In 33:36the Prophet is elevated to the position of being an
associate of God e.g., "when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter," and, "whoever
disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error,"
when 3:144 clearly says, "Muhammad is no more than a messenger."
How is :
(33:36) It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a
matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about
their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a
clearly wrong Path.
Different from the following Meccan verse?
(72:23) "Unless I proclaim what I receive from Allah and His
Messages: for any that disobey Allah and His Messenger,- for them is Hell: they
shall dwell therein for ever."
I have already pointed out that there are more than 40 such verses
and the people were commanded to obey their respective Messengers all through
the history of revelations
Why did a revelation saying that it is okay to marry the ex-wife of
one's adopted son become necessary at that time? Did the revelation come to
justify just one marriage in the whole wide world?
It became necessary because such a marriage violated a very strong
taboo of Arab Pagan society. It became necessary to establish the Islamic law
on the subject. This is already covered in my comment By
Naseer Ahmed - 2/2/2019 12:01:56
How come the revelation was known to the Prophet before it was
does it say that the revelation was known to the Prophet before it was
revealed? Read my above cited comment which covers what the Prophet hid in his
If some verses seem to be
dubious, is it best for us to stay silent?
you find even one verse that is dubious, and if you are a man of integrity and
not a hypocrite, then you must renounce the Book, Allah and the Prophet as
false. What are you?
I have answered your questions several times, but it does penetrate your thick skull because of your perversity. You continue to cast aspersions on the Prophet (pbuh) by saying that verses 33:36 to 38 do not belong in the Book.I don’t know how your perverse mind interprets these verses. It would help if you give your full understanding of these verses so that I can respond to it and show you where you are wrong. Don’t overdo this victimhood of takfir bit. I have not called you a kafir yet. You do not ask questions in the manner of one seeking knowledge. You are directly attacking the Book, Allah and the Prophet. You are hell-bent upon disparaging the Book, Allah and the Prophet. Do you deny it? At least have the moral courage to be honest, but I guess that is too much to expect from you.
GM sb, This is what you said:
“....or that He would send a timely message
permitting a man to marry his adopted son's ex-wife.” (verses 33:36,37)
You are clearly doubting that Allah had anything to do with verses
33:36,37 and saying by implication, that the Prophet(pbuh) put it in there. You
have also been openly disputing many other verses and saying that they have
been put in the Book by man. Below, you are saying that through verses 33:36,
37, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) has elevated himself and become a partner of Allah
"when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter," or,
"whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger. . . . ," probably would
not be found in Maccan verses in which we were told Allah had no partners.
You also say “The verse says the Prophet already knew beforehand what God was
later going to reveal. God reveals it only after the Prophet comes under
criticism for marrying his adopted son's ex-wife.”
It doesn’t say that. As I have clearly explained the verse, what it
means is that Muhammad (pbuh) was trying to hide the fact that he was commanded
by Allah to marry Zainab after Zayd divorced her, while he counselled Zaid with
“Retain thou (in wedlock)
thy wife, and fear Allah." If Zayd did not divorce, then the
Prophet couldn’t be blamed for not following Allah’s command to marry Zainab as
Allah’s command was contingent on Zaid divorcing. This is what the Prophet was
trying to achieve. And since all are
commanded to obey the Messenger, the Prophet made it impossible for Zaid to
divorce Zainab through his command to retain Zainab in wedlock, and not divorce
verse (33:38) makes clear that the Prophet was commanded by Allah to marry
Zainab after she was divorced, as a duty to Allah:
“There can be no difficulty to the Prophet in what Allah has
indicated to him as a duty. It was the practice (approved) of Allah amongst
those of old that have passed away. And the command of Allah is a decree
verses obviously cannot be revealed until Zaid had divorced Zainab as that
would amount to a command to him to divorce. Apparently, Zaid must have
approached the Prophet once again for permission to divorce and he did not withhold
his permission the second time in view of Allah’s command.
Now, if you are charging the Prophet of putting in verses in the Quran
to suit him, then the following verses are also added by him to cover himself
from the charge of fraudulent additions to the Book:
(69:44) And if the messenger were
to invent any sayings in Our name,
(45) We should certainly seize him by his right hand,
(46) And We should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart:
You are charging the Prophet with falsehood which makes the Quran to be
a Book of falsehood and Allah as helpless to prevent a false prophet to say
anything in His name and get away with it.
Now about your other question whether a verse to obey the messenger is
found in Meccan verses, I have already said that the command to obey the
Messenger is common to every Messenger and is found in both Meccan and Medinian
verses. There is not one, but 40 such verses dispersed all through the Book.
You are both an ignoramus and lazy to find the answer yourself. It is because,
for you, disparaging Allah, the Book and the Prophet (pbuh) have become a means
of establishing your superiority over the religion. This is true arrogance which
is what makes you “deaf, dumb and blind” and those who were not clear about the
meaning of “those who will not believe”, you provide a good example of such a
person. Repent and make amends or you may reach a point of no return.
digressing once again having lost the argument. If my explanation for verses
33:36,37 is not perfect. point out the flaw. You will never be able to find
fault with it because it is perfect and in complete conformity with the simple, straight-forward literal meaning of the verses. However, the depraved person that you have
become, you persist in character assassination of the Prophet (pbuh).
I wonder why you bother with the Quran if it is from a God
who cannot even be trusted to ensure its safe transmission to the people. I
know that you don’t and would like everyone to disregard it which is what you
keep saying in all your comments. You
therefore keep attacking it with verses that you think are easy to attack but
to your dismay, each time, you find me come up with the perfect answer. You are
destined to be frustrated in your attempts always for:
(58:21) Allah has
decreed: "It is I and My messengers who must prevail": For Allah is
One full of strength, able to enforce His Will.
After the Prophet, the promise of Allah extends to those who
strive in His name with the Quran and you will always be defeated in your
attempts to malign the Quran, Allah and the Prophet (pbuh).
Your comment is a typical example of your dishonesty and
attempt to digress when cornered. All your “questions” have been answered and
yet there is no expression of regret from you for character assassination of
the Prophet but a lame justification. I don’t know what you mean by the timing
of the verse when clearly it is perfectly timed. Every verse of the Quran is
perfectly timed. You now make the additional charge that asking the people to obey “Allah
and His Messenger” amounts to Allah making the Prophet his partner
(nauzobillah). You are an ignoramus. Read the story of any of the prophets in
the Quran and you will find that Allah told each of the people to obey their
We can see an example of your “de-escalation” right here.
While we have discussed thread-bare several of the verses that you have brought
up here, and you ran away after you were left without anything worthwhile to
say, you have brought them up once again here! Is bringing up the same topic in
every thread escalation or de-escalation? What a liar and fraud you are! The
enemies of the Prophet like Abu Lahab also stalked the Prophet and said the opposite
of whatever he said. Your behaviour has become likewise.
GM sb, I endorse every verse of the Quran as the word of Allah but not your perverted understanding of it. Does that make me not understand the attributes of Allah? You, who hold hundreds of verses as not from Allah, is the one who does not understand the attributes of Allah. And what is your standard for judging what is from Allah and what is not? Your cheap Utopian political philosophy?
I have shown that the verses in the Quran discriminate positively in favour of the women and the weaker sections of society. If this is seen as endorsing "gender inequality", then that is your way of seeing it. The Quran does not say in any verse that all are created equal, and if it said any such thing, that would be false and unbecoming of Allah to utter falsehood to look good, which is a human trait of the hypocrites but not of the Divine. If two things are not identical, then they are not equal is self-evident and anything said to the contrary is falsehood even though it may sound good. Allah's Book is not a book of hypocritical political slogans of some Utopian political philosophy. It is a Book from the one who created us and given us our nature and knows what is best for us. Allah is neither male nor female and has no need to be unjust and Allah is never unjust but on the other hand, His verses are in the best interests of the women and the weakest sections of society.
You do not even understand the nature of the “complete and perfected religion”. The religion is incomplete and imperfect if it left out guidance on any subject including war.
The specific verses that you have mentioned have been discussed in my articles and you have also discussed with me the same in several threads but have proved “dumb, deaf and blind”, because your standard is not the Quran but your cheap, hypocritical political slogans.
If Allah has said that He made some Jews into apes and swinesthen He has done it. How do you know that He didn’t? You know now that it is not man that has evolved from apes, but it is the other way round. This may be the most important clue for the evolutionists who have failed to prove the opposite. I am also told that genetically, the swine are nearest to humans, and if at all the organs of animals can be used to transplant into humans, it will be that of the swine. Swine flesh may have also been banned in Judaism and Islam because that is almost like cannibalism. It is only the Jews besides Muslims who totally avoid eating pork. Now this will sound outrageous to you because nothing like it has been said before, but then there is a clear scientific link between man and the two species of animals. Why the Creator, who created man, the ape and the swine, not change one into another? In any case, we have no way of knowing that what is said is not the truth. So, on what basis do you dispute it? Just because these things do not happen anymore? You may then dispute the parting of the sea to allow Moses and his people safe passage, the creation of Adam, the miraculous conception of Christ and many other things said in the Scriptures. Question with proof and not without it.
You say “……or that He would send a timely message permitting a man to marry his adopted son's ex-wife” and have cited verse 33:36,37 for it.
You are simply repeating a canard resorted to by the Islamophobes against the pristine character of the Prophet. You are character assassinating the Prophet himself. Shame on you! The charge then is against the Prophet that he put it in there! It is then equally a charge against the prophet that he put in the following verses to protect himself from the charge of putting in verses 33:36,37.
(69:44) And if the messenger were to invent any sayings in Our name,
You are charging the Prophet with falsehood which makes the Quran to be a Book of falsehood and Allah as helpless to prevent a false prophet to say anything in His name and get away with it. What is it then that makes you a believer and a Muslim? Why are you not bold enough to announce your apostasy?
As for verses 33:37 my understanding is as follows:
(33:37) Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah´s command must be fulfilled.
Zaid was the Prophet’s slave who freed him, but he refused to join his parents, declaring the Prophet as his “father”. The custom among the Pagans was to consider anyone who they called their father, mother, brother or sister as such, and the taboos regarding marriage applied equally. There are several other verses that frees the Muslims from such meaningless relationships and oaths. For example, divorce by zihar on the grounds of simply having said that the wife looks like the man’s mother from behind!
While teaching by mere words can be debated as to the true meaning, teaching by example, puts the matter beyond doubt. This is especially necessary to break strong taboos, beliefs or practices. If Allah wanted to establish that merely calling a person your father does not make him your father and none of the taboos and rights flow from such a relationship, what is the best way to do so but to establish a sunnat of the Prophet himself?
The Prophet asked Zainab who was his cousin to marry Zayd. Although Zainab was not happy about it considering Zayd, a former slave, below her socially, she couldn’t say no to the Prophet. The marriage was unhappy and soon on the rocks and Zayd wanted to divorce her.
Allah commanded the Prophet to marry Zainab after Zayd divorced her. If the Prophet wanted to marry Zainab, he could have done so, in the first place and now that she had become the wife of his foster son, he didn’t like the idea of marrying her at all. He was therefore trying to prevent the divorce so that he would not have to marry Zainab by saying to Zayd "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah.". What he said, had nothing to do with what Allah wanted and he was hiding the fact that Allah had commanded him to marry Zainab after Zayd divorced her. He did so fearing the reaction of the people for whom such an alliance was taboo. The meaning of the following is now clear:
“But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah.”
To me, it is clear that it was Allah who allowed the marriage between Zayd and Zainab in the first place, so that it could be dissolved subsequently, and the Prophet could be asked to marry the divorced Zainab to establish a legal precedent beyond dispute ending an undesirable custom and taboo.
Allah is the sole source of all knowledge of what is right and what is
wrong and if we wish to master this knowledge perfectly, it is essential that
we orient ourselves perfectly to receive this knowledge. The orientation is by gaining
a perfect understanding of the nature of Allah or of all His attributes.
Misunderstanding of any attribute leads to wrong behaviour and this is the way
Satan misleads and deprives us of becoming perfect Muslim.
Take the attribute of justice. Is Allah just if those born into “Muslim”
families have an edge over those born into families that practice polytheism? Some
of our revered scholars of the past have said that some people are predestined
to go to Heaven, while others are predestined to go to Hell or Allah has
created some for Heaven and others for Hell. This obviously sounds whimsical
and arbitrary which they explain away by saying “Allah wills what He wills”.
They get both the attributes wrong.
The answer any reasonable person will give is that justice demands that
persons born into any faith should have an equal chance of gaining Heaven/Hell,
but Muslims will not voice this opinion, because it is drilled into their heads
that non-Muslims are kafir and they will all go to Hell, and what they see is
that people born into a faith, remain in the same faith. Those who change their
faith are a small number.
Those who seek an unambiguous answer from the Quran on this question,
will find an answer, but those who firmly believe otherwise, will remain blind
and deaf to the clear answer. This is because we have not even learnt to trust
the word of Allah and read it without our mind cluttered with pre-conceived
notions. The reading therefore does not benefit us.
The Muslims, in general, are far from correctly comprehending the most
important attributes of Allah. They may worship only one God, but this God is
partial to them, which is not an attribute of the Rabb-ul-Alameen who is Al 'Adl or perfectly just, but the attribute of
the gods of the polytheists. So, how can a polytheist be at a disadvantage vis-à-vis
a Muslim, whose concept of his God is defective to the extent that he
attributes to Allah, the same quality of partiality, which is what makes the many
gods of the polytheists so very attractive to them?
Zuma sb, The hadith regarding knowing the 99 names of Allah is true
irrespective of who the narrator is and the chain of transmission. Even if the
narrator was a known liar, you can still say that this is true because it has
the ring of truth. Perhaps, it is not narrated well and therefore misunderstood.
It is not about memorising the 99 names of Allah but knowing
the 99 attributes of Allah or of fully comprehending the nature or zaat of
Allah. How can such a person not gain Heaven? The attributes of Allah are best
understood by a person who has understood the Quran without a single
contradiction and without treating any verse as abrogated. Such a person has
completely and perfectly understood the nature of Allah. One of the attributes
of Allah is that Allah is “Shaaker”. How can then one who has understood this
attribute not do things that please Allah the most and avoid doing what
displeases Allah? Allah is also able to enforce his Will? How can a person who
has understood this attribute not find what Allah’s will is and act in
accordance with that will to avoid Hell and gain Heaven?
Also, the problem is precisely in the misunderstanding of
Allah’s attributes. Islamic scholars have no problem with the contradictions
their interpretations create because they think that Allah is free to
contradict Himself because “He does what He wills” and this is proof of His
omnipotence that he is not bound by any rule. By creating one single
misunderstanding of Allah’s nature, Satan has succeeded in making people worship
Allah certainly chooses what He wills and He has willed the
rule of law and the law of perfect causality and He has also willed that he
will never change His ways or change His command/word once it is issued. Allah
has willed the laws and willed that He will abide by His word/command and never
change it. The Sign that the Quran is from Allah is that it is a Book without a
single contradiction and if you are given a Book saying that it is from Allah
and if that Book has even a single contradiction, throw it into the face of
Satan because such a Book cannot be from Allah. While the Book is from Allah,
our scholars, by their misinterpretations, have made it into a Book from Satan!
The Quran is a simple Book, easy to understand and without
crookedness. It does not require any science to understand it nor any interpretation.
All that is required is that we take its straight forward literal meaning. It is
scholarship that puts a spin on every verse and misinterprets which is why the
hadith which says that the scholars will be among the foremost who will be flung
into Hell is also true.
A hadith is not true because of who the narrator is or what
the chain of transmission is or in whose compilation it is found but whether it
rings true vis-à-vis the Quran. This is the fourth Usul al Hadith.
You are a very competent classical Islamic scholar and do a good job of
studying the literature and writing your articles. For you there is no truth
beyond what the four Imams have said and if they all agree, then that is an
absolute truth. You do not even know the meaning of logical reasoning because
logic is absent in all Islamic scholarship. As a matter of fact, you do not
even understand the meaning and implication of a contradiction.
Let us take what you say in your article: “Initially
the Muslims were not given permission to fight back even in defence. The
Quranic verses which initially debarred Muslims from fighting in defence are as
Can you point out the verse that says, “do not fight”? There is no such
verse and there is no verse that debarred the Muslims from fighting. There is
no verse asking them to fight either, because there was no enemy standing in
battle to fight them. The verses that you cited were applicable even when the
order to fight was given. The fighting was with those who stood in battle
against the Muslims and the other verses continued to apply to those who were
not in battle with the Muslims.
What you say however shows your thinking process and the “jihadists”
come from the same background and think alike. If those verses debarred the
Muslims from fighting earlier, why didn’t they debar them later? Is it because
the Prophet (PBUH) chose to ignore them?
The Sunnat of the Prophet (PBUH) (nauzobillah) is then to ignore the peaceful
verses when he wants to fight. The jihadists therefore ignore all the verses
that you cite when they have chosen the “most glorious path of Jihad in the
best traditions of the Prophet”. How do you blame them then? It is your own beliefs
and your own thinking process. The only difference is that being a coward, you
have not chosen jihad and give all kinds of excuses for it like the hypocrites
during the Prophet’s times.
Your refutation therefore amounts to nothing. When Islam has become a
religion where reason has no role to play, anybody can do anything and justify
it. It is no longer a religion, let alone a universal religion or the religion
of Allah. It has become the religion of Satan. No doubt, all of us think that
we worship none except “The One”. How do you know however, that the One you
worship is Allah and not Satan?
The Sign of Allah is that there can be no falsehood and no contradiction
in His Book. But the Muslims have made it the Book of Satan and cannot
understand it without numerous contradictions, and without considering many of
the verses as abrogated.
Based on logic, if I had found a single a single falsehood, or a single
contradiction in the Quran, I would have rejected the Book as a false Book, and
Allah as a false god for making false claims, and Muhammad as a false Prophet.
However, based on the most rigorous analysis and understanding of the complete
Book, I testify that this is indeed the Book of Allah and I know that the God I
worship is indeed Allah. It is however not possible, that the one I worship,
and what others worship with their understanding that creates numerous
contradictions, and with considering many verses as abrogated, is the same god.
There is some dilution if not a complete inversion.
With regard to the hypocrites, if what is meant is the people of major hypocrisy, namely those who make a show of being believers in this world when they are concealing kufr in their hearts and hiding it from the people, they will be in a worse position than the kuffaar and mushrikeen. Hence their fate will be in the lowest levels of Hell, as Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Verily, the hypocrites will be in the lowest depths (grade) of the Fire; no helper will you find for them”
Muslim in his Saheeh (135) from Jaabir (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: A man came to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and said: O Messenger of Allah, what are the two deeds that make entering Paradise or Hell inevitable?
He said: “Whoever dies not associating anything with Allah will enter Paradise, and whoever dies associating anything with Allah will enter Hell.”
“Verily, Allah forgives not that partners should be set up with him in worship, but He forgives except that (anything else) to whom He pleases, and whoever sets up partners with Allah in worship, he has indeed invented a tremendous sin”
“And indeed it has been revealed to you (O Muhammad Sallaallahu alaihi wasallam), as it was to those (Allah's Messengers) before you: ‘If you join others in worship with Allah, (then) surely (all) your deeds will be in vain, and you will certainly be among the losers.’
Nay! But worship Allah (Alone and none else), and be among the grateful”
The two comments of GGS are beside the
point and merely personal attacks and therefore abusive.
My comments are arguments based on evidence
and reason for which he has no response because he is clueless. What he fails
to realize is that his support of the hadith in the face of it contradicting
more than a dozen verses of the Quran, renders him in no position to argue with
the “jihadist” what they choose to ignore. When both parties are wrong and
conveniently ignore what each one chooses to ignore, no party can accuse the
other of being wrong. Only, one who rejects the hadith on solid grounds can criticize
the “jihadists” but even such a person is rendered ineffective by the support to
the hadith from the remaining Muslims such as GGS.
The “jihadists” derive support from the
following notions each one of which I have shown to be false, but supported by Islamic
ijma, qiyas, false notions of what is Sunna based on concocted or corrupted hadths,
and misinterpretation of the Quran based on the false hadiths deviating from
the clear meaning:
1. That Kafir means non-Muslim and all Kafir
will go to hell. In their mind therefore, they are not oppressing the
non-Muslims but doing them a favour by forcibly converting them. There is also
a hadith (maybe a weak one but that does not matter), that says that some
people will be taken to Heaven in chains because they were forced to do good or
forcibly prevented from evil. The ones forcibly converted will be in this
category. Some Sufi shrines in Pakistan are centers for forcible conversion of
abducted non-Muslim girls believing that they are doing good .
2. Shirk itself is fitna and that Allah has
commanded the fighting until “fitna=shirk” was ended. This is a
misinterpretation based on the hadith which is the subject of the article Since
the Prophet was fighting to end the fitna of shirk, and shirk continues to
exist, the fight must go on.
So, all of GGS claims of refutation of jihadist beliefs
and actions are empty claims and sheer hypocrisy because he shares their
beliefs but not what they do based on the same beliefs. He has not rejected the
following notions but argued against me:
1. Kafir = non-Muslim
3. The Prophet was commanded to fight until
the fitna of shirk was ended.
GGS can never argue based on reason
because he does not know what that means. GGS tries to devalue what I write by calling
it “Internet” learning which has become a catch phrase of imams thundering from
pulpits in the Friday sermons because the youth are questioning what they say
based on what they read on the Internet. He fools only himself. Nobody has said
quite what I have said in my more than a hundred articles, and nobody can,
based on shallow learning, rip apart the scholarship of the last 1400 years to
which GGS has no response. It is classical Islamic scholarship which is shallow,
bigoted and not based on reason. I wish Shahin sb would find a good moderator
to moderate the debates so that we can conclude based on evidence and reason
alone and not based on posturing based on their certificates of learning.
Interpret merely with the use of Hadith can lead to false teaching. The following is the extract:
Narrated Anas: A funeral procession passed in front of the Prophet and the people praised the deceased. The Prophet said, "It has been affirmed (paradise)." Then another funeral procession passed by and the people talked badly of the deceased. The Prophet said, "It has been affirmed (Hell)." Allah's Apostle was asked, "O Allah's Apostle! You said it has been affirmed for both?" The Prophet said, "The testimony of the people (is accepted), (for) the believer are Allah's witnesses on the earth." (Book #48, Hadith #810)"
The phrase, the people praised the deceased...It has been affirmed (paradise), in the book #48, hadith #810 would give the impression that praising the dead can affirm people to have the access to paradise and that believing in Allah and do good deeds are not necessary to enter paradise. Besides, the phrase, the people talked badly of the deceased...It has been affirmed (Hell), in book #48, hadith #810 would give the impression that those who talk badly to the deceased shall enter into hell. The entire verse turn up that the way to paradise is not by believing Allah and doing good deeds but whether they would praise the dead.
@Naseer sahib, You should join any good class which gives the
training of Islamic legal values.
You cannot make surgery of the people by reading some
books on internet; you will have to study it in a systematic manner for doing surgery
of any other people.
I have done in refutation of “jihadists” what I needed
to do for the sake of my religion, my country and my community. Rather I have
not done anything; it was just an effort to save the brainwashed youth from
clutches of terrorists of this age. I am sure this is very effective and I do
not need your certificate because you have been a person having a great
prejudice against me for years.
From scholars and ulama to commons; all have
appreciated this presentation and they have said “good”. This is enough for me.
Allah Almighty and His beloved Prophet know the best!
four sources of Islamic teachings were and are rooted in Muslim community.
Quran 2. Sunnah 3. Ijma 4. Qiyas. These four
sources have been the part of Islam and Muslim community from the early days of
Islam. They can’t be changed. If you have problem with your understanding, it
is your problem. We mainstream Muslims have no problem with understanding. There
are few who are brainwashed by neo-kharijite terrorists as well as some
political incidents; but all Muslims are not responsible for that.
comments tell me that you are very new and it looks like you are in nursery
class of Islamic teachings. You need to study harder. For that you need to be
very humble; all the time you are very offensive which is making you unable to reach
or take good understanding.
You do not
believe in hadith but we believe and find a hadith which says that
understanding of Din is gift of Allah Almighty.
presented the meaning and understanding of this hadith, in the same way as
presented by the scholars of the past. Ask “jihadists” why they are not
accepting this understanding.
in India have agreed to live in agreement with constitution and you should not
think that it is against Islam. Living in agreement with the constitution is
very much in agreement with Islamic spirit.
The Third Most Important Usul-Al-Hadith
Let us examine the language of the Hadith
that is the subject of the article: It has been narrated on the authority of
Abdullah b. ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to
fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat
and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my
behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.
Reported by Bukhari and Muslim.
This Hadith must be rejected following the
first Usul itself since the subject of war is fully covered in the Quran and
there is no need to refer to any hadith to understand what the objective and
justification for the battles were. We know that the Prophet had himself
forbidden people to write down the hadiths and it can be easily established,
that on any topic covered by the Quran, the hadiths fall short or even
contradict the Quran, which means that these were the sayings of the Prophet
before Allah provided the best answer and guidance to the question. The
prophet’s opinions were those of a human being and these were superseded by the
Quran which may also have served the purpose of letting people know that the
Quran is not and cannot be the word of the Prophet. If the sayings were not
immediately written down, many of these sayings are what people could recall
from memory. In such a situation it is an interpretation of what the Prophet
said and not a verbatim account of what he said. The second Usul must therefore
be to judge by the language of the hadith whether it is a verbatim account of
what the Prophet (pbuh) said, or an interpretation of what he said.
What may have occasioned such a saying as the
hadith under discussion? The Muslims had struggled for 13 years and then forced
to migrate leaving behind their homes and businesses. What would have been a
major concern for them? A major concern
would have been ‘when will the hostilities cease and when will we be able to
return to our homes?’ and lead a normal life.
Perhaps the question simply was “when will the fighting end?” and the
response may have been “when the people enter Islam in hordes”. The answer is a
Sign from Allah about how it will end. The Quran’s answer to the question which
makes clear the outcome is:
Victory is decreed
(58:20) Those who resist Allah and
His Messenger will be among those most humiliated.
(21) Allah has decreed: "It is I
and My messengers who must prevail": For Allah is One full of strength,
able to enforce His Will.
When military victory is achieved,
people will enter Islam in large number
(110:1) When comes the Help of Allah,
(2) And thou dost see the people
enter Allah´s Religion in crowds,
(3) Celebrate the praises of thy
Lord, and pray for His Forgiveness: For He is Oft-Returning (in Grace and
The Prophet’s answer would have been in
accordance with the above. It is easy to see how the same can easily get
distorted in transmission as in the hadith, to portray the Prophet as an
all-conquering hero and jabbar, who can impose his will by his military might
and make everyone accept Islam. The correct position is that “the people
entering Allah’s religion in large numbers” is merely a prediction of what will
happen and not the objective of the battles.
The language of the hadith must not be
examined as one may examine a verse from the Quran, the textual integrity of
which is not in doubt. What we must consider is whether It can be classified as
a verbatim account or an interpretation of the narrator. In this case, it is
obviously an interpretation to portray the Prophet as an all-conquering hero.
This hadith fails following the three most
important Usul/principles according to me (the most important being that it
directly contradicts several verses of the Quran and finds no support in any
@Miss KF, Comment 1
The early Muslims- companions [al-sahaba] and
their followers and successors [tabiu’n] (Allah be pleased with all of them),
because their beliefs [Aqaid aka creeds or doctrines] were pure through the
blessing of their association with the prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be
upon him); because the period in which they lived was near to his time; because
there were few newly-rising happenings [waqa’i] and differences [ikhtilafat]
and because they were able to have recourse [muraja’] to absolutely reliable
authorities [thiqat]; because of all these things they dispensed with writing
down the two sciences with their arrangement into sections and chapters and
thus they were not in need of stating the masail [issues/rulings/laws/investigations]
of these two sciences in form of derivatives [juz’iyat] and fundamentals
This situation continued until fitna arose among
the Muslims, oppression over the learned imams took place, differences of
opinions and tendency towards innovations [al-bida’ plural of bida’t] and personal
desires [al-ahwa] appeared, fatawa, new cases and much referring to Ulama in
important matters outnumbered.
Ms Kaniz Fatma,
In the Prophet’s (pbuh) time, the Quran was well-understood and followed
and whatever questions arose, were immediately answered through revelation.
There was therefore no need for any scholarship to find answers to any
There are exceptions to the above statement. The law of inheritance was
poorly understood and continues to be so till today, which necessitated Allah to
reveal 4:176 which is the last verse not only in this Surah, but the very last
verse revealed most reluctantly it would appear. This is the only verse in the
Quran that contradicts another verse of the Quran (4:12), but has a lesson to
offer. A poor solution (4:176) is better than no solution. The people were not
able to deal with the distribution as per verse 4:12 because of the state of
logic and mathematics in those days. For a better understanding, you may read
my article on Inheritance:
Inheritance Related Calculations Based On the Quran
The contradiction is explained away by saying that
the distribution in verse 4:12 covers uterine siblings (common mother) and that
in 4:176 siblings with common father which is a falsehood. Verse 4:176 was not
meant to be revealed at all. If you compare the calculations explained in my
article with that of the rulings of the jurists, you will find differences. My calculations
are based on pure logic and mathematics and without the slightest deviation
from the literal meaning of the relevant verses (4:11,12). The jurists are
unable to deal with these two verses based on pure logic and mathematics and therefore
end up with complex solutions to a simple problem.
The jurists prove inadequate with verse 2:282 also or
on the question of woman witnesses and their rulings violate the Quran and are
in fact extremely silly. This is covered in my article:
Is A Woman’s Testimony Worth Half That of A Man?
I have discussed the hadith on arrogance. The first and foremost usul
al-hadith should be to ignore the hadiths when the subject is covered by
the Quran and go entirely by the Quran since:
(25:33) And no question do they bring
to you but We reveal to you the truth and the best explanation (thereof).
of the Prophet appears to be his answer to a questioner before Allah provided
the best answer in the Quran through revelation. You will therefore find that
every saying of the Prophet (pbuh) on a subject covered by the Quran, falls
short of the complete and best answer provided in the Quran, and is sometimes the
opposite of what Prophet (pbuh) said, or wanted. The Prophet himself therefore
forbade writing down his sayings since these were his opinion before Allah
revealed the correct answer.
As regards rhetoric and kalam, these are dirty arts of arguing to win an argument rather than to explore a subject logically.
What was the cause that books of Fiqh, Kalam and Usul al-Fiqh
were not compiled in the era of the Prophet [peace be upon him] and why were
they compiled later?
The people should not be confused
about the term “Al-Ahkam Al-Sharia’” [Sharia judgments].
They do not differentiate between legal values of Ahkam Sharia which is of two
types. The ahkam sharia which is related to nature of practice [kayfiyat
al-‘amal] is called derived (far’iya) and practical
(‘amaliya) and that which is connected with belief [I’tiqad] and is known fundamental
[asliya] and doctrinal [I’tiqadiya].
The legal judgments which are derived
and practical can’t be put in the category of those connected with fundamental and
Knowledge of differences between the two
To continue from my previous comment on
the cited Hadith, the Quran says:
(25:33) And no question do they bring to you but We reveal to you the
truth and the best explanation (thereof).
So, to every question the people asked,
the Quran has provided the best answer. So, whatever the Prophet (pbuh) may have said in answer to any question
was an interim answer superseded by a subsequent revelation contained in the
Quran. Verse 4:34 is an example where the Prophet wanted to answer a question by
saying it is prohibited to beat one’s wife, but before he could answer, the verse
4:34 was revealed.
Now let us consider the response to the
question "And if the man likes his clothes
to be good and his sandals to be good?", the appropriate response from the
Quran is that Allah specifically allows this:
(7:26) O ye Children of Adam! We have bestowed raiment upon you to
cover your shame, as well as to be an adornment (warīshan) to you.
(7:31) O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel (zīnatakum)
at every time and place of prayer:…
Allah commands people to excel in all good things and virtues.
However, the response,
"Allah is Beautiful and loves beauty” is problematic. While Allah
may consider all his creation “beautiful”, in our eyes not all are beautiful. There
are many persons who consider themselves ugly. What about their feelings and
reaction to the response? They are likely to think that Allah loves them less
because they are not beautiful!
It is likely that the
verses that I have cited were revealed subsequently which is why the immediate
response of the Prophet (pbuh) makes no mention of these verses and once these
verses were revealed, there was no need for any other response to the question.
This is true of every hadith of the
Prophet. These appear to be answers given to questions before the answer came
in the form of revelation which means that every hadith that answers a question
covered by the Quran, is abrogated by the Quran. In any case, there is no
hadith that provides a better answer to any question than the Quran. And as I
said before, the hadiths are standing proof that the Quran is the word of Allah
and not of the Prophet (pbuh).
man gets inspired by theories and characteristics of wahabiyat, he is unable to
get true enlightenment to understand the faith. It is not necessary that
everyone of such genre identifies himself as Wahabi. Most of the
Wahabi-oriented followers have started hiding their identity but to show the
same characteristics in some other ways.
started their propaganda against the entire community with accusations that the
followers of Islam known as Sunni-Sufis-Barelvis do acts of bid’at, shirk,
kufr, puja-paath, grave-worshipping. One
of their characteristics was that they think and make the people think that these
non-Wahhabi Muslims love the blessed Prophet more than they do Allah. How has
real face of wahhabiyat has influenced its web of its specific characteristic
is really a great matter of concern. Hardly can a man understand such things
unless he is very expert and knows the deep-rooted differences between
Wahabiyat and non-Wahabiyat in both areas of studies; doctrines [I’tiqad] and
actions [a’amal]. Unless the people trace the real differences between them,
they can’t reach the solution of solving the problem of growing wahabiyat and
thereby the terror phenomenon.
of such repeated propagandas was not limited only to their faith matter, but it
amounted to kill all those that were and are non-Wahhabis. It is this place
where nonWahhabi Muslims differ from wahhabis. Non-Wahabi Muslims like to be
called ‘Sunnis’ and some of them make takfir of the wahhabi ideologues or consider
them gumrah but they do not take laws in their hands because their theology’s
main part is not to take laws in hand.
Wahhabi-inspired terrors, they take laws in their hands and commit various
sorts of terror activities, in addition to encouraging the followers of
wahabiyat to strengthen out their stability and muster up all their strength to
spread wahhabiyat and damage the existence of non-Wahhabis.
is going through the same phase of wahbiazation which in future amounts to
killing all non-wahabi Muslims.
'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud reported that the
Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "No one who has an
atom's weight of pride in his heart will enter the Garden [heaven]." A man
said, "And if the man likes his clothes to be good and his sandals to be
good?" He said, "Allah is Beautiful and loves beauty. Pride means to
renounce the truth and abase people." [Riyadh-as-Saliheen , volume 4,
hadith number 612] By Ghulam Ghaus
Siddiqi ق1/14/2019 9:58:43 AM
All praise to Allah that He shows through the ahadith, that
even a hadith of the Prophet (pbuh), cannot be passed off as a verse from the
Quran, because of the vast difference between the two. There is no hadith that is
good enough to have been a verse in the Quran. This is another proof that the
Quran is not, and can never be the word of the Prophet, but it is the word of
While the cited hadith may have been an appropriate response
to a question from the Prophet’s audience, it does not cover the subject of
pride and arrogance adequately. As a matter of fact, even though the follow up
question gives an opportunity to give a fuller explanation, the response covers
the question only partially. It makes an exemption of taking pride in dressing well without explaining why but by simply saying "because Allah loves beauty" which raises more questions than answer the question asked!
Allah is not a creator of evil, and all the emotions given
to man, serve Allah’s purpose. Pride and arrogance are related. When pride
takes the form of arrogance, it becomes blameworthy. Justifiable pride is good
and necessary to strive for excellence. Wearing good clothes is for a man who
takes pride in his appearance, pride in making a good impression, pride in
becoming a welcome member of the society. A person who takes pride in being
considered a man of integrity never tells a lie, or break a promise, or cheat.
A person who takes pride in being considered disciplined, is never late for an
appointment, never late for work or leave early and never waste time when on
duty. Self-esteem and pride are necessary to achieve excellence. The opposite
of a person who takes pride in achieving excellence in all virtues, is a person
without pride or a shameless person.
Why does Allah ask us to strive as in a race in all
virtues (fa-is'tabiqū l-khayrāti (5:48)? Why does one race except to
get ahead of the rest and what motivates except the pride in finishing ahead of
the rest or among the foremost?
So, what does Allah prohibit and what does He not prohibit? The
Quran gives a clear answer:
سَأَصْرِفُ عَنْ آيَاتِيَ الَّذِينَ يَتَكَبَّرُونَ فِي الْأَرْضِ
بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَإِن يَرَوْا كُلَّ آيَةٍ لَّا يُؤْمِنُوا بِهَا وَإِن يَرَوْا
سَبِيلَ الرُّشْدِ لَا يَتَّخِذُوهُ سَبِيلًا وَإِن يَرَوْا سَبِيلَ الْغَيِّ يَتَّخِذُوهُ
سَبِيلًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا وَكَانُوا عَنْهَا غَافِلِينَ
(7:146) Those who
behave arrogantly (yatakabbarūna) on the earth without the right (bighayri l-ḥaqi)
- them will I turn away from My signs: Even if they see all the signs, they
will not believe in them; and if they see the way of right conduct, they will
not adopt it as the way; but if they see the way of error, that is the way they
will adopt. For they have rejected our signs, and failed to take warning from
So, it is arrogance without the right to feel proud that is
forbidden and not taking pride in the position one attains by striving hard as
in a race in all virtues. One can and should take justifiable pride in what one
has achieved through earnest and honest effort.
Is this hadith the reason the Muslims are backward and unreliable
because they lack the sense of pride required to achieve excellence and to avoid
shameful deeds such as lying, inconsistency, unreliability, sloppiness etc.?
“The gnosis and
knowledge of men is, compared with the Prophet’s, like the drop of moisture
which oozes out of the top of a bound waterskin”. (Bayazid Bastami, Aspects of
Islamic Civilization, Routledge, p. 124, translated by A. J. Arberry)
By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi 1/15/2019 3:44:31 AM
The above is a completely nonsensical statement. It is meant
to exalt the Prophet (PBUH) and demean Allah. Allah says that:
He is made the Quran easy to understand and that it is a clear
perspicuous Book and a Light to those who seek true guidance and a promise to
lead the seeker from darkness into light. If the difference between an ordinary
man’s understanding and the Prophet’s understanding is so large, the
ordinary Muslim is absolved of his failures and shortcomings even if his
following of the Quran as compared to how the Prophet (pbuh) followed the same
is like “the drop of moisture which oozes out of the top of a bound waterskin” because
that is the difference that must be expected. And since it exalts our Prophet
if the difference is as large as possible, a Muslim must follow the Quran as
little as possible!
The Prophet (pbuh) and the vanguard Muslims (those who
became Muslim before the Battle of Badr and participated in it) will enjoy a
higher status and no later Muslim can ever achieve a status equal to any of
them no matter how great his deeds. This does not mean that later Muslims
cannot equal in knowledge. It does not make any logical sense for Allah to
place a barrier on attaining equal or even greater knowledge. Why would He do
that? Is Allah against excellence in knowledge and restricts the same? The fools do not know when they blaspheme Allah, and when they blaspheme Allah, they also blaspheme the Prophet (pbuh).
Equal status is not possible simply because the same
situation will not recur and later Muslims will never be subjected to the same
trials and thank Allah for that.
“But later the revelation of 2:190
allowed fighting against those who had persecuted for 14 or 15 years……….”
The first verse regarding fighting was not 2:190 but 22:39.
The following verses give the complete justification for fighting and places
the command in its historical perspective of the mission of all the prophets
and a clear warning of the likely outcome.
(22:38) Verily Allah will defend (from
ill) those who believe: verily, Allah loveth not any that is a traitor to
faith, or show ingratitude.
(39) To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight),
because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid;-
(40) (They are) those who have been
expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that
they say, "our Lord is Allah". Did not Allah check one set of people
by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries,
churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated
in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for
verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).
(41) (They are) those who, if We
establish them in the land, establish regular prayer and give regular charity,
enjoin the right and forbid wrong: with Allah rests the end (and decision) of
(42) If they treat thy (mission) as
false, so did the peoples before them (with their prophets),- the People of
Noah, and ´Ad and Thamud;
(43) Those of Abraham and Lut;
(44) And the Companions of the Madyan
People; and Moses was rejected (in the same way). But I granted respite to the
Unbelievers, and (only) after that did I punish them: but how (terrible) was my
rejection (of them)!
(45) How many populations have We
destroyed, which were given to wrong-doing? They tumbled down on their roofs.
And how many wells are lying idle and neglected, and castles lofty and
(46) Do they not travel through the
land, so that their hearts (and minds) may thus learn wisdom and their ears may
thus learn to hear? Truly it is not their eyes that are blind, but their hearts
which are in their breasts.
(47) Yet they ask thee to hasten on the
Punishment! But Allah will not fail in His Promise. Verily a Day in the sight
of thy Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning.
(48) And to how many populations did I
give respite, which were given to wrong-doing? in the end I punished them. To
me is the destination (of all).
My reading is that verses 2:190 to 194 were revealed in the 6
AH when the Prophet went for the first time after Hijrat towards Mecca to
perform Hajj/Umra. The question that arose was what if they were attacked? The
journey was performed in the sacred month Dhul Qadah and to the Sacred Mosque.
The response comes from Allah
2:191 “….fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight
you there; but if they fight you, slay them….”
prohibited month for the prohibited month,- and so for all things prohibited,-
there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition
against you, Transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that
Allah is with those who restrain themselves.
All the previous battles were near Medina and there was no
occasion earlier of the likelihood of a fight breaking out in the Sacred
also not necessary for him to make unnecessary comments which merely lead to
tautology and wearisomeness. Instead he should turn away from tediousness and
study the usul, without damaging his faculty of reasoning through the oriental scholarship.
save us from the so-called slogan of ‘subjectivity and objectivity’ in studying
Islamic Sciences and enable us to get the blessed understading of the Quran and
Sunnah, at least necessarily!
is interested in knowing the details of Ahkam Al-Shariya, it is extremely
necessary for him to study the usul/rules/methods which are the results of
unforgettable efforts of the earlier and later jurists during 1400 years. It is
not good for him to embrace the obscurities of illusions and darkness of doubts;
as such things will never be appreciated among those that are really scholars.
Yes It is
a matter of great concern that this century is missing the real jurist who can
resovle the newly rising issues, on the baiss of the methods which were known
and practically applied by the earlier and later jurists as the most striking gems
and pearls of great values. However it is Allah Who enables a man to deserve
that juristic rank.
very shocking to see few people blindly criticizing methodology of hadith [usul
al-hadith] as a result of their lack of understanding. They do not bother to
study the role of this subject of study, following in the footsteps of masters
of orientalists like Schacht. The arguments that Joseph Schacht made are based
on very weak foundations of reasons or on unauthentic anecdotes of Islamic
history. Other orientalists and their followers including few Muslim-named
people derived from his arguments many weak presumptions, to the highest extreme
of certainity that they are not ready to rethink their own version of mistakes.
This has made them supremacist and is causing xenophobia.
says in the article: “ Hadith scholars and
jurists have always held the view that any Hadith contradicting the Quran
should be considered obsolete………”
Hadith directly contradicts the following verses:
1. verse 2:256 “ Let there be no compulsion in
2. Verse 2:272.
It is not required of thee (O Messenger), to set them on the right path, but
Allah sets on the right path whom He pleaseth.
3. Verse (10:99) If it had been thy Lord´s will, they would
all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind,
against their will, to believe!
4. (8:61) But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou
(also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth
and knoweth (all things).(62) Should they intend to deceive thee,- verily Allah
sufficeth thee: He it is That hath strengthened thee with His aid and with (the
company of) the Believers;
There is no
verse of the Quran that supports the cited hadith but the hadith has resulted
in misinterpreting several verses of the Quran deviating from their clear meaning
and also misinterpreting the history of early Islam. This is covered in my
1. The Ahadith That Distort The Message Of The Quran - Part
2. The Ahadith That Distort The Message Of The Quran – Part
also lists several verses and says these verses “debarred
Muslims from fighting in defence”. This is incorrect. To debar the Muslims from
fighting, there should have been a verse that said “do not fight”. There is no
such verse. What prevented the Muslims from fighting are two reasons:
1. They were in no position to
fight. They were numerically very few and dispersed.
2. There was persecution and
even physical torture but only one person was killed. There was simply no enemy standing in battle
to fight with. The situation deteriorated over a period and when the Prophet
lost two powerful supporters because of their death, they made/planned an
attempt on the life of the Prophet, but he migrated before they could lay their
hands on him. The other Muslims migrated without much problem. Some Muslims
even stayed behind and faced no problem. They were neither harmed nor did the
subsequent verses regarding fighting apply to them. The verses regarding
fighting are not about civil war but about fighting an enemy on a battle field.
This situation did not exist earlier.
is objectionable about saying that the listed verses debarred the Muslims from
fighting is the question why the Muslims fought then later? Why did these verses not prevent fighting?
Were they abrogated? The verses were neither abrogated nor can it be said that
they did not apply. These verses continued to apply to those people who were
not at war but are simply inapplicable to an enemy standing in battle. These
verses continued to be applicable to those who had stayed behind in Mecca and
the war verses were inapplicable to them unless they migrated first which the Quran makes clear.
gnosis and knowledge of men is, compared with the Prophet’s, like the drop of
moisture which oozes out of the top of a bound waterskin”. (Bayazid Bastami,
Aspects of Islamic Civilization, Routledge, p. 124, translated by A. J. Arberry)
Some excerpts from the Last
Sermon of the beloved Prophet [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him] delivered
on the Ninth Day of Dhul Hijjah 10 A.H (c. 630 AD) include:
“O People, verily your
blood, your property and your honour are sacred and inviolable until you appear
before your Lord, as the sacred inviolability of this day of yours, this month
of yours and this very town (of yours). Verily you will soon meet your Lord and
you will be held answerable for your actions.”
“O People, it is true that you
have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have right over
you. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and
clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are
your partners and committed helpers.”
“All mankind is from Adam
and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any
superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a
black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action.
You know that every Muslim is the brother of another Muslim. Remember,
one day you will appear before Allah and answer for your deeds. So beware, do
not astray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.”
“All those who listen to
me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may
the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me directly.”
Does anybody see any abuse in any of my
comments in this thread? You can read GGS comments directed at me. Those are
hostile and abusive. GGS is frightened little boy running away because he has
"“I have been commanded to fight
some specific people until they say ‘There is no god but Allah ....”
Obviously some specific people meant in
this Hadith were those who had persecuted the Prophet and his followers for as
long as 14 or 15 years in the city of Makkah."
No matter who those specific people
were and what their crimes were, if the Prophet was commanded to fight until
such people were compelled to accept Islam by reciting the kalima, they are
being compelled. The Prophet and Allah (nauzobillah) are then both guilty of
violating "Let there be no compulsion in religion". This is
preposterous and a calumny against Allah and the Prophet. There is no choice
but to trash the hadith as inspired by Satan.
It is not only the extremists who are
misguided by the hadith but even scholars such as Ibn Al-Arabi, Shah Waliullah,
Raza Ahmad Khan, Javed Ghamidi, Malulana Waheeduddin Khan, al-Shabi, al-Hasan,
Qatadah, al-Dahhaq etc.
Naseer Ahmed -
12/22/2018 4:38:56 AM
If one has an understanding of the
Quran, he will realize that no one except those in whom Allah finds some
goodness are made to listen to the Message and accept Islam (See verse
8:23). Allah does not bless the evil with Islam and the worst are branded
by Allah as Kafir (those who will not believe) in their lifetime itself and
these will never believe even if they live for a thousand years. The examples
from history are the Pharaoh to whom Moses was sent, Qarun, Haman, Abu Jahal,
Abu Lahab, the people of Noah, Thamud, Aad and Lut destroyed by Allah etc.
Where is the question of forcing evil people to accept Islam?
Belief is therefore the most precious
gift and blessing from Allah. Why would Allah command the Prophet to
force this gift and blessing on the worst of the people?
By Naseer Ahmed - 12/22/2018 5:09:27 AM
Even if the hadith is limited to a
particular set of people,it contradicts "Let there be no compulsion in
religion" 2:256 besides other verses that advise the Prophet to accept
peace if offered by the enemy even if he suspects treachery from them or subsequent
breach of the treaty. So, is Allah saying one thing in the Quran and the
opposite to the Prophet (PBUH) privately? The hadith is an invention of Satan.
And what is the evidence that the
hadith was ever followed? Is it verse 9:5? It cannot be because the people
covered by it are given the freedom to move about freely as they please for an
amnesty period of 4 months during which time they can migrate to adjoining
Abyssinia and save their lives as well as their Pagan faith which I believe
they did while others accepted Islam and no one was killed because of
There is no evidence that the hadith
was ever followed and overwhelming evidence that the Prophet acted in a manner
that is the opposite of the hadith and exactly as per the Quran. Else, there
would have been no treaty of Hudaybiyah, or amnesty after the conquest of Mecca
for over a year until verse 9:5 was revealed and even then a clear opportunity
was given to those guilty to save themselves and their pagan faith while others
who were not guilty had the option to become jizya paying citizens as per 9:29
and retain their faith.
Who exactly then were the people
against whom the Prophet (pbuh) fought until they accepted Islam? I wonder why
anyone defends a Satanic hadith and blaspheme Allah, the Prophet and the Quran.
Islamic scholarship is however very
comfortable with the contradictions and their ilm al kalam has been developed
precisely to defend the indefensible. Ilm al kalam is the anti-thesis of
logic which has zero tolerance for contradictions.
By Naseer Ahmed - 1/13/2019 12:26:45 AM
GGS is blind to his own abusive,
meaningless and completely irrational tirade.
The Quran is a Book that makes things
clear. I do not need any other source to understand the Quran. Why do I
need the ahadith to understand the objective of the Prophet's battles? Does not
the Quran make it clear that it was to end the fitna of persecution and to make
the deen of Allah prevail? Does not the deen of Allah include "let there
be no compulsion in religion"? Is there any verse that says that the
battles were to end the kufr of shirk? Does verse 9:13 list shirk as one of the
reasons for the punishment in 9:5? So, what support is there for the hadith?
Does not Allah say that none will
believe unless Allah wills? Isn't belief a blessing from Allah? How can the
same Allah command that the worst kind of enemies of the Prophet and Allah be
fought against until they accept Islam? If Allah's blessing of Islam can be
forced on the worst enemies of Islam, what wrong have others done that you
spare them? Why should they be deprived of this blessing?
Isn't there a hadith that says even if
all believed or none believed it makes no difference to the majesty of Allah?
What has happened to the majesty of Allah that he should command the prophet to
fight certain people who are the worst enemies of the Prophet and Allah until
they believed? Why is Allah in love with these people that he should force His
blessings on them at the point of the sword?
The hadith is indeed Satanic and you
are supporting such a hadith.
Can you give a reasoned, logical, point
by point response?
By Naseer Ahmed - 1/13/2019 11:26:59 PM
Hazrat Abdullah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As reported that the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If
anyone has four characteristics, he is a pure hypocrite, and if anyone
has one of them, he has an aspect of hypocrisy until he gives it up: whenever
he is trusted, he betrays his trust; whenever he speaks, he lies; whenever he
makes an agreement, he breaks it; and whenever he quarrels, he deviates from
the truth speaks falsely." [Riyadh-as-Saliheen by Imam Al-Nawawi,
volume 4, hadith number 690]
Abdullah ibn Mas'ud said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, said, 'After I am gone there will be misappropriation
and matters of which you disapprove.' They said, 'O Messenger of Allah,
what do you command us to do?' He said, 'To fulfil the rights you owe to
others and to ask Allah for what is owed to you.'" [Riyadh-as-Saliheen,
volume 4, hadith number 670]
ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As reported, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him
and grant him peace, said, 'Those who are just will be on minbars of
light with Allah. They are those who are just in respect of their judgements,
their families and what they are put in charge of." [Riyadh-as-Saliheen
by Imam Al-Nawawi, volume 4, hadith number 660]
'A'isha [radiallahu anhu] said, "I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah
bless him and grant him peace, say in this house of his, 'O Allah, anyone who
is appointed over any of the affairs of my community and is hard on them, I
will be hard on him. Anyone who is appointed over any of the affairs of
my community and is kind to them, I will be kind to him." [Riyadh-as-Saliheen
by Imam Al-Nawawi, volume 4, hadith number 655]
ibn Wahb said, "I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, say, 'Shall I tell you about the people of the Fire? All
those who are coarse, domineering, and arrogant.'" [Riyadh-as-Saliheen
by Imam Al-Nawawi, volume 4, hadith number 614]
ibn Himar reported that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant
him peace, said, "Allah revealed to me that you should be humble so no
one should vaunt himself above another, and no one should commit injustice
against another."[ Riyadh-as-Saliheen
by Imam Al-Nawawi, volume 4, hadith number 602]
ibn Bashir said, "I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, say, "The halal is clear and the haram is clear. But
between the two there are doubtful things about which most people have no
knowledge. Whoever exercises caution with regard to what is doubtful,
shows prudence in respect of his deen and his honour. Whoever gets involved in
the doubtful things is like a herdsman who grazes his animals near a private
preserve (hima). He is bound to enter it. Every king has a private
preserve and the private preserve of Allah on His earth are the things that He
has made forbidden. There is lump of flesh in the body, the nature of which is
that when it is sound, the entire body is sound, and when it is corrupt, the
entire body is corrupt - it is the heart." [Riyadh-as-Saliheen, volume 4,
hadith number 588]
Hurayra reported that the Messenger of Allah may Allah bless him and grant him
peace, said, “The strong man is not the one who throws people in wrestling.
The strong man is the one who has control of himself when he is angry.”[Riyadh-as-Saliheen by
Imam Al-Nawawi, 647]
have heard speeches on the explanation of this hadith on youtube.
Dr. Hamza Yusus: youtube.com/watch?v=F2g6chliDIQ
Sheikh Tahir Wyatt:w.youtube.com/watch?v=YtO8f2bEhAI
Dr. Brown: youtube.com/watch?v=e6GBFW41uHg
others have explained this hadith well. But Mr. Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi’s
explanation here in this article is more scholastic and convincing.
quoting, Miss KF!
ibn 'Abdullah said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, say, “Whoever is deprived of kindness is deprived of
all good.” (Riyadh-as-Saliheen by Imam Al-Nawawi, volume 4, hadith
Jihadists and Islamophobes are ignoring such a hadith?!! 'A'isha reported that
the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Allah
is kind and loves kindness in every matter. (Riyadh-as-Saliheen by Imam
Al-Nawawi, volume 4, hadith number 633)
a person is in doubt about any issue, he should leave it and accept what is
better. There is a hadith. Al-Hasan ibn 'Ali said, "I memorised from the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, "Leave what
gives you doubt for what gives you no doubt." (Riyadh-as-Saliheen by Imam
anyone who has doubt in understanding the misunderstood hadith can leave it and
accept what the Quran says, without abusing anyone. One who has no doubt in
understanding this hadith and thinks he can clear doubts of Jihadists should do
it. This article tries to remove misunderstanding of jihadists who quote this
hadith and it is very necessary to refute their misunderstanding.
and terror ideologues have shaken their hands to quote this hadith to defame
Islam; we should not forget that they also quote the Quran, and ignore other
dozens of peaceful verses of the Quran and Ahadith
Islam urged to abolish the slavery system. The slavery system was gradually abolished. The
Prophet is reported to have said, "He who has a slave-girl and
teaches her good manners and improves her education and then manumits and
marries her, will get a double reward; and any slave who observes Allah's right
and his master's right will get a double reward." (Narrated Abu
Musa Al-Ashari, in Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 46, Number 723)
Comment 4 to Sultan Shahin Saheb,
The Imams of all the four Islamic schools of jurisprudence [Hanafi,
Shafei, Maliki and Hanbali] said, the Hadith “I was ordered to fight the
people” does not refer to all the people but to the disbelievers of Makka who
had persecuted Muslims.
We disagree with Ibn Taymiyyah’s thought but even he too has
explained this hadith in a way which does not support the jihadists who claim
to follow Ibn Taymiyyah.
The meaning of this Hadith in the language of Ibn Taymiyyah is as
follows: “the people that I must fight (who are they)? They are the people who
were hostile towards him, the first to assault him and break the covenant, not
all the people”.
The problem is with the understanding of jihadists who even kill
those who recite La Ilaha Illallahu.... [There is no god but Allah and Muhammad
is the messenger of Allah – peace be upon him]
“The classical understanding of this hadith ‘I have been commanded
to fight ....” is that it refers to some polytheistic Arabs who persecuted,
murdered Muslims and their allies, and broke their treaties with them. As such,
some deserved capital punishment, yet they are given the opportunity to repent
in which case they are to be forgiven, and their property will be protected.
This shows, the command of the Hadith was specific to one group only, those who
caused bloodshed and showed open aggression against the Muslims and their
non-Muslim allies, 1300 years ago. And history is a witness that no one was
forced to accept Islam” (https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/12/25/the-hadith-fight-until-they-say-there-is-no-god-but-allah-explained)
But terror masters, Islamophobes are not ready to accept this understanding.
It seems as if they had vowed to destruct all beautiful messages of the Quran
Comment 3 - Dear Sultan Shahin sahib, you say, “But would the same logic not
limit the prophet-hood of Hazrat Mohammad (peace be upon him) to merely Makka or
Arabia rather than mankind as Al-Naas or Lin-Naas,
is also used in verses of Quran like 2:185,3: 110, 7:158, 34:28, etc,
proclaiming his prophethood for all mankind, as we understand today?"
I do not think this was supported only by logic. This understanding
was primarily supported by the Quranic ayaat and other Ahadith which establish
a model for the believers that forced conversion is not allowed.
This article says that Alif Lam is
of four types; 1) Jinsi,
3) Ahd Zihni and 4) Ahd Khariji.
When Alif-Lam is prefixed to any word to focus on the definition [Haqiqat] of that word and not its
constituents, it is known as Alif Lam Jinsi. (2) When Alif Lam is prefixed to any word to focus on all
the constituents/ all the individuals of that word, it is called Alif Lam
Istighraqi. (3) When Alif Lam refers to some of the constituents of the
word to which it prefixed, it may refer to some unspecified constituents or to
some specific constituents. When it refers to some unspecified constituents, it
is called Alif Lam Ahd Zihni. (4) When Alif Lam refers to some specific constituents of the word to which
it is prefixed, it is called Alif Lam Ahd Khariji.
checking the letters ‘Alif Lam’ mentioned
in the aforementioned Hadith, we find that here in this Hadith ‘Alif Lam’ is meant for Ahd
Khariji. Thus the Hadith means “I have been commanded to fight some specific
people until they say ‘There is no god but Allah ....”
lam being Ahd-E-Khariji in this hadith is because in other cases it will
contradict the Quran and other Ahadith.
us see the ayat 2:185 which uses the word ‘al-nas’/the
people. In this case we can’t say that the alif-lam used in al-nas is
Ahd-e-Khariji as it will then contradict the Quran which implies that the
Quranic guidance is meant for all mankind. Here alif lam is istighraqi which
refers to all mankind / all people of the world. This is fully supported by other
Quranic verses which you also have referred to.
For example, Allah says, “Say “O people! Indeed I am,
towards you all, the Noble Messenger of Allah – for Whom (Allah) only is the
kingship of the heavens and the earth; there is none worthy of worship, except
Him – giving life and giving death; therefore believe in Allah and His Noble
Messenger, the Prophet who is untutored (except by Allah), who believes in
Allah and His Words, and obey him (the Prophet) to attain guidance.” (7:158)
Why don’t you tolerate ilm al-kalam if it is not tolerant towards
you? Are you not seeing your own face in the mirror?
Where have you brought the use of ‘Hudaybiya’ from?
As for Ilm al-Kalam, it is beneficial for men of true-seekers and
genuine and not for the haters who have no other option except to live with
their hate-filled hearts.
Your agenda is very clear and Muslims should never support people
like you in any way. You have neither understood the Quran, nor Ahadith, nor anyone.
Your jihalat exceeds because you have been abusive person on this
site, irrational, unreasonable and unable to understand the Quran itself.
You use abusive words for others but they are stuck with your own
thinking and mindset.
Why do you interfere into a healthy debate when I am not
interested into reading your abusive comments?
Show me how many Muslims support your arguments. None and never will they follow except those who
have purchased misguidance for guidance.
All English translators, while translating the Quran, have taken
support of Ahadith. It is your so-called agenda to denounce ‘hadith’.
Who has told you about Makki and Madani verses?
Who has told you that this the holy Quran?
Did Angel Jibrail bring revelation to you?
What is the source of history to record anything about Islam?
Who has told you about so many things you wrote in your articles?
Are you blindly claiming not to following ahadith?
Are you selective to decide which hadith is good for your wish and
bad for your wishes or do you have any approved method to check the hadith?
Who told you how to perform Namaz?
Who told you when and how and how much zakat you should give?
There are hundreds of issues for which you are still blind and
perhaps will remain forever unless you have good intention in pursuit of knowledge.
The ill-mouthed men can never attain fiqh/good understanding of the blessed
message of the Quran.
I hate and categorically reject you when you said “The hadith is an
invention of Satan”
There are many ‘mulla’ who attribute their satanic wishes to
Islam; and you are one of them.
Comment 2- Another example of general term being used in the Quran
for specific people can be seen in this ayat 54:12 which reads, “And We caused
the earth [al-ard] to gush forth with springs” (54:12)” This ayat refers to the
deluge in the era of Hazrat Nuh [Noah] peace be upon him. Does it mean all the
earth, as there is the use of al- with earth? No, this is not true. Scientifically
the flood could not have covered all earth. Thus what is meant by the word
“earth” is the earth to which Hazrat Noah was appointed, the land of his
people, which Allah wanted to drown with the flood. This understanding is
supported by the reading of the full context of the ayat and ahadith that talk
about its context.
This fact is categorically established that before the Prophet
Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), all prophets were sent
specifically to their people. Far be it from God Almighty, to send Noah specifically
to his people and then drown the whole earth. No, He Almighty drowned those people
who disbelieved in him.
says, “The phrase, Whithersoever ye turn... there is the presence of Allah, in
Quran 2:115 implies Allah can be located everywhere instead of restricting it
Almighty is omnipresent (present everywhere) by Himself. He does not need
anyone to make him omnipresent. Therefore Zuma’s using passive verb to express
this creed is categorically wrong.
Comment 1- Dear Sultan Shahin Saheb, you have posed interesting questions. I left
many implications in this article because it had been lengthy. But I will put
them under the comment section through your questions posed to me.
You said to me, “you seem to be putting overwhelming reliance on
the argument that the definite article al limits the
meaning of Al-Naasin this Hadith to only the specific people
or Mushrikeen of Makka or maybe Arabia.”
I read my own article again but I could not find that I had put
overwhelming reliance on the argument of alif laam meem or al. This argument,
if unsupported by the concept of war mentioned in the Quran and other Ahadith,
will be merely a linguistic argument. We know that only linguistic method is
not sufficient to reach the understanding of the message of the Quran or Sunnah
or Ahadith. If this alif lam argument had not been supported by the Quran and
Ahadith to mean that al-naas in this hadith was meant only for a specific group
of people, this would have been selective argument and urged the reader to pose
the question “why the same selective argument is not applicable to other verses
of the Quran in which the words ‘al-nas’, ‘al-qaum’ or al-alamin etc have been
used?” Therefore I could not put overwhelming reliance on the alif-lam
argument; rather I had to adopt the meaning supported by the Quran, other
war-related ahadith and implications of all the four imams of Islamic Jurisprudence;
which all together are important for to consider.
General terms in Arabic are sometimes used for specific people. The
early scholars found out many such examples in the holy Quran.
For example, Allah Almighty says, “The people [al-nas] said to
them, “Indeed, the people [al-nas] have gathered against you, so fear them.”
But it [merely] increased them in faith, and they said, "Sufficient for us
is Allah, and [He is] the best Disposer of affairs.” (3:173). In this ayat, the
word al-nas is mentioned twice. The point to note is that what is meant by the
first ‘al-nas’ [people] cannot be all the people [al-nas]. In the text, “When the people [al-nas] said to
them”, is it all the people on the earth who said? If so then who are they
saying to? At this point our logic might take us to many possibilities such as 1)
they said to themselves, 2) they said to other people. When we read the
implications of this ayat through the hadith to know its context, reason of
revelation, uses of general terms for specific reasons, we reach the level of surety
which gives us the benefit of ilm al-yaqin. We are thus sure of the fact that
the first ‘people’ [al-nas] who are saying differ from the people who are being
told, yet both [the people who said and the people who were being told] have
been referred to as the people [al-nas]. Supported by ahadith, all the books of
tafsir mention that what is meant by the first ‘people’/al-nas is Nuaym Ibn
Masud and his likes and what is meant by the second ‘people’ in this ayat [...the
people have gathered against you..] is Abu Sufiyan and the confederates.
Dear Ghulam Ghaus Saheb, you seem to be putting
overwhelming reliance on the argument that the definite article al
limits the meaning of Al-Naas in this Hadith to only the specific
people or Mushrikeen of Makka or maybe Arabia. But would the same logic
not limit the prophethood of Hazrat Mohammad (peace be upon him) to merely Makka
or Arabia rather than mankind as Al-Naas or Lin-Naas,
is also used in verses of Quran like 2:185, 3:
110, 7:158, 34:28, etc, proclaiming his prophethood for all mankind, as we
By using the definite article in these verses, is
God telling us that the Prophet was appointed as a messenger for this Arabian region
alone, as were other prophets who were asked to propagate their message in
their own regions or among the people who understood the language in which the
message was revealed to them?
this would contradict the meaning we derive from words like Aalemoon
or Aalemin for which the Prophet is appointed a messenger in
verses like, Q. 25:1,
21:107, 38:87, 12:104, 6:90, 81:27, etc.
Stewart on his twitter account writes (at 1:01 AM - 27 Dec 2018), “As a convert
to Islam, I was amazed to discover the detailed rights given to women in the
religion. The stereotyping of Muslim women as 'oppressed' is part of an
anti-Muslim global narrative, but still there are thousands of us who have
looked deeper and found the truth.”
expressed facts. Today I read in Inquilab an article of Khalid Rahmani in
which he wrote, “the western county raise slogans over freedom speech and in
this they exceed so much that they respect nudity and at the same time they
deny the freedom of right of the muslim who want to attire burqa, hijab or any
other covering dress. This is double standard”
people are not interested in women rights but in finding out possibilities to
criticize Islam while Muslim women who have understood Islam by their studies
think that Islam is doing best protection for them.
Someone asked me this question. Please reply.
"Europe had first problem with Judaism, now with Islam. No issue
with Hinduism, Buddhism or Sikhism. Is there a culture of intolerance among Abrahamic
Ms Kaniz Fatima,
Consider the verse:
(2:143) Thus, have We made of you an Ummat justly balanced, that
ye might be witnesses (Shuhada)
over the nations, and the Messenger a witness (Shaheeda) over yourselves;
The Messenger’s function as a witness over the Muslims is to
provide evidence to God on the Day of Judgment that His message was delivered.
Other prophets will similarly provide evidence and will also be given
an opportunity to intercede. For an example, read verses 5:109 to 118 which
describe how Jesus Christ (pbuh) will provide such evidence on the Day of
Judgment and what his words of intercession would be.
Those who do Dawah among the followers of the Messenger in turn
will provide evidence of having spread this message to the rest of the world.
(39:68) The Trumpet will
(just) be sounded, when all that are in the heavens and on earth will swoon,
except such as it will please Allah (to exempt). Then will a second one be
sounded, when, behold, they will be standing and looking on!
(69) And the Earth will shine with the Glory of its Lord: the
Record (of Deeds) will be placed (open); the prophets and the witnesses will be brought forward
and a just decision pronounced between them; and they will not be wronged (in
(70) And to every soul will be paid in full
(the fruit) of its Deeds; and (Allah) knoweth best all that they do.
The Shuhuda communicate the
message through words as well as by example. Their life, deeds and every action
is in accordance with the religion of Allah. They provide evidence to the
people about Allah, His attributes and His religion by what they say and by
what they do. They also provide witness or evidence to God that His message has
been properly communicated. They are exemplars par excellence. The highest
category of the Shuhada is
the prophets and the people who do Dawah in an exemplary manner by word and
The Quran recognizes several paths as the correct paths and
in general, assures that:
submits His whole self to Allah and is a doer of good,- He will get his reward
with his Lord; on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
The witnesses on the Day of Judgment will be all the
prophets and their followers who can be categorized as “Shuhuda”.
The power to grant intercession is with Allah only and no
one can intercede or so much as utter a word without Allah’s permission. No
prophet or person can therefore assure all those who claim to be their followers
of their intercession.
The best to intercede on a person’s behalf are his/her own
deeds and when these fall insufficient, and yet Allah wants to admit the person
to Heaven, will He allow intercession for the person. The Grace to grant
intercession and forgiveness, is with Allah only.
The Christians, the Jews and the Muslims exaggerate when
they say that their prophets will get them through the ordeal, or that they
will have to suffer in the Hell for only a short period.
The followers of Muhammad (pbuh) have the perfected and
complete deen with them and if with that advantage, they cannot be better than
the others, they will fall behind the others on the Day of Judgment.
(2:148) To each is a
goal to which Allah turns him; then strive together (as in a race) Towards all
that is good. Wheresoever ye are, Allah will bring you Together. For Allah Hath
power over all things.
Beliefs are a means to excelling in deeds and it is only our
deeds that will matter. Read the entire Quran carefully and you will find that there
is no reward for simply believing. False beliefs will of course lead us to
disaster – for example, the belief that the Prophet will get us through if we
have recited the Kalima, irrespective of our deeds.
Al-Faruqi reported that Shah Naqshband said,
of Muhammad (peace be upon him) includes whoever comes after the prophet (peace
be upon him). It is composed of the three types: ummat al-dawah, ummat
al-ijaba, and ummat al-mutabaa.
Ummat al dawah:
absolutely everyone who came after the Prophet peace be upon him and simply
heard his message. That the Prophet peace be upon him came to all people
without exception is clear from many verses in the Quran. Furthermore his
community is the moderating witness over all other communities and the Prophet
peace be upon him is the one witness over everybody including the other
communities and their own respective witnesses.
Ummat al ijaba:
those who accepted the message.
al-mutabaa: those who accepted the message and followed the footsteps of the
Prophet peace be upon him.
All of these
categories of the prophet’s community are saved. If they are not saved by their
deeds, then they are saved by the intercession of the prophet according to his
saying, “my intercession is for the sinners of my community”
and the Naqshbandi Sufi Tradition by Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, p.222)
Do you have
anything to comment upon this division of ummat?
Aayina, The Kafirin are not
the disbelievers but those who will not believe
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا الْكَافِرُونَ
لَا أَعْبُدُ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ
وَلَا أَنتُمْ عَابِدُونَ مَا أَعْبُدُ
وَلَا أَنَا عَابِدٌ مَّا عَبَدتُّمْ
لَكُمْ دِينُكُمْ وَلِيَ دِينِ
Surah Al-Kafirun is an early Meccan Surah (chronological
order 18) and is addressed to the Kafirun among the Mushrikun. These Kafirun
are told that neither do they nor will they worship what the Prophet worships.
These are words of finality and such Kafir will not believe. Who are they? We
can identify a few of them. The Prophet faced very hostile opposition to his
mission right from the early days. The violent opponents were Abu Jahl
mentioned from his behavior in Surah 96 Al –Alaq, chronologically the first
Surah to be revealed, Surah 68 Al –Qalam or the Pen (chronology 2), speaks of
Walid ibn Mughiyrah who was peculiarly despicable. He was a ringleader in
calumniating the Prophet and who came to an evil end not long after the battle
of Badr, in which he received injuries. Walid ibn Mughayrah was a wealthy
Sybarite, and an inveterate enemy to the Prophet. He and Abu Jahl did all they
could, from the beginning of the preaching of Islam, to abuse and persecute the
Prophet, to run down his doctrine, and to injure those who believed in it.
Surah 111 Al –Masad (chronological order 6) is about Abu Lahab and his wife who
were also enemies of the Prophet. These and their active associates and helpers
are the Kafirun that the Surah Al-Kafirun addresses. The chronological number
of this Surah is 18 and may have been revealed 8 years before Hijrah during
which the Prophet continued to do Da’wah among the Mushrikun leaving alone the
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا سَوَاءٌ عَلَيْهِمْ أَأَنذَرْتَهُمْ أَمْ
لَمْ تُنذِرْهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ
(2:6) As to the Kafaru, it is the same to them whether thou
warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe.
If Kafaru means disbeliever, then the above verse means that
it is futile to do Da’wah among the disbelievers. This is obviously incorrect
and clearly therefore, Kafaru does not mean disbeliever, but those with
characteristics of a person who will never believe such as Abu Lahab.
فَلَا تُطِعِ الْكَافِرِينَ وَجَاهِدْهُم بِهِ جِهَادًا كَبِيرًا
Al-Furqaan / The Criterion (25: 52) Therefore listen/obey
not to the Kafirin, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness.
The above verse is about not doing Da’wah to the Kafirin
because it is pointless to do dawah to them but striving against them to defeat
their nefarious designs.
Hud (11:36) It was revealed to Noah: "None of thy
people will believe except those who have believed already! So grieve no longer
over their (evil) deeds.
After the above verse was revealed, no one believed – not
even Noah’s son.
Compare 11:36 with the post migration Medinian verses 8:32
and 33 in which Allah does not consider the majority of the Mushrikin as
Kafirin or those who will not believe but people who could ask for pardon and
وَإِذْ قَالُوا اللَّهُمَّ إِن كَانَ هَٰذَا هُوَ الْحَقَّ مِنْ
عِندِكَ فَأَمْطِرْ عَلَيْنَا حِجَارَةً مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ أَوِ ائْتِنَا بِعَذَابٍ
وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُعَذِّبَهُمْ وَأَنتَ فِيهِمْ ۚ وَمَا كَانَ
اللَّهُ مُعَذِّبَهُمْ وَهُمْ يَسْتَغْفِرُونَ
Al-Anfaal / The Spoils of War (8:32) Remember how they said:
"O Allah if this is indeed the Truth from Thee, rain down on us a shower
of stones from the sky, or send us a grievous penalty." (33) But Allah was
not going to send them a penalty whilst thou wast amongst them; nor was He
going to send it whilst they could ask for pardon.
Not all the disbelievers are Kafir who will not believe.
There are people who are disbelievers because they lack knowledge (لَّا يَعْلَمُونَ 9:6) or those who fear persecution from the
Kafirin if they accept belief as is clear from 10:83 below:
(10:83) But none believed in Moses except some children of
his people, because of the fear of Pharaoh and his chiefs, lest they should
persecute them; and certainly Pharaoh was mighty on the earth and one who
transgressed all bounds.
The disbelievers who are not Kafir will believe once the
leaders of Kufr who are preventing them from accepting belief are removed and
once they gain true knowledge.
When the Quran uses Kafir for one who has no faith in God
and has rejected belief, such a person is also Zalim, Mujrim, Fasiq, Musrif,
Mufsid, Alin and Mutakabbir
When Kafir is used for one who has rejected belief, and one
who will not believe, such a person is not simply a disbeliever, but someone
like Satan, Pharaoh, Abu Jahl or Abu Lahab. He/she is also a Zalim (oppressor),
Mujrim (criminal), Fasiq (one who transgresses all limits of what is right),
Musrif (extravagant), Mufsid (mischief monger), haughty, proud and arrogant. To
quote Pickthall, “In the Qur’an I find two meanings (of a Kafir), which become
one the moment that we try to realize the divine standpoint. The Kafir in the
first place, is not the follower of any religion. He is the opponent of Allah’s
benevolent will and purpose for mankind - therefore the disbeliever in the
truth of all religions, the disbeliever in all Scriptures as of divine
revelation, the disbeliever to the point of active opposition in all the
Prophets (pbut) whom the Muslims are bidden to regard, without distinction, as
messengers of Allah.”
of Pharaoh the archetype Kafir:
L-Mus’rifīna (extravagant, given to excesses) 10:83, 44:31
Fasiq (rebel, wicked, transgressor) 28:32,
L-Muf’sidīna (mischievous) 7:103, 28:4,
Khāṭiīna (sinner, wrong doer) 28:8,
ʿĀliyan, LaʿĀlin (arrogant, tyrant) 44:31, 10:83
Mutakabbir (arrogant, insolent, haughty, proud) 29:39, 10:75
Kafarū Biāyāti L-Lahi (Rejecter of the signs of Allah) 8:52
Zalim (wrong-doer, oppressor) 8:54
A Kafir is not simply any disbeliever, but one who will not
believe because of the traits described above.
40:37 Thus was made alluring, in Pharaoh´s eyes, the evil of
his deeds, and he was hindered from the Path; and the plot of Pharaoh led to
nothing but perdition (for him).
When Kafir is used in the context of a man’s faith, it
acquires the most odious meaning. Kafir when used in this context, is a Zalim,
Mujrim, Fasiq, Mufsid or a tyrant, sinner a pervert transgressor of all that is
good and reasonable and a mischief monger. These are indeed the synonyms of
Kafir in such a context. He is not simply a disbeliever but congenitally
incapable of belief. He is covered with arrogance, haughtiness, selfishness,
perversity etc. The type of person Allah will never bless with faith. This
word does not apply to an ordinary non-Muslim or disbeliever.
Kafir Is Not Used For
the Disbelievers Even In the Very Last Verses of the Revelations
Among the very last verses about the Mushrikin of Mecca is
verse 9:5, in which Allah announces the penalty of death on those vanquished
Mushrikin who had fought the Muslims violating their treaty, if they remain in
Hijaz at the end of the four-month amnesty period without accepting Islam. In
this verse also, such people are not referred to as Kafir or as people who will
not believe, because the verse holds out the possibility that they may accept
Islam. And indeed, all of them accepted Islam and no one was killed as per
To call anyone a Kafir for his beliefs involves passing a
judgment. Allah did not pass such a judgment on a people among whom the Prophet
had preached for 13 years, who then drove him out of Mecca, fought battles to
annihilate the Muslims, violated their treaties, were vanquished eight years
later, were not avenged for eighteen months after their defeat, and yet
remained disbelievers. Even such people were considered potential believers and
therefore not Kafir or not among those who will not believe. If such people are
not called Kafir in the Quran, then how can anyone be considered as Kafir for
his beliefs? It is only Allah who can judge a person as Kafir and it is not
only the non-Muslims who will be so judged, but many among the Muslims who are
oppressors, sinners, transgressors, mischief mongers, ingrate rebels will also
be among the ranks of the Kafirin. Indeed, we have seen from the verses of the
Quran that a Kafir can be from among any people including the believers.
Calling a person Kafir for his beliefs when he does not have the traits of a Kafir
described in the article, is derogation, slander and a travesty. Those who do
so are the Zalim, Mujrim, Fasiq and Mufsid or the unjust, criminal,
transgressors and mischief mongers.
Revisiting the Meaning of Kafir
The Principles of War from the Quran
anyone answer why did Maulana Salman Nadvi have different views in different
places? First he supported isis then denied support in media and then said
the evidence please and answer me.
Sunnis for a Powerful Global Islamic Army to Fight Shias and Help Muslims in
Need; Five Lakh Brave Indian Youth Will Be Provided': Maulana Salman Nadvi to
am not much expert but I know such steps taken by such a well known maulana
will harm the muslim community. Today muslims are in trouble it is more because
of inability of such maulana to address the problem and solve the issue.
Hats off should have read Quran 9:29 (Mohsin Khan translation, out of context since it mentions), "Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last day...and those who acknowledge not...Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdue."
Before reading Quran 9:29, he should also meditate Quran 9:28, "(since it mentions)...Mushrikun (Polytheists...are Najasun (impure)....". There is no reason to assume Buddhists, Christians, Jews who believe in God and do righteous deeds to be impure or else there is no reason for him to save them since Quran 2:62, "(mentions)...
Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." As Allah permits them to have no fear, he certainly saves all of them and certainly not treat them to be impure.
The only possible reason to think that they could be impure was these people in the past did evil things against Muslims and that was to battle against them. As these non-Muslims who believed in God battled against Muslims, they were impure before Allah since they did evil before him, i.e. by killing Muslims.
No doubt they believed in Allah, he did not spare these evil doers to paradise since Quran 2:81, "(mentions)...Whosoever earns evil and his sin has surrounded him, they are dwellers of...Hell...". As Quran 9:28, "(mentions they were)...impure (since they battled against Muslims)...", it led Quran 9:29, "(to mention)...they (had to) pay the Jizyah with willing submission..." until they had submitted to Allah with full obedience due their killing was considered to be evil in his sight. As Buddhists, Christians and Jews are not evil in this contemporary world to stir up evil against Muslims, there is no reason to assume them to be Quran 9:28, "...Najasun (impure)..". As none of them are impure since none continue battle against Muslims, Quran 9:29 does not apply to them.
Besides, as those other people who do not believe in Allah do not battle against Muslims in this modern world, none commit evil deeds. As none commit evil deeds to kill Muslims, Quran 9:29 is not applicable to unbelievers in this modern world. This is by virtue of Quran 9:28, "(is meant for those) Mushrikun...(who) are Najasun (impure)...(who did battle against Muslims in the past)." Quran 2:191, "(Mohsin Khan translation - mentions the evil unbelievers in the past since it mentions)...they (first) fight you there...". Quran 2:81 condemns these people even some might believe in Allah to be impure due to their evil intention to kill Muslims for they will have a place in hell. Only those who believed in Allah do good deeds will have a place in paradise instead of those who believed and yet do evil to kill Muslims. To them, they have to give jizyah due to the sins to commit. Quran 9:29 mentions they have to be in willing submission to the truth that only those who do good deeds can go paradise instead of those who do evil, i.e. battled against Muslims. Quran 4:90, "(Mohsin Khan translation - mentions)...if they withdraw from you, and fight not against you, and offer you peace, then Allah has opened no way for you against them."
As Quran 4:90 mentions Allah has opened no way for you against them if they cease their battle against Muslims, it is irrational for Hats Off to support they can still be against them to force them to pay jiziyah. As non-Muslims do not do evil to battle against Muslims in this modern day, it is irrational to collect jizyah from them.
When people disobeyed their prophets, those prophets sometimes
complained to their lord and said:
Our people are not listening to us, nor heeding our words, but on the
contrary, are attacking us with curses and stones and are making us suffer._
Allah almighty replied:
As i order you, so you must do; if they listen or not is none of your
concern, for your duty is only to deliver my commands. _
Do not look after them, in order to see who is sinning, your duty is in
relaying the message (tabligh), and it is mine to take account (muhasaba) - _
On the last day, i will draw the account not before._
Therefore, how allah almighty will deal with his people in the end is a
secret belonging to him and him only.
"“I have been commanded to fight some specific people until they say ‘There is no god but Allah ....”
Obviously some specific people meant in this Hadith were those who had persecuted the Prophet and his followers for as long as 14 or 15 years in the city of Makkah."
No matter who those specific people were and what their crimes were, if the Prophet was commanded to fight until such people were compelled to accept Islam by reciting the kalima, they are being compelled. The Prophet and Allah (nauzobillah) are then both guilty of violating "Let there be no compulsion in religion". This is preposterous and a calumny against Allah and the Prophet. There is no choice but to trash the hadith as inspired by Satan.
It is not only the extremists who are misguided by the hadith but even scholars such as Ibn Al-Arabi, Shah Waliullah, Raza Ahmad Khan, Javed Ghamidi, Malulana Waheeduddin Khan, al-Shabi, al-Hasan, Qatadah, al-Dahhaq etc.