Response To Sister Umm Abdullah On Issue Of Khariji Belief; Polytheists Believed In Tawheed Al Rububiyyah.

[MuhammedAli]

Introduction:

A thread with the name of, Misuse Of 12:106 By Salafis, was started by someone with login name of Yunus. Discussion has revolved around the topic of, if polytheists believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah or if they were guilty of Shirk Al Rububiyyah. Brother Yunus adheres to Islamic understanding/belief that Arab polytheists were guilty of polytheism even in Rububiyyah. Sister Umm Abdullah is of belief like the typical Najdi Khawarij; Arab polytheists were believers in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. And these polytheists did not believe their idol-gods were Arbab/Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In order to defend this belief of Khariji Shuyukh of Najd she has presented some excuses and these excuses will be dealt with in this article. Inadvertently the discussion will gravitate toward the subject if the polytheists believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is able to do all as Lord or there are some things are out of His capability of Lordship. But all will come togather to establish the correct Islamic position.

1.0 - Polytheists Believed In Oneness Of Lordship But Were Not Monotheists In Lordship:

In response to brother Yunus’s post: “12:106 doesn't in any way prove the existence of people Allah calls pagans and are also *muwahidoon in Rubbubiyah*.”,  she wrote: “I don't remember seeing any Salafi scholar saying "Muwahidoon in Rububiyyah" .. they say that Pagan Arabs affirm Tawheed Rububiyyah meaning in the basis and major aspects of Rububiyyah and not in every aspect, as I explained before.” And I quoted the stated of Khariji Shuyukh in which they stated polytheists believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah:  "Specially if it is known that today the majority of scholars from different (muslim) countries do not know from tawhid except what mushriks (of Makkah) approved and they did not know the meaning of "al-ilahiyya" that "kalimatul-ikhlas" denied its attribution to anything other than Allah.” [Ref: Fath Al Majeed – Sharh Kitab At-Tawheed, Chapter (4) Fear Of Shirk, page 76] “The disbelievers whom the Messenger fought affirmed Tawheed ar-Rububiyah (Oneness of Allah's Lordship), yet their affirmation of Tawheed ar-Rububiyah did not enter them into Islam and did not sanctify their blood or wealth.” [Ref: Explanation Of Four Fundamental Principles, by Shaykh Salih Ibn Al Fawzan, Page 30, Published by: QSEP] And in response to her it was point by me: “Sister to say they believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is to say they were Muwahid in belief of Rububiyyah.” So basically it was pointed out to her that to say, they believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah, symentically means they were Muwahidoon in belief of Rububiyyah. Or it could be resolved by asking, are you believer in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah? If the answer is yes ask are you Muwahid in Onessness Of Lordship or Mushrik in beliefe of Oneness of Lordship? Anyone with ounce of knowledge and sense will realise the first question has answered the second by default. And this boils down to mean that the Shuyukh of Khawarij believed polytheists were monotheists in Oneness of Lordship. And this belief of Khawarij is a great lie and a clear disbelief in teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

2.0 - Oneness Of Lordship Means Believing Allah Manages Major Affairs Of Creation:

Sister Umm Abdullah wrote: “While in Rububiyyah, it is about Allah's Actions, and the pagan of Makkah did not associate partners in every action of Allah, but in some or many, while in some of the major ones like creation and ownership, they only ascribed to Allah. That is why their idols are called "ilahs" and not "Rabbs".” She stated polytheists believed Tawheed Al Rububiyyah because they believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) manages the following affairs [maybe others as well]: "If indeed, you ask them who is it that created the heavens and the earth, they would be sure to say, 'Allah'. Say : See you then the things that you invoke besides Allah? Can they, if Allah wills some penalty for me, remove His penalty? Or if He will some grace for me, can they keep back His grace ?" [Ref: 39:38] “Who created the heavens and the earth, and constrained the sun and the moon (to their appointed work)? they would say: Allah. How then are they turned away? [...] And if thou wert to ask them: Who causeth water to come down from the sky, and therewith reviveth the earth after its death? they verily would say: Allah. Say: Praise be to Allah! But most of them have no sense.” [Ref: 29:61-63] "...who is it that sustains you (in life) from the sky and from earth?” Or who is it that has power over hearing and sight? And who is it that brings the living from the dead and the dead from the living? And who is it that rules and regulates all affairs? They will quickly say, Allah. Say : Will you not then show piety to Him'' [Ref: 10:31] “Say: Unto Whom (belongeth) the earth and whosoever is therein, if ye have knowledge? They will say: Unto Allah. Say: Will ye not then remember? Say: Who is Lord of the seven heavens, and Lord of the Tremendous Arsh? They will say: Unto Allah (all that belongeth).Say: Will ye not then keep duty (unto Him)? Say: In Whose hand is the dominion over all things and He protecteth, while against Him there is no protection, if ye have knowledge? They will say: Unto Allah (all that belongeth). Say: How then are ye bewitched? “[Ref: 23:84-89] Polytheists of Arabia believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) managed all the mentioned – major affairs – quoted in the verses [and maybe more affairs].

2.1 - Belief In Rububiyyah Is Not Belief In Tawheed Al Rububiyyah:

Believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) manages all these affairs and more does not make anyone believer in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. Firstly, polytheists have not believed in complete Al-Rububiyyah but they have believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only manages major affairs of universe (i.e. major affairs of Al-Rububiyyah). Secondly, polytheists have not believed in Tawheed. Tawheed is belief of Oneness in, Dhaat (i.e. Essence), Asma Wal Sifaat (i.e. Names and Attributes) which is inclusive of Rububiyyah and Afaal (i.e. Actions), and Ilahiyyah (i.e. God-hood). Having a belief which negates belief of Oneness in anyone of these aspects negates belief in Tawheed. And there is evidence which establishes they committed Shirk in every mentioned category. Alhasil to term their belief of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) managing the major affairs of universe as Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is without warrant.

3.0 - Ilahs Of Polytheists Lords Or Gods:

She wrote: “While in Rububiyyah, it is about Allah's Actions, and the pagan of Makkah did not associate partners in every action of Allah, but in some or many, while in some of the major ones like creation and ownership, they only ascribed to Allah. That is why their idols are called "ilahs" and not "Rabbs".” In an attempt to refute her bold part of statement I quoted another one of my articles, here: “Lat, Uzza, And Manat As Lords Beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] What else did those people believe about the angels apart from believing them to be lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? This question is answered in the following vers of Quran – it reveals they believed these angels were daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Has then your Lord distinguished/honoured you by (giving you) sons, and taken unto Himself daughters in the guise of angels? Verily, you are uttering a dreadful saying!” [Ref: 17:40] “Have you seen Lat and Uzza? And another, the third Manat? What! for you the male child, and for Him, the female?” [Ref: 53:19/21] It was the polytheists of Arabia who believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had three daughters. This establishes the polytheists of Arabia believed Lat, Uzza, Manat to be Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because the polytheists believed these three are angels and hence daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and proof of them taking these daughter-angels as Lords is in the following verse: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] And in response to their attribution of angel-daughters as lord partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe.” [Ref: 6:100] And in another verse questions how they have come to know if the angels were female in the following verse: “And they have made the angels, who are servants of the Most Merciful, females. Did they witness their creation? Their testimony will be recorded, and they will be questioned.” [Ref: 43:16] Indicating the entire philosophy of polytheism is made-up and has no foundation other then their own desires.” To undermine the belief of Muslims she attempted to argue that the verse of Quran was revealed with in context of Jews/Christians [therefore it is regarding them and not polytheists of Arabia]: “As for the ayah (3:80): “Nor would he order you to take angels and Prophets for lords. Would he order you to disbelieve after you have submitted to Allah's Will?”  If you check the tafsir of this ayah, you will see that the verse is speaking about the Jews and Christians, and that the reason behind the revelation of this verse is that a group from the Jews came to the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) and asked him if he is calling them to worship him like the Christians worship Jesus (alayhi assalam); and Allah revealed this ayah.” This will be responded to in next three sections.

3.1 - Introduction To Meaning Of Verse 3:80:

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] Taking Prophets as lords was something which Jews/Christians did. And taking the angels as Lords was something which the polytheists did. This verse adresses the Muslims and says the Jews Christians, and polytheists took Prophets and angels as lords and Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam) would no instruct you to take them your your lords because he would be inviting you to Kufr.

3.2 – Ezra The Angel In Context Of Revelation Of Verse 3:80:

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states regarding the belief of a Jewish sect that Uzair was son of God: “The Jews call Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is the saying from their mouth; (In this) they are intimate; what the Unbelievers of the old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth.” [Ref: 9:30] Uzair has been associated with Prophet Ezra of Jewish Bible. In traditional Judeo Christian circles Ezra is regarded as a scribe who helped to restore the OT after it was lost during Babylonian captivity. If this is considered than Ezra would be from amongst those Prophet-Rabbi who has been elevated to status of Lord beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and this charge is evident from the following verse of Quran: “They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.” [Ref: 9:31] The hetrodoxical writings of 2^nd Ezra (i.e. 2^nd Esdras), 3^rd Enoch, the angels are reffered as ‘bene ha elohim’[1] (i.e. sons of god) and angel Metatron is believed to be their chief.[2] Traditionally the phrase ‘sons of god’ was mostly used for men pious men. Regarding Ezra the traditional Jewish opinion is/was that none is more pious then the one who committed the books of OT from memory to paper (i.e. Ezra). And based on this it is likely that a faction of them rationlised Uzair to be [an angel and] son of god. Please refer to following article for verification of various details, written by M S M Saifullah & Mustafa Ahmed, at Islamic-Awareness, here.

3.3 - Jesus The Angel In Context Of Revelation Of Verse 3:80:

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: (for) would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] “The Jews call Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is the saying from their mouth; (In this) they are intimate; what the Unbelievers of the old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth.” [Ref: 9:30]  There is concesus amongst scholars that there were some remenants of Ebionite Christians in Arabian Peninsula when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) receieved revelation. And later vast majority of these Christians converted to Islam. According to Epiphanius of Salamis in his book Panarion states [a sect of] Ebionite Christians believed Jesus to be archangel who was adopted by God to be His son. In this case it is likely this sect of Ebionites believed Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) is angel son of God and a Lord. The belief of Lordship would fit the following verse: “They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.” [Ref: 9:31]

3.4 - Substantiating The Disputed Meaning With Evidence:

The verse is not only talking abou Jews/Christians it is inclusive of polytheists of Arabia. Polytheists believed angels were children of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and following verse of proof of their belief: "They say, ‘The All-beneficent has taken offsprings.’ Immaculate is He! Rather they are [His] honoured servants. They do not venture to speak ahead of Him, and they act by His command. He knows that which is before them and that which is behind them, and they do not intercede except for someone He approves of, and they are apprehensive for the fear of Him. Should any of them say, ‘I am a god besides Him,’ We will requite him with hell. Thus do We requite the wrongdoers." [Ref: 21:26/29] And specificly the Polytheists believed their goddesses, Lat, Uzza, Manat were angels and daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) therefore. And I explained the relevent portion of verse (i.e. "Nor would he order you to take angels and prophets for lords.") with verses which establish polytheists belived their trinity goddesses were daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and angels. The evidence followed: “Has then your Lord distinguished/honoured you by (giving you) sons, and taken unto Himself daughters in the guise of angels? Verily, you are uttering a dreadful saying!” [Ref: 17:40] “Have you seen Lat and Uzza? And another, the third Manat? What! for you the male , and for Him, the female?” [Ref: 53:19/21] I had expalined verse of Quran with verses of Quran.

3.5 - Supporting The Interpretation From Tafsir Ibn Abbas:

The Islamic understanding is supported by Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Note he does not negate the historical context in which the verse was revealed nor affirms to it. Instead he explained the verse – being inclusive of Pagan Arabs - even though verse was revealed in context of Jews: "(And he commanded you) O people of the Quraysh, Jews and Christians (not that ye should take the angels) as daughters of Allah (and the Prophets for lords. Would he command you to disbelieve) how could Abraham command you to follow disbelief (after ye had surrendered (to Allah)) after he commanded you to follow Islam (completely Surrendering to Allah), saying to you: (Lo! Allah hath chosen for you the (true) Religion; therefore die not save as men who have surrendered [2:132]). Allah says here: Allah has not sent a Messenger except that He commanded him to follow Islam and not Judaism, Christianity or the worship of idols, as these unbelievers claim. It is also said that this verse was revealed about the claims of the Jews that Muhammad commanded them to love him and worship him as the Christians worshipped Jesus. The Christians and idolaters also made the same claim." [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Al Abbas - 3:80] This establishes that polytheists took the angels to be daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and believed Lat, Uzzat, and Manat are daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And verse 3:80 establishes these daughters were taken as Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

4.0 – Did Pagans Believe Angels Are Daughters Of Allah:

She wrote: “And my question still stands, i) where did Allah or His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) say that the pagans of Makkah believed that the Angels or anyone else they claimed are the offspring of Allah (Exalted is He), ii) [or that they] share authority with Allah, and have major attributes of Rububiyyah like creating,, ownership … etc?” In response to her first demand, the following verse of Quran establishes that polytheists believed angels are offsprings of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), I quote the following verse: "They say, ‘The All-beneficent has taken offsprings.’ Immaculate is He! Rather they are [His] honoured servants. They do not venture to speak ahead of Him, and they act by His command. He knows that which is before them and that which is behind them, and they do not intercede except for someone He approves of, and they are apprehensive for the fear of Him. Should any of them say, ‘I am a god besides Him,’ We will requite him with hell. Thus do We requite the wrongdoers." [Ref: 21:26/29] And this understanding is in line with understanding of Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “(And they say) i.e. the people of Mecca: (The Beneficent hath taken unto Himself a child) angels as daughters. (Be He glorified!) Allah exonerated Himself from having children or partners (Nay, but are honoured slaves) rather they are, i.e. the angels, are servants whom Allah has honoured with obeying Him; …” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Abbas – 21:26] Shaykh Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir has the following to say: “Here Allah refutes those who claim that He has offspring among the angels -- exalted and sanctified be He. Some of the Arabs believed that the angels were the daughters of Allah, but Allah says: (Glory to Him! They are but honored servants.) meaning, the angels are servants of Allah who are honored by Him and who hold high positions of noble status. They obey Him to the utmost in all their words and deeds.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir – 21:26] This has established that polytheists believed angels are daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and your first demand has been met. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states about people likes of you: “And not equal are the living and the dead. Indeed, Allah causes to hear whom He wills, but you cannot make hear those in the graves.” [Ref: 35:22] And I cannot make those hear the message of Islam who are in destined to enter graves with unbelief.

4.1 – Pagan Arabs Believed Lat, Uzza, Manat To Be Daughters Of Allah:

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated that polytheists believe angels are daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but they are honoured servants: They say, ‘The All-beneficent has taken offsprings.’ Immaculate is He! Rather they are [His] honoured servants. They do not venture to speak ahead of Him, and they act by His command. He knows that which is before them and that which is behind them, and they do not intercede except for someone He approves of, and they are apprehensive for the fear of Him. Should any of them say, ‘I am a god besides Him,’ We will requite him with hell. Thus do We requite the wrongdoers." [Ref: 21:26/29] The following verse implies the goddesses of polythiests mentioned in verse are females in belief of Pagan Arabs: “Have you seen Lat and Uzza? And another, the third Manat? What! for you the male , and for Him, the female? That, then, will be an unfair division! These are but names which you have coined - you and your fathers - for which Allah has not sent down any authority. They follow nothing but conjectures and the desires of the soul, while there has already come to them the guidance from their Lord.” [Ref: 53:19/23] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reconnects with the verses 19/23 in the following verse by saying: “Indeed those who do not believe in the Hereafter give female names to the angels.” [Ref: 53:27] The female names given in the context of verse 27 are al-Lat, al-Uzza, and al-Manat. And the following verse also indicates these female-angels and supposed daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) - al-Lat, al- Uzza, al-Manat - were believed to be angel-daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Has then your Lord distinguished/honoured you by (giving you) sons, and taken unto Himself daughters in the guise of angels? Verily, you are uttering a dreadful saying!” [Ref: 17:40] And regarding whom the pagans worship the verse indicates they worship female [angel-daughters - al-Lat, al-Uzza, al-Manat - whom they have elevated to status of] deities: “They invoke nothing but female deities besides Him and they invoke nothing but Shaitan (Satan), a persistent rebel!” [Ref: 4:117] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states regarding taking of angels as lord [daughters], that Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam) did not command you to believe in anything as such: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80]

4.2 - Sharing Of Authority With Allah And Major Attributes Of Rububiyyah:

Sister wrote that she wants me to prove that polytheists believed the offspring daughters/sons share authroity with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and have major attributes which are fundamental for Rububiyyah: “And my question still stands, where did Allah or His Messenger -sallallahu alayhi wa sallam - say that the pagans of Makkah believed that the Angels or anyone else they claimed are the offspring of Allah (Exalted is He), [or that they] share authority with Allah, and have major attributes of Rububiyyah like creating, ownership … etc?” Firstly, there is no need me to establish that shared authority with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Rububiyyah because when it is established that in the belief of polytheists angels are daughters (i.e. Lat, Uzza, Manat)  of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and these angel daughters are lords than Shirk in Rububiyyah is already established. [Note polytheists beleiving their gods share authority has been established in section 5.3.] Secondly, for Shirk in Rububiyyah to be warranted a partner does not not need to possesse major powers [and attributes] of Rububiyyah. Rather Shirk can be warranted for believing y god is excercising minor powers of Rububiyyah with limited/restricted human capability. And this is agreed even by sister Umm Abdullah that polytheists committed Shirk in minor aspects of Rububiyyah. Than it is clear that polytheists did not believe in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. Also Islamicly Rububiyyah is part of Ilahiyyah[3] and to believe there is Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will automatically establish the polytheists were guilty of major Shirk in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. And Quran establishes they committed Shirk in Ilahiyyah.

5.0 – Statement Of Sister Umm Abdullah And Its Meaning:

Sister Umm Abdullah wrote: “Allah using the pagan Arab's belief in His Lordship (i.e. Him being the sole Creator, Owner and Sustainer of the Universe) against them in their worshiping of others [gods] besides Him, is proof that they did not believe that those idols they worshiped, nor the angels, were Rabbs like Allah. The Pagans of Makkah attributing some attributes of Rububiyyah like benefit and harm, does not mean they believed they were Rabbs.” Firstly - In conjunction with material of post 17 you seem to be arguing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) uses their affirmation of belief against them to force the Arab polytheists to acknowledge Tawheed Al Ilahiyyah. The basis of your position is on following gounds: polytheists believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is sole Rabb, the only Rabb and since Rububiyyah is characteristic of Ilah. You have established this point in the following post: “The incident that was the reason behind the revelation of this ayah explains to us that those who worship something, are making them Rabbs, even if they don't consider them to be Rabbs [because Rububiyyah is quality of Ilah]. And some groups of people worship Angels, including some pagan Arabs, and by worshiping them they are taking them as Rabbs. And this can be used against them, because when they say that they don't believe in them as "Rabbs", one can say to them "Then why are you worshiping them if they don't posses Rububiyyah in your beliefs? Only The Rabb, The Creator and Owner of all the exists, deserves worship, and since you believe Allah is your Rabb Who Created you and what you worship, then you should be worshiping Him alone."  And Allah used their belief in His Rububiyyah in general, and Him being the Rabb, against them in their shirk in Uloohiyah.” [Ref: Sister Umm Abdullah, post #17] Therefore my objective would be to establish, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is has not had polytheists affirm to His Rububiyyah for sake of establishing Tawheed Al Ilahiyyah. Also see footnote one at the end of article. Secondly - Also there are two possible meanings of your statement. The likeness in your statement can be absolute or partial. i) Partial likeness [and generally Tashbih is in one attribute/characteristic and this would] would imply you are saying polytheists didn’t give attribute of Rabb as name to their idol-god and this would be caroborated by the statement which followed: “The Pagans of Makkah attributing some attributes of Rububiyyah like benefit and harm, does not mean they believed they were Rabbs.” ii) Absolute likeness [in Tashbih is rare and maybe not what you intended incase you did then it] would imply you’re saying that polytheists believed even though their gods have limited powers of Rububiyyah but they are not Rabbs, with unlimited powers of Rububiyyah, and being sole Creator, Owner, Sustainer of the Universe like of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is: “Allah using the pagan Arab's belief in His Lordship (i.e. Him being the sole Creator, Owner and Sustainer of the Universe) …” In another place you attempt to argue polytheists didn’t believe in Rububiyyah as they believed it for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “And my question still stands, where did Allah or His Messenger -sallallahu alayhi wa sallam- say that the pagans of Makkah believed that the Angels or anyone else they claimed are the offspring of Allah (Exalted is He) share authority with Allah and have major attributes of Rububiyyah like creating,, ownership etc?” And this is due to your belief that polytheists didn’t believe in absolute sense that their gods shared atributes of Rububiyyah with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Both these are quite possible and both these meanings are something that can be used for your position.

5.1 - Foundation For Refutation Of Sister Umm Abdullah’s Argument:

It has already been established the Christians take Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) as Lord beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And the Arab polytheists at the very minimum took the angels to be Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). With regards to the three main goddesses of polytheists Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has indicated they are believed to be female angels [daughters]: “So have you considered al-Lat and al-Uzza? And Manat, the third - the other one? Is the male for you and for Him the female? That, then, is an unjust division. They are not but [mere] names you have named them - you and your forefathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance. Or is there for man whatever he wishes? Rather, to Allah belongs the Hereafter and the first [life]. And how many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession will not avail at all except [only] after Allah has permitted [it] to whom He wills and approves. Indeed, those who do not believe in the Hereafter name the angels female names. And they have thereof no knowledge. They follow not except assumption, and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all.” [Ref: 53: 19/28] In light of this it is established that polytheists and Christians believed their gods to be Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Hence any explanation must consider these beliefs of polytheists and an explanation which ignores these beliefs of polytheists cannot be correct.

5.2 - Affirmation Of Rububiyyah To Establish In-Ability Of Idols:

When it is established that polytheists affirmed Rububiyyah for their idol-gods then question arises; why does Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) question them and force them to affirm Rububiyyah for Himself? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) questions them and forces them to acknolwedge characterisitics of Rububiyyah for Himself because all they depend upon as creation is believed to be in control of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) even in their own beleif and even they know their idol-lord-gods have no capability of anything. In other words they believe their idol lord-gods to be lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but they know they have no power of Rububiyyah. And in light of this Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “(They the idols are) dead, lifeless, and they know not when they (the people) will be raised up." [Ref: 16:21]"Will ye worship, besides Allah, something which hath no power either to harm or benefit you?” [Ref: 5:76] “And they worship besides Allah things that harm them not, nor profit them, and they say: "These are our intercessors with Allah." [Ref: 10:18] “... Verily those on whom you call besides Allah, cannot create (even) a fly, even though they combine together for the purpose. And if the fly snatches away a thing from them, they will have no power to release it from the fly. So weak are (both) the seeker and the sought.” [Ref: 22:73] "He to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth: no son has He begotten, nor has He a partner in His dominion: it is He who created all things, and ordered them in due proportions.” [Ref: 25:2/3] In other words, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has forced them to acknowledge all for Him but has pointed out to them the truth that their idol-lord-gods have no capability whatsoever. Against this point they have no comeback. They are forced to acknowledge in silence that their idol-lord-gods serve no purpose to them [cause they are idols – the create nothing in fact they are created by those who worship them]. Note the obejctive of such verses is to point out inability of their idols to do anything and to make them realise there is no reason to believe idols are lord-gods, and indicate to the polytheists a better alternative; to believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as their sole, the only Ilah and Rabb. And finally, Allah (subhanahu ta’ala) connected Ilahiyyah to Rububiyyah in this verse because Rububiyyah is part of Ilahiyyah: Yet have they taken, besides him, gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection." [Ref: 25:3] Hence by affirming the Oneness of Ilahiyyah they would be affirming oneness of Lordship as well.

5.3 - Affirming Rububiyyah For Allah And Negating Rububiyyah For Lord-Gods Of Polytheists:

They believed He is the Lord and the Master of their lord-gods and proof that they believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is superior/supreme Deity is in following Hadith: “Here I am at Thy service, there is no associate with Thee.” The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Woe be upon them, as they also said: “But one associate with Thee, you possess mastery over him, but he does not possess mastery (over you).” They used to say this and circumnavigate the Ka'ba.”[Ref: Muslim, B7, H2671] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) grants to their lord-gods and they grant due to receiving from Him. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) grants freely without being subject to authority of another but their gods being subjected to authority of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Following verse indicates dependency of their lord-gods upon Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and at the same time refutes their belief: “Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favors from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means;) praise be to Allah. But most of them understand not.” [Ref: 16:75] With regards to those polytheists who acknowledged their idol have no power of any sort Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states the following to guide them to Tawheed: “Allah sets forth (another) Parable of two men: one of them dumb, with no power of any sort; a wearisome burden is he to his master; whichever way be directs him, he brings no good: is such a man equal with one who commands Justice, and is on a Straight Way? “ [Ref: 16:76] And some among them believed even though their lord-god was under authority of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) their lord-gods were equal partners in Rububiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and this belief is refuted in the following verse: “He sets forth for you a parable from your own-selves: Do you have partners among those whom your right hands possess (i.e your slaves) to share as equals in the wealth We have bestowed on you whom you fear as you fear each other? Thus do We explain the signs in detail to a people who have sense.” [Ref: 30:28] In light of polytheistic belief that there are many lord-gods Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gives the following similitude: “Allah puts forth a similitude: a (slave) man belonging to many partners (like those who worship others along with Allah) disputing with one another, and a (slave) man belonging entirely to one master. Are those two equal in comparison? All the praises and thanks be to Allah! But most of them know not.” [Ref: 39:29] And then in another verse states what would happen if there were many gods and one creation: “!If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! but glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: (High is He) above what they attribute to Him!” [Ref: 21:22] Note confusion would result from all gods excercising their right of Rububiyyah. All wanting to govern the creation in their own way. This establishes that even the polytheists believed Rububiyyah is part of Ilahiyyah otherwise the argument against would be futile. Continuing with the - Rububiyyah is part of Ilahiyyah – Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states that if there were many gods then each god would have taken what it has created and would have attempted to over throw the kingdom of another god to become dominant: “Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any god. [If there had been], then each god would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him].” [Ref: 23:91] Once establishing all various defects in their beliefs of Rububiyyah then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) refutes them all in clear refutation, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: "He to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth: no son has He begotten [in form of lord of lords – Prophet Isa], nor has He a partner in His dominion [as an angel lord-god managing affairs of universe]: it is He who created all things, and ordered them in due proportions. Yet have they taken, besides him, gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection." [Ref: 25:2/3]

5.4 - The Real Reason For Which Allah Had Polytheist Affirm His Rububiyyah:

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) indicates; polytheists of Arabia did not believe in the day of ressurection: “Or [any] creation of that which is great within your breasts." And they will say, "Who will restore us?" Say, "He who brought you forth the first time." Then they will nod their heads toward you and say, "When is that?" Say, "Perhaps it will be soon.” [Ref: 71:51] “And they will be presented before your Lord in rows, [and He will say], "You have certainly come to Us just as We created you the first time. But you claimed that We would never make for you an appointment." [Ref: 18:48] “And if you are astonished (O Muhammad) then astonishing is their saying, "When we are dust, will we indeed be (brought) into a new creation?" Those are the ones who have disbelieved in their Lord, and those will have shackles upon their necks, and those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.” [Ref: 13:5] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states how He manages the affairs as Lord:“It is He who made for you hearing, eyesight, and hearts. Little do you thank. It is He who created you on the earth, and you will be mustered toward Him. And it is He who gives life and brings death and due to Him is the alternation of day and night. Do you not apply reason?” In verse 81 Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states that Arab polytheists living in time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are like the people of old times in denial of day of ressurection day:“Rather they say just like what the ancients said. They said, ‘What, when we are dead and become dust and bones, shall we be resurrected?’ Certainly we and our fathers were promised this before. (But) these are nothing but myths of the ancients.” In context of denial of day of ressurection Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) questions to them about His powers of Rububiyyah and states they will affirm these powers are of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Say, ‘To whom does the earth belong and whoever it contains, if you know?’ They will say, ‘To Allah.’ Say, ‘Will you not then take admonition?’ Say, ‘Who is the Lord of the seven heavens and the Lord of the Great Throne?’ They will say, ‘(They belong) to Allah.’ Say, ‘Will you not then be wary (of Him)?’ Say, ‘In whose hand is the dominion of all things, and who shelters and no shelter can be provided from Him, if you know?’ They will say, ‘(They all belong) to Allah.’ Say, ‘Then how are you being deluded?’” Then in the verse 90 states; what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has revealed [with regards to ressurection after death] is the truth and the saying of polytheists [that there is no such thing as ressurection after death is because] they are liars: “Rather We have brought them the truth, and they are indeed liars.” [Ref: 23:78/90] The context reveals the objective of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was to have polytheists affirm the ability of Rububiyyah for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for sake of establishing argument against them that if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does all these which you affirm then how would it be impossible for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to bring you back to existance again.

5.5 - Establishing The Tafsir From Clear Text Of Quran:

In verse 80 Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated people of old times negated ressurection after death just like the Arabs in the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were rejecting it: “Rather they say just like what the ancients said. They said, ‘What, when we are dead and become dust and bones, shall we be resurrected?’ Certainly we and our fathers were promised this before. (But) these are nothing but myths of the ancients.” [Ref: 23:80] From people of old, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentions the story of people of Nuh (alayhis salam), and indicates his Ummah did not want to accept the idea of ressurection after death: “And the eminent among his people who disbelieved and denied the meeting of the Hereafter while We had given them luxury in the worldly life said; This is not but a man like yourselves. He eats of that from which you eat and drinks of what you drink. And if you should obey a man like yourselves, indeed, you would then be losers.This is not but a man like yourselves. He eats of that from which you eat and drinks of what you drink. And if you should obey a man like yourselves, indeed, you would then be losers. Does he promise you that when you have died and become dust and bones that you will be brought forth (once more)? How far, how far, is that which you are promised. Life is not but our worldly life - we die and live, but we will not be resurrected.” [Ref:23:33/38] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states how Nuh (alayhis salam) reasoned with them to believe in ressurection after death: “O People, if you should be in doubt about the Resurrection, then (consider that) indeed, We created you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then from a clinging clot, and then from a lump of flesh, formed and unformed - that We may show you. And We settle in the wombs whom We will for a specified term, then We bring you out as a child, and then (We develop you) that you may reach your (time of) maturity. And among you is he who is taken in (early) death, and among you is he who is returned to the most decrepit (old) age so that he knows, after (once having) knowledge, nothing. And you see the earth barren, but when We send down upon it rain, it quivers and swells and grows (something) of every beautiful kind.” [Ref:22:5] Note Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) argued using the characteristics of Rububiyyah for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentioned in the verse to establish ability/power of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) over raising the dead. In the following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) responds to one who did not believe in ressurection after death: “And he presents for Us an example and forgets his (own) creation. He says, "Who will give life to bones while they are disintegrated?" Say, "He will give them life who produced them the first time; and He is, of all creation, Knowing." (It is) He who made for you from the green tree, fire, and then from it you ignite. Is not He who created the heavens and the earth Able to create the likes of them? Yes, (it is so); and He is the Knowing Creator. His command is only when He intends a thing that He says to it, "Be," and it is. So exalted is He in whose hand is the realm of all things, and to Him you will be returned.” [Ref: 36:78/83] Note here Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) again has highlighted title of Rabb and his Rububiyyah in order to make the point hit home.

5.6 - Summing The Discussion So Far:

It was established that polythiests of Arabia affirmed Rububiyyah for their idol gods. And they knew very well their idol lord-gods were unable to do anything. Therefore Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had them affirm His Rububiyyah to indicate to them that there belief in godhood/lordship of their idols is irrational. Quran establishes inability of idols to do anything and then also deals with belief of Rububiyyah which each group of the polytheists affirmed in their own unique way. The hasil in this regards is that their lord-gods are under authority of a superior and they are unable to do anything by themselves, and therefore it makes no sense to worship, or to ask a minor lord-god to gain favour of supreme Deity. In short these verses in which polytheists of Arabia attest to His Rububiyyah was to establish a common ground regarding the belief of Muslims and Mushrikeen about Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Once the common ground was founded Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) established the inability of their gods to do anything while directing them toward His ability in a bid to encourage them to accept Him as the only Lord/Ilah. Note this Tafsir is derived by considering various undeniable facts but the sections, 5.4, and 5.5, actually explain the meaning of verses of - where polytheists are forced to admit Rububiyyah - in their historical context. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) establishes that polytheists believed in His Rububiyyah to establish a common ground and uses it as a launch pad against their rejection of ressurection after death. The real objective for having them affirm Rububiyyah was to reason with them that if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) manages all the affairs of creation including creating you, giving you eye sight, hearing ability, and many more things than would it hard for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to recreate your bodies again for the day of judgment. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) told them their Lord will recreate not just as they were but even the unique finger print of their finger-tips He will recreate for day of ressurection: “I swear by the Day of Resurrection! And I swear by the self-blaming soul! Does man suppose that We shall not put together his bones? We are able to proportion (even) his fingertips!” [Ref: 75:1/4]

5.7 – The Likeness Of Allahs Rububiyyah Responded To:

If your intention was to negate title of Rabb for their idol-gods (and idol-gods are inclusive of al-Lat, al-Uzza, al-Manat) then it was already was established from Tafsir of Quran as well as from context of 53:19/28. In case you intended absolute likeness in your statement then note I have no where stated; polytheists believed their idol-gods are Arbab like Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Meaning I do not believe that polytheists believed their Arbab excercised absolute authority in managing the affairs of creation like Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In fact Allama Saeed Ahmad Qazmi (rahimullah) in his book, Maqalat e Qazmi, has clearly stated polytheists believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) excercises authority in major affairs (i.e. amoor e azaam).[4] And absoluteness was/is not our belief and you would be distorting the actual dispute. The dispute was did the polytheists believe their gods were Arbab. And now you have attempted to make the dispute into, did the polytheists believe their gods were Arbab like Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The first we affirm, that is to say; we affirm polytheists believed their gods were lords besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and due to which they excercised authority on minor affairs. But the second we do not believe that polytheists believed their gods were lords like Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

5.8 – Making Excuses For Tawheed Of Mushrikeen Of Arabia:

Also you stated: “The Pagans of Makkah attributing some attributes of Rububiyyah like benefit and harm, does not mean they believed they were Rabbs.” Firstly! You wouldn’t imply Rububiyyah because Arab polytheists attributed some attributes of Rububiyyah (i.e. harm and benefit) to their idol gods. Generosity and kindness reserved for polytheists. Yet for Muslims, [major] Shirk, Mushrik and Takfir knives are always kept in best for to make the slaughter smooth process. What I am hinting at is that you would imply Ilahiyyah just because a Muslim affirms some attributes for a deceased Muslim, as Karamah of deceased Wali-Allah, and believes in Rijal Al Ghayb - men of Ghayb - in a misguided belief due to Hadith of: ’O slaves of Allah help me!’[5]  And puts 2 + 2 togather and arrives at understanding that they can be asked for help in time of hardship and then utters: ‘O Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) help me!’ You will not hesitate to infer belief of Ulluhiyyah and Ilahiyyah and charge him of major Shirk, and nullify his/her Nikkah, make spilling of red stuff Halal upon the ‘true’ Muwahid Muslims of purest Tawheed. Yet you have all the excuses for your Mushrik brothers/sisters of Quresh. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, the Khawarij will kill the Muslims and leave the Mushriks alone. In your case the lesser is true, you’ve made excuse for Mushrik Muwahideen brothers/sisters of yours. Yet you, Shaykh of Najd Ibnul Wahhab, and your Khariji sect aka Najdiyyah/Wahhabiyyah make/made no excuse for Tawheed of those who say/said, there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah. Instead Shaykh of Najd wrote the Muslims of entire Arabian Peninsula didn’t even know the meaning, there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah. And accused the Muslims of major Shirk and murdered them wholesale. And you believed in his lie, and disbelieved in Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Shamelessness of Najd has no boundary. It is at home in heart of every member of Khariji group of Iblees/Shaytan [aka Qarn ash-Shaytan].

6.0 – The Back Tracking Of Sister Umm Abdullah:

After sister Umm Abdullah had received a convincing answer to her point mentioned in 3.0 and which was further explained in sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3, she decided to change the goal post and deleted my content which refuted her innovation. She has changed goal posts on numerous times in many other discussions as well, it seems I have habitual vandetta of misunderstand everything she is successfully refuted by me. And it can be seen on scribd as it was posted on the Khariji forum, here. Now she has changed the goal posts once again and as claimed the verse means: “Since I missed talking about the part about angels in this ayah, some [i.e. Muhammed Ali Razavi] seemed to have misunderstood what I am saying. The incident that was the reason behind the revelation of this ayah explains to us that those who worship something, are making them Rabbs, even if they don't consider them to be Rabbs. And some groups of people worship Angels, including some pagan Arabs, and by worshiping them [as Ilahs beside Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] they are taking them as Rabbs.” Did I misunderstand her, or Fitna is her? If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits it will be answered in due time.

6.1 - The Issue Explained In The Context:

Muslims believe that polytheists of Arabia believed their idol-gods are Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Khariji Shuyukh are of belief that polytheists of Arabian Peninsula believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah and the following is proof of this belief of Khariji Shuyukh: "Specially if it is known that today the majority of scholars from different (muslim) countries do not know from tawhid except what mushriks (of Makkah) approved and they did not know the meaning of "al-ilahiyya" that "kalimatul-ikhlas" denied its attribution to anything other than Allah.” [Ref: Fath Al Majeed – Sharh Kitab At-Tawheed, Chapter (4) Fear Of Shirk, page 76] “The disbelievers whom the Messenger fought affirmed Tawheed ar-Rububiyah (Oneness of Allah's Lordship), yet their affirmation of Tawheed ar-Rububiyah did not enter them into Islam and did not sanctify their blood or wealth.” [Ref: Explanation Of Four Fundamental Principles, by Shaykh Salih Ibn Al Fawzan, Page 30, Published by: QSEP] In an attempt to justify their Kufr, Sister Umm Abdullah believes polytheists of Arabia did not believe their idol-gods were Rabbs/Arbab beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but they believed in them as Ilahs/Aaliha. In one of her post, #7, she stated this: “They believe that Allah is "The Rabb". They don't believe their idols are Rabbs, but they did ascribe to them or some of them some attributes of Rububiyah. They called their idols "ilahs" and not "Rabbs".” In simple words, Khawarij believe Arab polytheists believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the Rabb and there was no Rabb beside Him. And in words of their Shaykh of Najd the polytheists were believers in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah and this belief was refuted. I responded to her with following verse: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] In an attempt to establish Islamic beliefe that polytheists did commit Shirk in Rububiyyah and the angels are al-Lat, al-Uzza and al-Manat. And they believed these three are angel lord daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Note this verse was the foundation on which the Islamic belief was erected and further developed. Therefore she considered it important to explain away the verse in such a fashion that it does not contradict with her position. Note my explantion of the verse was inclusive of Arab polytheists as well as Christians and [a sect from] Jews. If she managed to exclude the Arab polytheists from this verse she would have successfully demolished the foundation of my argument and so she tried. Note how the exclusivity of verse to Jews and Christians would benefit her and refute my position. Realising the importance she stated the verse was revealed because Jews enquired if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was asking them to worship him like Christians worship Prophet Isa (alayhis salam): “As for the ayah (3:80): “Nor would he order you to take angels and Prophets for lords. Would he order you to disbelieve after you have submitted to Allah's Will?” If you check the tafsir of this ayah, you will see that the verse is speaking about the Jews and Christians, and that the reason behind the revelation of this verse is that a group from the Jews came to the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) and asked him if he is calling them to worship him like the Christians worship Jesus (alayhi assalam); and Allah revealed this ayah.” In other words the verse was revealed in the context of Jewish question and regarding Jews and Christians. By directing it toward them she negated the inclusion of Arab polytheists into the verse and their exclusion would solidify her position. This is why she convinently ‘forgot’ to deal with the angels part. It would have been better to acknowledge error and say: My bad! I didn’t understand the verse and nor I am familiar with methdology of interpretation of Quran. Alhasil the real objective of sister Umm Abdullah was to exclude Rububiyyah from belief of polytheists but after being check-mated she changed the goal posts.

6.2 - Laying Bare The Distortion Of Quranic Verse:

And in reponse to this distortion of verse of Quran by our ‘truest’ Muwahid sister one should note; Christians took Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) as the Lord and they are not guilty of believing in Rububiyyah by affirming Ilahiyyah. In fact their belief of Lordship for Prophet Isa (alayahis salam) is very pronounced in their scriptures. Sister Umm Abdullah, you have Bassam Zawadi on your door step, he is your co-religionist and my ex-co-religionist. He should be questioned in regards to belief of Christians. Following questions would suffice; Do Christians believe Jesus is the Lord, the Lord of Lords? Does the supposed New Testament support such belief? Or do they believe he is just an Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? After all instruction is to seek knowledge from those who [are suppose to] know. Here are some NT refferences which establish the Christian belief of Lordship for Prophet Isa (alayhis salam):“Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Spirit.” [Ref: 1^st Corin 12:3] “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” [Ref: Romans 10:9] ”That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” [Ref: Phillippians 2:11/12] And even Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states clearly that Christians are guilty of elevating Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) to status of Lord beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.” [Ref: 9:31] The Christians did not become guilty of Shirk of Rububiyyah by believing in Ilahiyyah, and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not, and did not accuse them of believing in Rububiyyah for Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) due to their belief of Ilahiyyah. Christians, and this includes, Protestants and Catholics, and all Trinitarians, they all believe Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) is Lord beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and Lord of Lords.

6.3 – The Effect Of Christian Belief Of Lordship On Surah 3 Verse 80:

When it is established that Shirk of Rububiyyah upon Christians is not implied from their belief of Ilahiyyah but they actually believe Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) is Lord, the Lord of lords. Than the same meaning is true with regards to the polytheists of Arabia in this verse: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] And note in this verse there are no words which indicate this Takhsees for Christians. In other words, the verse does not state Christians believed in Rububiyyah but in context of belief of Arab polytheists the Rububiyyah is implied from Ilahiyyah. Absence of Takhsees for any group establishes that meaning of verse is uniform for those who took angels as Lords and those who took Prophets as Lords. And because we know Christians believed/believe Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) is Lord, and Lord of Lords, therefore the verse is not about implied Rububiyyah but actual affirmation of Rububiyyah for angels and prophets. Note, Quran explicitly also states the fact that Arab polytheists believed in their idol-gods (i.e. Lat, Uzza, Manat, and other gods) as Lords. And this was established in section 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 therefore please refer to it once again. From this we can gather that the verse is not about implied Rububiyyah but is regarding those who believed Rububiyyah for angels and prophets.

6.4 – Sons And Daughters Of Allah As Gods And Lords:

Christians took their Prophet as son of God, the lord of Lords, and a sect from Jews took Uzair to be son of God literally. And this is attested by following verse of Quran: “The Jews call Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is the saying from their mouth; (In this) they are intimate; what the Unbelievers of the old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth.” [Ref: 9:30] Sons of have attributes of their fathers. In context of these two parties, both sons would be gods (i.e. Ilahs) and possess attributes of Rububiyyah. Affirmation of Godhood is also affirmation of Lordship. Therefore Lordship is natural belief for both and this is why Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says to them: “And neither did he bid you to take the angels and the prophets for your lords: [for] would he bid you to deny the truth after you have surrendered yourselves unto God?” [Ref: 3:80] And the point equally applies for those who attribute dauthers to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) – polytheists of Arabia – they too are guilty of attributing angels as daughters of Allah and they therefore even if they did not believe their gods are Arbab besides Allah they all are indeed guilty of Shirk of Rububiyyah because they attributed daughter-godesses to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and they affirmed some degree of attributes of Rububiyyah for them. Also note, Islamicly when Godhood is affirmed for anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), any level of belief of Rububiyyah for that false god is enough to warrant major Shirk in Rububiyyah.

7.0 – Belief Of Mushrikeen In Rububiyyah For Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala):

Sister Umm Abdullah wrote the following: “And Allah used their belief in His Rububiyyah in general, and Him being the Rabb, against them in their shirk in Uloohiyah. And note how the mushriks of Quraysh used the word "ilah" and not "rabb" when objecting to the message of Tawheed that Islam came with. If they had a problem with Islam's teaching of their being only one Rabb, they would have also objected to that … but they only objected to there being one Ilah instead of the many ilahs like they believed.” She basicly stated, polytheists believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the only Lord and there was no objection to belief of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being the only Lord [she implied] therefore they did not believe any lord beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Firstly - The evidence from Quran and Sunnah has already established that polytheists [at the very minimum] believed the angels to be Lords beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is also established from Quran that polytheists of Arabia believed al-Lat, al-Uzza, and al-Manat were angel dauthers of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and goddesses. Evidence regarding which was quoted and discussed in sections; 3.1 to 4.1 and section 5.1. Does Jibraeel (alayhis salam) has to come to you and give you direct message from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructing you to believe in what He has already revealed in His Book? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And whoever has not believed in Allah and His Messenger - then indeed, We have prepared for the disbelievers a Blaze.” [Ref: 48:13]  The gate of Wahi is closed and the gate of Nabuwah is closed. The best of speech is Book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and best of guidance is guidance of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And if you choose any way other then religion of Islam it is/will be rejected. Secondly – Why did not they object to Tahweed Al Rububiyyah concept of Islam? You’re looking at Islamic teaching fourteen hundered years later. Much as changed and much has been introduced into it to faciliate better understanding of Islam. And the progress has been made in regards to Tawheed and Shirk. I mean to indicate that Muslims have invented classifications of Tawheed/Shirk -: Al Dhat, Al Asma Wal Sifaat, Al-Afaal/Rububiyyah. And your end the definition of Tawheed/Shirk is Al-Ulluhiyyah, Al Asma Wal Sifaat, Al-Rububiyyah. Unfortunately in your Tawheed (i.e. oneness) the belief of oneness is not essential – like it is in the case of your version of Tawheed Al Rububiyyah but in Islamic version affirmation of Tawheed of Ilahiyyah/Dhat is fundamental for Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. Considering all the later alterations/innovations it has become difficult for the people to see through the smoke. Let go of all of these definitions and return to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) like we were instructed to refer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to do so when we dispute. The answer is quite simple, you/we have detailed Tawheed/Shirk into many categories and the polythiests and Quran has not. According to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in belief of polytheists of Arabia, Rububiyyah is fundamental for Ilah. And this is one reason why Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has not clearly/explicitly affirmed Oneness of Rububiyyah for Himself in Quran by saying: He is Allah the One Lord beside Him there is no Lord, or with something similar. Therefore affirmation of many Ilahs beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) automatically amounts to existances of many Arbab beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And this would by default erect disbelief of Quranic teaching that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the only Lord. And similarly affirmation of beliefe that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the Only, the One Ilah, amounts to affirmation of the One, the Only Lord. Thirdly - Polytheists did not believe in Rububiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as we the Muslims believe. Rather they believed some aspects of Rububiyyah and negated other aspects. They denied ressurection because they could not comprehend Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being able to recreate human bodies after they have decomposed and remains have scattered through out the earth.

A Concise Refutation Of Khawarij Regarding Their Doctrine:

The Khawarij believe Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is to believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Alone is managing the affairs of universe/creation. And Shirk Al Rububiyyah is to believe a creation also manages the affairs of creation with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).[!] They argue polytheists did not believe their gods are Rabb nor they believed their gods manage the affairs of creation. And they conclude therefore they are Muwahideen in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. The Muslims believe Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is that there is Only One Ilah/Rabb and He Alone manages the affairs of creation as Rabb/Ilah. And Shirk Al Rububiyyah is to believe; there is [completely independent, or completely dependent, or depenent in some aspects and independent in others] Rabb/Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) who manages the affairs of creation with Him.[#] To Khawarij we say; fundamental requirements for Tawheed Al Rububiyyah are i) Tawheed ii) and Rububiyyah. One must believe in both to be Muwahid in Al-Rububiyyah. Tawheed/Shirk is of Dhat (i.e. Essence) and Sifaat (i.e. Attributes).[$] All Sifaat [and Asma] of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are connected with His Dhat [including His Rububiyyah] and they cannot exist without His Dhat. Rububiyyah is fundamental for Ilahiyyah and if a Dhat (i.e. Essence) from creation is believed to be Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then automatically Tawheed of Dhat is negated [as well as Tawheed of Sifaat]. Coming to point of polytheists believed Al-Rububiyyah was exclusively for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). One who is believed to be Ilah is also believed as Rabb which is established from the following verse: “Yet have they taken, besides him, gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection." [Ref: 25:3]  And we know that polytheists associated many Ilahs as partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Therefore they could not have believed in Al Rububiyyah was uniquely for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is established from Quran that polytheists believed in Al-Rububiyyah for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) question is what did they precisely believe? There is abundant evidence in Quran to establish they only believed limited Rububiyyah for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hence they did not believe in Al-Rububiyyah for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as they should have.

The Verdict On Who Believes Contrary To Clear Teaching Of Quran:

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has clearly stated in numerous verses of Quran, the Arabs are polytheists and to hold belief that they are Muwahid establishes disbelief in these verses. No Taweel is to be accepted in this regard because it is against the apparent and clear teaching of book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).  And to hold to belief polytheists were Muwahideen in Lordship is clear cut Kufr [due to disbelief in Quranic verses] and to make excuse for one who is guilty of such Kufr is also Kufr.

Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen.
Muhammed Ali Razavi

Footnotes:

- [1] In Jewish mysticism – Kabalah - the phrase ‘bene ha elohim’ (i.e. sons of god) used in passages of OT is understood to be refering to angels –  example is following passage:  “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, "My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.” [Ref: Gen 6:1/4] This is later development in interpretation of such passages but the basis to interpret them to mean angels existed prior to the interpretation.

- [2] “... we can deduce that the inhabitants of Hijaz during Muhammad's time knew portions, at least, of 3 Enoch in association with the Jews. The angels over which Metatron becomes chief are identified in the Enoch traditions as the sons of God, the Bene Elohim, the Watchers, the fallen ones as the causer of the flood. In 1 Enoch, and 4 Ezra, the term Son of God can be applied to the Messiah, but most often it is applied to the righteous men, of whom Jewish tradition holds there to be no more righteous than the ones God elected to translate to heaven alive. It is easy, then, to imagine that among the Jews of the Hijaz who were apparently involved in mystical speculations associated with the merkabah, Ezra, because of the traditions of his translation, because of his piety, and particularly because he was equated with Enoch as the Scribe of God, could be termed one of the Bene Elohim. And, of course, he would fit the description of religious leader (one of the ahbar of the Qur'an 9:31) whom the Jews had exalted.” [Ref: G. D. Newby, A History Of The Jews Of Arabia, 1988, University Of South Carolina Press, page  61].

- [3] Sister Umm Abdullah’s following statement was based on stated point – inserted by me -: “The incident that was the reason behind the revelation of this ayah explains to us that those who worship something, are making them Rabbs, even if they don't consider them to be Rabbs [because Rububiyyah is quality of Ilah]. And some groups of people worship Angels, including some pagan Arabs, and by worshiping them they are taking them as Rabbs. And this can be used against them, because when they say that they don't believe in them as "Rabbs", one can say to them "Then why are you worshiping them if they don't posses Rububiyyah in your beliefs? Only The Rabb, The Creator and Owner of all the exists, deserves worship, and since you believe Allah is your Rabb Who Created you and what you worship, then you should be worshiping Him alone."  And Allah used their belief in His Rububiyyah in general, and Him being the Rabb, against them in their shirk in Uloohiyah.” [Ref: Sister Umm Abdullah, post #17] i) Note the Arab polytheists at the very minimum did believe their angels to be their lord-gods and evidence has already been presented in the article. ii) The basis on which point was made by sister is valid -: Rububiyyah is quality of Ilah. iii) But she has ignored the actual belief of polytheists therefore even her own argument – underlined - would fail against them cause they would simply point out we believe them to be lord-gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and therefore they have the right to be worshipped as our gods. iii) Also sister Umm Abdullah wrote they would be guilty of associating a Rabb with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) due to their worship of idol-gods and this is partly correct because of Islamic teachings of Rububiyyah being part of Ilahiyyah. iiv) In this statement of sister Umm Abdullah, Shirk of Rububiyyah warranted upon Arab polytheists will be due to their worship, and not due to professing belief of lordship for their gods. And the fact is, the polytheists explicitly affirmed Rububiyyah for their idol-gods and angels. Alhasil over-all her point is invalid but the basis on which the point is made is valid. Following is the Halal version of her statement: “The incident that was the reason behind the revelation of this ayah explains to us that those who worship something, are making them Rabbs, even if they don't consider them to be Rabbs because Rububiyyah is quality of Ilah. And some groups of people worship Angels, including some pagan Arabs, and by elevating them to status of Ilah worshiping them they are taking them as Rabbs. And this can be used against them, because when they say that they don't believe in them as "Rabbs", one can say to them "Then why are you believing them to be your Ilahs  worshiping them  if they don't posses Rububiyyah in your beliefs? Only your Ilah and The Rabb, The Creator and Owner of all the exists, deserves worship, and since you believe Allah is your Rabb Who Created you and what you worship, then you should be worshiping Him alone."  And Allah used their belief in His Rububiyyah in general, and Him being the Rabb, against them in their shirk in Uloohiyah.” Please compare to see how meaning is changed.

- [4]“Mushrikeen believed that Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) is enactor/initiator of great affairs [of universe] and with this aqeedah they believed that Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) has granted some pious worshipers status of god-hood. Therefore they are all creations deserved/rightful ma'bood (i.e. ones deserving worship). So much [deserving of worship] that if any one worships Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) only it will not be maqbool (i.e. accepted) until it is not joined with worship of ibadis saliheen: “(It will be said): "This is because, when Allah Alone was invoked (in worship) you disbelieved (denied), but when partners were joined to Him, you believed! So the judgment is only with Allah, the Most High, the Most Great!” [Ref: 40:12] "You invite me to disbelieve in Allah (and in His Oneness), and to join partners in worship with Him of which I have no knowledge; and I invite you to the All-Mighty, the Oft-Forgiving!” [Ref: 40:42] In fact Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) is far above [in the heavens] therefore only His worship is without benefit. These saliheen should be worshiped whom are muqqarib (near/beloved) to Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) so we through their blessing become muqarrib of Allah (suhana wa ta'ala). They believed that these worshiped [idols/gods] are sami and baseer and come to our help and aid. They [the Mushrikeen] had carved stones [into idols] with the names of these [ibadis saliheen] and when they faced their worshiped [idol-gods] their focus and direction (i.e. Qibla) would be these stones (i.e. idols). And those who came after them failed to realized the great difference between the stones (i.e. idols) and human. And they made these stones (i.e. idols) as their worshiped [idol-gods].” [Ref: Maqalaat e Kazmi, Vol One, Page 33: Mushrikeen Ka Aqeedah, Edited, addition of verses.]

- [5] “The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The Substitutes (i.e. Abdaal) in this Community are thirty like Ibrahim the Friend of the Merciful. Every time one of them dies, Allah substitutes another one in his place.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad 5:322] “The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The earth will never lack forty men similar to the Friend of the Merciful [Prophet Ibrahim], and through them people receive rain and are given help. None of them dies except Allah substitutes (Abdaal) another in his place.” Qatada said: “We do not doubt that al-Hasan [al-Basri] is one of them.” [Ref: Mu’jam al-Awsat, by Tabarani] “Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Shurayk who said: My father told me, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Eesa, from Zayd ibn ‘Ali, from ‘Utbah ibn Ghazwaan, from the Prophet of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) who said: “If one of you loses something, or one of you wants help, and he is in a land in which there are no people, then let him say, ‘O slaves of Allah, help me; O slaves of Allah, help me!’ for Allah has slaves whom we do not see.” [Ref: Tabaraani, Mu‘jam al-Kabeer 17:117]

- [6] The result of this is; if it is believed a creation manages some affairs of creation [without affirming belief of Ilahiyyah/Rabubiyyah for that creation] the Khawarij charge the Muslims of committing major Shirk, and of Kufr.

- [7] In light of Islamic undestanding; i) Shirk Al Rububiyyah is associating a partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Rabb/Ilah, ii) and believing that this false deity has partnership in managing the affairs of creation. Note Islamicly there are two offences are committed due to Shirk. But the first offence is fundamental for the second offence otherwise the second cannot be offence which warrants major Shirk [but can be reprehensible innovation].

- [8] Scholars have included Asma (i.e. Names) and Afaal (i.e. Actions) as subcategories because some of Sifaat are used as Asma and some Asma are of type which indicate his Afaal.