کمیونٹی میں تلاش کریں

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

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

Introduction: 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: 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]

Bhaiyo ek hadees ka pta krna hai...huzur ne farmaya ki teen qism ke logo pr shariat ki qalam ni chalti...pehla majnoon ...dusri jo so rha ho...(kuch aise hi hai wo hadees.)) Kisi bhai ko koi ilm hai is bare m

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

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

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

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

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

Introduction: 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: 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: 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.

Introduction: Recently [on 09 Nov 2014 - 5:55 PM] a heretic with the name of Zia Bashir created a thread on IslamiMehfil forum titled; 'Honorable Prophet Muhammad’s Invitation To Tawheed And Shirk Of Arabs.', which you can read, here. Brother Zia Bashir basically presented the following principles to indicate how a Ilah is made – which will be presented in my own words: ‘To believe any being has control over benefit and harm, or can alleviate every type of hardship/upsetting [matter] or has the power in the kingdom of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to utilize the means in the skies and earth (i.e. such as sends rain from clouds and grows crops from earth), is elevating the being to status of God. Or to believe a being grants sustenance, or is in charge of distributing sustenance and grants to which the being wills, or believing a being grants son/daughter, or a being is part of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as son/daughter, is elevating the being to status of God. Worshiping the being in any way (i.e. invoking a being for help) or believing the being is acting attorney/disposer of all [affairs of creation] is elevating the being to status of God. To give life to the dead, to [breath] life into a clay figurine is in power of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), life and death’s owner is only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and to believe this power for anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is elevating the being to status of god, it is polytheism.’ In response myself and other Muslims responded to him pointing out faults and incompatibility of his principles with teaching of Quran/Hadith. It became apparent to Muslims engaged in discussion with him that he does not understand the concepts of Islam which explain Tawheed/Shirk. Hence it was realized there is need for Islamic principles which should indicate how a creation is elevated to status of an Ilah. This effort is to fill the void felt during the discussion. Continuing, just when the tide turned against him and faults of his principles became apparent to him and strength of Islamic arguments forced him to retreat toward the principles of Muslims, he quit. 1.0 - Linguistic Meaning Of The Word Ilah And Its Usage In Quran: Word Ilah commonly is translated to mean God but the actual meaning derived considering its root is; one deserving of worship (i.e. Mabud). Its equivalent singular ‘Ilahan’ and plural ‘Aalihatun’ have been used as synonyms for idols/idol. The evidence of this is when nation of Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) reached a certain group of people who worshipped idols, they demanded Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) create for them an Ilah (i.e. an idol to) which they can devout their acts of worship.[1] Also the word Ilah is synonym for Rabb (i.e. Sustainer) and Khaliq (i.e. Creator).[2] 1.1 - Reasons Why Polytheists Took Idols As Ilah: The polytheists believed their idols have the power to benefit/harm and that they have the power to intercede and will intercede for them to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on the day of judgment.[3] On basis of this belief they believed their idol can be taken as an Ilah in meaning of; deserving worship. This establishes polytheists had certain belief on basis of which they believed their idols are worthy of worship.[4] In the belief of polytheists Ilah is encompassed by certain attributes and as a result they took the idols as objects of worship. Hence Ilah is not just one that is worshipped but one that possesses certain traits due to which it is worshipped. 1.2 - Understanding Why The Muslims Take Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Ilah: According to some scholars the name ‘Allah’ is derivative of Al-Ilah (i.e. the God) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is possessor of [ninety-nine] beautiful names and attributes. [5] Hence comprehensively Al-Ilah is inclusive of all ninety-nine names and attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) not just, Rabb and Khaliq. If the name ‘Allah’ is not derived from the word Al-Ilah as some scholars have stated even then the true Ilah must be associated with ninety-nine names and attributes. As Muslims we believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the Creator (i.e. Al Khaliq), the Evolver (i.e. Al Bari), and the Provider (i.e. Ar-Razzaq), and the Life-Giver (i.e. Al Mu’hayi), and the One (i.e. Al Ahad) … all the ninety-nine attributes. Belief in names and attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is essentially connected with believing in Him as an Ilah. We believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to be our Ilah and we ascribe all beautiful names/attributes to Him. Therefore true Ilah is not just Mabud (i.e. one deserving of worship) but possessor of all attributes/names established for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Due to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) having mentioned attributes/names we have accepted Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is deserving of worship and believe it is proper to direct acts of worship to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Hence the linguistic meaning of Ilah is to be applied in the strict sense. But considering the fact; belief [n possesses x attributes is able to harm/benefit …] must exist before appointing of an Ilah therefore [such] beliefs are fundamental part of appointing an Ilah.[6] Would anyone take a potato to be their Ilah? Or take their fridge as their Ilah? Certainly not because a person understands they do not possess godly qualities and cannot benefit or harm. Alhasil, Ilah is taken when it is believed the one taken as Ilah has ability to hear/see, is able to harm/benefit and an intelligent being will not take a creation to be Ilah if one does not expect any harm/benefit. Hence naturally if one is worshipped then belief of Ilah must pre-exist in the heart of worshipper.[7] 1.3 - Comprehensive Meaning Of Word Ilah: It is important to note; the word Ilah is encompassed by the attributes/actions and it on basis of these attributes/actions an Ilah is taken. Hence linguistic meaning is applicable on every usage but attributes/actions which force a believer to choose Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as his Ilah are inclusive in the meaning of Ilah.[8] Therefore in Islam the Ilah cannot be separated from His attributes/actions. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Ilah with all of His attributes and actions. Also the Ilah of polytheists are Ilah with the attributes and actions which polytheists attributed to them. 2.0 – Thirteen Concepts Which Explain Attributes And Actions Of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Wajib Ul Wujud and the being of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and all attributes, actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are to be understood in meaning of zaati (i.e. personal), qulli (i.e. total), azli/abdi (i.e. eternal), haqiqi (i.e. real), bi-ghayr izni (i.e. without permission), ghayr muntahai (i.e. unlimited), ghayr makhlooq (i.e. uncreated), muhaal al fana (i.e. impossible to annihilate), bi-ghayr misl (i.e. without comparison), and khaliqi (i.e. creator’s), akmal (i.e. perfect), mustaqil (i.e. independent). If any attribute or action of any creation is understood according to these then the creation is elevated to status of god and has been made partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as a god. 2.1 – Explaining Some Concepts From Thirteen To Facilitate Better Understanding: When the Qull (i.e. total) is applied to Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) owner-ship then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Malik (i.e. Owner) of all creation, in other words His Malikiyyah (i.e. owner-ship) of all creation. When it is applied to His hearing it means Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hears everything and when it is applied to His Seeing it means He See’s everything. When it is connected with His Rubbubiyyah (i.e. Sustainer-ship, Provider-Ship) it means He is sustainer and provider of all creation. When Zaati (i.e. personal) is applied to Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ownership then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is believed to be Malik by His own-self.[9] When Zaati is applied to His Hearing it means ability of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hearing is His own and non-other has given Him the power to hear. When it is applied to His seeing it means He See’s by His own self and none has given Him the ability to see. When it applied to His Lordship/Sustainer-Ship then it means Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Rabb by His self and His act of sustaining is His own. When Azli is applied to ownership of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) it means He was/is Malik from eternity. When it applies to His Hearing it means Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was Hearing from eternity and when it is applied to His Seeing then it means Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) seeing from eternity. When it is applied to Rubbubiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) it means He had the ability to provide/sustain from eternity. 3.0 - Fundamental Way A Creation Is Taken As An Ilah: (i) To believe a creation is an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or the Ilah then the creation has been elevated to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (ii) To believe a creation has the right to be worshipped is to elevate the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (iii) To worship a creation, with intention of worship, without believing one being worshipped is an Ilah, is taking the being to be an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 3.1 – Deriving Ilah-Determining Principles From Thirteen Concepts: (i) To believe one is wajib ul wujood (i.e. existence is essential), or the being possesses certain actions/attributes or all attributes/actions according to understanding of zaati (i.e. personal), qulli (i.e. total), azli/abdi (i.e. eternal), haqiqi (i.e. real), bi-ghayr izni (i.e. without permission), ghayr muntahai (i.e. unlimited), ghayr makhlooq (i.e. uncreated), muhaal al fana (i.e. impossible to annihilate), bi-ghayr misl (i.e. without comparison), and khaliqi (i.e. creator’s), akmal (i.e. perfect), mustaqil (i.e. independent), is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (ii) To believe a creation can benefit/harm, or remove hardship, or has power to utilize means in creation, or grants and distributes sustenance, or grants male/female children, or manages affairs of creation, or gives life to the dead, or sends rain from clouds, or has power over ma teht al asbab[10] (i.e. according to natural means) / ma fawq al asbab (i.e. according to supernatural means) as an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is taking the being to be an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (iii) To believe a creation possessing atahi (i.e. bestowed), baaz (i.e. partial), waqti (i.e. transient), majazi (i.e. linguistical), bi izni (i.e. with permission), muntahai (i.e. limited), makhlooq (i.e. created), mumkin al fana (i.e. possible to annihilate), bi misli (i.e. with comparison) and makhlooqi (i.e. creations) attributes/actions no longer requires permission from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to utilize his attributes/actions, or to make use of what is provided in creation, and engages in ma teht al asbab and ma fawq al asbab without requiring permission from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is elevating the creation to status of being an Ilah besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (iv) To believe a creation possessed all attributes/actions in according to understanding of; atahi (i.e. bestowed), baaz (i.e. partial), waqti (i.e. transient), majazi (i.e. linguistical), bi izni (i.e. with permission), muntahai (i.e. limited), makhlooq (i.e. created), mumkin al fana (i.e. possible to annihilate), bi misli (i.e. with comparison) and makhlooqi (i.e. creations), but now has become equal to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in his one or more or all attributes/actions, or has been elevated to status of an Ilah by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is elevating the creation to status of Ilah-partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (v) To believe a creation possessing atahi (i.e. bestowed), baaz (i.e. partial), waqti (i.e. transient), majazi (i.e. linguistical), bi izni (i.e. with permission), muntahai (i.e. limited), makhlooq (i.e. created), mumkin al fana (i.e. possible to annihilate), bi misli (i.e. with comparison), and makhlooqi (i.e. creations) attributes/actions can provide ma teht al asbab and ma fawq al asbab type of harm/benefit without permission and granting of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is elevating the creation to status of being god partner to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (vi) To believe a creation possessing atahi (i.e. bestowed), baaz (i.e. partial), waqti (i.e. transient), majazi (i.e. linguistical), bi izni (i.e. with permission), muntahai (i.e. limited), makhlooq (i.e. created), mumkin al fana (i.e. possible to annihilate), bi misli (i.e. with comparison), and makhlooqi (i.e. creations) qualities can provide ma fawq al asbab (i.e. according to supernatural means) type of harm/benefit without permission and granting of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is elevating the creation to status of being god partner to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 4.0 – Guide To Interpreting The Six Principles: The following principle should be used to understand and expand six principles stated in 3.1. Thumb rule is, if one, or more, or all concepts, from the thirteen mentioned, are attributed to a creation’s Zaat (i.e. being), or Sift (i.e. attribute) or some/all Sifaat (i.e. attributes), or Fehl (i.e. action) or some/all Afaal (i.e. actions), then creation is made Ilah-partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 4.1 – Explaining The Thumb Rule: Najd says: Zahid can hear by his own self (i.e. Zaati) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not give him the ability to hear. Najd has attributed Zaati hearing to Zahid, therefore Najd has affirmed one concept from thirteen, for one attribute, and hence he elevated the Zahid to status of Ilah. Najd says: Zahid can hear by his own self (i.e. Zaati) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not give him the ability to hear and Zahid can hear absolutely everything (i.e. Qulli). This time Najd has affirmed Zaati and Qulli concepts for one attribute (i.e. hearing) of Zahid hence he has elevated Zahid to status of Ilah. Thumb rule is; if one or more concepts are attached to a attribute/action, or one concept but one or more attributes/actions are connected then creation is elevated to status of Ilah. 4.2 – An Important Note For The Students Of Knowledge: Please note, mentioned six principles in 3.1 are just a guide to understanding the principles of Islam regarding Shirk. These principles do not cover every aspect of major Shirk therefore Muslims dedicated to learning should explore the thirteen concepts in light of section 4.0 and 4.1 in order to unlock more principles. In section 3.1 Zaat (i.e. being) aspect of Tawheed/Shirk is not brought into the principles.[11] If I had done so the principles would have become excessively complex and difficult for the readers to understand. Hence readers can expand on the Tawheed/Shirk of Zaat using section 4.0. 5.0 - Interpreting 1st Ilah-Determining Principle To Demonstrate Methodology Of Interpretation: (i) To believe Zahid is Wajib Ul Wujud is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (ii) To believe Zahid possesses Zaati attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (iii) To believe Zahid possesses Qulli attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (iv) To believe Zahid possesses Azli attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (v) To believe Zahid possesses Haqiqi attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (vi) To believe Zahid possesses bi-Ghayr Izni attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (vii) To believe Zahid possesses Ghayr Muntahai attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (viii) To believe Zahid possesses Ghayr Makhlooq attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (ix) To believe Zahid possesses Muhaal Al fana attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (x) To believe Zahid possesses bi-Ghayr Misl attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (xi) To believe Zahid possesses Khaliqi attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (xii) To believe Zahid possesses Akmal attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (xiii) To believe Zahid possesses Mustaqil attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 5.1 – Explaining Various Interpretations Of 1st Ilah-Determining Principle: Here some difficult to grasp aspects will be explained to clarify them and in order to demonstrate how they are to be understood. The first interpretation of first Ilah-Determining principle is: To believe Zahid is Wajib Ul Wujud is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is interpreted as: Zahid’s Zaat (i.e. being), Sifaat (i.e. attributes), Afaal (i.e. actions) are absolutely/fundamentally necessary, non-existence is impossible and to believe this is to elevate Zahid to status of Ilah because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is alone Wajib Ul Wujud and apart from his existence everything and their attributes and their action can/cannot exist. The ninth interpretation of first Ilah-Determining principle is: To believe Zahid possesses Muhaal Al Fana attributes/actions is elevating the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Firstly, one whose attributes/actions are Muhaal Al Fana then automatically his Zaat is also Muhaal Al Fana because the attributes/actions cannot exist without the Zaat. If Zaat can be annihilated/destroyed then attributes/actions will also be destroyed/annihilated hence Zaat of one possessing Muhaal Al Fana attributes/actions must be Muhaal Al Fana. Secondly, To believe Zahid’s abilities of hearing/seeing and his action of walking/talking cannot be annihilated/destroyed [to put is simply – to eliminate their existence from creation] is elevating Zahid to status of Ilah because only attributes/actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are impossible to annihilate/destroy along His Zaat everything else beside Him can be removed from state of existence into state of non-existence. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. Footnote: - [1] “We took the Children of Israel (with safety) across the sea. They came upon a people devoted entirely to some idols they had. They said: "O Moses, design for us like unto the gods they have." He said: "Surely you’re a people without knowledge.” [Ref: 7:138] - [2] In the following verse words Ilah and Rabb have been used interchangeably: “Say, "I am only a man like you, to whom has been revealed that your Ilah is One Ilah. So whoever would hope for the meeting with his Rabb - let him do righteous work and not associate in the worship of his Rabb anyone.” [Ref: 18:110] Following verse uses the word Ilah in context of creating and harm/benefit: “Yet they have taken besides Him other gods (i.e. alihah) who created nothing but are themselves created, and possess neither harm nor benefit for themselves, and possess no power (of causing) death, nor (of giving) life, nor of raising the dead.” [Ref: 25:3] - [3] “Is not Allah enough for his Servant? But they try to frighten thee with other (gods) besides Him! for such as Allah leaves to stray, there can be no guide.” [Ref: 39:36] "We say nothing but that (perhaps) some of our gods may have seized thee with imbecility. “He said: "I call Allah to witness, and do ye bear witness, that I am free from the sin of ascribing, to Him." [Ref: 11:54] “And they have taken gods besides Allah that they might give them honor, power and glory.” [Ref: 19:81] "We only worship them so that they may bring us closer to Allah." [Ref: 39: 3] - [4] Alhasil, belief precedes the act of appointing Deity and engaging in worship. - [5] “And (all) the Most beautiful names belong to Allah , so call on Him by them, and leave the company of those who belie or deny (or utter impious speech against) His names. They will be requited for what they used to do.“ [Ref: 7:180] - [6] n possesses x, y, z attributes as well as ability to harm/benefit … hence Zahid decides n deserves worship therefore Zahid takes n as a Deity/Ilah in other words Mabud. - [7] Fiqhi verdict is stated in 3.0, principle 3, on the basis of Hadith; actions are determined according to intentions incase the belief of Ilah does not exist for what ever freak of nature reason but y has the intention of worshiping a creation. - [8] Quran is testimony to how Arabic words have evolved due to revelation of Quranic verses. Countless words in Arabic have evolved to mean something specific. In Arabic the word ‘Qibla’ means ‘direction’. The word ‘Qibla’ is used in context of facing Masjid Al Haram in prayer and as a result Muslims associate the word Qibla with direction which indicates Kabah. The word ‘Salah’ is used in meaning of ‘Dua’ (i.e. supplication) but now it has is associated with five daily prayers. Alhasil, linguistic meaning remain part of the Shar’ri meaning but depending on for whom the word is used and what context the word is used the meaning evolves. The implication here is; word Ilah linguistically means Mabud but its usage for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) adds to its linguistic meaning. Therefore the names and attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) become part of Shar’ri meaning of Ilah. - [9] Creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is made Malik (i.e. owner) of various objects by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) via means He has created. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the Malik (i.e. Owner) by His own-self meaning none has made Him Malik over creation. He was the Creator and is the Owner of what He created. - [10] Ma teht al asbab are – cure through use of medicine, strength through eating food, quenching of thirst with water, burning with fire, cutting with sharp instrument, light with bulb, walking with legs, lifting wit hands … in all these the; cure, strength, satisfying thirst, burning, cutting, light, walking, lifting is done with means available and not supernatural means. Ma fawq al asbab are actions - such as raising the dead, bringing rain from clouds, breathing life into clay bird figures, healing the blind instantly, splitting the moon, turning the staff into snake, bringing water out of fingers, growing trees from ash of seeds, rising the sun from the place of it’s setting. - [11] In section 5.1 Zaat aspect of Muhaal Al Fana has been discussed as a separate point even though it was not part of the first Ilah-Determining principle nor part of ninth interpretation. So you can certainly expand on this aspect to further your understanding of Tawheed with your private study.

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

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

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

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

Introduction: According to the principles of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat innovative practices which are based on Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) are praiseworthy innovations for which there will be reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) if they are followed by people. Especially if the innovative practices are combinations of acts of worship[1], combines acts of charity[2] and serves as a means of spreading Islamic knowledge. The Khawarij and those influenced by Kharijite definition of innovation, oppose the Muslims and hold to position; every practice, festivity, custom, which was [not mentioned explicitly by name and method of enacting it was not taught and] not sanctioned by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is [reprehensible] innovation. Every Innovation Is Misguidance They Say: Commonly the following Ahadith are quoted by opponents to refute position of Ahle Sunnat, the Ahadith: “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] From lingustic point of view anything which did not exist in the time of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) would be innovation. From Shar’i perspective innovation is everything which contradicts principles of deen and which is not sanctioned by deen, Ahadith establish this: “He who did 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 religion, that thing is rejected." [Ref: Bukhari B49, H861] “He who innovates things in our affairs for which there is no valid (reason) and these are to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4266] Therefore from Shar’i perspective innovation is every newly-invented belief, action, object which goes against the principles of Deen and is not in harmony with teaching of Deen. Hence every such novelty is innovation and every such innovation is an misguidance, and every such misguidance takes to hellfire. To argue every innovation is misguidances without restricting ‘every’ to specific type of innovation [which I have defined above] would establish contradiction between the Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has reportedly said: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.”[Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] “He who called (people) to righteous (i.e. innovation), 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] If every innovation was misguidance which took to hell then why would he inform the companions of reward for introducing good practices in Islam! This evidence supports the understanding that ‘every’ is not unrestricted but restricted to particular type of innovation [which contradicts the principles of Deen and which has no sanction in Deen]. Therefore the understanding of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat about the newly-invented practices is correct because neither of these practices in reality and in essence contradict any aspect of Deen. Instead these customs, practices, festivities, in essence contained acts of worship, charity, and serve as platform for spread of Islamic knowledge hence they accord the Prophetic guidelines. Heretics Advance A New Argument: The opponents of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat have advanced a new argument; there is no good innovation even if the people something good in some innovative custom, practice or festivity. There this argument is based on th following Hadith: “Abdullaah Ibn 'Umar (radi allahu anhu) said, "Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good."[3] Presenting their position in bit more detail; any innovated festivity, custom, practice, even if it contains acts of worship, charity, and is source of Islamic education, even then it is still a innovation. Despite all these it is without any goodness it and is misguidance which takes to hell fire. The simple response to this argument is; innovation in Shari’a is defined as acts, beliefs or activities which contradicts and go against the principles of Deen, and which has no sanction in deen, therefore such innovations are misguidance even if the people see good in them. Hadhrat Abu Bakr Disagrees And Then Agrees With Hadhrat Umar: After the death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) there was mass apostasy from Islam. Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) decided to take action against the apostates. The result was numerous battles fought in Arabian Peninsula which are now known as ‘Apostasy Wars’. During one such battle the Muslim army fighting Musailma the Liar had suffered major causualties including seventy companions who had memorized the Quran. After this battle Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) visited Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and said: "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." In response to this suggestion Hadhrat Abu Bakr said: “Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) responded by saying: "By Allah, that is a good project.” The Hadith continues to narrate words of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu): "`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." Upon realizing the importance of preserving the Quranic script Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) called Hadhrat Zaid bin Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu). After narrating the discussion between him and Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) he said to him: “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.” Hadhrat Zaid bin Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu) then said to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu): "How will you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?" Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) replied to him by saying: "By Allah, it is a good project.” Hadhrat Zaid bin Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu) further narrated: “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.”[4] Investigating The Incident In Light Of Teaching Of Islam: Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) refused to carry out something which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not do himself, citing the very same reason. Why would Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) refused to collect the Quranic script? Was the mentioned reason: “Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" the only reason on basis of which he refused or is there more to it? There is more going then what meets the eye. Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) must have been aware of the following Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam): “It was narrated from Abdullah bin Mas'ud that the Messenger of Allah said: "Verily there are two things - words and guidance. The best words are the words of Allah, and the best guidance in the guidance of Muhammad. Beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a going-stray.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H46] And the following Hadith specificly refers to leaders of Muslims: “It was narrated from ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud that the Prophet said: “Among those in charge of you, after I am gone, will be men who extinguish the Sunnah and follow innovation. They will delay the prayer from its proper time.” I said: “O Messenger of Allah, if I live to see them, what should I do?” He said: “You ask me, O Ibn ‘Abd, what you should do? There is no obedience to one who disobeys Allah.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B24, H2865] Hence his reluctance was based on the understanding that if he collects the Quran in a book format then he would be introducing a reprehensible innovation.[5] Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of the Ahadith known to Hadrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and he also knew that Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is also familiar with the following Hadith: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed, he will receive its reward and a reward equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in their slightest. And whoever introduces a bad practice that is followed, he will receive its sin and a burden of sin equivalent to that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H203] Hence he responded to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) by saying: "By Allah, that is a good project.” [Ref: Bukhari, B61, H509] Afterwards Hadhrat Zaid bin Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu) questioned the collection of Quran and after much effort he was convinced that collection of Quran into book format was a good act. Responding To - Every Innovation Misguidance Even If Good: Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hadhrat Zaid bin Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu) agreed to do something which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not instruct or himself did. They saw good in collecting the Quran into book format after initial resistance. After realizing the suggestion of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is a good suggestion and collection of Quran as a book is a good thing both companions agreed to carry out this task. If the following Hadith is taken literally then collection of Quran was misguidance even though three companions saw good in it : "Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) restarted a practice which all the companions stopped because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) stopped it. Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) collected all the people in Masjid under one Qari and remarked: “… 'Umar remarked, 'What an excellent innovation this is; but the prayer which they do not perform, …”[6] This indicates Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced a innovation. Now if it is accepted that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) had performed Taraweeh prayers and Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was merely reviving the Sunnah of Taraweeh prayers. Then the innovation is reintroducing something which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) stopped (– i.e. Taraweeh under one Imam). Based on the literalism of the Hadith if every innovation is misguidance despite one seeing goodness it the innovation then Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) excellent innovation was misguidance. A Fair Argument Against Injustice Of Heretics: If a innovation is good by its nature even though Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not do and which companions did not do then that innovation will remain a good innovation even if the people don’t see good in it. Especially if the innovation is based on the principle of worship and principle of charitiable deeds. The goodness of acts, beliefs, practices, customs, festivities, is judged on the criteria if the asal (i.e. foundation) is found in Quran/Sunnah. The praiseworthy innovations which Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) suggested he will be rewareded, according to 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] The misguidance of acts, beliefs, practices, customs, festivities, is determined by if the activities/beliefs contradict the Quran and Sunnah. If a festivity, custom, practice, act is against the explicit Shar’i injunctions then such will remain misguidance even if the people see good in it. To sum it all, any innovation which contradicts any principle or teaching of Islam, a act which was not sanctioned in deen, and for which there was no valid reason then such innovations are misguidance even if the people see something good in them. Conclusion: Every innovation is not evil because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has informed of reward for those who innovate good practices. Secondly if every innovation was misguidance or error even if the people see something good in it then compilation of Quran and Hadhrat Umars’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) collecting the people of Masjid under one Qari would be without any good and a misguidance. Not just the literalist understanding of the Hadith contradicts another Hadith which states one who innovates praiseworthy practice for him there is reward and those who follow the invented practice get equale amount of reward. Hence the meaning of Hadith is; every innovation which contradicts principles of Islam and contains acts which are not from Sunnah nor does it have a valid reason then such innovation is misguidance and without goodness. This explanation of the Hadith in the light of other Ahadith detracts nothing from position of Ahle Sunnat but rather defends and supports it. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. Footnotes: - [1] Such as performing of Nawafil, recitation of Quran, invoking Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in dua. - [2] Such as inviting the poor as well as family members and then for sake of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) pleasure provide them with food. - [3] Related: by Ad-Darimee, Abu Shamaah (no. 39), Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (no. 82), al-Laalikaa'ee in Sharh Usoolul-Ftiqaad (no. 126) & Sharh I'tiqad Ahl as-Sunnah (1/92), and by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal (no. 191). Its authentic; Ahkaam al-Janaa'iz (258) and Islah al-Masajid (13). Salim Al-Hilaali said: "Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun!" - [4] “Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found `Umar bin Al- Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "`Umar has come to me and said: "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." I said to `Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" `Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "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." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). '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)." 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 I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "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. So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat at-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuza`ima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is: 'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty..(till the end of Surat-Baraa' (at-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with `Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of `Umar.” [Ref: Bukhari, B61, H509] - [5] There can be absolutely no other reason to refuse to collect the Quran in a single book format apart from being responsible for introducing a reprehensible innovation. There could be no other motive for Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hadhrat Zaid bin Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to question and argue against the suggestion. If they didn’t fear introducing innovation then did they fear the kids will learn the Quran? Or did they fear that by making the Quran available in written form will result in education of everyone? Common sense dictates their fears was that they may be guilty of introducing innovation into deen and their reasoning was simple; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not do it so why should I/we? I can almost hear Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hadhrat Zaid bin Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu) saying to Hadhrat Umar(radiallah ta’ala anhu); if there was any goodness in it then Messenger (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) would have instructed us to carry out the task in his life time. - [6] “Abdur Rahman bin 'Abdul Qari said: "I went out in the company of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab one night in Ramadan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying 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) (i.e. let them pray in congregation!)'. 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, 'What an excellent Bid'a (i.e. innovation in religion) 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]