کمیونٹی میں تلاش کریں

Introduction: According to Ahadith the collection of Quran into a single book was a praiseworthy innovation. Shaikh Abu Rumaysah of Salafi/Wahhabi sect believes otherwise and has penned/typed a refutation against Muslims. Apart from citing clear evidence which establishes the companions considered the collection of Quran in single book format as a good Sunnah servant will also directly address the key points of Shaikh Abu Rumaysah. This topic has already has been addressed in another article, here. Shaikh Abu Rumaysah’s Written Material: “The collection of the Qur'an into one book after the death of Rasulallah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) and the statement of Abu Bakr, "How can we do that which was not done by the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam." [Ref: Bukhari] The proof, according to them, being that the companions collected the Qur'an in a book form after the time of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) without him enjoining it. Hence it being an innovation which the companions agreed upon as being good. Upon closer examination this is actually evidence against these people, not for them. When Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) came to Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and said that the Qur'an had to be collected as a book. He did not argue on the basis of bid'ah hasanah, rather he argued on the basis of necessity because many of the people who had memorized the Qur'an by heart were being martyred. Therefore the Qur'an was in danger of being lost and hence it had to be collected in book form. When Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) replied, he did not say, "Oh yes I agree with you, this is a bid'ah hasanah," Rather he argued that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) did not do this, so how could they? It was only after the necessity was made clear to him that he agreed. So, in conclusion, the collection of the Qur'an as a book was something the companions agreed upon due to necessity, not considering it to a good bid'ah.” [Ref: MuslimConverts] Hadith On Subject Of Compiling Quran In Book Format: “Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: Abu Bakr sent for me owing to the large number of casualties in the battle of Al-Yamama, while `Umar was sitting with him. Abu Bakr said: `Umar has come to me and said, 'A great number of Qaris of the Holy Qur'an were killed on the day of the battle of Al-Yamama, and I am afraid that the casualties among the Qaris of the Qur'an may increase on other battle-fields whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I consider it advisable that you should have the Qur'an collected.' I said, 'How dare I do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?’ Umar said: هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ (i.e. By Allah, it is good). `Umar kept on pressing me for that till Allah opened my chest for that for which He had opened the chest of `Umar and I had in that matter, the same opinion as `Umar had." Abu Bakr then said to me (Zaid), "You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the divine inspiration for Allah's Messenger. So you should search for the fragmentary scripts of the Qur'an and collect it (in one Book)." Zaid further said: By Allah, if Abu Bakr had ordered me to shift a mountain among the mountains from one place to another it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said (to `Umar and Abu Bakr), "How can you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?" Abu Bakr said, هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ (i.e. By Allah, it is beneficial.) Zaid added: So he (Abu Bakr) kept on pressing me for that until Allah opened my chest for that for which He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and `Umar, and I had in that matter, the same opinion as theirs. So I started compiling the Qur'an by collecting it from the leafless stalks of the date-palm tree and from the pieces of leather and hides and from the stones, and from the chests of men (who had memorized the Qur'an). I found the last verses of Sirat-at-Tauba: "Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves--' (9.128/129) from Khuza`ima or Abi Khuza`ima and I added to it the rest of the Sura. The manuscripts of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him. Then it remained with `Umar till Allah took him unto Him, and then with Hafsa bint `Umar.” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] Judge By Revelation And What Prophet Taught: Companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) judged, and the Muslim scholars continue to judge by what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has revealed, and what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained thereof. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) provided principles which help the scholars of Islam to issue rulings regarding issues which have not been directly addressed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The collection of Quran in book format was one such issue which was not instructed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) neither by the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hence the basis of collecting the Quran had to be established via ijtihadi reasoning which requires in-depth knowledge about the principles which can be employed to aid correct understanding. Something About The Hadith Quoted Above: Readers should be aware that Ahadith do not always provide comprehensive account of the events which they are narrating. Sometime a Hadith is briefed by a narrator, and in another version of Hadith, another narrator may add more detail. Sometimes details are completely eliminated. Hadith of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) suggesting gathering of fragments to compile a book indicates part of material is not narrated and evidence of this is found in the following: “Umar kept on pressing me for that till Allah opened my chest for that for which He had opened the chest of `Umar and I had in that matter, the same opinion as `Umar had." [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] As far as my knowledge, there is no detailed account of what Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to convince him it is good to compile Quran as a book. Surely, he did not repeat again and again: هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ“, until he annoyed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to submission. He must have argued his case employing prophetic guidance as evidence to strengthen his case. What is sure, whatever his argument was it was based on teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) pressing Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not in form of violence. The Islamic Position On Gathering Of Quran As A Book: After battle of Al Yamama which was fought against the Musailmah the liar Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) approached Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and suggested that Quran be collected in book format. Hadhrat Abu Bakr replied to him by asking: “How dare I do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?” It is important to point out his reluctance was not due to his disinterest in preserving Quran, or spreading of message of Islam. His not wanting to collect the fragmentary Quran into a single book has to be understood in light of subject of innovation and his reluctance was due to his fear of introducing a reprehensible innovation. In simple language Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said, how can he dare to innovate something, such as collecting of Quran in a book, which the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not do? Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) reasons with him by saying: “Umar said: هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ (i.e. By Allah, it is good/beneficial).” Note, such high caliber companions would judge all instances of their life by what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed, and what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had taught. Therefore statement of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) has to be understood in light of teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Islamic position is, that Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of the following statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and on basis of this he argued collection of Quran is [Sunnah] Khayr (i.e. good), here: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect..” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And his persistence paid and Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) eventually realized the importance of collecting Quran and recognized collecting Quran is good Sunnah, and commissioned it. Shaikh Abu Rumaysah Argument Against Islamic Position: Shaikh presents position of Muslims on subject of gathering of Quran into a book format: “The proof, according to them, being that the companions collected the Qur'an in a book form after the time of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) without him enjoining it.” Then he goes on to present the position of Muslims in his own words: “Hence it [is] being an innovation which the companions agreed upon as being good.” Responding the position Shaikh continues to writes: “Upon closer examination this is actually evidence against these people, not for them.” Shaikh’s closer inspection yields that Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) argued on basis of necessity and not on grounds of Bid’ah/Sunnah Hasanah, here: “When Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) came to Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and said that the Qur'an had to be collected as a book. He did not argue on the basis of bid'ah hasanah, rather he argued on the basis of necessity because many of the people who had memorized the Qur'an by heart were being martyred. Therefore the Qur'an was in danger of being lost and hence it had to be collected in book form.” Shaikh cites death of companions as being possible cause of Quran being lost and states this was the reason on basis of which fragmentary Quran had to be gathered in book format with intention of preserving Quran. Issue Of Danger Of Quran Being Lost Due To Death Qaris: Shaikh argued Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) suggested gathering of fragmentary Quranic texts to compile a book because he feared the Quran maybe lost and this is established from the text of Hadith in discussion: “… and I am afraid that the casualties among the Qaris of the Qur'an may increase on other battle-fields whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost.” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] Other alternatives to compiling were also available, such as assigning new roles to the Hufadh in battle field rather than combative roles, or encouraging others to memorize to Quran, including the children and women folk. Death of seventy Hufadh was not major loss of lives to threaten disappearance of book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because there were thousands who had memorized the Quran in life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If there was ever chance of such disappearance, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have provided precise instructions for its compilation into book format. In fact Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) took the responsibility of preserving the Quran Himself: “Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian.” [Ref: 15:9] Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) thought about disappearance of Quran but maybe not realized the possibility of textual corruption and variant readings. Compiling Quran in book format the Quran was exposed to new dangers. The issue of preservation of Quran was by writing is not definitive because the Jews had Taurah written yet it has been completely distorted and lost. Written or memorization both were risk based and both came with benefits. Memorization, hard copies or combination of both, none of these were sure guarantee for preservation of Quran. Even if the written route was not taken, and Quran only had been committed to memory, deaths of Hufadh, or persecution would cause the Quran to be lost because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would not allow his promise to be falsified. Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had good intention and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will reward him according to his intention and the good he achieved will earn him great reward. Yet it must be said, ground of his justification was invalid. Compiling Of Quranic Fragments Into Book Is Part Of Islam: First of all, Shaikh himself quoted a statement of Imam Shafi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) which is also being presented, here: "Whoever declares something to be good, he has declared it part of Shari’ah." [Ref: ar-Risaala] Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) declared gathering of Quranic fragments into one book as something good and evidence of it is here: “I said to `Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" `Umar said: هَذَا وَاللَّهِ خَيْر. (i.e. By Allah, this is good.) `Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which `Umar had realized." [Ref: Bukhari, B61, H509] In other words, Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) declared gathering of Quran into book format as a matter of Shari’ah. Note law of Shari’ah is Islam. Therefore what is part of Shari’ah cannot be judged on basis of necessity alone, and cannot be made part of religion of Islam on basis of necessity. There has to be a mechanism in Islam which allows it to be introduced into religion and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits it will be established. Necessity In Religion Is Not Mother Of Do Thou As You Wilt: Every necessity has to be met with ways which religion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has permitted. A man fought extremely well against the polytheists in a war but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had informed the companions he will be in hell. Eventually he was injured and could not tolerate pain and committed suicide hence earning hell fire for eternity.[1] His requirement was to alleviate the extreme pain he is suffering and this necessitated medicine not suicide. Point here is, that necessity by itself is not valid basis of doing something. Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced into Islam, or it should be said, Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made part of Shari’ah something which was not part of it. How could it be accepted by Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and how could he argue to compile fragments of Quran when there was no basis for making something part of religion in Shari’ah? Both these companions and generally all of the companions all agreed upon it because there was something in prophetic guidance which allowed it to be introduced into Islam. Statement Of Hadhrat Abu Bakr Is Evidence Against Position Of Muslims: Shaikh writes the incident mentioned in the Hadith is evidence against the Muslim position: “Upon closer examination this is actually evidence against these people, not for them.” Servant speculates Shaikh wrote the following underlined which he deemed evidence against us: “When Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) replied, he did not say, "Oh yes I agree with you, this is a bid'ah hasanah," Rather he argued that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) did not do this, so how could they? It was only after the necessity was made clear to him that he agreed.” Shaikh is referring to the following words of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) found in above quoted Hadith: "How can you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?" [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] Firstly, question needs to be asked, why are these words against us? If these words are against us because Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asking, how he could introduce a Sunnah which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not introduce then please inform me how could he agree to innovation being made part of religion on basis of necessity? Did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) say, on basis of necessity one can introduce innovation, and on basis of necessity innovation will be accepted? If necessity legitimizes actions which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not do then necessity is mother of all innovations. Coming to necessity argument, doing good deeds is a necessity to gain mercy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on day of judgment. Celebrating birth day of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is amalgamation of Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Due to necessity of doing good deeds, celebration of Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) should be agreed by you, but do you? Secondly, if statement of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not something which you considered against us but considered the argument which you based on it (i.e. argument of necessity) then answer the following question: Do you agree that Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asking, how can I introduce an innovation which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not introduce as Sunnah. You’re very learned, and hopefully reasonable, and confidence is high enough to say, your learn-ship will agree his reluctance was due fearing that he may be introducing an innovation. In this context, considering your position of necessity forcing Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to agree with Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) means he agreed that necessity is valid ground for introducing an innovation. This was the reason on which servant speculated that meat of matter against the Muslim position was the statement of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and it is because of this that the circle starts again with: How could he agree to innovation being made part of religion on basis of necessity? Did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) say, on basis of necessity one can introduce innovation, and on basis of necessity innovation will be accepted? Answering The Questions On Behalf Of Muslims: Necessity of compiling fragmentary Quran into a single book format by itself is fine understanding but the context in which the Shaikh presents lacks the proper foundation from Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Our Shaikh cannot present the foundation because if he does so the dispute will be no more. There is no Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has explicitly stated one can introduce innovation into to religion on basis of necessity because in religion of Islam necessity is not basis of making something permissible or impermissible. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did say: “Messenger of Allah said, "Whoever guides someone to virtue will be rewarded equivalent to him who practices that good action." [Ref: Muslim, B1, H173] “Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed, he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in their slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] If one judges fairly, one can see Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) guided Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to good deed by reasoning with him to compile Quran from fragments and from memory of Hufadh hence he will be rewarded. Both these companions worked together and reasoned with another companion who was then given the task of compile Quran from texts as well as memory of Hufadh. So a good Sunnah was introduced and those who read from this compiled Quran all earn equal reward to the one who compiled, and the one who initiated the idea, and the one who ordered the task to be carried out, and those who helped. Tackling The Key Points Of Shaikh By Horns: Shaikh believes, Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) none of them believed gathering fragmented Quran into a book is a good innovation and this is misguided understanding. The Ahadith record Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said: “I said to `Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" `Umar said: هَذَا وَاللَّهِ خَيْر. (i.e. By Allah, this is good.) `Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which `Umar had realized." [Ref: Bukhari, B61, H509] Another version has the following words: “Then I said (to `Umar and Abu Bakr), "How can you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?" Abu Bakr said, هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ (i.e. By Allah, it is beneficial.) Zaid added: So he (Abu Bakr) kept on pressing me for that until Allah opened my chest for that for which He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and…” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] Note, he declared the compiling the Quran from fragmentary and memory as Khayr. This word is very important because it was used by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in context of innovating Sunnah Khayr (i.e. good Sunnah) in the following two Ahadith: “Whoever initiates a Sunnah خَيْرًا (i.e. good Sunnah) that is followed, he will receive a perfect reward for that, and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. " [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H204] “Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed, then for him is a reward, and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] This is clear proof that Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was guiding Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) toward these Ahadith. Hadhrat Abu Bakr’s Reluctance And Hadhrat Umar’s Justification: When seventy Hufadh died in battle of Al Yamama then Hadhrat Umar approached and urged Hadhrat Abu Bakr to compile the Quran from various sources to preserve it. Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) replied: “How dare I do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] He said this because he feared introducing a reprehensible innovation into religion of Islam regarding which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: "And whoever introduces an بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ (i.e. reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] Regarding the ones who introduced the reprehensible innovation and those who follow it Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “And whoever introduces a سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. reprehensible practice) that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) replied by saying that this is a Khayr: “Therefore I consider it advisable that you should have the Qur'an collected.' I said, 'How dare I do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?’ Umar said: هُوَ وَاللَّهِ خَيْرٌ (i.e. By Allah, it is good). `Umar kept on pressing me for that till Allah opened my chest for that for …” [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H301] By he was referring to those Ahadith which state about Sunnah Khayr being good and reward worthy: “Whoever initiates a Sunnah خَيْرًا (i.e. good Sunnah) that is followed, he will receive a perfect reward for that, and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. " [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H204] “Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed, then for him is a reward and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] In other words he told Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) that the task of compiling Quran is a good Sunnah which is reward worthy. One version uses the word Sunnah Salihah to mean good Sunnah: "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good practice) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] Yet another version has the words Sunnah Hasanah: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good practice in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Note, the Hadith states, he who introduces into Islam, this is indication that what is being introduced is not already part of Islam, and what is not part of Islam is innovation.[2] It was this proof which convinced Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) that compiling Quran was introducing good Sunnah/Bid’ah into Islam. Conclusion: Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) debated with Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to persuade him to compile Quran from various sources. Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was reluctant due to fearing innovation but Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) managed to persuade him to commission the collection of Quran on grounds of it being a Sunnah Khayr (i.e. good Sunnah). Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “Narrated Sa`d bin Sahl As-Sa`idi: The Prophet looked at a man fighting against the pagans and he was one of the most competent persons fighting on behalf of the Muslims. The Prophet said, "Let him who wants to look at a man from the dwellers of the (Hell) Fire, look at this (man)." Another man followed him and kept on following him till he (the fighter) was injured and, seeking to die quickly, he placed the blade tip of his sword between his breasts and leaned over it till it passed through his shoulders (i.e., committed suicide)." The Prophet added, "A person may do deeds that seem to the people as the deeds of the people of Paradise while in fact, he is from the dwellers of the (Hell) Fire: and similarly a person may do deeds that seem to the people as the deeds of the people of the (Hell) Fire while in fact, he is from the dwellers of Paradise. Verily, the (results of) deeds done depends upon the last actions." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H500] - [2] For full detail read the following article which explains in great detail with corroborating evidence to prove Sunnah in this Hadith means innovation, here.

Introduction: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, whosoever introduces a good Sunnah into Islam which is followed, the innovator and the follower both will receive equal reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). On basis of this Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) created room for introducing innovations into religion of Islam. Anti-Muslim elements argue that in context of Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was stating one who revives a Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and those who follow it will receive equal reward. Note Servant has produced numerous refutations against this claim hence it will not be addressed in here. Rather Servant will utilize the linguistic meaning of بدعة to establish Islamic position. Note, this article continues some aspects which were neglected in the following article, here. Linguistic Meaning Of بدعة In Light Of Quran And Ahadith: Linguistically بدعة means innovation, something which does not have precedent. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to say: قُلْ مَا كُنتُ بِدْعًا مِّنْ الرُّسُلِ (i.e. “Say: "I am not a new thing amongst the Messengers.") (Ref: 46:9). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is told to say to disbelievers; that his Messenger-ship is not unique/innovative but there are precedents (i.e. Prophet Ibrahim alayhis salaam and others). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states in another verse He is the: بَدِيعُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ (i.e. “The originator of the heavens and the earth") (Ref: 2:117/6:101) Note Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created the universe and earth without relying upon a preceding example. Example of innovation without precedent is incident of a son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) killing his brother: “Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "None is killed unjustly, but the first son of Adam will have a part of its burden." Sufyan said: A part of its blood because he was مَنْ سَنَّ الْقَتْلَ أَوَّلاً (i.e. the first to establish the tradition of murdering)." [Ref: Bukhari, B83, H6] Words of Sufyan (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) are attested in another Hadith: “It was narrated from Abdullah that: The Prophet said: "No person is killed wrongfully, but a share of responsibility for his blood will be upon the first son of Adam, because he was, أَوَّلُ مَنْ سَنَّ الْقَتْلَ (i.e. the first one to set the precedence of killing).” [Ref: Nisa’i, B37, H3990] Shar’i meaning of بدعة is which does not have a precedent in text of Quran or Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and it is of two types blameworthy and praiseworthy. Depending upon what the innovation is composed of, it can be good or bad. Murder Of Son Of Adam (alayhis salaam) Is Innovation: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "None is killed unjustly, but the first son of Adam will have a part of its burden." Sufyan said: A part of its blood because he was مَنْ سَنَّ الْقَتْلَ أَوَّلاً (i.e. the first to establish the tradition of murdering)." [Ref: Bukhari, B83, H6] “It was narrated from Abdullah that: The Prophet said: "No person is killed wrongfully, but a share of responsibility for his blood will be upon the first son of Adam, because he was, أَوَّلُ مَنْ سَنَّ الْقَتْلَ (i.e. the first one to set the precedence of killing).” [Ref: Nisa’i, B37, H3990] On the basis of Hadith of son of Adam (alayhis salaam) it can be said that Sunna does not require precedent because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used the word Sunna for a murder which had no precedent and innovation does not have precedent either in Shari’ah. Hence the word Sunna means innovation and the murderer introduced an innovation. His Sunna should be understood to mean innovation even though Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used Sunna (i.e. practice). Another proof that he introduced innovation is the principle used to judge his action Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, without that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] So therefore the son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salaam) introduced innovation of murdering. Note, Shaikh used the word bad Sunnah even though it is obvious from the text of Hadith that murderous act was committed which was without precedent, hence appropriate translation should have been innovation. Establishing Basis Of Proof On Ahadith Of Good And Bad Sunnah: Sunnah linguistically means, way, precedent and practice. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regarding good Sunnah are: “Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed, then for him is a reward and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] Another Hadith establishes that good Sunnah for which the reward is being told is being made part of Islam: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Reward being told is of good Sunnah which is not part of Islam but is being made part of Islam. In other words, the Sunnah being introduced into Islam has no precedent in Islam, yet reward for it is guaranteed. Regarding bad Sunnah Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And whoever introduces a سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. reprehensible practice) that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] Once again, the burden of sin being equally shared is for a bad Sunnah which is not part of Islam but being made part of Islam: “And he who introduces an فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. evil precedent in Islam), there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Proof That Ahadith Good And Bad Sunnah Are About Innovations: It is established that word بدعة means something new without a precedent and the word سنة is used for Sunnah of first murder which did not have a precedent. Hence it is linguistically possible to use word سنة to mean بدعة. In context of reprehensible Sunnah, the word بدعة is used: “And whoever introduces a سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. reprehensible practice) that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] "And whoever introduces a بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ (i.e. reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] “Whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210] This is proof that both words can be used interchangeably to mean same thing. To further support it, note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “And he who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. evil precedent in Islam), there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] That which is not part of Islam via precedent is innovation, therefore evil Sunnah in this Hadith is referring to evil innovations. Continuing, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] This means reward is for a Sunnah which is not part of Islam but being made part of Islam. In other words reward is for good Sunnah which does not have precedent in Islam. Considering the meaning of بدعة we have to conclude the reward is for introducing a good innovation and for those who follow it. As proof of Islamic position; innovation can be good, note the words of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in following Hadith: “… that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abd al-Qari said, "I went out with Umar ibn al-Khattab in Ramadan to the mosque and the people there were spread out in groups. Some men were praying by themselves, whilst others were praying in small groups. Umar said, 'By Allah! It would be better in my opinion if these people gathered behind one reciter.' So he gathered them behind Ubayy ibn Kab. Then I went out with him another night and the people were praying behind their Qur'an reciter. Umar said, نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. How excellent this innovation is!) But what you miss while you are asleep is better than what you watch in prayer.' He meant the end of the night, and people used to watch the beginning of the night in prayer." [Ref: Muwatta Malik, B6, H3] Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) gathered the people to perform Taraweeh prayer under leadership of a single Imam. His innovation was followed by the companions in month of Ramadhan prompting him to say that his innovation was excellent. Ever since Hadhrat Umar gathering the companions under a single Imam it has been practiced during the entire duration of Ramadhan. This amounts to roughly thirty days, yet prophetic Sunnah is of three days only, therefore he is source of an innovation which has no precedent in prophetic Sunnah. Warning About The Distortion Of Texts Of Islam: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said that you will follow the way of Jews and Christians: “Narrated Abu Sa`id: The Prophet said, "You will follow the wrong ways, of your predecessors so completely and literally that if they should go into the hole of a lizard, you too will go there." We said, "O Allah's Messenger! Do you mean the Jews and the Christians?" He replied, "Whom else?" [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H662] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states regarding the Jews: “And verily, among them is a party who distort the Book with their tongues, so that you may think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book, and they say: "This is from Allah," but it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie against Allah while they know it.” [Ref: 3:78] Do not follow the footsteps of Yahood and distort the texts of Islam by changing the meaning of words, no good will be result of it. It is better for you to submit to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and authority given to his Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then to rebel against it. The straight path of Islam has been shown to you, so walk upon it. Aspire to be from amongst the Jammah (i.e. group) of Muslims and do not oppose it. Conclusion: Words سنة and بدعة are used interchangeably to mean innovation in Ahadith of equal reward and sin. بدعة means something without a precedent. In the Ahadith of good and bad سنة the reward is being told for Sunnahs which lack a precedent in Islam hence the usage of سنة is in meaning of innovation. Therefore the reward being told is about good innovations and the blame of sin is for bad innovations. Wama Alayna Ilal Balaghul Mubeen Muhammed Ali Razavi

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

Introduction: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been quoted as saying in Ahadith, every innovation is misguidance. Muslims believe literally every innovation is not misguidance. Only every reprehensible innovation is misguidance and every reprehensible innovation is composed of components which are violating the prophetic teaching and contradict spirit of Islam. Contrary to Islamic belief, the anti-Islamic elements believe every innovation in literal sense is innovation even if it is composed of Islamicly sanctioned acts of worship, charity, etc. This is due to their literal interpretation of Hadith and their emphasis on qullu (i.e. every). Hence it is important to establish use of ‘every’ is not in respect of every innovation but ‘every’ has been limited and restricted to reprehensible type of innovations. Also the Ibn Fawzaan quoted renowned scholar to aid his position. He stated collection of Quran into a book and writing and collecting Ahadith into books is not a praiseworthy innovation. Part two can be read, here. Saalih Al Fawzaan And Issue Of Translation: Ibn Fawzaan is a prominent scholar in Saudi Khariji State and member of Board Of Senior Scholars And Member Of Permanent Committee For Fatwah And Research. His works carry weight amongst the Khawarij hence it is crucial his writing is addressed from Islamic perspective and lays bare heretical understandings which he has purposed. Secondly, the translation of Ibn Fawzaan’s work by Maaz Qureshi at times was incoherent and bereft of contextual relevance. The points were poorly conveyed and lacked clarity hence original[1] was altered for sake of clarity by adding words and rephrasing sentences. Also discussion regarding Taraweeh prayer was separated into parts. Between which the subject of compilation of Quran was discussed. So material was connected with the relevant discussion and material regarding compilation of Quran was added after Taraweeh prayer discussion. Note, textual criticism skills were employed to reconstruct the message being conveyed in original Arabic and alterations were not result of reading Arabic text of original essay. Hence there is possibility errors might have been made in re-constructing of his point of view. I seek refuge in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) from misguidance of Satan the cursed. In case of errors in representing his view, please do notify me and mistakes will be rectified. Part One: Saalih Al Fawzaan’s Short Essay: “Whoever divides innovation in the religion into good innovation (i.e. bid'ah hasanah), and sinful innovation (i.e. bid'ah Say’yah), then he has committed wrong, and has opposed Prophet’s (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) statement, "Every innovation is a misguidance", because the Messenger (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) ruled that innovation - all of it - is misguidance, and this says that not all innovation is misguidance, rather there is good innovation. Al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab said in his commentary in al Arba'een: 'So his (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) statement, “The best discourse is the Book of Allah, and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and the worst of affairs are those which are newly introduced, for every innovation is an error” is a comprehensive statement, nothing is excluded from it. And this is the greatest principle from the principles of the Religion and it is connected with his (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) following statement, "Whoever invents in this affair of ours, what is not from it, then it is rejected" So whoever invents things and attributes them to the religion, and it does not have an origin in the religion to return to then it is misguidance, and the Religion is free from those things. And equal to that are matters of beliefs, or actions, or statements whether hidden, or manifest.’ [Ref: Jaami'ul 'Uloom Wal Hikam, p. 233] And there is not a proof for them that there is good innovation, except for the statement of Umar (radiallaahu 'anhu) regarding the Taraweeh prayer, "What a good innovation this is!" (i.e. ni'imatul bida'atu hadhihi).”[2] Ibn Rajab’s Definition Of Innovation: Prior to Ibn Fawzaan’s quoted material Ibn Rajab stated: “Regarding the Holy Prophet’s saying: “Beware of newly introduced matters, for every innovation is a straying.” It is a warning to the community against following innovated new matters. He emphasized that with his words, “every innovation is a straying.” [Such type of] innovations are those things which are newly introduced, having no source in the Shari’ah to prove them.” Ibn Rajab believes any practice/belief which is termed as innovation is by default a Shar’ri innovation, and such innovation has no evidence from Quran or Hadith. Yet from his statement one can glimpse that according to Ibn Rajab, an innovation without evidence of Shari’ah is straying innovation, because he connected Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance, to his following statement: “[Such type of] innovations are those things which are newly introduced, having no source in the Shari’ah to prove them.” Of course this is not his actual position rather an in-depth observation. He also stated; an innovated practice/belief with evidence of Shari’ah is not an innovation from Shar’ri perspective, here: “As for whatever has a source in the Shari’ah, thereby establishing it, then it is not an innovation in the [sense of] Shari’ah, even though it might linguistically be an innovation.” And same was repeated bit later: “As for those things in the sayings of the right-acting first generations where they regard some innovations as good, that is only with respect to what are innovations in the linguistic sense, but not in the Shari’ah.” Here Ibn Rajab is gravely mistaken because the scholars of Islam have always considered good innovations to be from perspective of Shari’ah. Shari’ah defines the goodness and evilness of innovations hence what it judges to be good and bad is part of Shari’ah. Before continuing to next point it is important to state that linguistic meaning of innovation is; which is without precedent. Shar’ri meaning of innovation is; which is without precedent in Islam. The important point in is that those scholars who have divided innovation to be good have done so on basis of following Hadith: “Whoever sets a good precedent in Islam, he will have the reward for that, and the reward of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest.” [Ref: Nisa’i, B23, H2555] When something is not part of Islam but it is being part of Islam than innovation is being made part of Islam. This is assertion is supported by linguistic and Shar’ri meaning of innovation. Considering this, meaning of the Hadith is when a good innovation which is not part of Islam is made part of Islam then the one who sets a good innovation in Islam [for others to follow] will receive reward and those who follow his good innovated precedent. Four Important Points Made By Saalih Al Fawzaan: There are four main points in the short essay produced by chief of Khawarij and they are as follow: i) One who divides innovation into categories of praiseworthy and blameworthy innovations has wronged teaching of Islam and opposed the statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). ii) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Use of وَكُلُّ (i.e. and every) in the relevant Hadith is to include everything and nothing is excluded from it hence all innovations are misguidance. iii) There is no proof for good innovation except the statement of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) regarding Taraweeh prayer. iv) Quote from Jami Ul Uloom Wal Hakim of Ibn Rajab Al Hanbali as quoted by Saalih Ibn Fawzaan. Scholars Always Divided Innovation In Two Main Branches: Early Muslim scholars have always and scholars continue to divide innovation to two main categories. Type one, which is composed of Islamicly sanctioned practices/beliefs. Type two, which is composed of Islamicly prohibited practices/beliefs. Type one, has been termed as, praiseworthy, permissible, righteous, guidance, and even termed it linguistic innovation.[3] Type two, has been stated to be, prohibited, evil, misguiding, sinful, and legal innovation.[4] Then these categories are subdivided into many categories.[5] The chief of Khawarij stated one who divides innovation into good and bad has wronged and opposed the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because he believes every newly invented matter, from perspective of Sharia if it is declared as an innovation than it is misguidance. Therefore it is important to point out who according to Ibn Fawzaan’s statement has wronged the religion of Islam and who in Ummah is guilty of opposing the teaching of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The Eminent Scholars Who Wronged And Opposed: Imam Shafi (rahimullah) stated innovations are of two types. The type which contradicts the teaching of Quran, the Sunnah, Hadith and Ijma, such one he classed as misguiding innovation. Concerning the type which does not contradict the teaching of Quran, Sunnah, Ahadith, and Ijma, he classed good and quoted Hadith where Hadhrat Umar (radiallah) had said Taraweeh is good innovation. Following is evidence of Imam Shafi (rahimullah) understanding on subject of innovation: “It was narrated to us by Muhammad ibn Musa ibn al-Fadl who had it narrated to him from Abul-Abbas Al-Asam who said Rabi ibn Sulayman narrated to us from Imam ash-Shafi’s that he said, “Innovated matters in religion are of two kinds: 1) Whatever is innovated and is contradicts the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or Ijma – then this is an innovation of misguidance. 2) Whatever is innovated of good and that does not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And Umar (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) said concerning the night-prayer in the month of Ramadhan: نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what a good innovation this is!) meaning something new not previously present, and if done does not rebut anything which existed before.” [Ref: Reported by al-Bayhaqi in Manaqib ash-Shafi'i, 1/469] Imam Al-Ghazali (rahimullah), Imam Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani (rahimullah), Imam Nawavi (rahimullah), Imam Qurtubi (rahimullah), Muhammad al-Shawkani (Khariji), Imam Suyuti (rahimullah), and countless others defined innovation into praiseworthy and blameworthy. Even Ismail Dehalvi (the apostate) divided innovation into good and bad in his Tazkira Al Ikhwan.[6] Position Of Muslims About Prominent Scholars: In light of Ibn Fawzaan’s statement it can be concluded that he believes the mentioned scholars and all those who divided innovation into good and bad categories are the ones who have wronged and opposed prophetic teaching. Considering this insolence of Ibn Fawzaan, effort is being made to defend the honor of prominent scholars of Islam from the indirect attack by supporting the definition of Muslims. As Muslims we believe, Imam Shafi (rahimullah), Imam Al Ghazali (rahimullah), Imam Ibn Hajar (rahimullah), and Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) scholars are not the ones who have wronged and opposed the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It is Ibn Fawzaan who is opposing the prophetic Sunnah and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills the charge will be established. Valid Difference Of Opinion Over The Definition: It would be too much to say he was unaware of evidence which establishes the understanding of these scholarly giants but it is just and befitting his caliber to say; he is ignorant of their interpretations. Ibn Fawzaan failed to understand; the difference on definition of innovation is a valid difference of opinion and none from these two definitions is blameworthy because the evidence exists for both versions. As Muslims we believe those scholars whose understanding of innovation agrees with Ijtihad of these luminaries, they are upon the truth, like those who pioneered this understanding of innovation. Those who have pioneered the simple definition of innovation and those who employ it they are closer to the truth but missed the mark of perfection. The pioneers of this definition have erred in their Ijtihad and there is no blame upon them for this but only reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because mistakes of Mujtahid are rewarded. Hadith Of Every Innovation Is Misguidance: Ibn Fawzaan quoted the following Hadith: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] And argued the words وَكُلُّ (i.e. and every) are used in the Hadith therefore nothing is excluded from this statement. There will be five approaches to answer this point: i) logical criticism to solve problem, ii) on usage of وَكُلُّ (i.e. and every), iii) concluding remarks regarding usage of ‘every’, iv) explaining the Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with Ahadith which support the positions argued for first and second approach, v) and establishing category of good innovation. Note, out of the four important points of Ibn Fawzaan pointed in the beginning or article, three will be addressed in forth coming material and the last one will be addressed as a separate part. First Approach – The Counter Attack: If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had stated; all of innovations are misguidance literally, without restricting/limiting the meaning of ‘every’ to a specific genre of innovations then questions is: Are books of Ahadith (i.e. Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmadhi etc.) included in this ‘every’ or excluded from ‘every’? If you say they are excluded therefore not innovations, then you have eliminated the foundation of your argument because your argument was ‘every’ used in this Hadith is without Takhsees (i.e. specifics) yet you have made Takhsees in ‘every’ to accommodate the books of Ahadith. We Muslims affirm that ‘every’ is connected with a specific type of innovation and it is not to be understood on its generality. The point is; ‘every innovation’ is not in meaning of ‘absolutely every innovation’ but ‘every innovation’ is used to mean ‘every innovation in a specific context’. What that specific context is, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits will be explained in third approach. Second Approach – The Usage Of Every: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "As for the boat, it belonged to certain men in dire want: they plied on the water: I but wished to render it unserviceable, وَرَاءَهُم مَّلِكٌ يَأْخُذُ كُلَّ سَفِينَةٍ غَصْبًا (i.e. for there was after them a certain king who seized on every boat by force).” [Ref: 18:79] It is stated in the verse that a king has ordered every boat is to be ceased but order was to cease all usable boats. Hence Khidar (alayhis salaam) damaged the boat to prevent the livelihood of boat owner being ceased by inflicting damage which can be repaired with little effort. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And [recall] when Moses prayed for water for his people, so We said, "Strike with your staff the stone." And there gushed forth from it twelve springs, قَدْ عَلِمَ كُلُّ أُنَاسٍ مَّشْرَبَهُمْ (i.e. and every people knew its watering place). "Eat and drink from the provision of Allah, and do not commit abuse on the earth, spreading corruption." [Ref: 2:60] The verse states every people knew where to drink water from when Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) struck the rock with his staff. Yet it was not every people in literal sense of the word but every tribe from the twelve tribes of tribe of Israeel. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “They said, Postpone [the matter of] him and his brother and send among the cities gatherers. Who will bring you every learned magician? يَأْتُوكَ بِكُلِّ سَاحِرٍ عَلِيمٍ (i.e. And the magicians came to Pharaoh). They said, Indeed for us is a reward if we are the dominant." [Ref: 7:111/113] Logistics of undertaking such task at that time would make it impossible to reach every city of earth. Yet the verse says they were sent to every city which is too farfetched. The polytheists in time of Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) sent for emissaries to every major city or to every city of Egypt to gather the best magicians to compete with Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam). Therefore literal reading of every city is not intended. Please bear with an example which would resonate with readers. Ali is carrying valet full of money, credit card, a brand new mobile phone, wearing on his 50 carat gold ring. Thief strikes and says: Hand over everything you have or you going to die. Does the thief want Ali to hand over all that he doesn’t carry with him as well or just what he is carrying with him? All that Ali is carrying at that moment. Third Approach – Summing Up The Findings: The word ‘every’ even though by itself is not limited/restricted and is inclusive of all but when it is used in a restrictive/limiting context then it is no longer on its natural meaning. Rather it is limited and restricted according to the context. Note the word ‘every’ was used but it was limited restricted by circumstances. Similarly in the verses ‘every’ was limited and restricted according to contextual relevance.[7] Hence it could be said, use of word ‘every’ in the following Hadith is not ‘absolutely every’ but in meaning of ‘every in specific context’, here: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Just as the context of verses limit and restrict the meaning of ‘every’ to ‘every in specific context’ the words ‘every innovation’ are limited and restricted by other Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Fourth Approach – Explaining Hadith With Ahadith: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And he who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. evil precedent in Islam), there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Linguistically innovation is what does not have precedent in Quran of Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). What is not part of Islam and is made part of Islam is innovation hence the mentioned Hadith is talking about one who introduces into Islam evil innovation. And tells for him who introduces evil innovation and those who follow his evil innovation will receive equal burden of sin. This understanding of above Hadith is supported by another Hadith found in Tirmadhi, here: "And whoever introduces a بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ (i.e. erroneous innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] In light of this, the following statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not literal: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Rather it should be understood in context of Hadith of ‘evil precedent in Islam’ and ‘erroneous innovation’. Therefore the interpretation of Hadith is as follows: the most evil affairs are the evil precedents and erroneous innovations introduced into Islam and every evil/erroneous innovation is misguidance. Hence the word ‘every’ is restricted and limited in the phrase, “… every innovation is misguidance …” in specific context of evil and erroneous innovations. Now question must arise, how are evil innovations judged to be evil? Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) answered this question by saying: “Aishah reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: if any one introduces into this affair of ours anything which does not belong to it, it is rejected. Ibn Isa said: the prophet said: if anyone practices any action in a way other than our practice, it is rejected.” [Ref: Dawood, B41, H4589] And in another Hadith it is stated: “He who enacted any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] In other words if an innovation is composed of anything which is not from prophetic Sunnah it is evil innovation and it is to be rejected. Fifth Approach – Establishing The Good Innovation: It was previously said, innovation is which does not have precedent in Quran and Sunnah, and following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) point to permissibility of, and reward for, introducing good innovation into Islam: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …”[8] [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Note, the Hadith states one who introduces into Islam a good Sunnah, if a good Sunnah is being introduced into Islam then it means it is not part of Islam. What is not part of Islam and it is being made part of Islam is, innovation. Hence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of reward for introducing good innovation into Islam. It was based upon understanding of the Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam that Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) declared his gathering of worshipers under leadership of an Imam as an excellent innovation, here: “Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] These Ahadith establish the position of Muslims that to introduce praiseworthy innovations into Islam is permissible and reward worthy. Conclusion: We have established the prominent scholars of past have divided the innovation into two categories. It has been established those who have divided innovation into good and bad have not erred nor opposed the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but rather have employed all evidence available on the topic of innovation to perfect their understanding. And it was minion of Iblis incarnate who actually opposed the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The usage of ‘every’ has been explained in detail. The usage of ‘every’ is affected by context, which limits its absolute meaning and restricts it to a specific. The foolish assumption that Muslims do not have any evidence but the evidence related to Taraweeh was shattered with proper explanation of Hadith of introducing good Sunnah into Islam. As for the quote taken from Ibn Rajab it has been explained by the content of first, second and third approach. Ibn Fawzaan position is based on Ibn Rajab's quote and due to which no direct response is required. Instead, Ibn Rajab's understanding of innovation was explored and his error was pointed out in light of evidence of Hadith. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] To find out where the alterations have been made please use MSWord to compare original and revised versions. To see the original quote click, here. - [2] Clarification Of Doubts Concerning Innovation. Originally taken from; Kitab at-Tawheed, author; Saalih al Fawzaan, page 106/110 Translation; Maaz Qureshi, Amendments; Muhammed Ali Razavi. - [3] Those scholars who have labelled type one innovations as linguistic innovation they follow a different definition of innovation. Their definition accords the following principles: Any action/belief of which there is no Asal (i.e. foundation - explicit or implicit evidence) such is innovation. And the opposite was: Any action/belief which can be established from Quran/Sunnah from implicit or from generality of words is not an innovation. They maintain innovation is of two types, linguistic and legal. According to this classification when an innovation is classed as an innovation from legal perspective than it is in meaning of ‘type two’ innovation (i.e. reprehensible - which composed of that which contradicts teaching of Islam). So according to their understanding compiling Quran into a book after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) gathering the people of Masjid to perform Taraweeh under one Qari for entire Ramadhan are not innovations [in legal sense]. And this is because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in his life time over saw the writing of revelation (i.e. Quran). Also there is precedent of performing Taraweeh under leadership of Imam because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in person led Taraweeh for three days. These scholars agree that these are innovations in linguistic sense. The vast majority of scholars have classified these two practices to be good innovations because of their division of innovation being divided as good and bad. Words of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) are evidence of Taraweeh being innovation and being good innovation according to this definition: قَالَ عُمَرُ نِعْمَ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِه.ِ [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] Therefore the real difference between the two parties is due to label and not of result. One group labels it linguistic innovation and other considers as good innovation. - [4] From Islamic perspective anti-Muslim element’s legal/Shar’ri innovation’s equivalent is reprehensible innovation. In Islamic terminology, all innovations are legal/Shar’ri innovations, be it praiseworthy or reprehensible. - [5] The details of sub-divisions and explanation of them can be found in the following book, What Is Innovation In Islam, by Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). - [6] If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits an article will be written on subject of innovation containing writings of these scholars. - [7] The word ‘every’ in its natural meaning cannot be used for creation without warranting major Shirk. The natural meaning of ‘every’ which is unlimited, unrestricted can only truly be used for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). When the word ‘every’ is used for creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) it is always used with certain constraints implied from context or implied from inability of creation for whom it was used for. - [8] “Narrated Ibn Jarir bin 'Abdullah: from his father that the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a good tradition which is followed, then for him is a reward, and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] “It was narrated that Abu Juhaifah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207]

Introduction: Recently during discussions with a Salafi about the nature of innovations in Islam. The Salafi ‘student of knowledge’ presented me translation of Ibn Uthaymeen’s small pamphlet size MSWord format copy of a Arabic work. He requested me to read and think about the contents and note the strenth of Ibn Uthaymeen’s reasoning against the legitimacy of praiseworthy innovations. He was convinced, once his this booklet was understood by me, it would be impossible for me to hold to the position of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat. Instead it will force me to back-track into Salafism. In this word format he highlighted a certain [portion which will be quoted below] and requested that special attention needs to be paid to it. After reading the entire treaty and much mulling over its line of reasoning and understanding the in-between the line material it was decided best response would be in a written format. Below is the written response which al hamdu lillah demolished the castle of Wahhabiyyah. 1.0 - Salih Al Uthaymeen’s Position In His Own Words: “That the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not leave anything which the people are in need of in their worship, their dealings with one another and their livelihood without having explained it is proven to you by His speech, the Exalted: “This day have I perfected for you your religion and have completed My favour upon you and have chosen for you Islaam as a religion.” When this matter has been explained [that Islam is perfected/completed then] - O muslim - know that every one who innovates something in the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) even if it is with a good intention, then his innovation, along with it being misguidance, will be considered a defamation of the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) and will be considered a denial and rejection of Allah (azza wa jal) the Exalted in His speech: “This day have I perfected for you your religion …” Since this innovator who innovated a matter into the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) which is not from the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) is saying silently that the religion has not been completed because this matter which was left out, and which he innovated, can be used to draw closer to Allah (azza wa jal).” [Ref: Innovations In The Light Of Perfection Of Shari’ah, by Muhammad bin Salih Al Uthaymeen] 1.1 - Salih Al Uthaymeen’s Position In My Own Words: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the source of perfection/completion which is beyond improvement. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) perfected/completed the religion of Islam and any additions or alterations to perfection/compeletion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) cannot be praiseworthy. This is the reason Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) told any/every innovation made part of Islam [after completion/perfection of Islam] is misguidance which takes to hellfire. Hence, there can be no and there is no, valid basis for praiseworthy innovations in Islam. By introducing ‘praiseworthy’ innovations into Islam one is negating the completion/perfection of Islam and improving upon what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) left us with and is implying that Islam was not perfected/completed.[1] 2.1 - Islam Is The Perfection/Completion Of Islams: Religion of Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) and his followers, Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and his followers was Islam: “And Moses said: ‘O my people! If you have believed in Allah, then put your trust in Him if you are Muslims.’” [Ref: 10:84] “And when I Allah inspired the disciples [of Jesus] to believe in Me and My Messenger, they said: ‘We believe. And bear witness that we are Muslims.” [Ref: 5:111] It is recorded in the Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated that the religion of all Prophets was Islam: "I am most akin to Jesus Christ among the whole of mankind, and all the Prophets are of different mothers but belong to one religion and no Prophet was raised between me and Jesus." [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5835] Their versions of Islam were suitable for their immediate evoriments but the Islam given to our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is a continuation of previous versions of Islam and perfection/completion of all those religions of Islam and is a universal message. Hence to argue on basis; our Islam is perfection/compeletion of previous versions of Islams therefore one cannot introduce praiseworthy innovations into our Islam, is utterly useless reasoning, because perfection/compeletion of older versions does not rule out praiseworthy innovations via Ijtihad. 2.2 - Islam Is Perfection/Compeletion In Itself: Improvements are made by Prophets/Messengers and there is no Prophet/Messenger with revelation after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.” [Ref: 33:40] Hence the version of Islam given to our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is perfect/complete and beyond any need of improvements - Islam is perfection/compeletion in itself but this does not mean praiseworthy innovations cannot be made part of Islam via Ijtihad. 2.3 - Allowing Innovated Practices Is Part Of Perfection/Compeletion Of Islam: Part of compeletion/perfection of Islam that it incorporates teachings which enable the Muslims to incorporate new practices into Islam via Ijtihad. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said in numerous Ahadith: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] As long as the newly introduced Sunnahs/Biddahs agree with fundamental principles of Islamic worship, charity, enjoining good, prohibiting wrong and we do not invent a new act of worship but we assemble the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallalu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) under various names, we inroduce good Sunnah. For which there will be reward one who invents it and those who adhere to it and those who call to it: “He who called (people) to righteousness/guidance, there would be reward (assured) for him like the rewards of those who adhered to it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6470] 2.4 – Perserving The Compeletion/Perfection Of Islam: Shara’i evidence firmly established new praiseworthy Biddah/Sunnah can be introduced into Islam and it would be permissible to act on them and acting on these praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs will earn reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Islam was perfected/completed but in this perfected/completed Islam room was created for incorporation of praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “We have, without doubt, sent down the Reminder (i.e. the Quran); and We will assuredly guard it (i.e. from corruption).” [Ref: 15:9] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has promised to protect the completion/perfection of Islam from corruption and if introducing praiseworthy innovations into Islam was corruption of Islam then Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would not have created the room for them. Therefore the perfection/completion of Islam will not be effect by newly introduced praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs into religion of Islam. 3.1 - Distorting The Perfection/Compeletion Of Islam: As Muslims we cannot nor we can believe that a Prophet can come after our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and abrogate or subsitute or add or ommit or alter any thing that has been taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). We must adhere to the Islam taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) without engaging in mentioned to maintain perfection/compeletion of Islam. If one engages in abrogation of matters in Ayaat/Ahadith without valid proof, or alters a method taught in Quran/Hadith, or subsitutes a action/belief by another not established with Quranic/Hadith evidence, or adds to a ritual practice or Quranic text which was not part of it, then such person engages in mutilation of Islam. He/She defaces the perfection of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and it is akin to indirectly claiming God-hood or Prophet-hood.[2] As Muslims we have ensured the teaching of Islam are protected from corruption and we have not made anything part of Islam which defaced Islam. 3.2 - Those Who Defaced Their Versions Of Islam: The Yahood/Nasara defaced the Islams given to them by their respective Prophets and took their innovative religions as the Islams of Prophets Musa/Isa (alayhis salam). In short they alterted the Islams and made them into monsteracities which they are recognized by at present. The message and teaching of Quran are still preserved and easily accessible. There has been no alteration, addition, ommition and abrogation of Quranic message of Islam in the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) like it happened to the religions of previous Prophets. Therefore the completion, the perfection of Islam is preserved and nothing of Islam has been defaced, or removed, or omitted, or abrogated, or altered. 3.3 – True Act Of Defacing Of Islam: True defamation of Islam would be, if one engages in altering the order of actions performed in prayers. One starts his prayers with prostration and ends it with standing or recites Surah Fatihah in prostration three times and recites twenty hail Mary’s (i.e. Ave Maria). Another example would be to believe that some parts of Quran have been omitted/deleted by Muslims. Or to add another verse to the end of Surah Fatiha, such as; lana tulillahi alal kazibeen, and believe it is part of Quran. Or altering the confession of Tawheedi creed to; there is no god except three in the One god and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. These are examples of improvements/innovations which in reality deface Islam not praiseworthy innovations. A praiseworthy innovation introduced into Islam via Ijtihad and which was not and is not believed to be Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and it accords with teaching of Islam, does not effect the compeletion/perfection of Islam, rather it compliments it. 4.1 – Innovated Sunnah In Line With Perfection/Completion Of Islam: During the Khilafat of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Musailamah claimed Prophet-hood. Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) sent armies to eliminate this Dajjal. At the end of wars some seventy Hufadh had fallen in the way of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) realized if the Hufadh continue to receive matyrdom at this rate sooner or later Quran will be lost, so he visited Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu). He said to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (subhanahu wa ta’ala): "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Qur'an by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." At this point one can say, Hadhrat Abu Bakr (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was opinion that collection of Quran as a single book format is a innovation which will deface the perfection/completion of Islam, so he said: "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Hadhrat Umar (subhanahu wa ta’ala) trys to convince him that it is a good Sunnah which does not effect the perfection/completion of Islam by saying: "By Allah, that is a good project.” Hadhrat Abu Bakr (subhanahu wa ta’ala) continues saying: "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which `Umar had realized." [Ref: Bukhari, B61, H509] Hadhrat Abu Bakr (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is now convinced that compiling Quran in a book is a praiseworthy innovation which even Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not engage in nor instructed. He also understood that religion of Islam was complete and all that was part of fundamental teaching Islam has been made part of Islam by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He also realized that the perfection/completion of Islam is not effected by a innovative praiseworthy Sunnah and nor do the praiseworthy innovations deface the perfection/completion of Islam. He also understood, by compiling Quran in a single book it does not amount to him ordering completion/perfection of Islam after Islam was perfected/completed.[3] 4.2 – Khalifah Gives Instructions To Engage In Praiseworthy Innovation: Hadhrat Abu Bakr (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says to a Sahabi: “You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Messenger. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." The Sahabi narrator added: “By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an.” Then he said to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (subhanahu wa ta’ala) what Hadhrat Abu Bakr (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said to Hadhrat Umar (subhanahu wa ta’ala) when he had suggested compiling Quran in single book format: "How will you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?" The Hadith continues: "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and `Umar.” [Ref: Bukhari, B61, H509] Once the companion realized the goodness in this praiseworthy Biddah/Sunnah and just like Hadhrat Abu Bakr realized it does not amount to blameworthy innovation [which disfigures the perfection/completion of Islam] he began gathering and compiling Quran into single book format and the result was Quran in our possesion today. 5.1 - The Destroyer of Perfection/Completion Of Islam: The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained all essentials of religion of Islam. He explained the concept of worship, types of worship, the method of worship and when to worship. He explained Zakat, Sadqa, Khayrat, and all issues connected with charity. He taught how to perform Ghusul and when to perform Ghusul. He taught the method of Wudhu and when to perform Wudhu. In short he taught all aspects of daily life and this is completion/perfection of Quran and Islam, stated: “This day have I perfected for you your religion and have completed My favour upon you and have chosen for you Islaam as a religion.” [Ref: 5:3] Islam is religion of micro-guidance, it aims to guides/manage all affairs. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) made Islam for mankind and for those who will come till the judgment day. Our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained the affairs which were happening in his time but left principles via aid of which we will be able to judge matters to arise after, and part of these principles the teaching is: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Therefore Muslims know that praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs are part of perfection/compeletion of Islam. One who argues against and believes; praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs are against the teaching of Islam is guilty of innovation. He refutes/rejects a teaching of Islam, which daringly can be said to be established by Tawatir. Even though one has good intentions his innovation is misguidance and is a distortion of perfection/completion of Islam – the religion approved by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The innovator of reprehensible innovation is indirectly claiming the right of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for himself – claims to have the right to legislate religion. Or he is claiming to be spokes person of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) after it has been clearly stated there is no Nabi/Messenger with Shari’a after our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has reported to have said: “Aishah reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: if any one introduces into this affair of ours anything which does not belong to it, it is rejected. Ibn Isa said: the prophet said: if anyone practices any action in away other than our practice, it is rejected.” [Ref: Dawood, B41, H4589] O Muslims, therefore believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as your God and believe in His beloved Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as the last/final Prophet. O Muslims, reject those who exercise the right of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and exercise the right of a Prophet to disfigure the perfection/completion of Islam and reject their reprehensible innovations. They oppose Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). O Muslims, you oppose such a individual and his party and believe what is taught by Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If you do not then know in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the only acceptable religion is of Islam and you will be amongst the loosers in day of judgment: “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” [Ref: 3:85] This is Islam is composed of teaching of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and if you leave him and obey the rival and enemy of Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) then you have preffered for your self religion other then perfected/compeleted religion of Islam. You have chosen for your self; the religion of Shaytan, the religion of Ibn Uthaymeen but not the religion of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). O heretics, you be to your religion and know that we believed in Islam and we believed in our Nabi Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) when he said: “Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed, he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in their slightest. And whoever introduces a bad practice that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] This the best of guidance of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and what opposes his teaching is innovation and every teaching which opposes and disfigures the perfection/completion of Islam takes to hellfire. 5.2– Blameworthy Innovations Harm Perfection/Completion Of Islam: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error." [Ref: Bukhari, B4, H1885] and in another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Sunan Nisa’I, B19, H1579] It is established Ibn Uthaymeen the chief of group of Satan, the leader of the Khawarij, opposed Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in regards to introducing praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs into Islam, hence he introduced a blameworthy innovation into Islam. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “He who enacted any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf, that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] "If somebody innovates something which is not in harmony with the principles of our affair religion, that thing is rejected." [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] In obedience to Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) we reject Ibn Uthaymeen’s innovation which defaced the perfected/completed Islam. Conclusion: Religion of Islam is has been completed and perfected by Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) last and finale Prophet – Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The beloved Prophet and the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed one who introduces praiseworthy Biddah/Sunnah into Islam which is followed after him it will be rewarded by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and those who call toward such praisworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs they will also be rewarded like the ones who act upon it. The teaching which permit introduction of praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs into Islam is part of perfection/compeletion of Islam and as long as the innovated practice is in accordance with the teaching of Islam and does not contradict the teaching of worship, charity, encouraging good, forbidding evil, and it aids Islam, then it is a good Sunnah/Biddah. The real true enemy of Islam, the destroyer and negater of perfection/completion of Islam is Ibn Uthaymeen the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). He has censored praiseworthy Biddah/Sunnah which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permitted and about which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) told of reward – for one who innovates and one who practices it. Ibn Uthaymeen and the Khariji minions of Iblees from Najd have found fault in the perfection/completion of Islam. Hence they have rejected the conceptual validity of introducing praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs into Islam. The Khariji’s reject this teaching of Islam and the fruits of this teaching. Therefore the innovation and the distortion of perfection/completion of Islam is from Khawarij and their scholars, and in this context Ibn Uthaymeen the cursed. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] If anyone is unhappy about my presentation of Ibn Uthaymeen’s reasoning then please be my guest and present his position from his own work better then my representation. Rest assured I have greatly improved the strenth of his reasoning. In other words his reasoning is presented more precisely, more elequently, more forcefully then Mr Ibn Uthaymeen did. - [2] If he affirms Prophet-hood or God-hood with his tongue and it is not impliedfrom his actions then such a person is Kafir, otherwise such a person is heretic of worst kind. - [3] Ibn Uthaymeen wrote:” Since this innovator who innovated a matter into the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) which is not from the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) is saying silently that the religion has not been completed because this matter which was left out, and which he innovated, can be used to draw closer to Allah (azza wa jal).” Based on this statement of Ibn Uthaymeen, one is forced to conclude that Mr Ibn Uthaymeen’s regarding Hadhrat Umar and Hadhrat Abu Bakr position would be they were completing/perfecting Quran which was left uncomplete/imperfect by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by His Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alayh wa aalihi was’sallam).

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?

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

Introduction: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated in Quran; Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness). One sent as a witness is sent to witness with eyes/ears. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to mankind hence natural conclusion is that he witnesses deeds of entire mankind. Deobandis/Salafis believe he indeed is sent as a witness to mankind but does not see/hear the actions of mankind. In other words they believe he is witness but ascribe no quality to him which establish that he is witness. Its like believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Rabb (i.e. Lord) without qualities of Rububiyah. Or believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Khaliq (i.e. Creator) without believing He creates. Affirmation of word but without believing the natural meaning. Muslims believe in the word and its implications. And as result we believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fullfils the criteria which he needs to be a witness. To put it simply he sees and hears the actions of those whom he was sent as a witness – i.e. mankind. Heretical Reasoning For Their Belief: I had stated in a discussion: “Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Shahid (i.e. witness) and a witness must posess two qualties; Hadhir (i.e. present phisically) as well as Nadhir (hearing, seeing). And without these qualities one can not be a truthful witness. Our belief is that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Hadhir in his heavenly resting place in Madinah ash'shareef but soul is able to move as soul of Musa (alayhis salam) was able to move from place to place while keeping touch with the body of Musa (alayhis salam) and Nadhir upon his Ummah. Ability of Hadhir Nadhir is a mojzaati qudrat which …” With regards to underlined a Deobandi brother with the name of Mustafvi wrote the following while discussing with me on topic of Hadhir Nazir: “It is true that your above mentioned two qualities have some weight but these two are not compulsory in all the cases. One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” [Ref: Mustafvi, Private Discussion, Publicised, Post 1.] Mustafvi brother in context of my evidences is attempting to argue that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not need to directly witness events as they happen rather he can/will bear witness upon being informed by truthful/reliable witnesses of his Ummah. This establishes hearing/seeing is not essential to be a witness rather receiving news of event is enough to bear witness. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills this position would be criticised within Shar’ri boundaries. Note arleady this quote was addressed in another response, here, and this response will focus another aspect. The Baseless Deobandi/Salafi Position: Neither Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and nor the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated in Quran or Sunnah that a witness is one who has been informed by another nor said witness can bear witness upon being informed by another. This principle of heretics is based on elevating their self to status of gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Have you seen the one who takes as his god his own desire?[1] Then would you be responsible for him?” [Ref: 25:43] And are worshiping their own whims and desires instead of submitting to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Making religion of Islam how they want it to be instead of making themselves into image of Islam. There is no evidence whatsoever which establishes or suggests - in Dunya or Aakhira - that if Zayd saw x y z happening and Zayd truthfully informs Amr of x y z then Amr would also become a witness of the event. Nor there is evidence which establishes or suggests - in Dunya or Aakhira - that Amr would be deemed as first hand witness due to receiving news from Zayd. Belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will qualify to be a witness upon being told by his Ummatis can only be valid if the mentioned rule can be established from Quran and Sunnah. Witnessing Of No-Witness And Its Worth: Take the following scenario into account: Zayd has been accused of murder. Amr and Bakr hear the news from Khalid that Zayd has murdered Akhtar. Amr and Bakr are truthful and upstanding members of community. Amr and Bakr testify in court Zayd has killed Akhtar. Note the two witnesses criteria has been met by witnessing of Amr and Bakr. In court of Shari’a will Zayd receive capital punishment or any punishment due to witnessing of Amr and Bakr? Well in light of following the head of Zayd would role like a football: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” A intelligent person even with basic understanding of Islamic judicial system will know; Zayd will not be charged or punished because of Amr and Bakr’s testimony unless Khalid bear witness and then takes an oath [to fulfill the criteria of two witnesses] that he saw Zayd committ the murder. Amr and Bakr’s testimony is nill and void in murder case. Same scenario but different dispute, with addition of Uthman: Khalid and Uthman both saw the murder taking place. Khalid wasn’t aware that Uthman witnessed the murder and saw Khalid at the crime scene. Khalid denies being at the crime scene in court. Uthman claims Khalid also witnessed the murder. In this case Amr and Bakr can truthfully testify that Khalid informed them of the murder. In other words Amr and Bakr would be coroborating the account of Uthman. Once truth of matter is established that Khalid was afraid of bearing witness but he was witness. Supportive evidence of Amr/Bakr will establish Khalid was also witness to murder then Zayd will receive punishment. But Amr’s and Bakr’s witnessing to murder on account of being informed by Khalid is nill and void. Their testimony will only become cause for Khalid to be summoned by court to give testimony but it will not serve basis for judgment of murder case. Apart from following Deobandi/Salafi rule being completely and absolutely against the established procedures of Islamic legal system: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” This rule opens door injustice: Truthful/Trustworthy members of community end up believing in town gossip [and without verifying it] report the incident to police and when incident is presented to Qadhi they testify Akhtar stole x y z. The result would be Akhtar getting his hand chopped off. Firstly in this judgment Islamic requirements of eye-witnesses werent met. Secondly being truthful/trustworthy is not sole requirement for witnessing rather the fundamental requirement is witnessing the events with eyes/ears. Islamic judicial systems first requirement is witnessing and then truthfulness trustworthiness would be considered. Thirdly the victim of crime has to exist and his complain has to be genuine. Mere testimony of truthfull and trustworthy bearded Arabic speaking Tasbih rolling Muslims is not enough against another believer/disbeliever. Prophets Will Testify Against Their Own Nations: Truthful Prophets will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they delivered the message given to them but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask them to produce witness. It is recorded in Hadith that Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that he delivered the message given to him by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to his nation. And his Ummah will negate this and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask Nuh (alayhis salam) to bring forth witness in his own defence: “Allah's Messenger said, "Noah will be brought (before Allah) on the Day of Resurrection, and will be asked: 'Did you convey the message of Allah?" He will reply: 'Yes, O Lord.' And then Noah's nation will be asked: 'Did he convey Allah's message to you?' They will reply: 'No warner came to us.' Then Noah will be asked: 'Who are your witnesses?' He will reply: 'Muhammad and his followers.' Thereupon you …” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H448] The above Hadith only gives example of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) and his Ummah. In actuality Ummah f every Prophet will be questioned and every single one of them would deny reicieving the message from their Prophet and we the Muslims and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify they delivered the message:“So how (will it be) when We bring from every nation a witness and we bring you (O Muhammad) against these (people) as a witness?” [Ref: 4:41]“And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you. And We did not make the qiblah which you used to face except that We might make evident who would follow the Messenger from who would turn back on his heels. And indeed, it is difficult except for those whom Allah has guided. And never would Allah have caused you to lose your faith. Indeed Allah is, to the people, Kind and Merciful.” [Ref: 2:143] Please note these truthful and trustworthy Prophets of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are testifying in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they have delivered the message given to them by Him. If following rule was true then wouldn’t Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) accept the testimony of His trustworthy and truthful servants:“One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) asking His truthful and trustworthy servants the Prophets to produce a witness in support of their claim is suffient evidence to refute the invented innovated principle. There are roughly hundered twenty-four thousand Prophets/Messengers and this amounts to roughly same numbers of reasons why this principle is wrong. Conclusion: Brother Mustafvi’s statement is completely without basis. There are no textual evidences which support bearing witness without seeing/hearing the event. Islamic legal system will not use the testimony of two truthful witnesses who haven’t seen the events to which they bear witness even if they claim they have been informed by two more first hand witnesses. And the greatest evidence against brother Mustafvi’s understanding is witnessing of Prophets against their own nations and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) demanding witness from them. If truthful/trustworthy person bearing witness was legitimate concept then who would be more truthful/trustworthy then the Prophets? But despite their truthful/trustworthiness Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not accept their testimony and will demand witnesses to coroborate his testimony. Alhasil this concept of brother Mustafvi is invalid and against established teaching of Islam. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “Then Allah tells His Prophet that if Allah decrees that someone will be misguided and wretched, then no one can guide him except Allah, glory be to Him: “Have you seen him who has taken as his god his own vain desire?” Meaning whatever he admires and sees as good in his own desires becomes his religion and his way.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 25:43]

Introduction: Deobandi brother with the name of Mustafvi made a statement in order to argue against Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. This article will focus on the statement and try to understand on which basis brother Mustafvi made the statement and how his statements could be interpreted in light of creed of Hadhir Nazir. Please note he might not have intended the details derived and beliefs attributed to him from his statement [in 1.0 and refuted in 1.1 to 1.2] because it is very unlikely he would be familiar with the topic of Hadhir Nazir comprehensively as a educated believer would be. But despite possibility of lack of knowledge his statement is being interpreted as if he was fully aware of all in’s and out’s this belief and implications of his statement. Objective is to comprehensively explore all possible angles of topic of Hadhir Nazir and his statements happens to be a mean to one such detail. The only material directly related to his statement and to him is from 0.1 to 0.2. 0.0 - My And Brother Mustafvi’s Statements: In my discussion with brother Mustafvi on topic of Hadhir Nazir I had written the following: “Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Shahid (i.e. witness) and a witness must posess two qualties; Hadhir (i.e. present phisically) as well as Nadhir (hearing, seeing). And without these qualities one can not be a truthful witness. Our belief is that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Hadhir in his heavenly resting place in Madinah ash'shareef but soul is able to move as soul of Musa (alayhis salam) was able to move from place to place while keeping touch with the body of Musa (alayhis salam) and Nadhir upon his Ummah. Ability of Hadhir Nadhir is a mojzaati qudrat which …” He responded with the following: “It is true that your above mentioned two qualities have some weight but these two are not compulsory in all the cases. One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” [Ref: Mustafvi, Private Discussion, Publicised, Post 1.] 0.1 - Chain Of Transmission And Its Major Components: To be a truthful and trustworthy person witnessing of event is essential. If Bakr is truthful and trustworthy and he witnesses x y z and informs Amr x y z has happened. Then for his truthfulness and trustworthiness to be established it is important that event has taken place and that Bakr witnessed it for himself. Even though the chain of transmission of Khabr (i.e. news/report) may not from eye-witness to eye-witness but it is reiable because Bakr has witnessed it and on account of his eye-witnessing it has passed from eye-witness to truthful to truthful. This is how chain of transmission in Hadith works. A authentic Hadith via many narrators it goes back to a companion who heard and saw Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) acted in such a fashion or utter the words of Hadith. Alhasil -: A truthfull and trustworthy individual witnesses a event and then transmits this information to a truthfull person. Then this report is transmitted continously from truthful to truthful. And this report will be trustworthy and truthfull, and is to be believed.’[1] Note this is the foundation on which brother Mustafvi made his statement. 0.2 - Error In Brother Mustafvi’s Statement: Brother Mustafvi’s statement is based on valid principle from principles of Hadith but his statement is incorrect because he inserted into it his error. Firstly the very basic error is that he does not mention witnessing by an eye-witness. One who originates the Khabr must be eye witness to the event he reports otherwise he is lieing or at least spreading rumours as actual events. Secondly one who hears a Khabr does not become witness to the event nor he qualifies to testify as an eye-witness, or as a non-eye-witness. Note which he claims having truthful Khabr qualifies the knower of news as a witness and can bear witness: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” There are thousands of Sahih (i.e. authentic) Ahadith and there are Mutawatir [is grade above, authentic] Ahadith but none claims to be witness on basis of them. Nor can claim to qualify as an eye-witness of event narrated in Hadith. Being informed by another and testifying on account of it is testimony of one’s own faith.[2] And its worth in court of law is no greater then it. 1.0 - Two Contexts His Statement Can Be Interpreted: There are two ways brother Mustafvi’s statement can be interpreted: i) From Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). ii) And from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to the present. Note brother Mustafvi’s statement was written in effort to refute Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. Therefore in the 1st case it implies, brother Mustafvi believes, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) what the nations did before he was sent as last/final Nabi and he will bear witness on account of this learnt knowledge . And in the 2nd case it means, brother Mustafvi believes, we the Ummah will educate Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about what nations did after him and he will testify on account of what we tell him. In both cases Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) direct witnessing of the events has been removed and replaced with being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by his own Ummah. In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly witnessing events is being negated. 1.1 - The Error Of Brother Mustafvi’s Understanding: There is no evidence to suggest that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be bearing witness on account of being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Or in other words will be giving testimony of his faith in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This is Qiyas (i.e. analogy) based on Hadith which states Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify in defence of Prophets upon being informed by last/final Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “… It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ And he will say: ‘Yes.’ Then his people will be called and it will be said: ‘Did he convey the message to you?’ They will say: ‘No.’ Then it will be said: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] Qiyas was/is not foundation of Islamic creed. Nor there is proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify on account of being informed by his own Ummah regarding events transpired after him. Again this is also based on Qiyas and both of these are against clear emphatic teachings of Quran. 1.2 - Islamic Verdict On 1st Scenario: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “So how (will it be) when We bring from every nation a witness and we bring you (O Muhammad) against these (people) as a witness?” [Ref: 4:41]“And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you. And We did ...” [Ref: 2:143] “Allah named you Muslims previous (scriptures) and in this (revelation) that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people.” [Ref: 22:73] The Ummah will bear witness in defence of Prophets. Note following Hadith explains what type of testimony they will give: “He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’” Then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will question the Ummah about how they know Prophets delivered the message to their nations and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed them of it: “He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] This establishes Ummats testimony is of their Iman. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not question Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Who informed you? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ensured that Muslims know Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not witnessed the events regarding which they have testified. For Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) this route is not taken and this indicates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had witnessed these events spiritually.[3] And proof of this is are those verses in which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) within context of historical events says: “Have you not seen[4] how your Lord dealt with Aad.” [Ref: 89:6] “Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with the companions/army of elephant.” [Ref: 105:1] “Have you not seen those elders of the children of Israel after the time of Moses …” [Ref: 2:246] And these verses are supported by Hadith a narrated in Musnad of Imam Ahmad (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala): “عرضات الأنبيا أممها و اتباعها من أممها” Which means: “Presented before me were [all] Prophets and their nations along side [their believing] followers.” This goes on to establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed the deeds of those before him and use of, ‘ألم تر’ , is referrence to seeing if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Alhasil the first belief of brother Mustafvi is refuted. Islamic Verdict On 2nd Scenario: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Indeed, We have sent you as a witness and a bringer of good tidings and a warner.” [Ref: 48:8] "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] And he is sent to mankind: "Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself. And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness." [Ref: 4:79] He is a Prophet sent to mankind as a witness like Musa (alayhis salam) was sent to Firawn: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is sent as a hearing and seeing witness to mankind like Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) was sent to Fir’awn. Note one who is sent as a witness must witness over whom he was sent to witness and without his witnessing he is not witness. Yet Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is witness and sent as a witness. Hence his witnessing of deeds of mankind is established from ever since he was sent as last/final Prophet and Messenger. There are number of Ahadith which establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has witnessed everything: "Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol5, H3246, Tafsir Surah Sad] "Narrated Hakim Bin Nafi, Saeed Bin Sinan, narrated Abu Zahriyat, Kathir Bin Murra Abu Shajara al-Hadhrami, Ibn Umar said: Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Kitab al-Fitan, 1st Chapter, Hadith No. 2, by Hafidh Naeem Bin Hammad al-Marwazi] On account of this knowledge Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed all that was to transpire from beginning of creation till the entering of people in paradise/hell: “Narrated Umar: One day the Prophet stood up amongst us for a long period and informed us about the beginning of creation (and talked about everything in detail) till he mentioned how the people of Paradise will enter their places and the people of Hell will enter their places. Some remembered what he had said, and some forgot it.” [Ref: Bukhari, B54, H414] Alhasil all this evidence goes on to refute the notion mentioned in second belief of brother Mustafvi. Conclusion: If brother Mustafvi’s statement is interpreted in light of science of Hadith even then it fails to meet the criteria because the originator of chain must be witness the event and then to narrate it to others. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) bore witness without witnessing himself then the rule of chain originator being first hand witness to event is broken. Yet verses of Quran and Hadith of Musnad Ahmad establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed Prophets and their nations and their beleiving followers and their actions. In light of this the chain originator is actual witness and he narrated and Ummah believed and bore witness. But whole objective of inventing ‘bearing witness without witnessing the events’ was to negate actual witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which has failed even if your philosophy of bearing witness without witnessing the event was believed. Even then it would be true for the Ummah and not for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Also if Ummah informing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about what transpired after him is considered in light of your rule then implication is Ummah has seen it and it will inform Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This was invented with objective to refute actual witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Yet the Quranic verses and quoted Ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) himself witnesses and had witnessed the deeds of all happenings till the judgment day. If we disregarding the fact Ummat informing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is without scriptural support. Even then it would imply, Ummat witnessed the events, and they informed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), who also had witnessed the events himself. Therefore scenario would be similar to angels presenting deeds of people to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) despite the fact that He is already aware of them. Or similar to, angels presenting to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam) salutations of his Ummah despite the fact that good/bad deeds were already seen by him and are seen by him. Alhasil however the ball is rolled the witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be refuted. Hence it would be better to let go of innovative concept of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) testifying for what is established from textual evidences. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] A example: Truthful and trustworthy people have transferred Quran and authentic Ahadith and on basis of information in these we believe and testify; there is no Ma’bud (i.e. deserving of worship) except Allah and Prophet Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. Note this testimony is of ones own Iman (i.e. faith) and not of an out side event. Testimony of faith only the person can express none else because one is aware of his own belief. Hence person testifying as such is first hand witness. - [2] Like it is in the case of following Hadith: “He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] Note the Ummah will testify and the Ummah of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) will question the testimony of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Ummah would be questioned who informed you and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Note He will not question Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) testifying against Ummah of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam). Ummah will bear testimony on basis of their own faith in truthfullness and trustworthiness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). - [3] Two logical conclusions can be made because of this: i) RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be testifying on account of being informed like his Ummah. And there was no difference between testimony of Ummah and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence there was no need to pursue it further. ii) Testimony of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was in result of actually witnessing the events therefore Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not pursue to negate his actual witnessing. But Ummah had testified on account of being informed by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ensured it was pointed out. Resolution -: Firstly please note Qiyas is not foundation of creed and to believe in first contention is to put faith in Qiyas. This is why I only mentioned the second contention in my main article. Secondly there are numerous places in Quran where Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentions events which had transpired long before birth of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In some cases Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while adressing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) begins the narrative with: “Did you not see!” And this is to attest that he saw and he is being reminded. From this scholars of Ahlus Sunnah assume position; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed the events prior to his brith and he is being asked to recall the events. Alhasil -: This goes on to establish the Islamic position taken in the article. - [4] The older translations of Quran in English and Urdu translated the words, ‘ألم تر’ , to denote seeing but new Wahhabi translation, Sahih International, has started the tradition of translating these verses: “Have you not considered …” The objective is to do away with the natural meaning of words due to the implications. They, insha Allah, will never succeed in distortion of Quran because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has made it clear that he saw the Prophets and their nations before him.

Introduction: 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Introduction: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha to be an innovation because he was unaware that it was Prophetic Sunnah. He deemed it to be an excellent innovation. On basis of such statements of companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Muslims have come to believe; companions did not believe in absolute literalism of Hadith, every invention is innovation and every innovation is misguidance, but they made Takhsees of ‘every’ to a specific type of innovation. On basis of his statements Muslims have argued; companions in general, and Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in specific, believed in concept of good innovations, and permissibility of introducing good innovations in Islam. Khawarij on other hand, in an attempt to discredit the Islamic teaching argue, his statements were made linguistically and not in Shar’ri sense. Therefore he did not believe in permissibility of introducing good innovations into Islam nor did he believe good/evil innovation category. And recently two articles, here, here, were produced regarding Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statements made about Salat ad-Duha. And these two articles have created a tiny stir amongst the Khawarij. One supporter of innovation and distortion sent a message in which he argued; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha is Prophetic Sunnah and believed it was a good/fine innovation in linguistic sense and not Shar’ri innovation. And to support his position he quoted Hadith from Sahih of Imam Al Bukhari (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). This is an out of box, a novel argument, and deserves a proper response. The Hadith Quoted Evidence: “Narrated Nafi: Ibn `Umar never offered the Duha prayer except on two occasions: (1) whenever he reached Mecca; and he always used to reach Mecca in the forenoon (i.e. al-Duha). He would perform Tawaf round the Ka`ba and then offer two rak`at at the rear of Maqam Ibrahim. (2) Whenever he visited Quba, for he used to visit it every Saturday. When he entered the Mosque, he disliked to leave it without offering a prayer.“ [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] What Did Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Say About Salat ad-Duha: It is recorded in a Hadith of Bukhari that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) he deemed Salat ad-Duha as innovation: “… 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. We asked him about their prayer and he replied that it was an innovation.” [Ref: Bukhari, B27, H4] Following Hadith explains why he believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and first two Khulafah did not perform Salat ad-Duha, and this is reason why he didn’t perform Salat ad-Duha, and deemed it innovation: “Narrated Muwarriq: I asked Ibn `Umar "Do you offer the Duha prayer?" He replied in the negative. 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, H271] Not only did he deem it as an innovation but he deemed it to be good/fine innovation: "It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, 3] And following Hadith establishes Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha was innovated in the Khilafat of Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu): "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." [Ref: Musannaf Abd Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] Note the underlined words, Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is saying the people of have innovated Salat ad-Duha. Alhasil, he believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not perform Salat ad-Duha and it was people innovated Salat ad-Duha then how can he believe it was Prophetic Sunnah and how can he practice it as a Prophetic Sunnah? The answer to this question will, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills, will follow. Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Or The Narrator Of Hadith: In contradiction to Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) the narrator of Hadith 283 states Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed Salat ad-Duha. Does the narrator, who claims Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed Salat ad-Duha on two occasions, knows if Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performs Salat ad-Duha, or does Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) know if he performed Salat ad-Duha? Narrator of Hadith - 283 - cannot know better about Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) then Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) himself. Negation by Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is proof of belief and action of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) not what someone else as attributed to him. Performing Two Rak’at Nawafil In Masjid At al-Duha Time: Evidence of following Hadith establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed two Rak’at Nawafil when he returned from a journey: “Narrated Ka`b: Whenever the Prophet returned from a journey in the forenoon, he would enter the Mosque and offer two rak`at before sitting.” [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H321] This Hadith is the basis on which Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) based his action of performing 2 Rak’at Nawafil at the time of al-Duha after under taking a journey. Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Performed Nawafil At Time Of al-Duha: Following Hadith establishes Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu), used to undertake journey from Madinah, and reach Makkah at the time of al-Duha (i.e. forenoon), and he performed two Rak’at Nawafil in Masjid Haram: “Narrated Nafi: Ibn `Umar never offered the Duha prayer except on two occasions: Whenever he reached Mecca; and he always used to reach Mecca in the forenoon (i.e. al-Duha). He would perform Tawaf round the Ka`ba and then offer two rak`at at the rear of Maqam Ibrahim.” [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] And the reason why he performed two Rak’at in Masjid Haram at Maqam of Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salam) is because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed it there: “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] Note even though the Hadith does not explicitly indicate Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed 2 Rak’at Nawafil after the journey this is to be implied because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was resident of Madinah and he must under take a journey to reach Makkah – Masjid Haram. Therefore the Hadith is proof for Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performing two Rak’at Nawafil at the time of ad-Duha. In simple words, Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed two Rak’at Nawafil in Masjid Al Haram, at the time of al-Duha after taking a journey because he knew it was Prophetic Sunnah. And He Performed Nawafil At Time Of al-Duha In Masjid Quba: The Hadith in discussion indicates Masjid Quba as second place where Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed Salat ad-Duha: “Whenever he visited Quba, for he used to visit it every Saturday. When he entered the Mosque, he disliked to leave it without offering a prayer.“ [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] The fact is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used to visit Masjid Quba on Saturday, and in there he performed two Rak’at Nawafil as evidenced by following Ahadith: “Narrated Abdullah bin Dinar: Ibn Umar said, "The Prophet used to go to the Mosque of Quba every Saturday walking and riding." Abdullah (Ibn `Umar) used to do the same.” [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H284] “Narrated Ibn Umar: The Prophet used to go to the Mosque of Quba walking and sometimes riding. Added Nafi (in another narration), "He then would offer two rak`at." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H285] Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) merely imitated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing two Rak’at Nawafil in Masjid Quba. And he seems to have combined Rak’at Nawafil Sunnah with following Hadith: “Narrated Ka`b: Whenever the Prophet returned from a journey in the forenoon, he would enter the Mosque and offer two rak`at before sitting.” [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H321] Ibn Umar’s Position And Confusion Caused By Narrator: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) deemed Salat ad-Duha to be an innovation which he believed neither Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor the first two Khulafah had performed, and therefore he did not intend to perform Salat ad-Duha [even when he performed Nawafil at the time of al-Duha]. And this is established from following part of Hadith: “I asked Ibn `Umar "Do you offer the Duha prayer?" He replied in the negative. 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, H271] And Ibn Umar performed two Rak’at Nawafil at the time of al-Duha (i.e. forenoon) in Masjid based on the following Hadith: “Narrated Ka`b: Whenever the Prophet returned from a journey in the time of al-Duha, he would enter the Mosque and offer two rak`at before sitting.” [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H321] But these two Nawafil were not performed with intention of performing Salat ad-Duha. If these two Nawafil performed at time of al-Duha were termed Nawafil of Salat ad-Duha then this would contradict, what Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) himself negated. Therefore only acceptable and non-contradictory understanding possible is that he performed them at the time of al-Duha without intending to perform Salat ad-Duha. And following statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) establishes that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) only intended to perform what his companions did (i.e. performing 2 Rak’at Nawafil at the time of al-Duha in Masjid after journey) and he did not forbid Nawafil being performed at any times - including Salat ad-Duha – except on the forbidden times, which the following portion of Hadith establishes: "I do only what my companions used to do and I don't forbid anybody to pray at any time during the day or night except that one should not intend to pray at sunrise or sunset." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] Hence it is safe to conclude that the narrator of Hadith - 283 - erroneously assumed on part of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) that he performs Salat ad-Duha on two occasions. Where as the fact is Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was enacting on other Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but due to routinely of reaching destination of Masjid Al Haram and Masjid Quba at the al-Duha time gave impression he performs Salat ad-Duha. Salat ad-Duha Said To Be Linguistic Innovation Or Shar’ri Innovation: When it is evident that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not perform Salat ad-Duha, and deemed it as fine innovation, which was beloved to him. Then the argument that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed it believing as a Prophetic Sunnah fails to achieve its objective. In other words, it does not support the argument; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made following statements in linguistic usage: "It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [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." [Ref: Musannaf Abd Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] And therefore established proof of Islam stands that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed in introducing good innovations into Islam and held to definition of innovation which is of majority of Islamic scholarship. Meaning he believed in good/evil innovation classification and not what Shaykh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) had taught. And this in turn establishes Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not believe in absolute literalism of following Hadith: “Avoid novelties, for every novelty is an innovation, and every innovation is an error." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B40, H4590] “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is error." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] But rather he understood the innovation in question in according to Hadith of – erroneous innovation (i.e. بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ): “And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation, which Allah is not pleased with nor His Messenger, then he shall receive sins similar to whomever acts upon it, without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] And concept of evil innovative Sunnah is also supported by following Hadith: “And he who introduces a evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Alhasil – he believed; ‘every erroneous innovation is misguidance’ and not ‘every innovation is misguidance’ in literal sense. And he believed good innovative Sunnahs can be made part of Islam/Shari’ah which is evident from his statements about Salat ad-Duha. And these statements are in accordance with following Hadith: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.”[Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Innovation is not part of Islam and reward being told is for a Sunnah which is introduced into Islam. Therefore the reward being told is about good innovative Sunnah and not for which is already part of Islam. Alhasil – Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made the statement about Salat ad-Duha in light of Ahadith like this. This Hadith establishes category of good innovative Sunnah [in other words good innovation] in Shari’ah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) therefore his statements about Salat ad-Duha were made in context of Shari’ah. Conclusion: The Hadith in which it is stated Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed Salat ad-Duha on two occasions is misunderstanding of one who narrated it. The fact is that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was acting on Prophetic Sunnah by performing two Rak’at Nawafil in Masjid after undertaking a journey but the timing he reached his destination was always at the time of al-Duha. This gave impression to onlookers that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is performing Salat ad-Duha but he merely performed two Rak’at Nawafil after under taking journey at the Masajid mentioned in the Hadith. Where as his actual position on Salat ad-Duha is narrated in Ahadith; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha was a fine innovation which originated at the time of Khariji revolt against the Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And he believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and two of his Khulafah did not perform Salat ad-Duha and in imitation to their way he did not perform it either. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

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

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

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

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

Introduction: Already an article has been written to refute Ibn Uthaymeen’s (lanatu lillah) mutilation of religion of Islam. With mercy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) it was established the true innovator and defacer of perfection/completion of Islam was Ibn Uthaymeen (lanatu lillah). He is the undeclared prophet and undeclared god of those who follow his reprehensible innovative methodology. For us Muslims, there is no law giving God but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and there is no law giving prophet after Prophet and the Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 1.0 - Quote From Ibn Uthaymeen’s Book: “My brothers, now that this matter has been settled, did the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) die while something from the religion which draws one closer to Allah the Exalted remained which he did not explain? Never! Since the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained the whole of the religion either by his speech, his action or his (silent) approval, whether that was initiated of his own accord or whether it was due to a response to a question. Sometimes Allah would send a Bedouin from the furthest region of the desert in order to ask the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) a thing from among the matters of the religion which the Companions, who stuck by the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not ask him. This is why they used to rejoice when a Bedouin would come and ask the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about certain affairs. That the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not leave anything which the people are in need of in their worship, their dealings with one another and their livelihood without having explained it is proven to you by His speech, the Exalted: “This day have I perfected for you your religion and have completed My favor upon you and have chosen for you Islam as a religion.” When this matter has been explained [that Islam is perfected/completed then] - O Muslim - know that every one who innovates something in the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) even if it is with a good intention, then his innovation, along with it being misguidance, will be considered a defamation of the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) and will be considered a denial and rejection of Allah (azza wa jal) the Exalted in His speech: “This day have I perfected for you your religion …” Since this innovator who innovated a matter into the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) which is not from the religion of Allah (azza wa jal) is saying silently that the religion has not been completed because this matter which was left out, and which he innovated, can be used to draw closer to Allah (azza wa jal).” [Ref: Innovations In The Light Of Perfection Of Shari’ah, Pages 3/4, by Muhammad bin Salih Al Uthaymeen] 1.1 - Salih Al Uthaymeen’s Position In My Own Words: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught all aspects of the religion of Islam. Even the minute details were taught and religion of Islam was completed, perfected, with all these fine details. Comprehensiveness of Islamic teaching is detailed in Quran and Hadith therefore there is no room for praiseworthy innovations in religion of Islam. And one who innovates into religion of Islam anything which was not taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) insinuates indirectly; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not perfect/complete the religion of Islam because x, y, z matters were not made part of Islamic teaching which should have been part of Islam. As such, this innovator is a heretic and his deeds will be rejected and will end in hell fire. 1.2 - The Heretical Argument Summed By Wahhabi Side Of Me: There is no need for innovations in Islam even if they are introduced for the purpose; 1) of improving Islam, 2) propagating Islam, 3) assisting Islam, 4) sending reward of good deeds to the deceased.[1] The religion of Islam was comprehensively explained by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in minute detail. All improvements were made until Islam reached perfection/completion in the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). All that was required to spread Islam, assist Islam was taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hence every newly introduced matter in the religion of Islam is [reprehensible] innovation, a misguidance and takes to hell fire even if the people see goodness in it. 2.0 - The Straight Path And Straight To Hell Path: Islam being perfected and completed and every aspect of Islam being taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has absolutely no consequence to introduction of praiseworthy Biddahs/Sunnahs into religion of Islam. Rather the comprehensiveness of Islam is being misused by Khariji fringe elements to support predetermined heretical belief. If one does not accept the Shar’ri legality of introducing praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs into religion of Islam then such a person should in principle not accept praiseworthy innovations which became backbone of Islam. 3.0 - Jihad Example Of Exhaustive Prophetic Teaching: Jihad is important part of Islamic teaching. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gave direct instruction to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to engage in Jihad: “O Prophet, fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination.” [Ref: 9:73] He engaged in Jihad against the hypocrites and disbelievers as instructed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Sunnah weaponry employed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sword, spear, shield, bow and arrow. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs the believers: “And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery) to threaten the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allah does know.“ [Ref: 8:60] Note, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs the Muslims to prepare all the means of war in power and then instructs the Muslims to prepare the war horses to threaten the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The means of war are explained by the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) – sword, spear, bow and arrow, etc. 3.1 - Miswak Demonstration Of Comprehensiveness Of Islam: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained the following verse: “The nature made by Allah in which He has created men there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion", with words: “There is none born but is created to his true nature (i.e. Islam). It is his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian. Quite like beasts produce their young with their limbs perfect.”[2] In other words every child born is born on the religion of Islam but the parents alter this natural inclination according to their own world view. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has reported to have said: “Narrated 'Aishah, that the Prophet said: "Ten are from the Fitrah: Paring the mustache, leaving the beard to grow, Siwak, cleaning the nose with water, paring the fingernails, washing the knuckles, plucking the underarm hair, shaving the pubic hairs, and Intiqas with water." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B41, H2757] Note, Islam is religion of Fitrah or accurately the pure human Fitrah is fundamentally Islam and therefore use of Miswak/Siwak is part of Fitrah/Islam. Hence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) routinely used Siwak before performing Tahajjud prayers: “Narrated Hudhaifa: Whenever the Prophet got up for Tahajjud prayer he used to clean his mouth (and teeth) with Siwak.” [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H237] He is reported to have said: “Abu Hurairah narrated; Allah's Messenger said: "If it were not that it would be difficult on my nation, then I would have ordered them to use the Siwak for each prayer." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B1, H22] 4.0 – Biddah Weapons And Sunnah Weapons And Heretical Methodology: Religion of Islam was completed/perfected and detailed guidance on every aspect of religion of Islam was provided by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). As evidence establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) engaged in Jihad against the disbelievers and demonstrated the type of weapons to be employed. These weapons are part of Islam and are part of perfected/completed and detailed guidance on Jihad. To employ any other weapon not established from the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is adding to already perfected/completed religion of Islam.[3] It is akin to saying; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not know about the AK47, RPG, MG’s, HG’s but we know better what weapons are better for Jihad in the way of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and we have to improve Islam and their short comings by introducing Biddah weapons into battle field.[4] Also it is akin to saying; religion of Islam was not completed/perfected and the micro-guidance of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not enough hence these Biddah weapons are better substitute in modern battlefield then the Sunnah weapons. 4.1 - Biddah Tooth Brush/Paste And Sunnah Miswak And Heretical Methodology: Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is to use Miswak to clean his teeth and use of Miswak is part of completion/perfection of religion of Islam and part of micro-guidance from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This Sunnah Miswak has been replaced by Biddah brushes/pastes and heretics especially use Colgate brushes/pastes.[5] Use of these Biddah brushes/pastes is equal to believing that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not know better then the disbelievers about oral hygiene and what the disbelievers invented is better replacement to Miswak.[6] One who leaves the guidance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) for the tooth brushes/pastes of what the disbelievers invented believes Islam was incomplete and imperfect and the guidance of beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regarding oral hygiene was insufficient. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), the knower of unseen and apparent, willed for the Muslims to use tooth pastes/brushes he would have revealed a verse in Quran saying when it is invented then use it. Or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to whom the news of unseen arrived would have told us about tooth pastes/brushes. 4.2 – Biddah Bukhari/Muslim And Heretical Methodology: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed and explained the Quran to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he explained it to his followers. Deen of Islam was completed/perfected and we find absolutely no instruction from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about Hadith collections called Bukhari/Muslim. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) completed and perfected the religion of Islam and provided micro-guidance without employing Bukhari/Muslim then what need is there for Bukhari/Muslim? Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not employ Bukhari/Muslim in his sermons and there is no record of his saying; in Bukhari/Muslim it is written, yet he was means of completion/perfection of Islam. Then question worth asking is, what need is there for Bukhari/Muslim? If Islam was perfected/completed without Bukhari/Muslim then question is; can Islam be perfection/completed without Bukhari/Muslim? Is Bukhari/Muslim essential part of Islam and part perfection/completion of Islam? Can Biddahs be part of perfection/completion of Islam? Are not the Biddahs misguidance even if the people see goodness in them? Do you see goodness in Bukhari/Muslim? You distort the perfection/completion of Islam by introducing Biddahs of Bukhari/Muslim into Islam. Your adherence to these Biddahs is proof that you believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not provide comprehensive guidance in religion of Islam and Quran is not enough for guidance. Neither Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor his beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) left any instruction compile Bukhari/Muslim or any Hadith book for that matter nor they gave instructions regarding employing these two Biddahs. 5.0 – Putting Everything In Perspective Of Heretical Methodology: In parts 3.0, it was established that Jihad is essential part of Islam. Also the weapons used by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions were declared. Using this as a base, in part 4.0 a heretical argument against the heretics was advanced, using their own methodology to establish for them the fault of their own methodology. In part 3.1 and part 4.1 exact methodology was employed for the same purpose. In part 4.2, purpose was to demonstrate how a member of anti-Hadith sect can use the very same argument of Ibn Uthaymeen against books of Ahadith. Heretical methodology was employed for sole purpose of showing these heretics the mirror so they see the ugliness of Wahhabism. In the hope they would realize the heretical nature of their understandings which stem from their heretical methodology of – every innovation of evil/sinful even if people see goodness in it. 5.1 – Exposing The Heretical Methodology Of Wahhabism From Sunnah: Heretics have not believed in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) when he said: “It was narrated that Abu Juhaifah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. Whoever introduces an evil practice that is followed after him, will bear the burden of sin for …" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207] We Muslims are instructed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in Hadith Qawli; “I enjoin you to fear Allah, and to hear and obey even if it be an Abyssinian slave, for those of you who live after me will see great disagreement. You must then follow my sunnah and that of the rightly-guided caliphs.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4590] We follow his Sunnah because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has explained: “Narrated `Abdullah: The best speech is Allah's book, and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and the worst are newly-invented matters, and whatever you have been promised will surely come to pass, and you cannot escape (it).” [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H120] This also attested by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in the Quran: “There is indeed the best example for you to follow, in the Messenger of Allah, for every such person looks forward to Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah much.” [Ref: 33:21] Hence the best of guidance on Sunnahs/Biddahs which are good is of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). We the Muslims reject and disbelieve the minions of Satan from Najd and reject their heretical methodology which contradicts teaching of Islam. We believe in the Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) who has informed us of reward for praiseworthy Sunnahs/Biddahs. 6.0 - Muslim Perspective On Comprehensiveness Of Islam: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed the Quran to his beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and explained all aspects of religion of Islam to him. He taught worship, types of worship, time of worship, actions in worship, what to say in worship, number of time one should worship, and times on which one should worship. Wudhu is ritual washing of hands, mouth, cleaning nose, washing face, elbows, and feet. Prophetic tradition provides absolute guidance on how to perform Wudhu, when to perform Wudhu and how Wudhu is invalidated. Quran/Hadith detail almost every aspect of Islam and human life and give verdict on it and this is part of comprehensiveness of Islamic teaching. Another part to comprehensiveness of Islamic teaching is, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) provided principles to judge matters/practices which would arise after completion of Islam. Part of these principles is the teaching; if one introduces a praiseworthy Sunnah into Islam and it is followed by the people the reward will be equal to one who acts on the innovated Sunnah.[7] The second principle in context of innovated practice states; one who innovates a reprehensible Sunnah into religion of Islam, he will be sinful for it, and those who will follow the reprehensible Sunnah they will receive equal amount of sin.[8] Without these principles and without teachings of Ijtihad - the comprehensiveness of Islamic teaching would be limited to a particular era and Islam would have been unable evolve to withstand the ideological and social challenges faced in past and faces at present. These principles and the teaching about Ijtihad ensure that core of Islam remains static yet the Muslims are empowered to judge worldly and religious innovations in the light of Quran/Hadith.[9] 6.1 - Later Innovations Into Islam According To Methodology Of Muslims: Starting with modern weapons, even though there is no explicit evidence which establishes that these weapons are established from the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but their use allows the believers to fulfill a command of religion. Therefore there use is permissible and there use in Jihad comes into category of good Sunnah/Biddah and it is reward worthy. Tooth brushes/pastes are not Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Miswak is Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Despite this the use of tooth brush/paste is permissible in Islam because it helps to achieve a objective of deen – oral hygiene. The first Muslim to employ it for purpose of oral hygiene will be rewarded because those who followed him achieved a religious objective via tooth paste/brush. These modern inventions are not replacement for the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but the permissibility is established. Coming to Bukhari/Muslim, indeed they are later innovations and they are essential part of religion of Islam and without these the perfection/completion of Islam would not be appreciated. Even though names of these books are not mentioned in Quran/Ahadith these books contain essential knowledge of Islam and are fundamental to understanding Quran. They are indeed later Biddahs/Sunnahs but they are good and reward worthy because they contain Sunnahs of beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which explain Quran. Conclusion: Ibn Uthaymeen’s position; Islam was completed and perfected and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) provided micro-guidance on affairs of religion hence one who introduces Biddah/Sunnah into Islam has defaced the perfection/completion of Islam, is a poor excuse to justify his this heretical belief. If is accepted and employed fairly without bias it could even eradicate the basis for Quran because neither Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) left instruction to compile the Quran into one book format. Based on this fact it can be argued, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) perfected religion of Islam and provided complete guidance on everything but did not consider it important to leave instructions for compiling Quran in single book format nor did his Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was aalihi was’sallam) then what need is of it? O senseless Ibn Uthaymeen, isn’t this akin to insinuating Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not perfect/complete Quran good enough and their guidance wasn’t complete enough? Quran is complete/perfect and the guidance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is perfect guidance. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has told of reward for introducing into Islam good Sunnah/Biddah and for those who follow the good Biddah/Sunnah. Those who support the evil/sin of Ibn Uthaymeen they will bear the burden of it and he will be their leader in hell-fire. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] Heretics understand the following Hadith literally, it states; every newly introduced matter is innovation, and matter of fact is that his [praiseworthy] innovations fall into these four categories. Hence the detail was incorporated into summing up of Wahhabi position because when they state EVERY innovation is MISGUIDANCE then they declare all FOUR types of [praiseworthy] innovations as MISGUIDANCE. No sane heretic would ever dare to actually negate all FOUR types of [praiseworthy] innovations. - [2] “There is none born but is created to his true nature (i.e. Islam). It is his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian quite as beasts produce their young with their limbs perfect. Do you see anything deficient in them? Then he quoted the Qur'an., The nature made by Allah in which He has created men there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion" [Ref: Muslim, B33, H6423] - [3] Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are of four types; 1) Qawli (i.e. speech), Fehli (i.e. actions), Taqreeri (i.e. tacitly approved), and Wasfi (i.e. quality). - [4] No it is not akin to saying anything; it is me being [stupid] Wahhabi and being Ibn Uthaymeen (lanatu lillah). Belief is in Islam is what you affirm with tongue and confirm within your heart. - [5] Use of Colgate is for dramatic effect, trying to be like all knowing Wahhabi, who knows everything about the intentions and reasons and nothing is concealed from him when he writes something to refute his opponent. I do not have any idea what the Wahhabi’s actually use but rest assured they have replaced the Miswak with some modern tooth paste/brush and the Miswak is used before Friday prayers. So point is, they use tooth pastes/brushes and the brand, you can ask your closest Wahhabi. - [6] Read footnote #4, it explains the intention behind it. - [7]“He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] - [8] “And whoever introduces a bad practice that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6470] - [9] Core of Islam – here means fundamental teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Core of Islam is, Islam without additions made after the death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Core without Biddahs/Sunnahs of companions, generations succeeding companions and the generation succeeding the second generation and core without all types Sunnahs/Biddahs that Muslims introduced thereafter.

غیر مقلد حضرات امام ابو حنیفہؒ پہ مرجئیہ ہونے کا الزام لگاتے ہیں لیکن غیر مقلدین کے مشہور عالم ابراہیم میر سیالکوٹی امام ابو حنیفہ ؒ کا دفاع کرتے ہوئے لکھتے ہیں کہ '' بعض مصنفین نے امام ابو حنیفہؒ اور ان کے شاگردوں کو رجال مرجئیہ میں شمار کیا ہے ۔۔۔۔۔۔علماء نے اس کا جواب کئی طریقے سے دیا ہے، اول یہ کہ یہ آپ ؒ پہ بہتان ہے ، آپؒ مخصوص فرقہ مرجئیہ سے نہیں ہوسکتے'' ( تاریخ اہلحدیث، صفحہ 56،57،58) غیر مقلد عالم ابراہیم میر سیالکوٹی صاحب نے اپنی کتاب تاریخ اہلحدیث میں تفصیل سے امام ابو حنیفہؒ پہ لگائے جانیوالے تمام الزامات کا دفاع کیا ہے اور آخر میں یہ تسلیم کیا ہے کہ '' ائمہ کرام ؒ کی بے ادبی اور توہین کرنا دنیا اور آخرت دونوں جہاں کے نقصان کا باعث ہے۔ (تاریخ اہلحدیث،صفحہ 72) ان مشہور غیر مقلد عالم کا امام ابو حنیفہؒ کا دفاع کرناموجودہ دورکے ان تمام غیر مقلدین کے منہ پر طمانچہ ہےجو امام ابو حنیفہؒ کی توہین اوربے اد بی کرتے ہیں اور ان پہ کفر اور شرک کے جھوٹے فتوے لگاتے ہیں۔