, so lets address this principle of yours:“A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth, without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted.”A Hadith records, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told: “A Prophet will come on the Day of Resurrection accompanied by one man, and a Prophet will come accompanied by two men, or more than that. Then his people will be called and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ And they will say: ‘No!’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’” [Ref: Ibn Maajah, B37, H4284] This is completely against your principle which states, witnessing of a truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, without being first-hand witness is truthful, and is to be accepted. Yet this Hadith establishes that a truthful witness, a Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), who had heard/seen the events as first-hand witness does, testifies in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), that he delivered the Message entrusted to him. But Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the all-knower and all-seer enquires: “Who will bear witness for you?” And in response he would say: “Muhammad and his ummah!” Note when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) didn’t accept the testimony of a Prophet who had witnessed events he testified about how can you even contemplate He would accept testimony of people who were not first-hand witnesses to the events? According to your principle if testimony is to be accepted then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) should readily accept the testimony of Prophet against his own Ummah. Not only the mentioned Prophet meets all the criterias metnioned in your principle but exceedes the requirement of your principle because he is actual witness. This proves your principle is invalid. 3.3 - A Valid Counter Argument And A Response: You could expand your principle to add the underlined: “… despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted if he is not a party in dispute.” And then argue; he was a party therefore his witnessing was rejected but if he wasn’t a party then even if the mentioned Prophet wasn’t actual witness his testimony will be accepted, and this argument is respectable but your selective application of correct principles isn’t. Firstly, In another article, linked, it was established witnessing required to establish a criminal act is of hearing/seeing type. You cannot apply some of court precedure and reject others after all judgment day is the grandest court to be established to judg disputes. Disputant being unable to bear witness in his/her own defence is to be taken with criteria that truthful witness is one who bears witness of events which has been seen/heard by witness. Secondly, Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is mentioned in Quran as, just/balanced Ummah, as such Ummah will be asked to bear witness in defence of the mentioned Prophet: “’Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes!’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’” [Ref: Ibn Maajah, B37, H4284] The just nation, the balanced nation of last and final Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness in defence of the mentioned Prophet. And I quote: “A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth, without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted [if he is not a party in dispute].” Now if your principle conformed to teaching of Islam then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would have accepted their testimony. 3.4 – Prophet Muhammad Bears Witness: But instead Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask them, how do you know this Prophet delivered the message and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had informed them. Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be called to bear witness in defence of the mentioned Prophet and he will bear witness – as mentioned in following Hadith: “So, I and my followers will stand as witnesses for him.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H555] Note the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness first and then RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness over his own Ummah: “That is the words of Allah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” (Ref: 2:143) [Ref: Ibn Maajah, B37, H4284] This establishes that if your principle was valid then witnessing would have stopped at the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Ummah as whole is upon justice and balance. Conclusion: We Muslims bear witness to Ilahiyyah and Risalah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because this is teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and it also is Prophetic Sunnah. A truthful witness in Shar’ri terms is one who has seen/heard the events to which he bears witness about. To be an eye witness over the Shahadatayn the requirement is; an individual is able to see/hear all and testify, I bear witness none is worthy of worship except Allah, and be witness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) appointing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as His Messenger and this is impossible. The only possibility, believable, and true understanding of Shahadatayn is that a person is bearing witness to his/her own belief by saying, أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ. And this witnessing is of first-hand witness. And witnessing is connected with belief as the verses 63:1/3 demonstrate and therefore saying, I testify, is akin to saying, I believe. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] The reason behind this is that to be witness to Wahdaniyyah (i.e. Oneness) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as mentioned in, أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ , one must be aware of, all, creation to testify as a first-hand witness. Witness on actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because if one claims that he is first-hand witness then he must have been witness upon the event of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being confered with the role of Messenger of Allah.