Mohd. Yunus. I
would have much preferred you answered me by quoting a piece of poetry or song.
e.g: In translated form: “Give up prejudice O fool in the mirror house of this
world. It is your own picture that you deem ugly.”
You still have
not won. Your statement: "Quran is lame without Ahadith" purports to
undermine the Qur’an. On the other hand Ashraf Ali Thanvi statement “70 Ulooms are required
to understand the Quran. don't read the Quran by yourself else you will go
astray” virtually amount to youre say does not literally demean the Qur’an. But
you must be around 30 and quite outspoken and of a generation behind me, so I
give you the benefit of doubt.
leave the website if you want to be a good Muslim. My son is around 30. The
only thing I have asked him since his early life is to be exemplary in conduct
and behaviour (like our Prophet – I don’t tell him this), hard and honestly and
try to excel in whatever lawful thing he is doing (essence of Qur’anic message
I don’t tell him) and to share the fruit of his labour with the others (again essence
of Qur’anic message I don’t tell him). Here is my belated standard Eid message now
forwarded to you as consolation prize for challenging us indefatigably: Hope fasting in the holy month
of Ramadan has brought us closer to God, made a better human being out of us,
cleansed our hearts of all negative feelings against others, prepared us to do
our best in all our lawful activities, professions and pursuits and to share
the fruit of our labour with others in the true spirit of greater jihad
following the example of our beloved Prophet.”
Bottom Line: Unless
you take me to be a fool or a fanatic, you must take my 14 centuries namesake you/
others demonize habitually as Prophet of God. What greater proof you need.
please. Your problem – having topped all your exams and doing remarkably well
in the academy, you are not adequately rewarded. Don’t bother. Drive all
defilements from your mind (rujza fahjur). This clear ayah of merely two words
can make your life so happy and peaceful. But you want to speculate what agony
(some may think lustful desire) went through the mind of the Prophet that the divine
speech that did not mention the name of any single companion or wife of the Prophet
was compelled to record it (33:37). You are like one going to a beautiful
garden shining with galleries upon galleries of flowers. All you see is a ‘Nim’
plant and find fault in it for its lack of beauty or fragrance – without knowing
there must be something good in it.
i am not Shahid Kapoor.i am shahid alhamdulilah a muslim, born of muslim parents. i am a sayyid from both mother and father sides.seeking the path of truth from allah is a right of everyone...havent you ever read the surah fatihah.....alas sadaf sahiba you are an ignorant lot.
and beta shahid....
if u r an aunty then it is ok but if you r in your thirties then i am firm that you lack basic etiquette and social norm.what muslims have achieved in INDIA ....nothing but a lot of people ignorant of islam, illeterate women, shrine-dwelling-muslims etc.
You and a bunch of other Sultan Shahin people believe in selective Islam. You want to run YOUR OWN BRAND OF islam based on your likings and dis-likings. Allah has pointed out people like you in the Quran: "they make their faith a pretext so that they may turn (men & women)from the way of allah. verily evil is that which they are wont to do" .....surah THE HYPOCRITES. AYATH:2
When he (Dr. Zakir Nayak) is already on the straight path, what are you praying for, Mr. Shahid Kapoor? If you have to pray, then pray for us so that we too come on straight path. By the way, what communication skill has he, that he is unable to convert us and bring us to his own path? As for us, we do not claim of any great communication skill. We just place the mirror in front of you to see, how beautiful you are, and at that you are getting fired up.
Dr. Zakir Nayak has no doubt shown how to start a channel to say whatever one has to say, I can only hope that some Muslims will learn the trick but my fear is that some non-Muslims too will learn the trick and then complete the leftover job of vitiating the environment of peace and harmony of India.
Mr. Shahid, you are happy that 15 people converted to Islam, but do you have any thermometer to insert in them and know whether they have really converted or they just believe that they have converted. In any case, conversion of the whole world to Islam has never been the agenda of Islam. The agenda of Islam was and is and should be to maintain peace and harmony and for that peace with non-Muslims is a must thing for Islam.
Can't you see, the situation in Pakistan where almost 100% of population is Muslim, yet there is no peace, and same is the situation with Afghanistan. I am not saying American drones are not robbing away their peace; they are of course doing that, but what about homemade Mujahids, who are hell bent on killing Shias and everyone else including themselves as suicide bombers.
The reason is that few decades back, when the young men of today were children, there was a great General, who brought glory to Islam. His name also starts with ‘Z’. I hope you guessed correctly, he was General Zia-ul- Haque and he implemented and taught such a version that at first glance, it seemed OK, that he was prohibiting, drinking and gambling, but along with that he planted in the minds of Pakistanis that they are the best of people and they should be proud of being best and rest everyone who aren't like them are bad people. Young people chanted repeatedly a slogan, ‘Mard-e-Momin, Mard-e-Haq, Zia-ul-Haq, Zia—ul-Haq’ .This small plant took shape of a tree that you can see in form of people over there who think that except for them rest everyone are bad and conspiring against them and they therefore hate everyone who aren't like them, be it culturally or be it ideologically.
The same exercise Dr. Zakir Nayak is doing and after 20 years when the present day youngsters will grow up strong enough they will try to mock non-Muslims in every nook and corner as Dr. Zakir Nayak is doing on stage surrounded by thousands of Muslims and is secure in doing so. But these youngsters will not be safe as they may expose themselves to dangers and then they will face the retaliation. A Godhra resulted in Gujrat, a Peace TV as in present state, will finish of the 1000 years of every achievements of Muslims in India. But, no, you will see him doing to be doing good and will see us as enemies of Islam and Muslims. And you do so because you are brain washed. Otherwise anyone on this website; ask, Satwa, who is the chief opponent of Islam on this website, what he has to say. He will definitely say that this website is propagating Islam. But dumb people like you are happy counting on fingers how many have converted to Islam and how many are balance but cannot see how Peace TV is converting the relation between Non-Muslims and Islam. With the kind of 'human err' that Dr. Zakir Nayak is doing, he is distancing not just Non-Muslims from Islam, but every intelligent and well read Muslim from the Muslim community itself.
Dr. Zakir Nayak’s arguments can be digested only by those who are less learned than him. And if you assume that he is the most learned, then that is because of your ignorance and bias for Dr. Zakir Nayak.
His ‘scientific’ arguments have flaws in it, not to speak of his understanding of Islam. And not just one or two errors but too many to be ignored from a man who is a medical professional and that too who is putting up for public viewing. I cannot tell you what the errors are, because first of all you will not listen and second, you are most likely not to understand, given your inability to detect the errors by yourself. But anyway, we will still try to put down here the flaws that are there and we will do it for several reasons. First of which is to save people from getting wrong information and subsequent swelling of their chest on the basis of those wrong information. Secondly, to tell non-Muslims, that not all Muslims are as Jahil as Dr. Zakir Nayak, nor are all Muslims kind of people who mock at non-Muslims. Third and the last reason is that even Dr. Zakir Nayak needs to be corrected for what are the wrongs in his facts, logic and style apart from his understanding about Islam. And don’t be surprised that Dr. Zakir Nayak doesn’t take anything from here. At least he is not as big a fool as you. He is definitely a learner and a preacher, so he learns even from the pages of New Age Islam. And since you do not know, let me tell you, he has used in his speeches several points which we have pointed out and he avoids taking name of the website saying just don’t go on such websites that may unnerve you. He has on several occasion taken name of Mr. Sultan, without uttering full name, while talking about people who are teaching another version of Islam through such websites.
Beta, Shahid Kapoor, you have lot to learn, and hopefully you will find his every words answered on this website or in form of a book by someone in reply to 150 question answers of Dr. Zakir Nayak. It is not difficult at all by any scholar over here to pick up any of his book and produce a reply to it. The only advantage Dr. Zakir Nayak has is the backing of Saudi Arabia and likes of them from Middle-east with no shortage of money for running the TV channel and paying the charges for airing the show which enables him to market his views. And if you ask why Saudis back him, then I wish you could understand that Saudi want to maintain and in fact enhance their influence to retain their throne and if anyone ever attempt to throw away monarchy and bring in democracy, brainwashed people would support Saudis royals as they would see them as Custodian of their Holy Places and their views aligned with the Coustodians. As for you or anyone who is just too enamoured by Dr. Zakir Nayak’s memorizing capability, then let me tell you, even you can develop such memory if you want and many youngsters are already developing theirs. In fact they are even copying his style and accent and doing all this is not really as difficult as you imagine as there are hardly 60 Ayahs with their numbers that you have to remember and appear hero.
_On an average, any Muslim who prays, he/she remembers a dozen of Ayahs. A little more of effort and you can do it on your own. There are lakhs, yes lakhs of Hafiz of Quran who remember the whole Quran from end to end consisting of several thousand of verses, over 6000 to be more precise. So why don’t you faint over their achievement? That is simply because they, as in India, do not speak English or they aren’t a Doctor, both of which, makes a mind boggling impact on Jahils.
We surely appreciate some good works of Dr. Zakir Nayak, but we differ with him ideologically. I would still recommend you to view a particular program on Peace TV, where Mr. Mubarak Kapdi, emphasizes on education. The name of program is ‘Sham-e-Ilm’. And if you are wondering, then how come, people like him and several speakers from here and there have joined as a team if Peace TV is that bad, then let me clarify to your simple brain that Peace TV as a whole is not bad. If only Dr. Nayak had used this opportunity of having a media in his hands, to give more time to such educationists and emphasis on education on all subjects rather than mis-education, then Peace TV would have been more neutral and served positively to the society which includes Muslims as well.
Anyone who begins to do something, people join them. Remember, ‘Main akela chala tha jaanib-e-manzil magar, log saath aate gaye, aur kaarwa banta gaya’. So the need for you is to have an open mind; do something, so that you too can make an impact like that of Dr. Zakir Nayak if not more. Just applauding him serves no purpose. Even a lesser of impact will do, but do something. If you can write, write here on this website, if you can speak, ask Dr. Zakir Nayak to give you chance to speak on his channel. By the way, I know Dr. Zakir Nayak doesn’t give chance to other speakers, especially those whom he disagree with and it is visible in his question answer session where he refuse to enter into argument or give second chance to the questioner who can use the answer of Dr. Zakir Nayak and counter question him using logic. He doesn’t let the counter-question come up and deny the opportunity for the application of logic by the questioner based on Dr. Zakir Nayak’s response.
For a similar reason, he doesn’t invite secular, moderate speakers or speakers with Hari Pagdi, or Shias or famous personalities of Muslims who have made their name in various fields and have been an inspiration to many. So basically his Channel is his a propaganda tool and nothing else with no freedom. In comparison to that scenario, even if Dr. Zakir Nayak himself ever wanted to write on this website, I am sure Mr. Sultan will not deny him opportunity for that as this website is open for one and all._____________________________________________________________________________________
Dr zakir naik is one of the prominent preachers of islam.we are blessed to have him in our times and too in our country india. he is the person who has opened the door of islam for non-muslims.....the door that was practically closed for the non-muslims under the followers of so-called sufis,shrine-dwellers,brahmanic styled peers and shaikhs.recently dr. Naik was opposed by the braelvis in bihar over his programme in kishanganj.
But alhamdulilah and summa alhamdulilah the programme was a big success.more than 15 became muslims there.dr. Naik and his likes present islam the way it shoulb be presented.their simplicity,reasoning and logical abilities quenches the thirst of all the seekers of truth.this is disturbing for the religious-shopkeepers, so-called shaikhs/peers,astray bunch of sufis,supporters of shrine-dweeling-stressed-islam......
These people invented their own version of islam------brelvis/wahabis/ahle hadiths/sufists/salafis/deobandis,new age islam and they all want muslims should listen to them and follow (bring imaan on them) them. Dr. Naik wants everybody read the quran and sunnah and follow them.dr. Naik ne mazhab-i-islam ki taleemaat per se chand logon ki ijareydari ko khatam krney ka kkam kia hai.
we may disagree with Dr. naik on some points, he may be inconvenient on some points because "to err is human". AND can Brelvis/Deobandis/Wahabis/Ahle Hadiths/ etc prove themselves free of errors no ...not even in seven ages.so if there is any point of difference with Dr. naik we must contact him and seek clarifications from him.
Remember COMMUNICATION SKILLS AND LEADERSHIP QUALITIES ARE THE ESSENCE OF ISLAMIC TEACHINGS.
I PRAY THAT " O' ALLAH guide us including DR. ZAKIR NAIK rehmatullah alaih to the straight path...path of those upon whom you (allah) bestow your favours, nor those who have gone astray. (amen)
Whenever anyone talks about Dr. ZakirNayak, it is said he has phenomenal memory as if, if he didn’t had that he waslike empty cover of groundnut. I seriously contest this. There is more to Dr.Zakir Nayak than even Dr. Zakir Nayak thinks of himself. Perhaps he too hastaken seriously that all the chutney he has made of scriptures is the best hehas. Dr. Zakir Nayak has a phenomenal character and that matters. It is anothermatter that I have some serious reservation about what he speaks and the way hehas made the format of things but since he is able to sell it, I have to admitthat he has phenomenal skill in the art of selling.
Dr. Zakir Nayak is a product ofall the taunts he heard when he was growing up by Non- Muslim, moreparticularly from Hindus and questioned him all those questions on which heapplied his mind at that tender age and came out of his replies in form ofbooks and subsequent lectures and debates. In fact not just Dr. Zakir Nayak,just about any Muslim in India as a child faces these kinds of questions. Sobasically he started from that regular humble scenario from where anyone canbegin but what is really phenomenal about him is that he managed to establishan entire shop exclusive for answers to such questions. Not just he managed toestablish it, but he did extremely well in its business, selling whateversells, reading the market and tapping it.
To be honest people like him are the‘doers’ in this world, who ‘do’ things which people just see happening. Sodefinitely that is the real phenomenal act of his. Just how many people doanything? All that they are good at is criticizing or appreciating someone orsomething depending on their affiliation. All such exercises are absolutelyjust exercise of their tongue. But it requires real hard work to become SachinTendulkar. Even today after 23 years in Cricket Sachin Tendulkar is one playerwho do not skip his morning practice. Why? And that too after having achievedalmost all kind of achievement. It is no joke to wake up every day at dawn andgo for practice sacrificing all those wonderful early morning dreams. Dr. ZakirNayak could have continued working as a physician and earned well but why doeshe wake up every day and go to pray Fajr?
He wake up and go for Fajr prayerbecause he is Farz conscious. He realizes that it is a Farz on him as it isFarz on every Muslim and he begins his day following the footsteps of someonewhom he admires most as a Muslim- our beloved Prophet Muhammad SAW.
The phenomenal discipline that itrequires to pull yourself out of bed and do the same monotonous exercise ofImaan building everyday is something which only can perhaps balance the RSSchaddiwalas deshbahkti exercise they do every morning. It also brings good luckand positivity beside the added hours of the day to accomplish more. (I hopeJansanghis do not read this and double the number of hours spend on that tobeat Dr. Zakir Nayak.)
Next great phenomenal thing about Dr.Zakir Nayak is that he organized all that. For that he must have met lots ofpeople and came up with his business proposal, and must have impressed them thenecessity to do so and collaborated with each participant some of whom musthave sponsored him or some may have given him some valuable suggestions and hemust have been humble enough to accept whatever they gave him. Had he been akdutype he would have just roamed the road of Mumbai with his stiff neck, that’sall. Somewhere he learnt that it requires a team to do anything of anysignificance and for a team one has to sacrifice his ‘self’. Team’s interestcomes first and one’s ego later. I know of many geniuses who fail thispsychological demand of any success. (Again I hope Jansanghis aren’t readingthis, else they may take a cue and move aside Narendra Modi as Prime-Ministercandidate sacrificing him for a person less offending, more acceptable andhence more suitable for the job to achieve their teams their ultimate objective-Power.)
Personally I do not care if Jansanghisread this or Dr. Zakir Nayak himself read this or his teammate read this. But Icare for Muslims who will read this and I want to say to them that Dr. ZakirNayak is an answer of his time, as time and situation changes new answers haveto come up and in very natural way definitely it will come up but for that theyshouldn’t think that they are not the answers. At least Dr. Zakir Nayak neverthought it that way. I wish Muslims see the energy this man has and enthusiasmhe has and hope he carries in his heart that he would be able to answer as manypeople as would be possible by him. He made possible that his voice reaches asmany. The phenomenal energy, the phenomenal enthusiasm and the phenomenal hopethat he carries is nothing but really phenomenal. He is phenomena personified.
And if you sincerely evaluate him, he isa good man who is propagating the good things when he shows on Peace TV screenthat Islam is the way against violence and all such evil practices. He has soaptly named the channel ‘Peace TV’ because indeed the message of Islam ispeace. He brings a guy for a program which is to motivate children and theirparents to promote education and yes that’s about secular education and aboutidentifying the value of time and understanding the need for children tocompete and get good grades for marks. Then there comes a guy who is a lawyerand very modern looking young man who says that Muslims must trust in IndianJudiaciary and Indian Constitution and the whole thing is absolutely innational interest. Of course, Jansanghis will point out that since suchnational interest is in Muslims interest therefore they are talking aboutnational interest but at the same time Jansanghis will have to admit that thesame will be true for them too if at all they too talk in national interest.Only thing is that Jansanghis not only do not talk in national interest butthey act against national interest by trying to create animosity between Hindusand Muslims and provoke Muslims by calling them traitors even though theythemselves are the real traitors who got Father of the Nation killed, got Indiadivided in the name of Pakistan for Muslims, and who continue to createdisturbance in the land of tolerance and Peace, that is, India.
So as far as comparing Jansanghi and Dr.Zakir Nayak is, clearly Dr. Zakir Nayak is more secular than Jansanghis. Infact it is no brainer. Jansanghis aren’t secular. They are communal and in factthey feel offended if you ask them how much secular they are. They are bigotsof the worst kind. But the thing that irks Indian Muslims the most is thatJansanghis are anti-nationals and Indian Muslims can perhaps tolerate anythingbut not anti-nationals. There is a book in which it is recorded the names andnumbers of Muslims who contributed and sacrificed for the freedom of India andthat book is a thick book and in that the small prints of names and thepunishment they received is listed and the list seems endless . Such thingsJansanghis never did and above that nor they accept that Indian Muslims havewon freedom from British on their own merit. At least whatever Dr. Zakir Nayakknows and can reply, however unconvincing some of his answers may be, we haveto appreciate that this man is taking pains and doing efforts to give reply toJansanghis sitting on their Shaka in khaki chaddis and alternating TV channelsbetween watching Peace TV and ridiculing them or some news channel for more andmore news against Muslims.
I have already mentioned earlier tooelsewhere on this website that such Jansanghis are his real audience and targetgroup. Some of their samples come to ask questions to him in his mehfil butmostly it is to these mushtandes of RSS whom he home delivers his replies. TheMuslims who are present there or those who watch it on TV are just sickos whojust hate Jansanghis and relish enjoy anything said which ridiculeschaddidhaaris. Dr. Zakir Nayak has understood this psyche of Muslims and catersto them by hitting two birds in one shot. Jansanghis too are insulted andMuslim’s perversion too is satisfied.
This phenomenal understanding of hisaudience is yet another great skill of the master blaster. And he playsphenomenally well for the galleries. No wonder why he is being recognized asGod of Muslim TVangelism.
And once someone is able to create hisbrand value then his face become his product and then lot many Arabs andIndonesians and UK based and America based and elsewhere based rich parties arethere who fall in love with the face. Things become as easy and as natural thenafter as any natural phenomenon. Can anybody stop a natural call infinitely?
The thing is what Muslim youngster canlearn from Dr. Zakir Nayak and then what can they improve upon and add upon.After all Dr. Zakir Nayak too did the same thing and enhanced the scale of suchtongue wrestling that earlier wrestlers participated in. Let us go back to theparagraphs mentioned above and identify the key words which are phenomenalabout Dr. Zakir Nayak. Just drinking gallons of Memorax will not make suchyoungster Dr. Zakir Nayak and definitely old lethargic fellows can do no betterthan realize that they wasted their time when they could have done all thosethings which Dr. Zakir Nayak did to be known for what he is known for. It isotherwise quite easy to excuse themselves by saying that Dr. Zakir Nayak isGod-Gifted and they could never match or excel him as they are gifted by Satan.
A man whouses logics to debate with other religions, an educated Dr and still defendsYazid! This is unbelievable! What the point of scoffing at a Christian who saysJesus is God when you say more than that. How can you dare to call blessingsupon a well known sinner, a satan who defied Allah, His prophet and the HolyQur'an!
1. Whoever kills abeliever out of premeditation, his abode is hell, he is cursed and on him is aterrible punishment
????????????? ????????? ????????????? ??????????? ????????? ???????? ?????? ?????????????? ???????? ?????????? ????????? ???? ???????? ???????
???? ???????????? ????????? ????? ????? ???????????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??????? ?????????????? ???? ??????? ??? ???????? ???????????? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???????????????? ???????????? ??????? ???????? ???????? ???????? ???? ??????????????? ?????????????? ????? ????? ???????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ??????????? ?????????????
2. Whoever kills prophets and virtuous people is a Kafir and his place is Jahannam
?????????????? ??????????? ???????? ?????? ????????????? ????????????? ????????????? ????????????? ????????? ??????????? ??????????? ???? ???????????????????? ????????? ???????
3. whoeverdispleases Allah and His messenger is cursed
????? ????????? ????????? ??????? ????????????????????? ??????? ??? ?????????? ???????????? ????????? ?????? ?????????????????
Many Ulama fromthe Tabiin up to now have declared Yazid a Kafir. How can you be unaware ofthis?
Then how canyou condemn a Christian who professes Jesus is God, of course bigotry,fanaticism and pleasing the masters Wahhabis.
Dear Mr. Rizvi
I hate Yazid as much as every muslim must, and I hate him solely for what he did in Karbala. I am no fan of Zakir Naik but I found at least two mistakes in your article- 1) Zakir Naik called Osama his friend ‘if he is terrorising USA, he is with him’ 2) 'I have never seen Naik discussing critical issues in Quran with the leading clergy in Islam or the Qaris who too have memorized Quran by heart' Qari is not the person who memorizes Quran by heart, it is the Hafiz who does that.
i support Dr. Zakir Naik. I heard that "terrorist" comment. You are quoting out of context. Regarding Yazid, He clearly gave explanation later. After all, he too is a human. But, from my viewpoint, he is a better muslim. a good muslim.
This is just a fullish attempt by S A H RIZVI, an ignorant shia muslim, to defame Dr Zakir Naik. Every body in this world knows that shia's hate Dr Zakir Naik, because he is very busy in increasing the numbers of sunni's by bringing new muslim converts into Islam.
This attack on Dr Zakir Naik has left me feeling disgusted with this site and its administration. I feel the sole purpose of this New age Islam site is to CONFUSE MUSLIMS and make them suffer more in order to full fill the wishes of their masters in RAW secret agency who want to create negative opinion about Muslims all over the world specially Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
Though I am not a fan of Dr. Naik but I have watched him debating with Dr. Willium Cambel of Christanity, Sri Sri Rava Shankar of Hinduism.I think he is a Wali (Friend of Almighty Allah). He propagates Islam in its original and pure form. I do not understand why are the Mullahs of this time calling themselves as Alhi Sunat wa Jammat anguish over the views of this bold man. They can not debate with any Christian missionary. Dr Naik has God given knowledge on Comparative Religions.As he quotes Bhagwat Gita, Holy Bible and other scriptures. I challenge, nobody in the world will quote like this bold man.
I don't understand why such hue and cry about the views of this man and calling him kafir? Today every religious persons try to impose their views and understandings on the world and proclaims only their likeminded peoples are on the straight path and others are misguided.
Dr. Naik do not believes in sects. He quotes from Quran, Hadeeth and Holy books of other religion. We all know that Islam is against sects. Were the Khulfai Rashdan muslim or Hanfia/Shafia/Maliki/Hanbali. Surely they were Muslim. These sects were formed after 70 H of Islami calendar.
Who have created these sects in Islam? If anyone do not like his views he should challenge him and make him shut, if not then keep quite.
About Yazeed, refer the saying of Prophet SAW, ask scholars of Quran and Ahadeeth and gain knowelge.It will benefit you towards the straight path.
Dr Zakir Naik is kafir and seperating Muslims from each others. He is supporter of Yazeed. If he call yazeed RA athen I call him agent of terrorist and kafir to Dr Zakir Naik.
An exporter of cream is also not an importer of cream. Again a logical impossibility in the question." Unquote
Why should export and import be a one way street? For business or atleast liberalism to thrive it should be a two way process, not one way street. Or we stop import of that ice cream that refuses my export.
Mr Ahmed says:"I don't understand why such hue and cry about the views of this man ". This is because he creates such "hue and cry". He opens his big mouth to spit on others' religions. How dare he say 'Islam, product 100%; marketing 0%. Christianity, product 0%; marketing 100%.' This is totally disgusting. He is the kind of person who can create riots all over the world. Any fan of Zakir Naik, I challenge you to answer how could he say ''Christianity, product 0%; marketing 100%."
Though Iam not a fan or follower of Dr. Naik,I don't understand why such hue and cry about the views of this man and calling him kafir ? Today every religious leader/maulvi try to impose his views and understandings on the world and proclaims only his like minded peoples are on the straight path and others are misguided.Naik do not belives in sects, he quotes from Quran,Hadeeth and other Holy books of other religion and not from any sects written fatwas.If any one do not like his views he should challenge him and make him shut,if not then keep quite.
About Yazeed,refer the the saying of Prophet SAW, ask scholars of Quran and Ahadeeth and gain knowelge.It will benefit you towards the the straight path.
Please understand that Zakir is the only Islami scholar who knows Islam with proof. Do not blame him if you have some doubts go & ask him he can be reached on IRF.net.
Zakir Naik You are the worst creature on this earth who honours Yazid.
Dear Mr. Sultan Shahin,
Thanks a lot for exposing Mr Zakir Naik. He lives in Petro Dollar and does not believe in plural society. He wants to impose SAUDI ARABIAN way of life everywhere.
Just see Pakistan was separated from India in the name of Islam and nobody can find peace in Pakistan.
In almost all Muslim countries, even in Saudi Arabia, Americans are having their defence forces and they are begging for science and technology.
Dr. Abdus Salam of Pakistan became the only Muslim Nobel prize winner so far but he was an Ahmadia Muslim, Pakistan removed the word Muslim from his graveyard as Ahmadia are regarded as Kafir or Non Muslim. This is a hatred given to a pious man. Even Allama Iqbal, the great poet of Pakistan has been told a non Muslim because he was an Ahmadia.
In India, Ahmadia, Daudi Bohra, Aga Khan, Parsi are well educated people.
Lee- The PIG, but inspite of trying to portray yourself mature enough, you fail to give answer to why Middle east is rich, and peaceful, and has been able to buy almost entire of your Las Vegas. You fail to answer why entire Steel industry has sllipped away from ridiculously 'pious hands of West' and you fail to give answers to the two mails, one about the war of words that even America do not want to indulge in with North Korea and next one about the real thing that demotivates and distracts the Army so fond of superlatives. Remember, it is mere child of 9 years, that is all that is required for you and shamelessly by you, Lee-The PIG.
Exactly 5 minutes I contributed by my free will in my free time to put up this post, when I am at lunch and charging my mobile phone for a little more time than usual. Hope you reply again on something else other than the points mentioned above as it is these things that make you cower.
A copy paste below from my side too. I need to convey all this in the language you understand.
Already, Taliban has returned back as a force to reckon with, and NATO chief was made a scapegoat to be unable to handle the situation so he was removed. Pakistan is already turning getting more and more Talibanised. And they even have Nuclear weapons. And interestingly, whatever pressure America made, nothing worked to stop Pakistan from acquiring Nuclear weapon. Iran too is on verge to declare any day, and you have Obama as head, who as per you clearly in appeasement mode for Muslims. American and European stalwarts with their wisdom failed to predict the economic bust, now what do you expect more from them. On the other hand, China and India are such a strong emerging market that now your West may not remain anymore the West with superlatives. So any chance of you, staying filthy rich in future too, is no more
SADAF - You are a child, and calling me "Lee-the-PIG" sums up your childishness.
SADAF - America and the West have to give economic support to Egypt, Pakistan, and other Muslim nations, because they are so poor - the Dhimmi is helping because your own mainly Muslim nations are failing, and not just failing, they are killing each other like in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Somalia.
How does that make you feel, knowing that the West is helping Muslim countries to develop because most mainly Muslim nations are despotic, poor, and lack a decent infrastructure.
Thank you for your reply and I appreciate the fact that you have responded in a polite way, and I read your words.
If Islam, Islamic Sharia law, and the Hadiths, allow non-Muslims to marry Muslim females, then why is it a criminal offence in Saudi Arabia and some other mainly Muslim nations?
I clearly understand that it is a major problem and given the fact that non-Muslims are unequal, according to Mohammed and the Hadiths, then please state in the Koran or the Hadiths where it is allowed?
Yes, you are correct, Mohammed did have an army but it was not to bring peace but it was to obtain power.
Several Jewish tribes were enslaved and massacred, this was not about peace but it was about power and control.
Also, Mohammed states the following:
Quran 9: 29 Fight those who do not profess the true faith(Islam) till they pay the polltax (jiziya) with the hand of humility.
Quran 9: 5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolators wherever ye find them and take them captive, and besiege them and prepare for them each ambush….
Quran 47: 4 When you meet the unbelievers in the Jihad strike off their heads….
Quran 2: 191 And slay (kill) them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out such is the reward of those who suppress faith.
Quran 8: 65 O Apostle ! rouse the believers to the fight of….unbelievers.
No truth in Islam, just contradictions and ridiculous scientific statements; and of course the Hadiths tell us how Mohammed supported the enslavement of Jews and how he desired their property; just like attacking innocent caravans; this is criminality.
Does God need money by killing innocents and would God support the killing of innocents and then steal their wealth or property?
Dhimmitude means the enslavement of non-Muslims; it means inequality under the law of Islam - Again, does God need taxation from free people and would God demand tax from free people on the condition that if they do not pay, then they will be liable to be persecuted even more harsher?
Dhimmitude is brutal - it is a system based on the "ruler" over "the ruled."
Muslims have more freedom in India compared with the treatment of Christians, Ahmaddiya Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and others, have in Pakistan.
Ahmadiyya Muslims and Shia Muslims face more persecution and massacres in Pakistan than they do in India; indeed, in India both the Shia and Ahmadiyya have greater freedom.
Ha-ha, the pious family tradition in Islam is on very rocky ground. Your prophet, Mohammed, married a child, had sex with concubines, and married more than 4 wives; therefore, is Mohammed your role model?
Stoning people to death is barbaric and anybody who can justify this system is not a person of peace nor a person of God.
Does God need to kill people so slowly, if so, your God is based on hatred and not compassion. It is easy to kill, it is easy to hate; but it is not easy to forgive.
Your presumption is that an apostate is evil, therefore, it is ok to kill the individual. Again, ridiculous, it means your God is based on hatred and your religion fears freedom. People convert for different reasons but no loving God needs people to be killed for merely changing their religion.
Also, apostates are not evil, they have merely changed their faith for various reasons and compared with Mohammed, who had slaves, and enslaved, then how do you define evil.
Surely, marrying a child is evil? Surely, having sex with concubines is evil? Yet Mohammed did both!
Blasphemy law is barbaric when it means death and victimization. Only last week two Christians were killed in Pakistan and again the Muslim God needs to kill in order to destroy open debate; yes, draconian and barbaric.
Many Ahmadiyya Muslims and Christians are being abused by the blasphemy law, and others, and minorities reside in a state of fear and terror.
Mohammed attacked innocent caravans for booty; again, breaking the law means Islamic punishment, but Mohammed supported criminality, did adultery, had more than 4 wives, and so forth; he should have been punished in Islamic law but of course the God of the Muslims gave Mohammed special rights.............
A pious Muslim is no more pious than a pious Buddhist or a pious Hindu; no, you know that non-Muslims are unequal in Islamic law therefore you are telling the lie, not me, and you know your own faith so no point to hide behind chlidish comments.
Are you claiming that non-Muslims are "unclean?" and unfit to marry Muslim females? After all, you are implying this and again note how we infidels are treated - Mohammed is not a peacemaker and Islam is based on hatred.
All people should have equality under the law and this is a natural and godly way to think.
You merely confirm that Islam means hatred; keep it up, you are doing a good job for me and others should read your comments and study what you say; no equality, no compassion, just a mindset based on injustice.
Jesus was pure; Buddha was pure; Mohammed left a legacy of hatred and divisions and this legacy is ongoing.
Lee Jay Walker
Please read this as a question and answer series:
From a non-Muslim point of view it is hard to follow the logic that Islam means peace.
Become a Muslim then to come closer to the Truth and Peace.
Does dhimmitude mean peace?
Yes. If by paying fraction of the income tax that I am paying today to the State, I can save myself from the mob violence of Bhagalpur, Gujarat, (and ‘riots after riots in India’), I will happily accept the equivalent of dhimmitude.
Does stoning people to death for adultery mean peace?
To save innocent women from being raped, and exploited and to save the pious institution of family, why not? A peaceful family is the greatest provider of peace.
Does killing apostates mean peace?
Sometimes some men are totally possessed with evil and so the collective judgment of a society through a mechanism may dispatch such evil persons to outer space a bit early. No harm to peace. May be good for the peace in society.
Does blasphemy laws in Pakistan mean peace?
It means peace everywhere if the regime has the moral capacity to enforce it. A religious-centric society will allow nobody to blaspheme any reputed religion in which people have Aastha.
Did Mohammed mean peace when he attacked caravans, killed Jews and enslaved them?
If it was a caravan of dacoits, yes. If Jews rebelled against State, yes. These standards are still practiced by all governments of the world.
Does Islamic Sharia law mean peace when the testimony of a Muslim male is deemed to be higher than a non-Muslim?
A pious Muslim man is ten times more credible witness than a liar (and you know who is a liar on this website).
Does it mean peace when a male Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, or other, would face either death or prison for marrying a Muslim female?
One has to be clean to even think of marrying a Muslim woman. Marrying a Muslim by a non-Muslim is a logical impossibility which has been confirmed by the High Court of Delhi.
Does Saudi Arabia mean peace when they will not allow one single Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh, or other non-Muslim places of worship?
An exporter of cream is also not an importer of cream. Again a logical impossibility in the question.
Does chopping hands and feet off for punishment mean peace?
Yes, to the non-chors.
Buddha supported peace. Jesus supported peace.
I also support peace along with my friend , the kalua in my neighborhood. But as a hater of Muslims you can only be a communal rioter.
Mohammed had an army and supported Jihad.
(..and succeeded to crush the evil). Let our Army try to do a Jihad against the Maoists.
Lee Jay Walker, you say Jesus supported peace, I guess you have not read the Bible. In the Gospel of Matthews Jesus Christ said, ‘Do not think that I came to bring peace on Earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.’ You say: “Does blasphemy laws in Pakistan mean peace?” Do not consider Pakistan to be the representative to Islam, nor does Saudi Arabia. Then you say: "Does it mean peace when a male Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, or other, would face either death or prison for marrying a Muslim female?” Nowhere in the Quran is it mentioned that a Hindu or a Buddhist or a Christian would face death or prison. It is mentioned in the Quran that do not marry a non Muslim. A believing slave man or woman is better than a luring disbelieving man or woman. A Muslim is a person who submits his will to God, so even a so-called ‘believer’ can be a non Muslim, if he acts according to his own will. You say: “Does chopping hands and feet off for punishment mean peace?” Suppose you keep a servant. He has a habit of lying, cheating, robbing and doing all sorts of bad habits. One day you go to the office and work overnight, next day when you enter your house you find all your valuable things are nowhere to be found and your servant is also nowhere to be seen. You would surely get frustrated and would definitely feel like ‘punishing’ him. Yes your mode of punishment can be different. You cannot chop off hands and feet for every act of punishment. It is for a really hard crime.
Muhammad did have an army. He had and army of justice to bring ‘peace’.
Lee- The PIG, when you get answer from Dr. Zakir Naik, then tell me too. I guess you would be lucky to get appointment with him.
As for war of words, Lee-the PIG, see below mentioned news item and learn from it that even America thinks twice about provoking and getting provoked. And America has come to that much level that it has to think, what to do next. Vietnam and poor Afghanistan was too much to handle. North Korea ha Nuclear as well as backing nuclear and economic powered China. Bhoo... Lee-THE pig, what would be your fate now...Bhoo...
Buddha supported peace.
Jesus supported peace.
Lee Jay Walker
I think that there are some people who have lost their field and have vested interests oppose Dr. Zakir Naik. Dr. Naik is presenting purest form of Islam before Muslims and non-Muslims. So a good number of non-Muslims are accepting Islam. He has debated with Dr. William Cambel of Christian missionary, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar of Hinduism and much more. Nobody else in India and world can debate with any non-Muslim like him being a student of comparative religion. I being a student of Islamic Studies, appreciate Dr. Naik's work.
It really most interasting debate between Dr. Naik and journalist Rizvi saheb. I came to know so many fact about the real teachings of Islam and the wrongfull interpretaton of it by some people. Islam is great religion of peace. Only counter violence perpetrated on poor by unjust rulers. It never preached the creed of violence. thanks to sultan shaheen an New Age Islam
In a pluralistic society in India Dr.Zakir Naik is doing glorious service not only to Islam but to promote correct picture of Hinduism going to ancient literature.
As he is honest,daring and down to earth straight forward,he attracts a large gathering whom he imparts with knowledge in crystal clear term.Only people whose hearts are sealed do not wish to learn from him.A.H.Zacki.
I think that there are poeple who just for the sake of opposing Zakir Naik are doing so.
He puts the Islamic point of view very correctly. One may disagree with him. It is his right.
There is no compulsion in Deen. Everyone will face the day of judjement and will be anserable
for his deeds.
By Irshad Mahmood – PRESIDENT
Siraat-al-Mustaqeem Dawah Centre
Let me explain about the book Siraat-al-Mustaqeem, for the Mission to Reform Ummah.
We are living in the fast moving information age and facing many CHALLENGES from all around the Globe including Man Made Disasters. Keeping in mind the cultural and religious backgrounds of the people, exclusive kinds of Islamic literatures to Reform Ummah along with friendly dialogue and availability on internet for FREE, are required to fulfill the main objectives of DEEN to serve the humanity and please Allah.
This book, Siraat-al-Mustaqeem in the light of Quraan and Hadeeth is a brief guide to prepare our Ummah to face all the modern challenges and the only way to enter Paradise/Heaven. It consists of articles published on some Islaamic Groups (Yahoo & Google Groups) based on the following major topics:
1> Comparative Religion to learn about other religion.
2> Educates ourselves to do Effective Dawah.
3> Educates our Kids for the Future of the Peaceful World.
4> Points out Our Mistakes.
5> Points out the Roots of Downfall of the Muslim Ummah.
6> Explains the Possible Cure to our Misconceptions.
7> Explains Our Responsibilities.
8> Guides to Set Our Priorities.
9> Marriage Counseling.
10> Global Counseling.
11> Introduction to Global Economic Solution.
For more details please visit the following websites:
For Dawah to Non-Muslims:
To Answer all never ending questions / concerns from Non-Muslims:
To get more information and updates on emails, please join Siraat-al-Mustaqeem, for the Mission to Reform Ummah: Please invite others to join as well:
Download for FREE to Print, Publish and Forward to as many as you can.
And withhold yourself with those who call on their Lord morning and evening desiring His goodwill, and let not your eyes pass from them (always yes sir, till they follow the Quraan and Really Authentic Sunnah), desiring the beauties of this world's life; and do not follow him whose heart We have made unmindful to Our remembrance, and he follows his low desires and his case is one in which due bounds are exceeded. (Al_Quraan_018.028)
Dear Mr. Rizvi,
A fantastic article. You have exposed this fanatic and fundamnetalist person. He is misusing the freedom of expression. Since he has a failed in his field, he is making money by fooling the gullible public.
Although I have not seen all the debates of Dr. Zakir Naik, but whatever i have seen are all justified with strong logical resoning and also within the contours of Hadith and Quran. It is but natural everyone cannot accept the truth because everyone cant digest the truth. Islam can never be modified , there can be nothing like modern Islam . Islam is what Prophet (S.A.W) preached. So, I urge people to strongly believe in Hadith and Quran rather than criticising the intellectuals like Dr. Zakir Naik.
The greatest difference b/w Islam and any other religion is nothing but -"All kind of ibadath or prayer must be directed to GOD”. Islam outstands any other religion in the world with this concept. Still some people pray to other things than ALLAH (swt),like praying to dead scholars, and say the meagre excuse that its not Prayer but seeking help!!!.Actually our prophet (s.a) has not given a 'CLEAR CUT DEFENITION' of prayer, but has explained in detail through his life what prayer is and what is shirk. And anyone in this world irrespective of his religion knows what a prayer is.
ALLAH (swt) has also explained in Quran the stages when prayer comes from humans, and have cited the example of danger in ship, danger during lightning, lack of rain, to protect us from accidents, etc."So i would like to ask a question to the people who ask help to the dead ulama in grave"--what are you asking to the man in the grave???Are you just saying a hello?? Or are you asking help your problems???Or are you asking him to give you a baby??
Is Allah insufficient for you to solve your problems???If you ask like this, doesn’t it become a prayer to him???Can you cite a single example where the prophet (s.a) and his companions asked like this way to a dead man???Or can you site a single prayer from Quran other than to Allah (s.w.t)???Or can you site a single example where other prophets than Muhammad (s.a), who asked help to dead????Then why are u trying to put this nonsense and shirk on Islam????Why can’t you ask help only to god and what prevents you from doing it???
And they say it’s all about Wahhabi and blah blah...there is no Wahhabi or anything in Islam. and it’s not allowed in Islam to taqleed Abdul Wahhab or any other scholars. The Quran and the authentic hadiths are still present in this world to clear your doubts about the basics of shirk and thouheed.
As far as Zakir Naik is concerned, I like him as he is a great preacher of Islam and pure tawheed. He is against grave worshipping. It’s very shameful that you have not understood what he has said about bin laden and also it shows the hatred of the man against Zakir . I would also like to remind that we should not taqleed or believe Zakir aik blindly, as a man he can also make mistakes!!
nice other side shown of zakir naik in this article .
after all he is not god but a simple human being
a good article to read..
GOOD ARTICLE TO SU[PPLEM,ENT MR RIZVI ARTICLE
Band Of Fanatics: The Zakir Naik Show
By Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
I am sad to see that people are criticizing Dr. Naik. Why dont we have some fatwas for such people?
The criics looks to me Shia or Sufi. BTW they are very far from Islam already so they will not like the right teaching. You guys are Abu jahal of our society. Latan ho sab pe ...
You are as lunatic as simian looking Zakir Naik, May Allah curse be on him. Abu Jahal is from your sect and he is the forefather of Zakir Naik, and all the wahabis, the rabid transgressors. Naik is Jahil and must be condemned with all might anyone calling yazeed as RA has to jahil and son of Abu Jahal and Abu Lahab and Abu Sufyan.
You are as lunatic as simian looking Zakir Naik, May Allah curse be on him. Abu Jahal is from your sect and he is the forefather of Zakir Naik, and all the wahabis, the rabid transgressors. Naik is Jahil and must be condemned with all might anyone calling yazeed as LA has to jahil and son of Abu Jahal and Abu Lahab and Abu Sufyan.
This is a great article expsoing the man called as Zakir Naik. I have just read this article on the internet. Mr Rizvi has done a great job and MUslims must understand the grand design of this evil man Naik.In India. no one can ever condone the sins of Yazeed. He was the greatest terrorist of all times and we all condemn and curse him. If a Muslim cannot curse Yazeed then who should he?
I am a Hindu with limited knowledge of my religion and practically very little knowledge of other co-religions. But my religious sentiments are wounded when I read Dr.Zakir Naik's "comparative religion” on Hinduism. Sri Ramakrishna took one analogy of water to prove that God called by any name will be the same one god and the names and religions are only different paths to the same God. In a pond Muslim climb down from one side drinks water and says 'pani'; Christian climbs down from another side and says water; Hindu climbs down from another side and says JAL; Scientist from another side says aqua; they refer to the same water. So also with God! This analogy is made to bring religious harmony among people. But Dr. Zakir Naik says water and urine are not same. Thus implying that Islam alone is water and all other faiths are like urine! Even a good intentioned analogy is twisted to show his logic power!
Mr. Mughal oooh Sorry Mr. Wahabi.
you say me qabrprast.
But you Abdul wahab prast.
Sharam tujhko magar nahi aati
I thank the editor very much for the tremendous work he has done to bring to us all this useful information. I have not read in dtails all the articles in this site but at least I have grabbed some information.
I am requesting the editor to motivate Islamic Researchers/writers so that they may focus very much on Islamic literature regarding men who deny their spouses sex without any justifying reason. This has been discussed at length on the side of Women who do the same but on the men's side, there has been a gap. Various Hadith have been quorted by Various Sheikhs and Imams in Qutbahs regarding catastrophe that befalls the woman who anoys her husband and therefore deny him sex, but the other side of the coin has not been discussed at all.
Please entice researchers to write on that issue.
Illiteteracy has many names. You try to prove a point even without exercising your brain and understanding. [Zia Haider]
Dear Zia Sahab,
Reply is as under:
Unity among Muslims and Dr. Zakir Naik’s Evil: A Point of View
From: Susqueh@aol.com <Susqueh@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Fight over the Meaning of Islam, NewAgeIslam.Com - 18 Dec, 2008
Date: Sunday, December 21, 2008, 8:18 PMIs
this the one you wanted?
In a message dated 12/21/2008 4:47:29 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, email@example.com writes:
u and janab dr zakir adaab.
This must be my 7th latter to u with no response as yet. For a man with I.Q of 800 who dares the whole man kind to question ur knowledge. It looks u have only bookish knowledge but no wisdom. So let me repeat my qs to u with a copy to my Islamic fronds as well. 1) On terrorism. u said i am a fundamentalist follower of Islam, and each fundamental follower of Islam should be a terrorist, elaborating it with 2 examples i.e. he should be a terrorist to all anti social elements like a police man. my answer was not even the worst killer rapist etc will feel terror seeing a policeman, he will have a fear y, because he knows that the policeman can arrest him, at best can kill him in an encounter, but will not, repeat will not kill his innocent wife, and children.
The terror comes when u feel that he will kill innocent people. No ans.1. a) ur 2nd argument was Gandhi was a freedom fighter to us but was a terrorist to British govt. u fallowed it with another example of Mandela who won noble prize for peace was considered a terrorist by the apartheid govt of S.A. told u here also u are wrong neither British govt nor apartheid govt of S.A considered them as terrorist because they knew when in power none of them will kill brutally the innocent people (like their family) there is a world of deference between terror and fear.
Look into oxford dictionary. now that I can neither visit ur site not ur channel is aired so I do not know whether u have submitted a public apology or not, some one tells me that u have revised on Gandhi and have the offender to revise it by saying that radical members of freedom fighter were considered as terrorist by British govt. if so let me remind u that even the most passionate freedom fight will attach innocent people like women, and children, he may kill a tyrant ruler. Whom u is trying to deceive with such statements u urself?2) U said where few ulammas agreed with u that qoran-a-pak prohibited a Muslim to bow before any one other then Allah, hence Muslims can not sing bande matram. It is such a preposterous statement that I should believe that that a man of ur 600 I.Q will say so.
Because even I a moron can say that this statement is absurd. I am quoting 5 different thing where u/any member of Islamic faith now.1A) go to hazt ali and see for urself'2a) during urs not only they bow mazar but bow even to the holy chadder that will be put to mazar.3a) when u entered a court of a nawab/king u bow to him.4a) when a player wins or when he is playing tycavendo he has to bow to receive his medal of honour.5a) I don’t know if u are western enough to greet ur parents, of that matter any elder with hai, hai, or with a salaam.
if u do hai hai can not argue but if say slam as any normal Muslim will do this when u take ur hand up to touch the head, ur head will come dawn even if a minuscule. i can quote 1 more but that will hurt ur sentiment, and my religion prohibits me. I cannot stoop to ur heights to hurt others faith as u do by taking Jesus/Christianity apart brick by brick. I believe the faith comes from heart not from head, and if u hurt some ones faith u kill him thousand times in one life. If u recall when u said u are a fundamental fallowed of Islamic faith. I replied i am also a fundamentalist of humanity as religion. Mark the difference between faith, and religion.
There can be no other religion other then humanity, rest are all faiths, the moment u convert the faith into religion then u will impose ur faith on others, that is where the fight begins. The faiths were created by man, and the basic reason to create the faith was only 1 i.e. to stand together to face the tyranny of greedy, and lustful people.
Jesus didit, so did Prophet Mohammad, only their approach was different. U is scholar so u must have read allama iqbal, and he said MAZHAB NAHIN SIKHATA APUS MAY BAIR RAKHNA HINDI HAI HUM VATAN HAI HIBUSTAN HAMARA. WHILE U ARE PRECHING HATERED AT THE TOP OF UR VOICE OVER PEACE T.V i am not a lawyer and do not know if u can be prosecuted for fanning hatred to propagate ur faith. But this is a food for thought for all. i know Dr Naik will not accept my challenge, as he has not done till now, but request the members of new Islamic age to send me their reaction. I may be absurdly wrong but will correct my perception if u tells me where I am wrong
Illiteteracy has many names. You try to prove a point even without exercising your brain and understanding. I have given you the age factor the age difference between Hazarat Omar and Hazrt Ali (AS). At the time the assassination of Omar, Janabe Kulthum was barely 12 to thirteen years old. Ummre Kulthum who married Umar was the daughter of Hazarat Abu Bakr.
I am amazed to see your silence on the forces Saudi regime which is illegitimate and violates all; norm of Islam. These people have demolished all traces of Islamic history but have preserved everything of theirs. You talk about these people who are the major source for terrorism across the world by the Wahabis/ But Abdullah and his family are usurping Muslim money
Read this again Please see how these Saudis are wasting Muslim wealth and then they speak of Islam. Dont show us the picture of poor in India there are many such in your Saudi Arabia. Do you think it is a welfare state. One more Khomeini and this time from the Sunni community would emerge to dismantle the ill gotten Saudi royal family. Mughal how do you support the institution of monarchy with the knowledge you have. You can do because anyone who can support yazeed can do anything
The Saudi royal family's wealth is so large that no reliable estimate is available. However, when King Abdullah's predecessor, his half-brother King Fahd, died two years ago, his fortune was said to be worth £30billion. An essential part of family wealth is the Kingdom in its entirety, which the Al Saud view as a totally owned family asset and these include:- co-mingling of personal & state funds from lucrative government positions- huge land allocations- direct allotments of crude oil to sell in the open market- segmental controls in the economy- special preferences for the award of major contracts- outright cash handouts
Rochester, MN. is the home of the Mayo clinic, a world-class medical facility. It is also home to an airport with runways long enough to allow a 747 to land, which is necessary when the King of Saudi Arabia arrived for a check-up, bringing his entourage.
Rochester officials say members of Saudi Arabia's royal family spent enough money during their visit this week to remedy the area's economic woes for the year.
Estimates of their spending ranged from $1 million to $2.5 million per person during an eight-day visit.
Saudi Arabian King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz arrived in Rochester on Nov. 15 for a check up at the Mayo Clinic. He was accompanied by at least five Saudi princes and hundreds of others.
Taking the lower bound, that's a cool $125,000 a day. To put this in perspective, the average* per-capita personal income (PCI) in Rochester was a shade under $40,118 in 2007. Not adjusting for inflation, the average man, woman, or child would have to work for three years to earn enough cash, pre-tax, to spend what the Saudis spent in one day - at least. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Damn right it's good to be the king.
Anyways, I hope they took time to take in one of the famous landmarks, the corncob water tower.
This excludes travel cost and other expenditure.
Fromer King Fahd son set a tent for his marriage which costed US $ 100 million
Why did the Prophet find only Ali worthy of marrying his daughter to? [Hasan Iqbal]
Dear Hasan Sahab,
Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] gave his two daughters [May Allah be pleased with them both] to Hazrat Uthman Ibn Affan [May Allah be pleased with him].
As per Shia Books:
A Rafizi Abul Qasim Ali Bin Ahmed Bin Musa [Death: 352 Hijri] in his book Al Istighasa Fi Bidah-es-Salasa had denied that Ruqqaya [May Allah be pleased with her], Umme Kulthum [May Allah be pleased with her], and Zainab [May Allah be pleased with her] were also the daugthers of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] besides Hazrat Fatimah [May Allah be pleased with her] from Hazrat Khadija [May Allah be pleased with her] whereas Ruqqayya, Zainab and Umme Kulthum were the daughters of Mohammad [PBUH] from Khadija and all three were borne before the Prophethood [Bu'saat]. Abul Qasim above meant to say that these three daughters were borne to Khadija from her earlier husband. Abul Qasim's claims are rejected by books like Nasb Al Quraish, Kashf Al Ghamma Fi Maarifatul Aimma, Umdatut Talib Fi Ansab Aal Abi Talib.
The claim of the above Rafizi was thoroughly rejected by a noted Shia Scholar Abdullah Mamqani in his book Tanqeeh ul Maqal Fi Ahwal Ir Rijal and declared that Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] had four daughters [May Allah be pleased with all of them]. Rafizi Abul Qasim was declared apostate by several noted Shia Scholars like Sheikh Abbas Al Qumi in his Tatamma Al Muntaha, and by another Shia Scholar Allama Aaqa Meer in his Naqd ur Rijal and by another Giant Shia Scholar Mohammad Bin Yaquob Al Kulaini in his Usool ul Kafi's Chapter Bab-e-Tareekh also accepted that Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] has four daughters from Khadija [May All be pleased with her].
Following Shia Books accpeted that Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] had four daughters from Khadjia [[May All be pleased with her].
1- Kitaabul Khisal by Sheikh Sadooq.
2- Tazkaratul Masoomeen.
3- Tuhfatul Awam.
4- Manaqib Ibn-e-Sheher Ashoob.
5- Hayatul Quloob.
6- Jilaul Uyoon.
7- Tehzeeb Al Ahkam.
8- Al Istabsar Mara'atul Uqool.
9- Firoo Kafi.
10- Saafi Sharah Kafi.
11- Kashful Ghama.
12- Qarbul Asnad.
13- Majalisul Momineen.
14- Ailaam ul Wari.
17- Amali Sheikh Toosi.
Who are the people referred to in Ayat-e-Tatheer? and why? [Hasan Iqbal]
For your kind perusal,
Background of Purification Verses Quran 33:33
Waqarna fee buyootikunna wala tabarrajna tabarruja aljahiliyyati aloola waaqimna alssalata waateena alzzakata waatiAAna Allaha warasoolahu innama yureedu Allahu liyuthhiba AAankumu alrrijsa ahla albayti wayutahhirakum tatheeran Interpretation of the Meaning:And stay in your houses. Bedizen not yourselves with the bedizenment of the Time of Ignorance. Be regular in prayer, and pay the poor-due, and obey Allah and His messenger. Allah's wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household, and cleanse you with a thorough cleansing. [AL-AHZAB (THE CLANS, THE COALITION,THE COMBINED FORCES) Chapter 33 - Verse 33]
Sahih Muslim narrated that It was narrated by ‘Aisha ( May Allah be pleased with her) that the Messenger of Allah sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam once went out in the morning suspending a cloth over his hair; When he saw Al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali appearing, he hid it ,then came Hussein and entered with him.When ‘Ali and his spouse Fatima came, he hid it and said:
“ And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the family, and to make you pure and spotless.” Quran 33 : 33
The Shi’ite adherents claim that all members of the household of the Prophet and their posterity are infallible. And thus, it is a must to obey them.; For they deserve to be Imams. They do support their claim categorically with the above mentioned Qur’anic verse and the Prophetic Tradition. How true is their claim?
Indeed the purification verse was revealed in favor of the Prophet’s wives, as God Almighty stated in the Holy Qur’an and we would have to quote the complete context and background from the Verse number 32 and we would have to quote Verse 34 not only 33:33
Ya nisaa alnnabiyyi lastunna kaahadin mina alnnisai ini ittaqaytunna fala takhdaAAna bialqawli fayatmaAAa allathee fee qalbihi maradun waqulna qawlan maAAroofan
O ye wives of the Prophet! Ye are not like any other women. If ye keep your duty (to Allah), then be not soft of speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease aspire (to you), but utter customary speech. [
Waqarna fee buyootikunna wala tabarrajna tabarruja aljahiliyyati aloola waaqimna alssalata waateena alzzakata waatiAAna Allaha warasoolahu innama yureedu Allahu liyuthhiba AAankumu alrrijsa ahla albayti wayutahhirakum tatheeran
And stay in your houses. Bedizen not yourselves with the bedizenment of the Time of Ignorance. Be regular in prayer, and pay the poor-due, and obey Allah and His messenger. Allah's wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household, and cleanse you with a thorough cleansing.Waothkurna ma yutla fee buyootikunna min ayati Allahi waalhikmati inna Allaha kana lateefan khabeeran
And bear in mind that which is recited in your houses of the revelations of Allah and wisdom. Lo! Allah is Subtile, Aware.
[[AL-AHZAB (THE CLANS, THE COALITION,THE COMBINED FORCES) Chapter 33 - Verse 32, 33, and 34]
So, whoever ponders these verses with a clear and objective mind, without prejudice will come to a conclusion that they were revealed exclusively in favor of the Prophet’s Consorts. Moreover, if one fathoms the verse: “ Stay quietly in your house…… will find out that, it is only one verse and the Messenger’s wives are the only ones addressed therein.
This might lead us to quesion ourselves: If the verse addressed only the wives of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam, why didn’t it contain a feminine pronoun of (Meem) instead of using an article implying plural of men? It should be clear that the Messenger of Allah sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam was the head of his household. So, in order to include him, it was incumbent to use the article “ Meem” that denotes talking about a group of men. For he was a man and a leader of his household. For more explanation of this, we should refer to the verse wherein Allah talks about Prophet Ibraahim (Pbuh).
They said: Wonderest thou at the commandment of Allah? The mercy of Allah and His blessings be upon you, O people of the house! Lo! He is Owner of Praise, Owner of Glory! [HUD (HUD) Chapter 11 - Verse 73]
Since Abraham was also included in his family, the Holy Qur’an addressed his wife using musculine plural of men with the article ”Meem” as it is customary in the Arabic grammar. For the plural of men is applied even though there is only one man in the group of females according to the classical Arabic. Moreover, in Arabic, a wife is addressed as ”Ahl”, which also means ” People” as revealed in the verse wherein Allah almighty was talking about Prophet Moses salahu alihi wasallam.
Then, when Moses had fulfilled the term, and was travelling with his housefolk, he saw in the distance a fire and said unto his housefolk: Bide ye (here). Lo! I see in the distance a fire; peradventure I shall bring you tidings thence, or a brand from the fire that ye may warm yourselves. [AL-QASAS (THE STORY, STORIES) Chapter 28 - Verse 29]
So, what do you find strange if this verse was addressed solely to the wives of the Prophet (Pbuh), though the article of musculine plural was applied ?!
2. What proves that this verse was revealed solely for the wives of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam ,is the Prophetic Tradition itself. In this regard, Prophet Muhammad sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam prayed for his close relatives, including his in-laws and said: ( O Allah! Those are also members of my family, O Allah purify them. )
Suppose the verse was addressed to them, confirming that Allah had purified them, why could the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam need to invoke Allah Almighty to include this kith and kin in the purification promise ?!!
3. The household of the Messenger of Allah salahu alihi wa aalihi wasallam includes his wives, Imam Ali, Lady Fatima, the two Imams Al-Hasan and Al-Hussein, and Zaid ibn Al-Arqam who was asked about the household of the Prophet and said in the Hadith: ( His spouses are a fibre of his household ). He went further to explain that his household includes also the people who were not allowed to receive any charity namely: the relatives of Ali, the kindred of Ja’afar, the family of Aqeel, and the kinsfolk of Al-Abbas. Therefore, the concept of the Prophet’s household encompasses also Al-Abbas- the son Abdul Muttalib, the kith and kin of ‘ Aqeel bin abi Talib, and the family of Ja’afar bin Abi Talib, as stated in the Tradition (Hadith) of Zaid bin Al-Arqaam. It also includes the family of Al-Harith bin Abdul Muttalib, due to what the Messenger salahu alihi wa aalihi wasallam told Rabbea bin Al-Harith and Al-Abbas bin Abdil Muttalib: ( Verily , the family of Muhammad does not deserve any charity , for it is people’s filth ) Sahih Muslim
Even though, we accept the infallibility of the Shi’ite Imams, we will come to a conclusion that it is not logical or Substantial for a non-prophet to be infallible whatsoever he may be.
4. Referring to the above mentioned verse, and deducting therefrom that Allah’s purification from abomination was meant also for the in-laws and the entire kith and kin of the Messenger of Allah sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam ,prompts a person to wonder and get surprised. The reason for that is self-evident and palpable for everybody.
The aforementioned Hadeeth mentions Fatima ( the daughter of the prophet May Allah be pleased with her ) as part and percel of the people who were meant for purification among the family members of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam.
The Imamite Shi’ah claim that Allah Almighty granted the Shi’ite Imams infalliblity because the task they were to be assigned to undertake required of them to be so. The task they were to undertake was to lead people and to apply the Divine Laws of Allah Almighty in Judging among mankind. Now the question casts itself, suppose what they claim is correct, is Lady Fatima ( May Allah be pleased with her ) a prophet or an Imam to be infallible?! Why she should be infallible if she is not a prophet or an Imam ( like how shia believe ) ?!!
Allah Almighty bestowed the attribute of infallibility on the Prophets and Messengers because they had a task ahead of them that was to convey the message revealed to them to their respective peoples and to safeguard the supernatural message they were entrusted with by Allah Almighty.
5. Since the purification verse was revealed in regard to the wives of the Allah’s Messenger and Allah Almighty affirmed to make them pure and spotless, the Messenger of Allah sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam gathered his closest kith and kin and invoked Allah Almighty to purify them as promised his wives (Prophet’s).
He thus said in his supplication: ( O Allah ! those are my kith and kin, remove all abomination from them and make them pure and spotless ). So after Umm Salama saw that the Messenger of Allah sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam had included Ali, Fatima, Al-Hasan and Al-Hussein in the members of his household, she requested him earnestly to include her among the people he supplicated for. The Messenger of Allah informed her undoubtedly that there was no need for himto include her among his kith and kin since she was one of his wives, and the verse was revin their regard. This is a sound evidence that states categorically the fact that the verse was not revealed in regard of the Prophet’s kith and kin but rather it was addressing his wives.Had it been addressing also his kith and kin there would be no need for him to gather his daughter, son -in-law and his grandsons to invoke Allah to include them among his spouses who were promised to be purified.
6. In the verse: ” And Allah wishes only to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the family, and to make you pure and spotless.” Allah’s statement was not to assure them that they had already been purified, but rather to stipulate a condition that if they obeyed Him, He would remove all abomination from them and thus purify them. He only wished to purify them if they met this Condition.
If you analyze the context, you will find that Allah Almighty was giving the prophet’s wives some divine directions to do all what He commanded them and to abstain from what He forbade. He thus informed them that if they Conformed to his commands and abstained from what he forbade, He would reward them by removing all abomination from them and make them pure and stainless.
It should be noted that God Almighty has used this pattern of speech to address our predecessors. Consider the following verse:
Allah would not place a burden on you, but He would purify you and would perfect His grace upon you, that ye may give thanks. [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD) Chapter 5 - Verse 6]
Allah would explain to you and guide you by the examples of those who were before you, and would turn to you in mercy. Allah is Knower, Wise. [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 26]
Allah would make the burden light for you, for man was created weak. [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 28]
The wish of Allah expressed in the above mentioned verses comes as a condition of being loyal to His commands, to love Him and make Him pleased with you. Otherwise, without fulfilling this condition, His wish cannot come into reality, i.e the purification cannot occur.
7. The main aim of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam in his aforementioned Hadeeth was to pray for his kith and kin to get all their abomination removed from them by Allah, and to be purified as well. This implies that he prayed for them to be among the pious believers who were purified by Allah Almighty. Hence, avoiding abomination is a must for all the believers. For Allah Almighty wishes to purify all the believers who subscribe only to Him in their acts of devotion and not only the family of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam. Although the Prophet’s kith and kin are more entitled to get the purification of Allah Almighty, the verse does not restrict Allah’s purification to them only, to be regarded as impeccable. Allah Almighty says:
Truly Allah loveth those who turn unto Him, and loveth those who have a care for cleanness. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 222]
So, as Allah Almighty told us of His wish to purify members of the prophet’s family, He so informed us of His wish to purify the believers as well. Therefore, if we suppose that the wish of Allah to purify the believers was meant to make them impeccable, then all sincere pious believers are infallible.
8. The purification mentioned in the aforementioned verse was not meant to make the kith and kin of the Messenger of Allah infallible, but rather to remove all abomination and mischief from them. This style is widely used in the Holy Qur’an. We read in the Holy Qur’an:
Take alms of their wealth, wherewith thou mayst purify them and mayst make them grow, and pray for them. Lo! thy prayer is an assuagement for them. Allah is Hearer, Knower. [AL-TAWBA (REPENTANCE, DISPENSATION) Chapter 9 - Verse 103]
You will never find anybody say that the purification mentioned in the afore-mentioned verses was meant to make the Prophet’s family members infallible. We also read in the Holy Qur’an:
Thy raiment purify, [AL-MUDDATHTHIR (THE CLOAKED ONE, THE MAN WEARING A CLOAK) Chapter 74 - Verse 4]
This is mentioned in many verses of the holy Qur’an. The stain here implies filth and dirt. By this Allah Almighty alludes to polytheism (Shirk). To substantiate this explanation and interpretation, Allah Almighty says in the Holy Qur’an:
So shun the filth of idols [AL-HAJJ (THE PILGRIMAGE) Chapter 22 - Verse 30]
Also the word stain may mean , the forbidden foods and drinks as Allah has plainly stated:
Say: I find not in that which is revealed unto me aught prohibited to an eater that he eat thereof, except it be carrion, or blood poured forth, or swineflesh - for that verily is foul - or the abomination which was immolated to the name of other than Allah. But whoso is compelled (thereto), neither craving nor transgressing, (for him) lo! thy Lord is Forgiving, Merciful. [AL-ANAAM (CATTLE, LIVESTOCK) Chapter 6 - Verse 145]
Another example is the following verse;
O ye who believe! Strong drink and games of chance and idols and divining arrows are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork. Leave it aside in order that ye may succeed. [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD) Chapter 5 - Verse 90]
There is no verse however, in the Holy Qur’an that refers to “stain” as to mean sins. For if it means sins, then the verse of purification came to confirm that those of the prophetic family were infallible from committing sins.
9. The verse does not whatsoever mean that purification has already taken place, but it rather asserts explicitly the will of Allah Almighty to purify the Staunch and sincere wives of the prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam. From the previous argument, we also deduct that the Messenger of Allah sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam was eager to pray for his immediate and other relatives to be included in the verse of purification, in order to achieve the same as his spouses were promised.
Worthy of mention, is that whenever the Messenger Of Allah went to perform the daily obligatory prayer, he used to pass by the house of his cousin and son-in-law, Ali and his spouse Fatima, reminding them of the obligation of prayer by saying:
( Stick to the mandatory prayers, O members of the family! )
After this exhortation, he used to recite to them the following verse:
“ Allah so wills to remove all abomination from you O members of the family, and to make you pure and stainless.”
As stated before in the same verse. By this, he was reminding them, especially Ali, of performing Obligatory prayers in congregation in the mosque. For if one observes all obligatory acts of worship and obey Allah fully, then his reward will be to purify him from all abomination and stains.
10. If we presume that the purification verse was revealed only to address the relatives of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam and not his spouses, so the purification stated in the verse does not suit them, due to following Qur’anic text in which Allah Almighty says: “ But He so will to purify you and complete His favors on you.” He so addresses His servants in so many other Qur’anic verses. So, if the aim of Allah Almighty in purifying the spouses of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam was to make them infallible, it would necessitate us to say that all the believers are infallible, following the Qur’anic verse which states that Allah Almighty so Wills to purify them. I am pretty sure that neither the Sunnis nor the Shi’as can allege that analogy. So how can the purification theory be executed in respect of some sects of people and leave others out of bound? Can’t you see that in this preposition, there is some whimsical and temperamental inclination? There is no any scientific methodology in it.
It is surprising that the Shi’ite Scholars cling to the purification verse and allege that is was revealed with regard to the relatives of the Prophet sala alahu alihi wa aalihi wasallam, leaving out anything that deals with the purification. By this, they claim that only the relatives of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam are infallible. They thus intend to forget other verses that Allah Almighty revealed to purify the companions the Holy Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam from all abomination. We read for example.” But He so wishes to purify you and complete His favor on you.” They besides, slander the rightly guided Companions of the Holy Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi was and allege that they will be caused to turn upside down as a punishment for them. They claim this, inspite of the fact that Allah Almighty confirmed His Will to purify the sincere Companions of the Holy Prophet. You find many parities in the assumptions of the Shi’ite Scholars, that cause you to shake your head incessantly and come to a conclusion that, it is not but bigotry towards their Sect and utter hatred of the rightly guided Companions of the Holy Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam.
11. To remove abomination from the kith and kin of the Prophet sala allahu alaihi wa aalihi wasallam does not entitle them to be Imams. Now we are on the outset of looking for an evidence either from the Holy Qur’an or from the Hadith that confirms the religious leadership of the Prophet’s relatives. If it is said that among the pre-requisites of the Imamite is to be infallible, then the following question casts itself; What do you say regarding Fatima bin Muhammad , who was among his daughters and among the relatives who included in the purification verse? Can we enforce the same principle on her and regard her as one of the Imam? If they say no, then we should cast the following question; which is matter of factly a quotation from a lengthy Qur’anic verse “ Do you only believe in some portions of the book ( i.e. Qur’an) and disbelieve in the others? ” You should either implement what you claim totally or admit its futility. But tampering with the Qur’anic verses and trying to fix them in some places to suit your desires without objectivity, is in fact, playing about with the Holy Book of Allah! May Allah forbid!
WHO ARE IN THE FAMILY OF PROPHET MOHAMMAD [PBUH]:
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him urged in the past two hadeeths to adhere to his noble household, to know their right, to respect them, and to honor them, may Allah be pleased with them all. But the question is; who are the household of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him?
Hadeeth Al-Thiqlayn indicates to the concept of the Prophet’s household clarifying that Ahl Al-Bayt are the relatives of Prophet Muhammad and his wives.
To the completion of the previous hadeeth, The companion of the prophet Zayd who narrated Hadeeth Al-Thiqalyn says: “his wives are among his household, but his household are those who charity is forbidden upon them.” One asked: “and who are they?” Zayd answered that they were the household of Ali, household of Aqeel, household of Jaffar, and household of Abbas. The first person asked again: “Upon all of them charity is forbidden?” and Zayd answered by a yes”
Abdulrahman bin Abi Layla, a dignified Companion, says: “Once we asked Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him about how to pray on his household although Allah told us how to pray on him. Prophet Muhammad answered: “Say: ‘O’ Allah send prayers upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, just as You sent prayers upon Ebraheem and the family of Ebraheem. Verily, You are full of praise and majesty. O’ Allah, send blessings upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, just as You sent blessings upon Ebraheem and upon the family of Ebraheem. Verily, You are full of praise and majesty.”
Then Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him taught them other forms of prayers upon him and his family, and one of the forms is: “O’ Allah, send prayers upon Muhammad and upon the wives and descendants of Muhammad, just as you sent prayers upon the family of Ebraheem, and send blessings upon Muhammad and upon the wives and descendants of Muhammad, just as You sent blessings upon the family of Ebraheem. Verily, You are full of praise and majesty.”
Although the wives of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him are named as Ahl Al-Bayt in the Ebraheemite Prayer, we would find a better and a clearer declaration that the wives of the Prophet are his household in this narration:Anas bin Malik reported: “A banquet of bread and meat was held on the occasion of the marriage of the Prophet to Zainab bint Jahsh. I was sent to invite the people (to the banquet), ………. The Prophet left and went towards the dwelling place of Aisha and said, "Peace and Allah's Mercy be on you, O the people of the house!" She replied, "Peace and the mercy of Allah be on you too. How did you find your wife? May Allah bless you. Then he went to the dwelling places of all his other wives and said to them the same as he said to Aisha and they said to him the same as Aisha had said to him.” (Saheeh Al-Bukhari, Tafseer Al-Quran, Surat Al-Ahzab), (Al-Nisa’ei, Work of the day and night, 271)
In the hadeeth of Al-Efk (the narration of the Lie), the Prophet peace be upon him, while he was on the pulpit narrating charges of adultery from Ubaydillah bin Abi Salool against the Mother of Beleivers, Aisha, says: “O people give me your opinion regarding those people who made a forged story against my family. By Allah, I do not know anything bad about her. By Allah, they accused her of being with a man about whom I have never known anything bad, and he never entered my house unless I was present there, and whenever I went on a journey, he went with me” (Saheeh Al-Bukhari, Tafseer AL-Quran, Surat AL-Nour)
Now, let us see what language has to say about this issue. Arabic Language scholars are very clear in identifying the wives of a man as his household. Ibn Manthoor says in the Tongue of the Arabs (Lisan Al-Arab): “Ahl Al-Bayt: its dwellers, Ahl Al-Rajul (family of a man) is the closest people to him, and the household of Prophet Muhammad may Allah have peace on him is his wives, his daughters, and his son-in-law who is Ali bin Abi Talib”
Al-Fayrooz Al-A’abadi says in Qamoos Al-Muheet: “Ahl Al-Amr is its rulers, Ahl Al-Bayt is its dwellers, Ahl Al-Mathhab (sect) is its who believe in it, Ahl Al-Rajul is his wife, and Ahl Al-Nabi is his wives, his daughters, and his son-in-law i.e. Ali may Allah be pleased of him.”
Al-Zubaydi says in Taj Al-Aroos (The Bride’s Crown): “Ahl Al-Mathhab is its believers, Ahl Al-Rajul is his wife and children, and this is how the verse: “and was travelling with his family” is explained as his wives and family. Ahl Al-Nabi is his wives, daughters, and his son-in-law Ali. It was said that the descendant of a man is Ahl Al-Rajul. In the Quran: “Enjoin prayer on thy family, and be constant therein,” “And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye Members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless,” and “let mercy of Allah and His blessings be upon you Ahl Al-Bayt, He is the most benign and most exalted.”
In addition to the Prophetic narrations and to the Arabic Language scholars’ sayings, the Quran itself testifies that wives are included in the phrase “Ahl A-Bayt.”
The Quran called Prophets’ wives as their household. Allah says: “so he said to his family, "Tarry ye; I perceive a fire; perhaps I can bring you some burning brand therefrom, or find some guidance at the fire”. And it is known that only Mousa’s wife was with him and no one else.
In the story of Zaleekha, the wife of Al-Azeez, when she wanted to temp Yousif, Allah says: “She said: "What is the (fitting) punishment for one who formed an evil design against thy family, but prison or agrievous chastisement?"
Also, Allah says: “Now when Moses had fulfilled the term, and was travelling with his family.” Al-Qumi says in his Tafseer: “When the time had come, Mousa took his wife, Shu’ayb provided Mousa, and Mousa lead his goats. When Mousa wanted to leave, Shu’ayb told him: “Go, Allah made it privately for you.” Therefore, Mousa lead his goats aiming Egypt. Mousa and his wife were in a place when a cold breeze, wind and darkness stroked Mousa and his family. Then, Mousa saw a fire, where Allah said the verse: “Now when Moses had fulfilled the term, and was travelling with his family.”
Included in the term “Ahl Al-Bayt” are Ali, Al-Hasan, Al-Hussain, and Fatima, may Allah be pleased with them all as it is mentioned in Hadeeth Al-Kisa’a (the narration of the cloak) that is narrated by Muslim. The mother of Believers, Aisha says: “One day, the messenger of Allah left the house at the afternoon and he was wearing a cloak. Then Hasan bin Ali came and the Prophet took him under his cloak. Next Hussain bin Ali came and the Prophet took him under his cloak. After that Fatima came and the Prophet took her under his cloak. Finally, Ali came, and the Prophet took him under his cloak. Then the Prophet said: “And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye Members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless”
In retrospect, it is cleared that the household of Prophet Muhammad are his wives, the family of Ali (Hasan, Hussain, and Fatima), the family of Aqeel, the family of Abbas, and the family of Jaffar. Those are the ones who Prophet Muhammad ordered us to dignify and respect. Hadeeth Al-Thiqlain did not testify to the infallibility of anyone of them, but raised their status. Using the verse of Purification and hadeeth Al-Kisa’a to prove Ali’s infallibility is non-sense.
Mr. Aamir Mughal, Assalam.
I think you are wasting time explaining to the people who did not wish to get educated. It is said that you can wake up a person who is asleep but not the one who pretends to be asleep. The same is the case with the members of the Shiite religion. They do not belong to the mainstream Muslim Sunni community. to respect the greats of Islam. To them there is little difference between 'halal' and 'haram'. For example, Muthah was made haram for us, but for Shiite it is halal and continue to be in practice in their community. Let them do it. They have already left Islam to form a new religion called Shiite religion. There is no point in pointing out to them quoting verses from our Qur'an, as their Qur'an is different. They believed in Tahrif of Qur'an and alleged that the Qur'an you and I read was corrupted (nouzubillah) by the Ashabe Rasool, leaving the last 10 suras, in which there were references to Ali and family. This is their belief. To them, the imaginary 12th Imam Mehdi, took possession of the original Qur'an containing 40 suras and disappeared. Nobody knows where he went even after 1200 years but they hope that he will reappear one day with that Qur'an. If that be the case, where is the need for us to prove from the present Holy Qur'an which they never recognized it.
Let them practice Muthah and any other haram practices during the Moharram. It is their problem and we the Sunni Muslims have nothing to do with it. "Lakum Deenukum, Waliyadeen"...their religion is to good to them and so is our religion good to us. There ends the argument. Some mindsets are like a concrete, all mixed up and set. It is very difficult to break the jinx of such concrete mindset. Any amount of proof through historical documents or from Ahadeese Rasool PBUH and Holy Qur'an would have any religious effect on them. To them, what Khomeni says or Burhanuddin says, or Agha Khan says or Druze leader says, is religion. To them Imam is the final authority like in Qadiyana, Ghulam Ahmed was the final authroity. Prophet PBUH, Khulfae Rashdeen and other greats of Islam are secondary and only Ali and family primary concern.
Mr. Mughal, a learned man like you, should not waste time trying to convince these pretenders. They will argue to the hilt but would never accept anything coming from us. They need assistance and guidance only from the misguided Imams like Khomeni, about whom you have extensively quoted elsewhere and exposed his hypocrisy.
I suggest to you, Mr. Mughal, not to give weight to what this wayward lady Kaneez has to say. She is a mad and irreligious woman, who indulges in slander at the drop of a hat. She branded you as Western Cowboy and slandered me for my views about her religion, in a typical baazari style, that will put even a market maid to shame. Better ignore her along with the drummer SAF Rizvi, and urdu speaking Barelvi. All these are pretenders of Islam, whose rituals are denigrating the greats of Islam like you and me. It is therefore advisable to channelise your energy in some other important aspects of religion than wasting time answering to these ill informed and wayward street guys and maid. On my part, I would continue to torment them and expose the fallacies associated with their beliefs and practices. Abhi picture bakhi hai, mere dost. Wassalam.
FOR AMIR MUGHAL AND MR BASHA Setting the controversy to rest. See your concoction [Faraz]
Mutah is clearly mentioned in Sura Nisa Ayat number 24. It was also practiced during the reign of Abu Bakr? Who gave Omar the authority to ban it? [Shaukat Bharti]
As per my humble knowledge:
The Shias quote invalid evidence to support their argument that mut’ah is permissible. For example: (a)They quote the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them (with a dowry) from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually (to give more) after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.) [al-Nisa’ 4:24] The Permission to Marry All Other WomenAllah said, (All others are lawful) meaning, you are allowed to marry women other than the prohibited types mentioned here, as `Ata' and others have stated. Allah's statement,(provided you seek them (with a dowry) from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication,) meaning, you are allowed to use your money to marry up to four wives and for (the purchase of) as many female slaves as you like, all through legal means,((desiring) chastity, not fornication.) Allah's statement,(So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due,) means, to enjoy them sexually, surrender to them their rightful dowry as compensation. In other Ayat, Allah said,(And how could you take it (back) while you have gone in unto each other),(And give to the women (whom you marry) their dowry with a good heart), and,(And it is not lawful for you (men) to take back (from your wives) any of what (dowry) you gave them)Prohibiting the Mut`ah of Marriage(So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due,) was revealed about the Mut`ah marriage. A Mut`ah marriage is a marriage that ends upon a predeterminied date. In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that the Leader of the Faithful `Ali bin Abi Talib said, "The Messenger of Allah prohibited Mut`ah marriage and eating the meat of domesticated donkeys on the day of Khaybar (battle).'' In addition, in his Sahih, Muslim recorded that Ar-Rabi` bin Sabrah bin Ma`bad Al-Juhani said that his father said that he accompanied the Messenger of Allah during the conquest of Makkah, and that the Prophet said,(O people! I allowed you the Mut`ah marriage with women before. Now, Allah has prohibited it until the Day of Resurrection. Therefore, anyone who has any women in Mut`ah, let him let them go, and do not take anything from what you have given them.) Allah's statement,(but if you agree mutually (to give more) after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you.) is similar to His other statement,(And give to the women their dowry with a good heart). The meaning of these Ayat is: If you have stipulated a dowry for her, and she later forfeits it, either totally or partially, then this bears no harm on you or her in this case. Ibn Jarir said, "Al-Hadrami said that some men would designate a certain dowry, but then fall into financial difficulties. Therefore, Allah said that there is no harm on you, O people, concerning your mutual agreement after the requirement (has been determined).'' meaning, if she gives up part of the dowry, then you men are allowed to accept that. Allah's statement,(Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.) is suitable here, after Allah mentioned these prohibitions.Even if we were to say for argument’s sake that this verse indicates that mut’ah is permitted, we would still say that it is abrogated [Mansookh Verses] by the reports in the saheeh Sunnah which prove that mut’ah is forbidden until the Day of Resurrection. (b) The reports that some of the Sahaabah regarded it as being permissible, especially Ibn ‘Abbaas. The refutation here is the fact that the Raafidis are following their own whims and desires, because they regard the companions of the Prophet (may Allaah be pleased with them) as kaafirs, then you see them quoting their actions as permissible in this instance and in others. With regard to those who said that it is permissible, they are among those who did not hear that it had been forbidden. The Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) – including ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and ‘Abd-Allaah ibn al-Zubayr – refuted Ibn ‘Abbaas’s view that mut’ah was permitted. It was narrated from ‘Ali that he heard Ibn ‘Abbaas permitting mut’ah marriage, and he said, “Wait a minute, O Ibn ‘Abbaas, for the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade it on the day of Khaybar and (he also forbade) the meat of tame donkeys.” [Muslim]Thus it becomes clear that there is no evidence in this verse to suggest that mut’ah is permissible. Allaah has made marriage one of His signs which calls us to think and ponder. He has created love and compassion between the spouses, and has made the wife a source of tranquility for the husband. He encouraged us to have children and decreed that a woman should wait out the ‘iddah period and may inherit. None of that exists in this haraam form of marriage. Mut’ah or temporary marriage refers to when a man marries a woman for a specific length of time in return for a particular amount of money. The basic principle concerning marriage is that it should be ongoing and permanent. Temporary marriage – i.e., mut’ah marriage – was permitted at the beginning of Islam, then it was abrogated and became haraam until the Day of Judgement. A woman who is married in a mut’ah marriage, according to the Raafidis – i.e. the Shi’ah, who are the ones who say that this is permissible – is neither a wife nor a concubine. But Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts, from illegal sexual acts) Except from their wives or (the slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame;But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors” [al-Mu’minoon 23:5-7] The Raafidis quote invalid evidence to support their argument that mut’ah is permissible. For example: (a)They quote the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “…so with those of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed…” [al-Nisa’ 4:24] They say: this verse indicates that mut’ah is permissible, and the word ‘their mahr (ujoorahunna – lit. their dues or their wages)’ is evidence that what is meant by the phrase ‘you have enjoyed sexual relations’ is mut’ah. The refutation of this is the fact that prior to this Allaah mentions the women whom a man is forbidden to marry, then he mentions what is permissible for him, and He commands the man to give to the woman he marries her mahr. The joy of marriage is expressed here by the word enjoyment (‘of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations’). A similar instance occurs in the Sunnah, in the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah according to which the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Woman is like a bent rib, if you try to straighten her you will break her. If you want to enjoy her, then enjoy her while she still has some crookedness in her.” [Bukhari and Muslim]The mahr is referred to here as ajr (lit. dues or wages), but this does not refer to the money which is paid to the woman with whom he engages in mut’ah in the contract of mut’ah. The mahr is referred to as ajr elsewhere in the Book of Allaah, where Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “O Prophet (Muhammad)! Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage)…” [al-Ahzaab 33:50] It was narrated from ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade mut’ah marriage and the meat of domestic donkeys at the time of Khaybar. According to another report, he forbade mut’ah marriage at the time of Khaybar and he forbade the meat of tame donkeys. [Bukhari and Muslim]It was narrated from al-Rabee’ ibn Sabrah al-Juhani that his father told him that he was with the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) who said, “O people, I used to allow you to engage in mut’ah marriages, but now Allaah has forbidden that until the Day of Resurrection, so whoever has any wives in a mut’ah marriage, he should let her go and do not take anything of the (money) you have given them.” [Muslim]Mut'ah is Arabic word which means "enjoyment." Actually, it has a deep religious connotation and draws a line of demarcation between the Shi'ahs and the rest of the Muslim Ummah. The books of Hadith and Fiqh written by Shi'ah scholars define mut'ah as "a temporary marriage contracted for a fixed period in return for a compensation." The belief in the sanctity and virtues of mut'ah is an integral part of the Shi'ah faith. In contrast, the rest of the Muslim Ummah considers mut’ah as prostitution. Shi'ahs justify their belief in mut’ah with the following verse of the Qur'an, and they claim that this verse was revealed specifically to declare the sanctity of mut’ah:"Also [prohibited to yon are] women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. [This is what] Allah has ordained upon yon. Except for these, all others are lawful, provided yon seek them [in marriage] with gifts from your property, desiring chastity, not lust. So for whatever yon have enjoyed from them, give them their compensation as an obligation. “5The Shi'ahs also claim that mut'ah was openly practiced during the Prophet's lifetime and that it was the second caliph, 'Umar, who forcefully prohibited this practice. They even go to the extent of saying: "The believer is perfect only when he has experienced mut’ah. "6Sunnis acknowledge that mut’ah was a common practice during the pro-Islamic days of ignorance (jahiliyyah) in Arabia. It is stated in at-Tirmidhi's book of hadith in the chapter on marriage that when a man would go to a strange village where he had no acquaintance, he would marry a woman for as long a period as he thought that he would stay so that she could take care of him and his property. This practice continued during the early days of Islam until the Qur'an revealed:"...And those who abstain from sexualintercourse except with their wives or those [women] whom their right hands possess. "7The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam also states that mut'ah was a common practice among Arab travelers and goes back to the fourth century A.D. "When a stranger came to a village and had no place to stay, he would marry a woman for a short time so that she would be his partner in bed and take care of his property." Caetani also concluded that mut’ah in the pagan period was religious prostitution that took place during the occasion of hajj.8Thus, mut’ah was a loose sexual practice during the pre-Islamic days of ignorance in Arabia. Being an old and established institution, it continued during the early days of Islam. The Prophet (PBUH) also allowed it temporarily on two other occasions, but only under strict, exceptional conditions during the conquest of haybar and during the conquest of Makkah - fearing that those Muslims whose faith was not yet strong might commit adultery during jihad. Shi'ahs widely quote hadiths in relation to these events to support their continued belief in mut’ah. Sunnis accept these hadiths but add that they happened before all of the revelations of the Qur'an were revealed and the religion completed. Historians and commentators on the Qur'an and hadith agree that Islam eradicated most social evils in a gradual way. It is well known that practices like gambling, drinking, and the eating of pork and blood were common during the early days but were gradually prohibited. Likewise, it seems probable that mut’ah was first forbidden to those at Khaybar in the year 7 A.H. and was then completely prohibited to all upon the conquest of Makkah in 8 A.H. Several traditions of the Prophet (PBUH) regarding mut'ah are well documented in books of. hadith, such as the following:'Ali reported: "On the day of the conquest of Khaybar the Prophet (PBUH) forbade mut'ah and [eating] the flesh of a donkey. "9Sabrah bin Ma' bad al-Jihani reported: "I went forth with the Prophet (PBUH) for the conquest of Makkah, and he (PBUH) allowed us mut'ah with women. But we had not even left the city [yet] when it was prohibited by the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)."10According to al-Bayhaqi, Ja'far as-Sadiq, the sixth Shi'ah imarn, regarded mut'ah as fornication."11 And ‘Ali is reported by ad-Darqutni to have said that mut'ah was abrogated when the Qur'anic verses about marriage, divorce, 'iddah.'12 and inheritance were revealed. "13 Additionally, there are four hadiths quoted in Saheeh al-Bokhan under the title "The Prophet Finally Forbade Mutah." Three of these relate to the incidents of mut’ah during the early period of Islam. In the fourth hadith 'Ali said to lbn 'Abbas that the Prophet (PBUH) forbade mut’ah and the meat of domesticated donkeys on the day of Khaybar. And in Saheeh Muslim a group of traditions, which go back to Sabrah bin Ma’bad, substantiate that the Prophet (PBUH) permitted mut’ah in the year of the conquest of Makkah. Sabrah went with a companion to a woman, and each offered her a cloak in exchange for mut’ah. She chose the younger person with a shabbier cloak (i.e., Sabrah) and slept with him for three nights. Thereafter, the Prophet (PBUH) forbade it forever.A Shi'ah might object to the aforementioned information because it is from Sunni sources. The fact is, however, that the Qur'an itself negates the Shi’ah concept of mut’ah. But first, the verse the Shi'ahs present in support of their belief in mut’ah, describing the classes of women with whom marriage is forbidden, should be examined. The last part of the verse reads:"Except for these, all others are lawful, provided you seek them [in marriage] with gifts from your property, desiring chastity, not lust. So for whatever you have enjoyed from them, give them their compensation as an obligation. " 14This verse clearly emphasizes the concept of chastity through regular marriage. Mut’ah, on the other hand, is an open license for sexual pleasure with as many women as one can financially afford. The women who engage in mut’ah are hired women; thus, it can be performed with all women irrespective of their age, character, conduct or religion. It requires no witnesses, nor is there any obligation on the man's part to provide food and shelter to the woman. The only precondition is that the woman agrees to the price and the length of the mut'ah and that the man pays her the compensation when he has relations with her. One can discern for himself whether such a practice leads to sheer promiscuity or promotes chastity. Two terms in the verse under discussion are used by Shi'ah commentators to allow mut’ah. The first word is "ujur" (pi.of ajr), which means "compensation"; the second is "istamta'tum" which can be translated as "what you have enjoyed." So the end of the verse could be translated: "But give them their compensation for what you have enjoyed of them [in keeping with your promise]." Shi'ah commentators claim that "ajr" refers to the price of mut'ah agreed upon by the two parties. On the contrary, Sunnis state that it refers to the mahr (bridal money given by the husband to the wife).Similarly, Shi'ahs explain the term "istamta'tum" as the physical act of consummation. However, this is contradicted by the following Qur'anic verses:"There is no blame upon you if you have divorced women whom you have not touched [i.e., the marriage has not been consummated]or specified for them a mahr. But give them [a gift of] compensation [matti’uhunna]. The wealthy has his capability and the poor has his capability – a provision [mata’an] according to what is acceptable, an obligation upon the righteous.”15“They had their enjoyment [fastamta’u] of their portion, and you have had enjoyment [fastamta'tum] of yours as those before you enjoyed [istamta'a] theirs.” 16"Their friends among men will say, 'Our Lord, we enjoyed [astamta'a] each other but have reached our term " 17"O Prophet, say to your wives, if you desire the life of this world and its glitter, then come, I will provide for you [umatti'kunna] and set you free in a handsome manner."18“O you who have believed, when you marry believing women and then divorce them before you have touched them, no period of waiting have you to count in respect to them. So give them provision [matti'uhunna] and set them free in a handsome manner.” 19"And on the Day that the disbelievers will be placed before fire, [it will be said to them], 'You used up your good things in the life of this world and enjoyed [wastamt'tum] them.'” 20All of the aforementioned Qur'anic verses contain words with the root letters of the word “mut'ah” (m-t-'a), such as “istamta'tum", which is a derivative. Yet, none of the verses gives even a hint or connotation of the meaning interpreted by the Shi'ahs. The Shi'ahs do not relate any of these verses to the their concept of mut'ah. One may thus raise the question that if a word used on six different occasions in the Qur'an does not refer to temporary marriage, then how can the same word in a single verse refer to temporary marriage? It should be noted that the Qur'an continues with this statement: "So many them with the permission of their families and give them their dowers according to what is reasonable. " 21Such a case is only possible in a regular marriage since these conditions are not necessary in mut'ah. Although the Shi'ahs present the previous verse in support of their belief in mut'ah, they completely ignore this verse, which follows immediately thereafter. The fact is that Shi'ahs are very selective in their quotation of both Qur'anic verses and hadiths. They always present only those that agree with and corroborate their specific beliefs while completely ignoring others. Thus, while quoting verse twenty-four of Surah an-Nisa' and ignoring verse twenty-five, they also "forget" the six other verses that use the same terminology.The Muslim ummah unanimously upholds that mut'ah is abrogated by all of the Qur'anic verses that speak about marriage, divorce, inheritance, dower, the guardian's permission, the 'iddah of divorced and widowed women, etc. And the following verse leaves no doubt that mut'ah is completely forbidden and unlawful:"...And those who abstain from sexual inteicomse except with their wives or those [women] whom their right hands possess.” 22Explaining this verse, lbn 'Abbas said, "All other ways of sexual contact except these two are forbidden." 23As previously mentioned, Shi'ahs claim that it was 'Umar who forbade the practice of mut'ah and that mut’ah was openly practiced during the lifetimes of the Prophet (PBUH) and Abo Bakr. In fact, Sunnis acknowledge that 'Umar again24 declared mut’ah to be illegal, but they also state that he did not make the ruling from himself. 'Umar was elected caliph just two and a half years after the Prophet's death. Present around him were the respected family inembers and noble companions of the Prophet (PBUH). Had 'Umar's declaration been contrary to the Prophet's practice, a number of these noble people would have objected to it. Yet, nowhere in Islamic history is recorded a single protest against his announcement. Furthermore, since 'Umar was later succeeded by 'Uthman and then 'All, had 'Umal's statements been contrary to the ruling of the Prophet (PBUH), at least one of them would have reestablished the sanctity of mut'ah. Again, there are no records of such abrogation. Oddly enough, ‘Ali left behind a voluminous book, Nahjil-Balaghah, wherein he presented various aspects of Islam and the Muslim state. However, not a single word in favor of mut'ah is mentioned in it. Had 'Umar been wrong, nothing would have prevented 'All from condemning it in his writings. The fact is that ever since the Prophet's death there has been a consensus among the Muslim ummah about the illegality of mut'ah. Perhaps some people might not have been aware of its prohibition and subsequently contracted it after the Prophet's death; however, when 'Umar found out about it, he made another public declaration against it and enforced the ruling as the caliph and head of the Islamic state.The Shi’ah Fiqh of Mut’ah from Their Own SourcesThe following citations from the most authentic Shi'ahbooks, regarded as the basic sources of Shi'ah beliefs and practices, elaborate on the concept of mut'ah. They need to be analyzed in order to determine if mut'ah promotes chastity, as desired by Almighty Allah or if it, instead, leads to religious prostitution and debauchery.The Proceeded for Contracting Mut’ahWhen Hisham Salim asked how one should contract mut'ah, Imam Ja'far as-Sdiq answered that one should say, "I am marrying you for this period of time for this amount of money. When the prescribed period is over, there will be annulment, and there will be no 'iddah after this." 25No Divorce or Inheritance Involved in Mut'ahThe narrator asked Imarn Baqir about the women of mut’ah. The imam said, “She is not among those four [women classified as wives] because she neither needs a divorce, nor is [a child born of her] entitled to any inheritance. She is like a hired woman!" 26No Need for Witnesses or Open Declaration"There is no need for witnesses or any open declaration in mut’ah.” 27The Price of Mut’ahThe narrator asked Imam Ja'ftr as-Sadiq, "What should be the minimum compensation for mm'ahl' The imam said,"Anything that the two parties agree upon."28The Inexpensiveness of Mut’ahThe narrator asked Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq what the minimum compensation for mut’ah could be, and he answered, "One fistful of wheat."The Least Costly Mut'ahMut’ah is a marriage that may last for a very short time. It needs no witnesses, and it has no period of 'iddah. The minimum compensation that could be paid to the woman for sexual relations is one dirham (i.e., less than 25 cents)."29The Convenience of Mut'ahAban bin Tughlaq related that he said to Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq, “Often during my travels I come across a very beautiful woman and am not sure if she has a husband or if she is an adulteress or if she is one of dubious character," The imam responded, "Why should you worry about all of these things? Your duty is to believe what she engage in mut'ah with her.” 30Mut'ah is Allowed with Women of Dubious CharacterThe narrator asked Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq, "In al-Kufah there is a woman known for her dubious character. Can I engage in mut'ah with her?" The imam said, "Yes, you may engage in mut'ah with her."31Mut'ah with Numerous WomenZararah said, "I asked the imam [i.e., Ja'far as-SSdiq] with how many different girls one can contract mut’ah. He answered, ‘with as many as one likes. These women are like hired girls.” 32Numerous Sexual Gratifications in Mut'ahOne my have sexual relations with the woman contracted for mut'ah any number of times he desires."33An Open License with All WomenMut'ah is allowed with all types of women. She may be a virgin, married, widowed or may belong to any sect, group or religion. She may be a Christian, Jew or Muslim.34 However, mut'ah with a Majusi (Magian) woman is permissible only when one is helpless."35Mut'ah with One Thousand WomenIf one desires, he may have mut'ah with one thousand women since these are like hired women."36Mut'ah with a Young GirlJameel bin ad-Dari said that he asked Imam Ja'fiar as-Sadiq if mut'ah was permissible with a virgin girl. The imam said, "There is no harm in it if the girl is not too young. However, all of the collectors of hadith agree that a nine-year-old girl is not considered too young."37The Commission of Mut’ah'Ali asked the Prophet (PBUH),38 What is the reward of the person who participates in the virtuous deed of arranging the mutual meetings of a man and woman?" The Prophet (PBUH) said, "He will receive the same reward as the two who engage in mut’ah.” Blessings of Mut’ahThe Prophet (PBUH) said,39 "The man who contracts mut'ah once will be saved from the Hellfire. One who contracts it twice will be in the company of vitreous men [in Paradise]. And the one who contracts it three times will be my companion in firdaws [the highest level of Paradise]."Mut’ah - A Blessing from AllahNo one can close the door of blessings which Allah opens for His servants, Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq said, “Mut' ah is one of the blessings of Allah."40Mut'ah - A Security for ParadiseIf a man contracts mut'ah once in his lifetime, Allah will grant him Paradise.41Mut'ah - A Savior from ShirkOne who contracts mut'ah is saved from shirk (the greatest sin of ascribing partners to Allah).42Mut'ah - A Pardon from All SinsThe father of Saleem bin 'Aqabah said that he asked Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq if there was reward in agreeing to mut’ah. The imam said, "Yes, if it is practiced for seeking the pleasure of Allah and to oppose those who deny the sanctity of mut'ah.Thus, when a person engages in mut’ah, all of his private talking to the woman is recorded as virtues. When he extends his arms towards the woman, this is also written as virtue. When he engages in the sexual act with the woman, Allah forgives all of his sins. When the two take a bath, Allah showers His blessings upon them and forgives their sins equal to the amount of hair [on their bodies]." The narrator inquired in surprise, "Equal to the amount of hair on their bodies?" The imam replied, "Yes, for every one single hair [wet by the water]. But their reward is reduced by the amount of hair that may not be wet."43Mnt'ah - A Pardon of Sins for Practicing WomenIt is narrated by Imam Baqir that the Prophet (PBUH) said, "When I was being taken to Heaven during the Mi'raj (ascension), Jibreel met me and told me, '0 Muhammad, Allah has promised to forgive all of the sins of those women who practice mut’ah.”44Denying Belief in Mut'ahOne who does not believe that we (i.e., the Shi'ah imams) will reappear and role (the world in the future) and one who does not believe in the sanctity of mut'ah is not from among us.45Punishment for Not Performing Mut'ahThe Prophet (PBUH) said, 'The men and women who die without performing mw'ah even once in their lives will appear on the Day of Judgment with their ears and nose cut and [their faces] deformed.” 46Mut’ah - A Safeguard Against the HellfireImam Ja'ftr as-Sadiq narrated from the Prophet (PBUH) that one third of the body is saved from the Hellfire if one contracts mut’ah once. Two thirds of the body is saved if one contracts mut’ah twice, and the whole body is saved from Hell if one contracts mut’ah three times. " 47Mut'ah - A Deed of Allah's Virtuous ServantsIt is narrated that once the Prophet (PBUH) was sitting among his companions and the discussion came to the topic of mut'ah. The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Do you know what is the reward of mut'ah?” The companions answered, "No," The Prophet (PBUH) then said, "Jibreel just came to me and said, '0 Muhammad, Allah sends His blessings to you and commands you to instruct your ummah to engage in the practice of mut'ah since this is the practice of [Allah's] virtuous servants.” 48Mut'ah - A Ladder to the Stages of PietyOne who engages in mut'ah once gets the status of Imam al-Husayn. One who engages in it twice becomes equal in status to Imam al-Hasan. The one who performs it three times reaches the position of Imam 'Ali. And he who practices it four times acquires the level and position [equal to that] of the Prophet(PBUH)." 49Great Reward for Women Who Donate Their CompensationFor the woman who donates back her compensation to the person who contracts mut'ah with her and for the woman who foregoes her dowry, Allah will reward her with 40,000 cities of light and 70,000 dresses of velvet and tfi3/(silk brocade)...And Allah will reward her with 70,000 more dresses from Heaven for each quarter of a dirham she donates back... And for each quarter of a diiham Allah will also assign 1,000 angels who will continue writing virtues in her account until the Day of Judgment. 50I'arat al-Furuj (Loaning of Vaginas)The Shi'ah books of fiqh carry a separate chapter entitled "I’arat al-Furuj" This could literally be translated as "The Loaning of Vaginas." Under this heading the Shi'ah imams have discussed the various conditions under which a woman can be temporarily given to another person. The books give details as to how a woman can be loaned only for the pleasure of seeing her naked body or for the pleasure of enjoying her lasses or for the pleasure of having sexual intercourse with her. Most of these descriptions are very explicit and are not even worthy of being reproduced here. The following are a few of their milder quotations:A man asked Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq if it was permissible to temporarily loan a woman to another person. The imam said, "It is not permissible." Then he hesitated for a moment and added, "There is no harm if one offers his slave girl to one of his brothers." 51Imam Abu 'Abdullah [Ja'far as-Sadiq] said, "If a person allows another person to kiss his slave girl, then such a kiss is permissible, and the man should be contented with the kisses alone; but if he offers him her vagina, then everything is permitted. "52A narrator stated, 'I said to Imam Abu 'Abdullah [Ja'far as-Sadiq], 'a few of our friends have narrated from you that if a person offers his slave girl to another person, she is permissible to him.' The imam responded, this is correct... ' I asked, 'a certain person has a fine, beautiful slave girl who is a virgin. He keeps her only for himself but says to one of his brothers to enjoy the girl except her vagina. Would sexual intercourse be lawful with her?' The imam said. No, enjoy what is permitted to yon by your brother.' I further asked. What if that man gets carried away by his desire and engages in sexual intercourse?' The imam said, this would be very improper.' I then asked, Would that man be called a fumigator?' The Imam said. The man would not be called a fomicator. Rather, he would be called dishonest. If the girl was a virgin, he should pay to the master one tenth of her price; otherwise, the fine will be one twentieth of the price of the slave girl.’” 53It must be pointed out that these sayings of the Shi'ah imams and their interpretation of the Holy Qur'an should not be taken as their personal views. The Shi'ahs claim that it was Allah and His Prophet (PBUH) who made mut’ah a blessing for the Muslim ummah. The following citations by Imam Abu 'Abdullah Ja'far s-Sadiq further explain this Shi'ah point of view:"The Qar'an was revealed to declare the sanctity of mut’ah. The Prophet(PBUH) also practiced mut'ah. " 54"Allah has prohibited'all intoxicating drinks for the Shi'ahs, but instead He has granted them mut'ah. " 55"The Qur'an was revealed to justify mut’ah, and people practiced it in accordance with the sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) "56Two basic points should be made concerning the aforementioned quotations. The sayings of the Shi’ah imams in Shi'ah doctrines are classified as 'hadith’ Technically; Shi'ahs make no distinction between the sayings of the Prophet (PBUH) and those of their imams. The quotations given in earlier pages thus occupy the status of 'hadith" in their eyes and serve as the foundation of the Shi'ah faith and practice. Furthermore, all of the citations in the preceding pages are from the most authentic and original Shi'ah sources. Tafseer al-Qummi and Tafseer Minhaj as-Sadiqeen are two of the earliest and most reliable Shi'ah commentaries on the Qur'an. Additionally, Usul al-Kafi and Furu' al-Kafi the most fundamental and original sources of Shi'ah hadith. The earlier editions of both "Kafis" had an inscription on the title page, reading: According to Imam al-Mahdi, this book is kafi [sufficient] for our Shi'ahs." The other two books quoted from are Tahdheeb al-Ahkam and Man La Yahduruhul-Faqeeh. These are classified among the four, basic source books of Shi'ah beliefs called al-Kutub al-arba'ah and are regarded as the most reliable sources of Shi'ah fiqh.Usul al-Kafi and Furu'al-Kafi are the other two books from these four.All citations given in the preceding pages thus come from the most respected Shi'ah sources of hiadth and fiqh. Consequently, the belief in the sanctity, blessings and merits of mut’ah constitutes an integral part of the Shi'ah faith. Thus, it is not possible for someone to consider himself a Shi'ah and not believe in the sanctity and merits mut'ah.Now it is left to the reader's judgment to decide if the practices of mut’ah are in harmony with the tenets of the Qur'an and the Prophet's teachings. Would such a practice establish a society based upon piety, righteousness and chastity, or rather, would it open the doors for lust, lewdness and debauchery? It is clear from the aforementioned presentation that this type of society would necessarily be opposed to a society based upon the Sunni interpretation of the Qur'an and hadith, in which mut’ah is totally forbidden and regarded as fornication, adultery and prostitution.Unfortunately, very few people realize the significant differences between Sunni and Shi'ah beliefs. Most Shi'ah writings and preaching revolve around the emotional issues of love for the Prophet's family members, the virtues of 'Ali, the martyrdom of al-Husayn, etc. A number of people are attracted to Shi'ism because of the sensitivity and emotional nature of these issues. They do not realize that Shi'ahs have grossly misrepresented the Qur'an, as well as distorted and forged hadiths. The concocted belief in the sanctity and virtues of mut'ah is a classic example of such distortion.Islamic history has shown that wherever Shi'ahs have gained political power, the sanctity of mut'afi was enforced even at the cost of human life. During the reign of Akbar (the great Mongol emperor in India), the chief justice, Qadhi Ya'qub Manikpuri, was sentenced to death for his verdict that mut’ah was not permissible in Islam.57 Many people coming from the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent would testily to the fact that a number of Sunni heads of state in undivided India embraced Shi'ism only to justify their lust for free sex, while claiming to practice mut'ah. The brutal fact is that when prostitution was legalized by the British in undivided India, a great many prostitutes were initially from the Shi'ahs, perhaps practicing it as a virtuous deed. It seems appropriate to conclude this discussion with the following questions; If an Islamic state is established based upon Shi'ah doctrines or if the Shi'ahs are allowed to practice their religious beliefs, who would organize the "religious duty" of supplying young girls with which one could engage in the practice of mut'ah? Would the state or the Shi'ah community issue religious licenses to a few virtuous women to take up the profession of mut'ah on a full-time basis or would devout Shi'ahs allow their wives, mothers, sisters and daughters to participate in the virtues of mut'ah in their free time? Moreover, how would these girls be religiously different from the prostitutes sitting in a brothel? Indeed, not one of the Shi'ah books of hadith or fiqh has yet answered these questions.As previously mentioned, none of the references cited in the previous pages come from the earliest and original Shi'ah sources. Therefore, one could perhaps say that these sources are obsolete and that the contemporary Shi'ah scholars and literature do not propagate such beliefs about mut'ah. In order to dispel such misconceptions, presented below are two citations from the work of Mullah Baqir Majlisi, whom Ayatullah Khomeini considered to be an authority on Shi'ah beliefs.It should be recalled that Majlisi (d. 1111 A.H.) is one of the most respected Shi'ah scholars. He wrote approximately sixty very comprehensive and voluminous books. In several of his writings Khomeini has referred to Majlisi's works. As a matter of fact, Khomeini recommended in his Kashfal-Asrar that Shi'ahs read Majli’s books.58 One of Majli’s books deals exclusively with the virtues of mut'ah. It has been translated into Urdu by a contemporary Shi'ah scholar named Syed Mohammad Jafar Qudsi and is entitled Ijala Hasna. The following quotations are from these recent sources:"The Prophet (PBUH) said, 'One who performs mot'ah with believing woman is like the one who visits the House of God [i.e.,theKa'bah] seventy times”59"[For the] one who excels in this virtuous deed [of mut'ah], Allah will raise his levels [of faith and piety]... [On the Day of Judgement] he will pass on the bridge over Hell with the speed of light... Seventy rows of angels will accompany him... and he will enter Paradise without giving the account [of his life]. 0'Ali, one who helps fellow Muslim brother [to contract mut'ah] will also receive these blessings and rewards. "60To conclude this discussion, aquotation from Ayatullah Khomeini is presented:It is permissible to engage in mut’ah with a fornicator woman but with a disliking in [one's] heart, especially if she is a well-known and professional fornicator. When a person contracts mut'ah with her, he should advise her to quit the profession of fornication."61In other words, a man should first have his sexual gratification with a prostitute and then should advise her to quit her profession. Could this be Islam? Isn’t it obvious which belief Sunni or Shi'ah, represents the authentic religion of Islam? Should one enjoy the "virtues" of mut'ah or accept Islam, which is free from such corrupt practices?For the benefit of a casual reader, who may have been grossly mislead by the references given in earlier sections, it must be reiterated that never did the Prophet (PBUH), 'Ali, or Ja'far as-Sadiq declare the "sanctity and blessings" of mut'ah. The fact is that none of the authentic books of hadith document any of these statements; instead, in order to justify mut'ah, Shi'ahs have wrongfully attributed these statements to such noble people and have subsequently hurt the reputations of these magnanimous personalities of Islam.The art of writing bibliographies in Eastern literature is vastly different from that in Western literature. Most Eastern bibliographies quote only the book's name, followed by the author. Citations of publishers and the publication year are not generally found. This is because, in the past, most books were published by the authors, and each book had only one publication. As such, it is very difficult to write the bibliographies of Shi'ah sources. Shi'ah publishers consistently alter the sequence and contents of their original books. Two recent publications of the same book often have two different sets of information. Strangely enough, when a Shi'ah publisher reprints a book, he often changes its contents. Thus, two editions of the same book by the same publisher may also have two different sets of information. Consequently, a researcher may find difficulty in locating the cited pages of Shi'ah books. All of the references given in the preceding pages, however, are authentic and come from reliable Shi'ah and Sunni sources. In order to help the reader to appreciate the reliability and authenticity of the references utilized in this discussion, the bibliography presented here has been annotated, and Shi'ah and Sunni sources have been duly classified.
Reference:Abu Isa, Muhammad bin Isa (d.279A.) Sunan at-Tirmidhi; Cairo: Egypt, Maktabah Mustafa al-Babi, 1949. A source book of Sunni hadith containing 2028 original collections.
Babawayh, Shaykh as-Sadiq bin Ja’far Muhammad bin 'Ali (d. 381AH.), Man Li Yahduruhul-Faqeeh, Najaf, Iraq: Matba'ah an-Najaf, 1376 A.H. A source book considered being one of the four original collections of Shi’ah Hadith.
Gibbs, H. A. R. and Kramer, J. H Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam, Leiden: J. R. Brill, 1961.
Ikram, Shaykh Muhammad, Roodh-e-Kausar, Lahore: Pakistan, Ferooz Sons, 1958. A classical Urdu work used as a university textbook.
Kashani, Fathullah (d. 988 A.H.), TafseerMinhaj as-Sadiqeen,Tehran, Iran: Dar al-Kutub al-lslamiyyah, 1396 A.H. One of the most famous and respected Shi'ah Qmr'amc conmimlaries.
Khomeini, Ayatullah, Tahreer al-Waseelah, Najaf, Iraq: Matba'ah al-Adab, 1390 A.H. A most voluminous work on Shi'ah fiqh by the recent Shi’ah imam and leader of the Iranian revolution. It consists of two volumes, consisting of 656 and 650 pages, respectively.
Kulayni, Muhammad bin Ya'qub Abu Ja'far (d. 329 A.H.), Furu'al-Kafl, Tehran, Iran: Dar al-Kutub al-lslamiyyah, 1374 A.H. The most famous and original collection of Shi'ah hadith dealing with the furu (details) of Shi'ah beliefs and practices. It contains 16.199 original collections.
Kulayni, Muhammad bin Ya'qub Abu Ja'far (d. 329 A.H.), Usul al-Kafi, Tehran, Iran: Dar al-Kutub al-lslamiyyah, 1374 A.H. The most famous and respected collection of Shi'ah hadith. The earlier editions carried an inscription on the title page that read:
"According to Imam al-Mahdi this book is kafi [sufficient] for our Shi'ahs."
Muslehuddin, M., Mut’ah, Lahore, Pakistan: Islamic Publication Ltd., 1974, A contemporary book that discusses the illegality of mut’ah according to the Qur’an and the sunnah.
Muslim, lbn al-Hajjaj (d. 261 A.H.)Saheeh Muslim, Delhi, India: Alsah Almatabi, 1349 A.H. A source book of Sunni hadith containing 12,000 original collections. It is regarded to be the most reliable work after al-Bukhari.
Qudsi, Syed M. Jafar, Ijala Hasna, Lahore, Pakistan: Imamia General Book Agency, n.d. An Urdu translation of Mullah Biqir Majlisi’s book on mut’ah. Several different editions of the book have been published in India and Pakistan.
Qummi, 'Ali bin lbraheem (d. 381 A.H.), Tafseer al-Qummi,Najaf, Iraq: Matba-ah an-Najaf, 1386 A.H. Regarded to be the oldest and most respected Shi'ah Qur'anic commentary.
Tusi, Shaykh Abu Ja'far (d. 460 A.H.), Tahtheeb al-Ahkam,Tehran, Iran: Dar al-kutub al-lslamiyyah, n.d. A source book of Shi'ah Hadith. It is considered to be one of the four original collections of Shi'ah
Umar (RA) when confronted that he took away the righteous claim of Ali had also responded that Ali (AS) was a young and not mature to handle a complex office of the Caliphate. After he took over as Caliph in 634 Umar did never enjoy coziest of relation with Ali (AS) and so the matter of giving his daughter which was not in her early teen in marriage to Umar stands fabricated. [Faraz]
Dear Faraz Sahab,As per my humble and poor knowledge
Undoubtedly the noble Sahaabi ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib wasone of the wisest and most determined of people. He iswell known for his courage and bravery. He was thefirst youth to enter Islam, then he stayed close tothe Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be uponhim) before theHijrah. When the Prophet (peace andblessings of Allaah be upon him) leftMakkah,accompanied by Abu Bakr, he stayed behind and slept inthe Prophet’s bed (thus fooling the mushrikeen whowanted to kill the Prophet (peace and blessings ofAllaah be upon him)).
Among his virtues are thosementioned in the hadeeth narrated by Sahl ibn Sa’d(may Allaah be pleased with him), who said that heheard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah beupon him) say, on the day of Khaybar, “I will give theflag to a man at whose hands Allaah will grantvictory.” They got up, wishing to see to whom the flagwould be given, each of them hoping that he would begiven the flag. Then he said, “Where is ‘Ali?” He wastold that he was suffering from eye-trouble. Heordered that ‘Ali should be called to him, then hespat in his eyes and he was healed immediately, as ifhe has never had any problem in his eyes. [Bukhaari and Muslim]
Just as ‘Ali had many virtues and goodcharacteristics, other Sahaabah also had other virtuesand good characteristics.
Among the virtues of AbuBakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) is that whichwas narrated from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri, who said: TheProphet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)delivered a khutbah and said: “Allaah has given aslave the choice between this world and what is withHim, and he chose what is with Him.” Abu Bakral-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him) began toweep, and I said to myself, “What is making this oldman cry if Allaah has given a slave the choice betweenthis world and what is with Him, and he chose what iswith Him?”The Messenger of Allaah (peace andblessings of Allaah be upon him) was that slave, andAbu Bakr was the most knowledgeable of us. He said, “OAbu Bakr, do not weep. Abu Bakr has favoured megreatly with his companionship and his wealth. If Iwere to have taken a close friend among my ummah, Iwould have chosen Abu Bakr, but the brotherhood ofIslam is sufficient. Do not leave any door to themosque without closing it off, apart from the door ofAbu Bakr.” [Bukhaari and Muslim]
Another of his virtues is that he accompanied theProphet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)during theHijrah (migration to Madeenah), as Allaahsays (interpretation of the meaning):
“If you help him (Muhammad) not (it does not matter),for Allaah did indeed help him when the disbelieversdrove him out, the second of the two; when they (Muhammad and Abu Bakr) were in the cave, he said tohis companion (Abu Bakr): ‘Be not sad (or afraid),surely, Allaah is with us.’ Then Allaah sent down HisSakeenah (calmness, tranquillity, peace) upon him, andstrengthened him with forces (angels) which you sawnot, and made the word of those who disbelieved thelowermost, while the Word of Allaah that became theuppermost; and Allaah is All-Mighty, All-Wise”[al-Tawbah 9:40]
And ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas (may Allaah be pleased with him)narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings ofAllaah be upon him) appointed him as the commander ofthe army of Dhaat al-Salaasil. He said: So I came tohim and said, “Which of the people is dearest to you?”He said, “ ‘Aa’ishah.” I said, “Who among men?” Hesaid, “Her father.” I said, “Then who?” He said, “Then‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab,” and he mentioned some othermen. [Bukhaari and Muslim]
Another of his virtues is the fact that the Prophet(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) appointedhim to lead the prayers in his stead at the end of hislife, when he fell sick with his final illness, and herebuked those who objected to this and said, “Tell AbuBakr to lead the people in prayer.” [Bukhaari and Muslim]
And it was narrated from Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaahbe pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace andblessings of Allaah be upon him) climbed Uhud with AbuBakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan, and it trembled beneaththem. He said, ‘Stand firm, O Uhud, for there is noone on you but a Prophet, a Siddeeq and two martyrs.” [Bukhaari]
With regard to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah bepleased with him), he also had many virtues and goodcharacteristics which were proven in many reports. Forexample it was narrated that Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (mayAllaah be pleased with him) said:The Messenger ofAllaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)said: “Whilst I was sleeping, I saw the people wereshown to me, and they were wearing shirts. Some shirtscame down to the chest, and some were shorter thanthat. ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab was shown to me and he waswearing a shirt that dragged along the ground.” Theysaid, “How did you interpret that, O Messenger ofAllaah?” He said, “Religious commitment.” [Bukhaari and Muslim]
It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar said: Iheard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings ofAllaah be upon him) say: “Whilst I was sleeping, a cupof milk was brought to me and I drank until I saw itswetness coming out of my nails. Then I gave the restto ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab.” They said, “How did youinterpret that, O Messenger of Allaah?” He said, “(Itis) knowledge.” [Bukhaari and Muslim]
And it was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah bepleased with her) that the Prophet (peace andblessings of Allaah be upon him) used to say, “Amongthe nations who came before you there weremuhaddathoon (men who were inspired) and if there areany such men among my ummah, then ‘Umar ibnal-Khattaab is one of them.” [Muslim]
And there is other evidence which points to thevirtues of the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased withthem). But the fact that some of them were superior toothers is something that makes sense and is proven insharee’ah. It is not the matter of whims and desires,rather it should be referred to sharee’ah, as Allaahsays (interpretation of the meaning):
“And your Lord creates whatsoever He wills andchooses, no choice have they (in any matter).Glorified is Allaah, and exalted above all that theyassociate (as partners with Him)”[al-Qasas 28:68]
So we should refer to the shar’i evidence in order tofind out the status of the Sahaabah (may Allaah bepleased with them). It was narrated that Ibn ‘Umar(may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “We used tocompare the people as to who was better at the time ofthe Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaahbe upon him). We used to regard Abu Bakr as the best,then ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab, then ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan(may Allaah be pleased with them).” [Bukhaari]. According to another report hesaid: “At the time of the Prophet (peace and blessingsof Allaah be upon him) we did not regard anyone asequal with Abu Bakr, then ‘Umar, then ‘Uthmaan, thenwe left the companions of the Prophet (peace andblessings of Allaah be upon him) and we did notdifferentiate between them.” [Bukhaari]This is testimony of all the Sahaabah, narrated by‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar, that Abu Bakr was superior toall the Sahaabah, followed by ‘Umar, then ‘Uthmaan.
Now let us turn to ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah bepleased with him) himself, and he see what he said. Itwas narrated that Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah (who wasthe son of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib) said: “I said to myfather, ‘Which of the people was the best after theMessenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah beupon him)?’ He said, ‘Abu Bakr.’ I said, ‘Then who?’He said, ‘Then ‘Umar.’ I was afraid that he would say‘Uthmaan. I said, ‘Then is it you?’ He said, ‘I amonly one of the Muslims.’” [Bukhaari]
It was narrated that ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased withhim) said: “No one is brought to me who regards me assuperior to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar but I will punish himwith a beating like a fabricator.” Shaykh al-Islam IbnTaymiyah said: It was narrated that he used to speakfrom the minbar of Kufa and say that the best of thisummah after our Prophet was Abu Bakr, then ‘Umar. Thiswas narrated from him via more than eighty isnaads,and it was narrated by al-Bukhaari and others. Hencethe earlier Shi’ah all used to agree that Abu Bakr and‘Umar were superior, as has been mentioned by morethan one. Manhaaj al-Sunnah, 1/308
It was narrated from Abu Juhayfah that ‘Ali (mayAllaah be pleased with him) ascended the minbar andpraised and glorified Allaah and sent blessings uponthe Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be uponhim), then he said: “The best of this ummah after itsProphet is Abu Bakr. The second is ‘Umar (may Allaahbe pleased with him), and after that, whoever Allaahwants to be good will be good.” [Imam Ahmad in his Musnad]
These ahaadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings ofAllaah be upon him) and these reports from theSahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) all testifyto the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, amongstwhom there is no dispute concerning it, that the bestof this ummah after its Prophet is Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq(may Allaah be pleased with him), then ‘Umar. MayAllaah be pleased with all of the Sahaabah.
With regard to the idea that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar alwaysused to ask ‘Ali questions and that they did not haveknowledge, this is not proven in any reportwhatsoever. Rather it is proven that the Prophet(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) orderedthat Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) shouldlead the people in prayer when he was sick with hisfinal illness. The Prophet (peace and blessings ofAllaah be upon him) would not have delegated this taskexcept to one who had knowledge of the rulings on theprayer. And it was proven that the Prophet (peace andblessings of Allaah be upon him) appointed Abu Bakr(may Allaah be pleased with him) to lead theHajjbefore the Farewell Pilgrimage, and the Prophet (peaceand blessings of Allaah be upon him) would not haveappointed a man to such a position unless he was themost knowledgeable of them concerning it (theHajj).
Indeed it is narrated that ‘Ali learned some ahaadeethfrom Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with them both)concerning some issues. It was narrated that Asma’bint al-Hakam al-Fazaari said: “I heard ‘Ali say: Iwas a man who, if I heard a hadeeth from the Messengerof Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him),Allaah would benefit me thereby as much as He willedto benefit me. If a man from among his companions toldme a hadeeth I would ask him to swear to it; if heswore to it then I would believe him.” He told me thatAbu Bakr said, and Abu Bakr spoke the truth, “I heardthe Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaahbe upon him) say, ‘There is no man who commits a sinthen he gets up and purifies himself and prays, andseeks the forgiveness of Allaah, but Allaah willforgive him.’ Then he recited this verse (interpretation of the meaning):
“And those who, when they have committed Faahishah(illegal sexual intercourse) or wronged themselveswith evil, remember Allaah and ask forgiveness fortheir sins; — and none can forgive sins but Allaah —and do not persist in what (wrong) they have done,while they know”[Aal ‘Imraan 3:135]
Tirmidhi narrated from ‘Ibn ‘Umar that theMessenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah beupon him) said: “Allaah has placed truth on the tongueof ‘Umar and in his heart.” [Tirmidhi]
And we have quoted above the words of the Prophet(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning‘Umar: “Among the nations who came before you therewere muhaddathoon (men who were inspired) and if thereare any such men among my ummah, then ‘Umar ibnal-Khattaab is one of them.”The point is that the belief of Ahl al-Sunnahwa’l-Jamaa’ah, on which they are unanimously agreed,is that the best of this ummah after its Prophet isAbu Bakr, then ‘Umar – may Allaah be pleased with themboth.
Ali Ibn Abi Talib [May Alla be pleased with him] on the allegations against Abu Bakr [RA] Suwaid ibn Ghafalah 1 reported that once he passed by a group of Shee'ah who were talking about Abu Bakr and 'Umar in derogatory terms. Then he visited 'Alee ibn Abee Talib and told him:"O Ameer al-Mu'mineen, I passed by a group of your companions while they were referring to Abu Bakr and 'Umar in derogatory terms. If it were not that they thought that you secretly felt as they openly said, they would not have dared to say it." 'Alee replied: "I seek refuge in Allaah! I seek refuge in Allaah from secretly feeling anything towards the two of them other than what the Prophet entrusted to me. May Allaah curse anyone who holds inside himself anything but goodness and gratitude towards both of them. (They were like) two brothers to Allaah's Messenger, his two companions, his two assistants, may Allaah's mercy be on both of them."Then 'Alee got up with tears in his eyes, holding on to my hand until he entered the Masjid. Next he ascended the mimber and sat at its top holding on to his beard and looking at it until the people gathered. After having made a brief but eloquent speech, he added: "What is wrong with those who make allegations about the two masters of Quraysh, the two fathers of the Muslims, allegations which I would never say, or want to hear others say; and for which I may be punished.By He who split the seed and created the soul, only a pious believer loves them, and only a wretched sinner hates them. Those two who accompanied Allaah's Messenger , commanding all that is good and prohibiting all that is evil; who became angry with wrongdoers and punished them based on truth and honesty alone. In their rulings, they did not overstep the opinion's of Allaah's Messenger . In fact, their opinions always coincided with those of Allaah's Messenger and the believers were pleased with both of them throughout their respective caliphates.The Messenger of Allaah appointed Abu Bakr to lead the believers in their prayers for the last nine days of the Prophet's life and he died without recalling him. The believers, subsequently, made him responsible for their affairs, and gave him their Zakaah. They willingly pledged allegiance to him and I am the first person from Banu 'Abd al-Muttalib to confirm his leadership. He disliked leadership and wished that one of us would take his place. By Allaah, he was the best of those who remained after the Prophet ; the eldest, the kindest, and truly the most compassionate and pious. He was like angel Mikaaeel in his benevolence and Prophet Ibraaheem in his willingness to forgive and his dignified bearing. He took the path of the Prophet and passed away on that path (may Allaah have mercy on him). After Abu Bakr , 'Umar took command, and I was among those pleased with his appointment. He ruled according to the policy of Allaah's Messenger and his companion, Abu Bakr , following their footsteps the way a young camel follows its mother. I swear by Allaah, he was kind and gentle with the weak, a champion of the cause of the oppressed and without any blame concerning Allaah's religion. Allaah manifested examples of the truth through him and made the truth a part of him to such a degree that we used to think that an angel was speaking with his tongue. Allaah made his conversion a strengthening factor for Islaam, and placed in the hearts of the Hypocrites a fear of him and in the hearts of the believers love for him. Allaah's Messenger compared him to Angel Jibreel in his harshness towards the enemies of Islaam. So who among you can be compared to the two of them. May Allaah's mercy be on them, and may Allaah provide us with the ability to continue in their paths. Let whoever loves me, love them, for whoever does not love them has angered me, and I will have nothing to do with him. If I hear anymore derogatory talk about the two of them, I will punish the offenders severely. After today, whoever is brought before me will get the punishment of a slanderer. Verily, the best of this nation after its Prophet is Abu Bakr and 'Umar . Then Allaah knows best who is the best. I am saying this asking Allaah's forgiveness for both you and myself."
Note:1) Suwaid ibn Ghafalah was among the major scholars of the Taabi'oon. He accepted Islaam during the lifetime of the Prophet but never met him. On the day that the Prophet was being buried in al-Madeenah, Suwaid came to the city for the first time. He later settled in Kufah and died at the age of 130 in the year 700 CE. All the major books of Ahaadeeth have ahaadeeth narrated by Him. Ibn Hajar, Taqreeb at-Tahtheeb, Vol. 1, p. 341.
Even the Shia Books contain these remarks of Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]:
Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] also confirmed that he and Muawiyah [May Allah be pleased with him] were on the same deen this is proven even from the Shia sources. Shareef Al Razi narrated in Nahjul Balagha a speech delivered by Ali where Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] says:
"In the beginning of our matter, the people of Sham and us met. It is obvious that our God is one, our Prophet is one, and our call in Islam is one. We do not see ourselves more in faith in Allah or more in believing His messenger than them, nor they do. Our matter is one, except for our disagreement in Uthman’s blood, and we are innocent from his murder." [Nahjul Balagha, vol.3, p.648]
Dear and Respected Faraz Sahab,
By the way did Hazrat Ameer Muawiya [May Allah be pleased with him] paid amount to Hazrat Abu Huraira [May Allah be pleased with him] to concoct Hadith-e-Thaqlain [Two Weighty Things - Hadith Regarding the virtues of Ahl Al Bayt]. Shias very fondly quote this Hadith all over the place.
Subject: Narrators of Hadith-e-Thaqalain
14. Abu Hurayrah, `Abd alRahman ibn Sakhr (d. 59/679).
Abu Bakr al Bazzaz,
Shams al Din al Sakhawi,
Jalal al Din al Suyuti,
Ahmad ibn al Fadl ibn Ba Kathir,
Nur alDin al Samhudi,
Mahmud ibn Muhammad al Shaykhani al Qadiri.
Ubayd Allah ibn Ziyad [whose father Ziyad ibn Abi Sufyan was the brother of Hazrat Muawiyah (May Allah be pleased with him) and Ziyad Ibn Abi Sufiyan had served as Governore of Persia under Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] [Read Tabari, Wafiyatul Ayyan by Ibn Khalqan, Al Bidayah Wal Nihaya, and Ibn Athir]
Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] is also Rightly Guided Caliph [Khalifa-e-Rashidoon] like his friends Abu Bakar, Omar and Uthman [May Alla be pleased with all of them]. No doubt there were differences between Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Muawiyah [May Allah be pleased with both of them] but these differences were not like as defined by several Historians. Even the Shia Books contain these remarks of Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]:
THE MERITS OF 'ALI B. ABI TALIB (ALLAH BE PLEASED WITH HIM) and other Companions of the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]Translation in English:“If you help him (Muhammad) not (it does not matter), for Allaah did indeed help him when the disbelievers drove him out, the second of the two; when they were in the cave, he said to his companion: ‘Be not sad (or afraid), surely, Allaah is with us.’ Then Allaah sent down His Sakeenah (calmness, tranquillity, peace) upon him, and strengthened him with forces (angels) which you saw not, and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowermost, while the Word of Allaah that became the uppermost; and Allaah is All-Mighty, All-Wise” [[AL-TAWBA (REPENTANCE, DISPENSATION) Chapter 9 Verse 40]
English Translation:And the first to lead the way, of the Muhajirin and the Ansar, and those who followed them in goodness - Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He hath made ready for them Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide for ever. That is the supreme triumph. [AL-TAWBA (REPENTANCE, DISPENSATION) Chapter 9 Verse 100]
And those who came (into the faith) after them say: Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who were before us in the faith, and place not in our hearts any rancour toward those who believe. Our Lord! Thou art Full of Pity, Merciful. [AL-HASHR (EXILE, BANISHMENT) Chapter 59 Verse 10]
English Translation:Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave the pledge to you under the tree, He knew what was in their hearts, and He sent down As-Sakinah upon them, and He rewarded them with a near victory. [Surah Al-Fath Chapter 48 Verse 18]
English Translation:And the first to lead the way, of the Muhajirin and the Ansar, and those who followed them in goodness - Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He hath made ready for them Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide for ever. That is the supreme triumph. [AL-TAWBA (REPENTANCE, DISPENSATION) Chapter 9 - Verse 100]
Translation:Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves. Thou (O Muhammad) seest them bowing and falling prostrate (in worship), seeking bounty from Allah and (His) acceptance. The mark of them is on their foreheads from the traces of prostration. Such is their likeness in the Torah and their likeness in the Gospel - like as sown corn that sendeth forth its shoot and strengtheneth it and riseth firm upon its stalk, delighting the sowers - that He may enrage the disbelievers with (the sight of) them. Allah hath promised, unto such of them as believe and do good works, forgiveness and immense reward. [AL-FATH (VICTORY, CONQUEST)Chapter 48: Verse 29]
One of the basic principles of Muslims is that they accept that which has been narrated in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and the consensus of the scholars, concerning the virtues and status (of the Sahaabah). They give precedence to those who spent and fought before the victory – the treaty of al-Hudaybiyah – over those who spent and fought afterwards, because Allaah says:
English Translation:And what aileth you that ye spend not in the way of Allah when unto Allah belongeth the inheritance of the heavens and the earth? Those who spent and fought before the victory are not upon a level (with the rest of you). Such are greater in rank than those who spent and fought afterwards. Unto each hath Allah promised good. And Allah is Informed of what ye do. [AL-HADID (THE IRON) Chapter 57 Verse 10]
They believe that Allaah said concerning the people of Badr – who numbered three hundred and umpteen – “Do whatever you like, for I have forgiven you,” because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “Maybe Allah looked at the people of Badr and said, ‘Do whatever you like, for I have forgiven you.’” (Bukhari and Muslim from the hadeeth of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib)
English Translation:Allah was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance unto thee beneath the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, and He sent down peace of reassurance on them, and hath rewarded them with a near victory; [AL-FATH (VICTORY, CONQUEST) Chapter 48 Verse 18]
The Army Commander at Karbala was Umar Bin Saad Bin Waqas [with whom Hazrat Hussein Ibn Ali - May Allah be pleased with him was negotiating - Saad Bin Waqas was a very close relative of Prophet Mohammad - PBUH - Read Tabari, Al Bidaya Wal Nihaya and Ibn Aseer, and Ibn Khalqan] and from Sa'ad Bin Waqas [May Allah be pleased with him] we have a Hadith on the Virtue of Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]
The narrations below were narrated by Hazrat Saad Bin Waqas [May Allah be pleased with him] and his son Amir. Hazrat Saad was maternal uncle of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH].
1- Amir b Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas reporte (l on the authority of his father that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) addressing 'All said: You are in the same position with relation to me as Aaron- (Harun) was in relation to Moses but with (this explicit difference) that there is no prophet after me. Sa'd said: I had an earnest desire to hear it directly from Sa'd, so I met him and narrated to him what (his son) Amir had narrated to me, whereupon he said: Yes, I did hear it. I said: Did you hear it yourself? Thereupon he placed his fingers upon his ears and said: Yes, and if not, let both my ears become deaf.
2- Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) left 'Ali b. Abi Talib behind him (as he proceeded) to the expedition of Tabuk, whereupon he ('Ali) said: Allah's Messenger, are you leaving me behind amongst women 4nd children? Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Aren't you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses but with this exception that there would be no prophet after me.
3- Sa'd reported Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying to 'Ali: Aren't you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses?
NOTE: Rafizi accept these Hadith about Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] but I fail to understand is it possible that the son of Hazrat Saad i.e. Amr Bin Saad was shown by the same Historian Tabari through 'doubtful' narrators as the Leader of the Syrian Army [under the orders of Ubaidullah Bin Ziyad bin Abusufiyan (Ziyad had served as Governor of Persia under Hazrat Ali - May Allah be pleasede with him)] sent against Hazrat Hussain [May Allah be pleased with him].
Abu Mikhnaf [The Liar Rafizi Narrator whose narrations were the major part of Tabari's History regarding Jamal, Siffin, Neherwan, and Karbala] in his separate book "Maqtal Hussein (Urdu Translation published in Hyderabad Daccan India] has also reported that before the main 'battle' of Karbala, Huzrat Hussain and Amr Bin Saad [relatives] were discussing something without anyone with them. Nobody questions Tabari and Mikhnaf as to what were they discussing before the 'alleged massacre'.?Regarding Khilafa!Ibn Katheer said in his Tafseer (3/517):
This phrase is used a great deal by scribes who are transcribing books in which the phrase “ ‘alayhi al-salaam (upon him be peace) is used in reference to ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him), to the exclusion of other Sahaabah, or the words “karrama Allaahu wajhahu (may Allaah honour his face)” are used. Although the meaning is acceptable, we should respect all the Sahaabah equally in this way, because this is a kind of veneration and honouring, and the two shaykhs [Abu Bakr and ‘Umar] and Ameer al-Mu’mineen ‘Uthmaan are more deserving of that – may Allaah be pleased with them all.Saying the words “karrama Allaahu wajhahu (may Allaah honour his face)” after mentioning the name of ‘Ali and singling him out in this manner is one aspect of the way in which the Shi’ah exaggerate about him. It was said that this is because he never looked at the ‘awrah of any person at all, or because he never prostrated to an idol. But this is not something that is unique to him, as other Sahaabah who were born in Islam also shared these characteristics.
Some of them said that the words “karrama Allaahu wajhahu (may Allaah honour his face)” are only said in reference to ‘Ali because he never prostrated to any idol.
The Raafidis, the enemies of ‘Ali and the enemies of the family of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) use this phrase, we should avoid imitating the people of bid’ah (innovation). And Allaah knows best. They have reasons for doing that which do not justify singling out ‘Ali for this phrase, such as the fact that he never looked at the ‘awrah of another person, or that he never prostrated to any idol. But those Sahaabah who were born in Islam also share these chracateristics. It should also be noted that when giving any reason it is also essential to offer evidence and proof.Undoubtedly the noble Sahaabi ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib was one of the wisest and most determined of people. He is well known for his courage and bravery. He was the first youth to enter Islam, then he stayed close to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) before the Hijrah. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) left Makkah, accompanied by Abu Bakr, he stayed behind and slept in the Prophet’s bed (thus fooling the mushrikeen who wanted to kill the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)). Among his virtues are those mentioned in the hadeeth narrated by Sahl ibn Sa’d (may Allaah be pleased with him), who said that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say, on the day of Khaybar, “I will give the flag to a man at whose hands Allaah will grant victory.” They got up, wishing to see to whom the flag would be given, each of them hoping that he would be given the flag. Then he said, “Where is ‘Ali?” He was told that he was suffering from eye-trouble. He ordered that ‘Ali should be called to him, then he spat in his eyes and he was healed immediately, as if he has never had any problem in his eyes. [Bukhari and Muslim] Just as ‘Ali had many virtues and good characteristics, other Sahaabah also had other virtues and good characteristics. Among the virtues of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) is that which was narrated from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri, who said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) delivered a khutbah and said: “Allaah has given a slave the choice between this world and what is with Him, and he chose what is with Him.” Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him) began to weep, and I said to myself, “What is making this old man cry if Allaah has given a slave the choice between this world and what is with Him, and he chose what is with Him?” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was that slave, and Abu Bakr was the most knowledgeable of us. He said, “O Abu Bakr, do not weep. Abu Bakr has favoured me greatly with his companionship and his wealth. If I were to have taken a close friend among my ummah, I would have chosen Abu Bakr, but the brotherhood of Islam is sufficient. Do not leave any door to the mosque without closing it off, apart from the door of Abu Bakr.” [Bukhari and Muslim]
Another of his virtues is that he accompanied the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) during the Hijrah (migration to Madeenah), as Allaah says
[[AL-TAWBA (REPENTANCE, DISPENSATION) Chapter 9 Verse 40]
(interpretation of the meaning): “If you help him (Muhammad) not (it does not matter), for Allaah did indeed help him when the disbelievers drove him out, the second of the two; when they (Muhammad and Abu Bakr) were in the cave, he said to his companion (Abu Bakr): ‘Be not sad (or afraid), surely, Allaah is with us.’ Then Allaah sent down His Sakeenah (calmness, tranquillity, peace) upon him, and strengthened him with forces (angels) which you saw not, and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowermost, while the Word of Allaah that became the uppermost; and Allaah is All-Mighty, All-Wise”.
And ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas (may Allaah be pleased with him) narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) appointed him as the commander of the army of Dhaat al-Salaasil. He said: So I came to him and said, “Which of the people is dearest to you?” He said, “ ‘Aa’ishah.” I said, “Who among men?” He said, “Her father.” I said, “Then who?” He said, “Then ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab,” and he mentioned some other men. [Bukhari and Muslim]
Another of his virtues is the fact that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) appointed him to lead the prayers in his stead at the end of his life, when he fell sick with his final illness, and he rebuked those who objected to this and said, “Tell Abu Bakr to lead the people in prayer.” [Bukhari and Muslim]
And it was narrated from Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) climbed Uhud with Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan, and it trembled beneath them. He said, ‘Stand firm, O Uhud, for there is no one on you but a Prophet, a Siddeeq and two martyrs.” [Bukhari]
With regard to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him), he also had many virtues and good characteristics which were proven in many reports. For example it was narrated that Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whilst I was sleeping, I saw the people were shown to me, and they were wearing shirts. Some shirts came down to the chest, and some were shorter than that. ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab was shown to me and he was wearing a shirt that dragged along the ground.” They said, “How did you interpret that, O Messenger of Allaah?” He said, “Religious commitment.” [Bukhari and Muslim]
It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whilst I was sleeping, a cup of milk was brought to me and I drank until I saw its wetness coming out of my nails. Then I gave the rest to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab.” They said, “How did you interpret that, O Messenger of Allaah?” He said, “(It is) knowledge.” [Bukhari and Muslim]
And it was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to say, “Among the nations who came before you there were muhaddathoon (men who were inspired) and if there are any such men among my ummah, then ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab is one of them.” [Muslim]
And there is other evidence which points to the virtues of the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them). But the fact that some of them were superior to others is something that makes sense and is proven in sharee’ah. It is not the matter of whims and desires, rather it should be referred to sharee’ah, as Allaah says:
[AL-QASAS (THE STORY, STORIES) Chapter 28 - Verse 68] (interpretation of the meaning):
“And your Lord creates whatsoever He wills and chooses, no choice have they (in any matter). Glorified is Allaah, and exalted above all that they associate (as partners with Him)”
So we should refer to the Quran and Hadith's evidence in order to find out the status of the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them). It was narrated that Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “We used to compare the people as to who was better at the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). We used to regard Abu Bakr as the best, then ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab, then ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan (may Allaah be pleased with them).” [Bukhari]. According to another report he said: “At the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) we did not regard anyone as equal with Abu Bakr, then ‘Umar, then ‘Uthmaan, then we left the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and we did not differentiate between them.” [Bukhari].
This is testimony of all the Sahaabah, narrated by ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar, that Abu Bakr was superior to all the Sahaabah, followed by ‘Umar, then ‘Uthmaan.
Now let us turn to ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him) himself, and he see what he said. It was narrated that Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah (who was the son of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib) said: “I said to my father, ‘Which of the people was the best after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)?’ He said, ‘Abu Bakr.’ I said, ‘Then who?’ He said, ‘Then ‘Umar.’ I was afraid that he would say ‘Uthmaan. I said, ‘Then is it you?’ He said, ‘I am only one of the Muslims.’” [Bukhari]
It was narrated that ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “No one is brought to me who regards me as superior to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar but I will punish him with a beating like a fabricator.” Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: It was narrated that he used to speak from the minbar of Kufa and say that the best of this ummah after our Prophet was Abu Bakr, then ‘Umar. This was narrated from him via more than eighty isnaads, and it was narrated by al-Bukhaari and others. Hence the earlier Shi’ah all used to agree that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were superior, as has been mentioned by more than one. Manhaaj al-Sunnah, 1/308
It was narrated from Abu Juhayfah that ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) ascended the minbar and praised and glorified Allaah and sent blessings upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), then he said: “The best of this ummah after its Prophet is Abu Bakr. The second is ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him), and after that, whoever Allaah wants to be good will be good.” [Musnad Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal]
These ahaadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and these reports from the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) all testify to the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, amongst whom there is no dispute concerning it, that the best of this ummah after its Prophet is Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him), then ‘Umar. May Allaah be pleased with all of the Sahaabah.
With regard to the idea that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar always used to ask ‘Ali questions and that they did not have knowledge, this is not proven in any report whatsoever. Rather it is proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ordered that Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) should lead the people in prayer when he was sick with his final illness. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would not have delegated this task except to one who had knowledge of the rulings on the prayer. And it was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) appointed Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) to lead the Hajj before the Farewell Pilgrimage, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would not have appointed a man to such a position unless he was the most knowledgeable of them concerning it (the Hajj). Indeed it is narrated that ‘Ali learned some ahaadeeth from Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with them both) concerning some issues. It was narrated that Asma’ bint al-Hakam al-Fazaari said: “I heard ‘Ali say: I was a man who, if I heard a hadeeth from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), Allaah would benefit me thereby as much as He willed to benefit me. If a man from among his companions told me a hadeeth I would ask him to swear to it; if he swore to it then I would believe him.” He told me that Abu Bakr said, and Abu Bakr spoke the truth, “I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say, ‘There is no man who commits a sin then he gets up and purifies himself and prays, and seeks the forgiveness of Allaah, but Allaah will forgive him.’ Then he recited this verse :
[AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 - Verse 135]
(interpretation of the meaning):
“And those who, when they have committed Faahishah (illegal sexual intercourse) or wronged themselves with evil, remember Allaah and ask forgiveness for their sins; — and none can forgive sins but Allaah — and do not persist in what (wrong) they have done, while they know” [Tirmidhi]
Tirmidhi narrated from ‘Ibn ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Allaah has placed truth on the tongue of ‘Umar and in his heart.” And we have quoted above the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning ‘Umar: “Among the nations who came before you there were muhaddathoon (men who were inspired) and if there are any such men among my ummah, then ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab is one of them.” The point is that the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, on which they are unanimously agreed, is that the best of this ummah after its Prophet is Abu Bakr, then ‘Umar – may Allaah be pleased with them both. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: “No one among the respectable Muslim scholars has said that ‘Ali was more knowledgeable or had more understanding of Islam than Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, or even than Abu Bakr alone. Those who claim that there is consensus on that are among the most ignorant of people and the greatest liars. Rather, more than one of the scholars have stated that there is scholarly consensus that Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq was more knowledgeable than ‘Ali, such as Imam Mansoor ibn ‘Abd al-Jabbaar al-Sam’aani al-Marwadhi, one of the leading scholars of the Sunnah among the companions of al-Shaafa’i, who mentioned in his book Taqweem al-Adillah ‘ala’l-Imam that there was consensus among the scholars of the Sunnah that Abu Bakr was more knowledgeable than ‘Ali. I do not know of anyone among the famous imams who disputes this point. How could it be otherwise when Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq used to issue rulings and commands and prohibitions, and pass judgements, and deliver khutbahs in the presence of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), as he used to do when he and Abu Bakr would go out to call the people to Islam, and when they migrated together, and on the day of Hunayn, and on other occasions, when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) remained silent and approved of what Abu Bakr said; no one else enjoyed such status. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) consulted with the wise and knowledgeable men among his companions, he would consult Abu Bakr and ‘Umar first, because they were the first to speak about matters of Islam in the presence of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) before the rest of his companions; for example when he consulted them about the prisoners of Badr, the first ones who spoke about that were Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and this also happened on other occasions… In Saheeh Muslim it is narrated that the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) were with him on a journey and he said: “If the people obey Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, they will be guided aright.” And it was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that he used to give his fatwas based on the Book of Allaah, and if he could not find anything then he would look at the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), then if he could not find anything he would refer to the fatwas of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, then if he did not find anything he would refer to the fatwas of ‘Uthmaan and ‘Ali – and Ibn ‘Abbaas was the habr al-ummah (scholar of the ummah) and the most knowledgeable of the Sahaabah of his time, and he would consult the words of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar and give them precedence over the words of anyone else among the Sahaabah. And it was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed for Ibn ‘Abbaas and said, “O Allaah, cause him to understand the religion of Islam and teach him the correct interpretation (of the Qur’aan).”
FOR AMIR MUGHAL AND MR BASHA Setting the controversy to rest. See your concoction
The wife of Umar ibn al-Khattab was Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr, whose mother was Asmaa bint Umays (she was a sister of Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and a stepdaughter of Ali ibn Abi Talib), on the bases of which she has been uncounted amongst the daughters of Ali ibn Abi Talib just as he has deemed Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr as his own son from the lineage of Abu Bakr- One of the son of Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr was Zayd ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab whose mention is found in history. The reality is that Sayyida Umm Kulthum (as) married on only one occasion and that was to Aun ibn Ja'far. The Umm Kulthum that married Umar ibn al-Khattab in 17 Hijri was someone else. The wife of Umar died during the reign of Mu'awiya ibn Hind, whilst Umm Kulthum - the daughter of Sayyidah Fatimah (as) was witness to the tragedy of Kerbala and died after 62 Hijri. Lady Umm Kulthum is buried in Baab Sagheer cemetery in Damascus, Syria.[FARAZ]
I will just restrict myself to Giant Shia Scholars to prove that Syeda Umme Khulthum [May Allah have mercy on her soul] was the lawfull wife of Hazrat Omar Ibn Khattab [May Allah be pleased with him] and if you deny that Scholar and his Hadith then basically you are denouncing Infallible Imam of Shia School of thought:
Usool al- Kafi that is a collection narrations and traditions attributed to the Shiite Imams, Ahlul Bayt and the Prophet. Al-Kafi is the MOST reliable Shia Book, as the reliable Shia Scholars said and declared . Its author is Thiqat al-Islam Muhamad Ibn Yaqoob AlKulayni (A VERY reliable Shia Scholar, died in 328 H). Some Shi'ites scholars believe usool Al-Kafi was presented to the legendary Imam Qaem who liked it and said: "It suffices our Shi'ites" (al-Tharee'ah ela Tasaneef al-Shi'a: Agha Buzurg al-Tahraani; vol.17, p.245)
Narration through Imam Jaffer [May Allah have mercy on his soul]:
Umme Khutlthum was the wife of Omar [Firoa Kaafi Bab Tazweej Umme Khulthum Kitabun Nikah 346/5, Kitabut Talqq 115/6, another report from Hazrat Sadiq in Kaafi 116/6, in Tehzeebul Ahkam by Abu Jafar Mohammad Bin Hasan Tusi reported the narrtions of Kaafi regarding Hazrat Omar Marriage with Syeda Khulthum, the same Tusi in his another book Kitabul Istibsar 352/3 also narrates about this marriage]
Imam Jaffer narrates from his father Mohammad Baqir that Umme Khulthum Bin Ali and her son Ziad Bin Omar Bin Khattab [from Hazrat Omar to Umme Khulthum] died in the same year [Tehzeeb al Ahkam Kiltabul Miras 262/9 by Abu Jafar Mohammad Bin Hasan Tusi]
Note: I am not quoting the language Shia Scholar Kulaini attributed towrads Hazrat Jafer Sadiq [Great Great Maternal Grandson of Hazrat Abu Bakar Siddiq] which Sadiq allegedly used for the daughet of Hazrat Ali and his son-in-law Hazrat Omar.
A DETAILED SHIA SOURCE ON THE MARRIAGE OF HAZRAT OMAR BIN KHATTAB WITH UMME-KULTHUM BIN ALI:
The fourth century after the Hijrah witnessed the compilation of Muhammad ibn Ya‘qub al-Kulayni’s monmumental work al-Kafi. This work enjoys the following distinctions:
in it the author sought to document the minor compilations of Shi‘i hadith by previous authors into one major compendium
it was compiled in Baghdad during the Minor Occultation of the Hidden Imam (as stated by Aqa Buzurg Tehrani in adh-Dhari‘ah, vol. 17 p. 245) at a time when the representative of the Imam resided in that city, which afforded the opportunity for its contents to be scrutinised an ratified by the Imam himself (as stated by Ibn Tawus in his book Kashf al-Mahajjah, p. 159) This is in itself proof of the authenticity of the narrations contained in the book (says al-Hurr al-‘Amili in Wasa’il ash-Shi‘ah, vol. 20 p. 71).
it actually bears the seal of approval of the Hidden Imam himself, and he was the one who named it "al-Kafi" (meaning "sufficient") by saying, as reported by al-Khwansari in Rawdat al-Jannat (vol. 6 p.116): "hadha kafin li-shi‘atina" (This is sufficient for our Shi‘ah).
In this work the author has documented at least FOUR traditions to the Imams which affirm the marriage of Umm Kulthum to ‘Umar. In fact, he has devoted the 23rd chapter in the Book on Marriage (Kitab an-Nikah) in Furu‘ al-Kafi to the marriage of Umm Kulthum (bab tazwij Umm Kulthum). Two of the four traditions are contained in this chapter, while the other two are found in a related chapter on where a widow whose husband has died should spend her waiting period, or ‘iddah (bab al-mutawaffa ‘anha zawjuha al-madkhul biha ayna ta‘taddu wa ma yajibu ‘alayha).
However some of these traditions impart a unique flavour to the entire episode, in that now for the first time it becomes presented as a marriage concluded by sheer force and terror, in which ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, for all his nobility and courage, could not protect his young daughter, and was compelled, on threat of physical violence to his person, to give her to the khalifah. The traditions documented in al-Kafi are as follows:
‘Ali ibn Ibrahim—from his father—from Ibn Abi ‘Umayr—from Hisham ibn Salim and Hammad—from Zurarah, who narrates that
—Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq said regarding the marriage of Umm Kulthum: "That was a ‘woman’ who was taken from us by force." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 5 p. 347, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992)
[The word ‘woman’ here is an attempt from the writer of this article to preserve the honour of the Ahl al-Bayt, since a literal translation of the original Arabic would prove too vulgar.]
Muhammad ibn Abi ‘Umayr—Hisham ibn Salim, who narrates that
—Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq said: "When [‘Umar] proposed to Amir al-Mu’minin, he said, ‘She is a child.’
Then he [‘Umar] met ‘Abbas and asked him, ‘What is wrong with me? Is there a problem with me?’ ‘Abbas asked, ‘Why?’ ‘Umar replied, ‘I asked your nephew for his daughter’s hand in marriage, and he rejected me. Oh, I swear by Allah, I will fill the well of Zamzam with earth, I will destroy every honour that you have, and I will set up two witnesses to testify that he stole, that I may cut off his right hand.’
‘Abbas thereupon came to ‘Ali and informed him of what had transpired. He asked ‘Ali to put the matter in his hands, and ‘Ali complied." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 5 p. 347-348, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992)
Humayd ibn Ziyad—Ibn Sama‘ah—Muhammad ibn Ziyad—‘Abdullah ibn Sinan—Mu‘awiyah ibn ‘Ammar—Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq:
—[Mu‘awiyah ibn ‘Ammar says:] I asked him about a woman whose husband died: Should she spend her ‘iddah in her house, or where she wants to? He replied, "Where she wants to. When ‘Umar died, ‘Ali u came and took Umm Kulthum to his house." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 6 p. 117, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992)
Muhammad ibn Yahya and others—Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa—al-Husayn ibn Sa‘id—an-Nadr ibn Suwayd—Hisham ibn Salim—Sulayman ibn Khalid, who says:
—I asked Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq about the woman whose husband has died: Where should she spend her ‘iddah? In her husband’s house, or where she wants to? He said: "Where she wants to. When ‘Umar died, ‘Ali u came, took Umm Kulthum by the hand, and took her to his house." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 6 p. 117, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992)"UNQUOTE"
I am not surprised to read the above mentioned article by Maulana Nadeem ul Wajid. I have strong exception to the attitude he had mention and especially his stout defence of Zakir Naik. Our objection to Zakir Naik is not on the individual but the stream of thought which I say as dangerous emanating from this man. I agree with the article that Mr Rizvi wrote titled Unveiling Zakir Naik wherein he says that he used his memory to mesmerize the audience many of whom include people who do not have any understanding on the Holy Quran. Most of his talks/debates are stage managed. Maulana Nadeem, if people start believing in what you say that let God alone judge Yazeed then you tend to justify all criminal act committed by this monstrous Syrian ruler at the battle of Harrah and later the desecration of the Holy Kaabah.. If Maulana Najmul hold the same opinion then what to say about Shimr bin Duljowshan, Omar ibn Saad and others who committed the most heinous crime at the battle of Kerbala. A wrong is wrong and cannot be right if done by Muslim.
It is this thought process that has to be fought. If Zakir Naik justifies terrorism and say all Muslim should be terrorist, it has to be fought. If Zakir Naik says Osama is good and that he supports him if he is terrorising US, it must be fought. Terrorism in any form cannot be justified be it Osama or his support by Zakir Naik.
Maulana, you see the hate campaigners in the Peace TV which is run by Zakir Naik. You have Ahmad Deedat whose Combat kit against the Christians stir the entire community and called for his deportation. His personal grudge against the Christian cannot be scarified at the altar of Islam. Dialogue as one article said should be between civilisation and Clash of civilisation.Then Zakir Naik has the most perfidious Israr Ahmad of Pakistan in his commentator list whose remark on Hazrat Ali angered the whole Muslim ummah. If at all Zakir Naik excel is his hate campaigns.What goodness are you talking about this characterless man? Why has he not spoken against his ideological masters the Saudi government who continues to remain the slave of Americans? The Saud family are best the slave of the capitalist US regime and wag their tail whenever Bush calls from Washington. Why Zakir Naik who supports Osama has never uttered a word against the ill gotten Saudi family.These are the issues Maulana Najmul which makes Zakir Naik the most hated figure in the Islamic world. He will not say anything against the Saudi regime but will says it is haram to believe in Prophet Muhammad (SAW) (Rasullah SAW ko manna bhi haram hai Jo shaks mar gaya ho is exactly the word he uses)It is these obnoxious sign that must be read, as Saudi regime is removing all traces of Islamic history be demolishing all aspect related to Islam and our Prophet, Zakir Naik wants to replace Islam with the Saudi regime.What else can any one call him Kafir or Munafiq
FOR AMIR MUGHAL AND MR BASHA
Setting the controversy by illiterate peol;le to rest
The wife of Umar ibn al-Khattab was Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr, whose mother was Asmaa bint Umays (she was a sister of Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and a stepdaughter of Ali ibn Abi Talib), on the bases of which she has been uncounted amongst the daughters of Ali ibn Abi Talib just as he has deemed Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr as his own son from the lineage of Abu Bakr- One of the son of Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr was Zayd ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab whose mention is found in history.
The reality is that Sayyida Umm Kulthum (as) married on only one occasion and that was to Aun ibn Ja'far. The Umm Kulthum that married Umar ibn al-Khattab in 17 Hijri was someone else. The wife of Umar died during the reign of Mu'awiya ibn Hind, whilst Umm Kulthum - the daughter of Sayyidah Fatimah (as) was witness to the tragedy of Kerbala and died after 62 Hijri.
Lady Umm Kulthum is buried in Baab Sagheer cemetery in Damascus, Syria.
I am happy to read your comment and respect your feelings. You are right as we must refrain from making personalised comments. I have always loved reading your comment except at times when you rake controversial views. Let us talks about crucial issues that confront our community and hope more civility comes in the dialogue. Truth shall prevail over falshood and like yazeed (LA) perished Zakir Naik and his likes would meet the same fate. We must also get into the root of the radical ideology which is preached and professed by only group of Islam and funded by one country. PEACE WITH YOU I am sure you wioll lead this debate from the front
Dr. Mansoor Ilahi and Haider,
If you do not like Dr. Zakir Naik and his work, please do not read his books. I never cared to know what he wrote and where his books are available. I have my own choice of authors and the books. Are we reading the book written by another blasphemous writer, Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses"? Salman Rushdie, we all know, enjoy his life in wining, dining and womanising. He had maaried a Chennai based Brahmin dancer and model for some time and divorcd her. May be she was his fourth wife and he is still found in company of women evene today. He has grown up children but then the end womanising no where in sight. Such people whose birth is faulty and doubtful would indulge in such blasphemous writings about Islam. Sulman Rushie is one such witer, a perverted intelligence. The way we ignored him, we must also ignore this man called Dr. Zakir Naik, who is trying to radicalise Islam. He thinks he is doing a great service to Islam, but as a matter fact, he is dividing the society. It is not the change of heart, but I always held these views right from the beginning. I refused to attend his lectures, whenever held in Chennai, for I did not like his way of dealing with Islamic issues and his rhetorics was only to please his non-Muslim audience more than Muslim audience. There were so many in history of the world who have memorized Quran and othe books of other religions. One can hear such innumerable quotations from Bible by Christian orators. What is important here what purpose it serves to help the cause of Islam. But then while I oppose him, I held him in high esteem for his knowledge of Islam and nothing more than that except to defend his right to say what he likes. It is for us to either accept such orators or reject them outrightly. Let's not belittle the achievement of our own scholars. This is the point I was making but not understood well by the readers on this web page, but kept on calling me the supporter of Dr. Zakir Naik, which I am not.
I saw some civility and order in the mature and reasoning comments from Haider. As I always held the view, we must respect someone's view points while disagreeing with him but not stoope to low down level, simply because his or her views are not palatable. This is what is expected from the co-religionists. Let us discuss and debate different aspects of religion but with decency as this site is being visited by several non-Muslims also. We should not become a laughing stock and redicule of others. This is my concern. Wassalam.
The man who says in Urdu (Muhammad SAW) ko manna bhi haram hai) and as all Muslims thinks that our Holy prophet (SAW) is the pivot on which Islam moves is not worth to listen or read his book. Sorry Zakir Naik is not worth a reading and please don’t advise people to read his book Islam Aik Insan Aik. One can understand what will be quality of his book. Please dont read or listen to what Naik says,
There is something seriously wrong with you just the same way as things are with Zakir Naik. He justifies terrorism and Osama and you strongly support him but attack terrorism. Your post is devoid of any intelligence and believe me totally senseless. What I wrote was in reaction to your assumption in the earlier posts where you began well condemning terrorism and yes also Jinnah who you supported . Your post is already hanging in the article. I welcomed your change of heart as all good old man do. While in that so called good article you messed up raking irrelevant issues. I AM OPPOSED TO ZAKIR NAIK AND HIS IDEOLOGICAL MASTERS for their attempt to rewrite history. On one hand they demolish everything and every traces of Islamic history just like Yazeed and his father Muwaiya attempt to change the history and on the other Zakir Naik say it is haram to follow Prophet. Video clip available. Basha I have love for you, I know you write well and looks like an educated man. please come put of the shell and see the true islam which has no place for Yazeed and his likes.
To know in depth Dr. Zakir Naik please read book “Islam Aik –Insan Aik” in Urdu language. This book consists of 110 Questions & Answers of Dr. Naik on various issues.
You may get it by post
I am not a confused man but it is rather you and the Shiites who fail to see reason and view Islamic history in proper perspective. I have already condemned Pakistani terrorists in many of my articles posted here and elsewhere. Pakistan has started the crackdown in right earnest and it came for appreciation both from India and US. But much has to be done to totally dismantle the terror structure still operating from their soil. Mere arrest of its leaders like Azhar and Sayeed would not satisfy the world. But they all must be brought to book. This is what I have been suggesting besides taking a number of steps to strengthen our own security system.
The whole of India and more particularly Muslims joined them in condemning the terrorism and the carnage that was carried out in Mumbai on 26/11 in which more than 200 people were killed 40 of them being Muslims and more than 300 were injured. The refusal of the Muslims for the burial of the dead terrorists on the ground that such people did not belong to Muslim religion, was a demonstration of Muslims commitment to the polity and secular credentials of the country. The whole nation joined in expressing its solidarity with the families who lost their kith and kin. But why the same people have not shown similar sentiments when thousands numbering around 5000 of Muslim families including children and women were killed in Gujarat in a gruesome state sponsored pogrom that displaced thousands of Muslim families. Even after six years, the killers are still roaming in and around Gujarat headed by Modi, who was denied visa by US. He is still in the black list of the US adminstration. When the whole world cried and condemned, it would have been much appreciated, if the whole of India would have joined in condemning the act of carnage in Gujarat also in the same way, the sentiments were shown following the terrorists attack in Mumbai. We all know the pain of terror attack, among the dead in a similar terrorists attack at Malegoan and Modsa blasts were Muslims also and that is why we the Muslims of India condemned in strongest terms and refused to bury the bodies of the killed terrorists on the ground they were not Muslims. Such was the attitude of Muslims when compared to others.
As for your knowledge of Islamic History is concerned, instead of calling me illeterate, better check your knowledge. If you cannot, please read my following article, posted in the same web site but perhaps did not attaract your attention. After reading this, if you have any remorse for cursing or slandering the greats of Islam, repent immediately and seek Allah's forgiveness, for He forgives genuine seekers of forgiveness.
THE DOGMATIC BELIEFS OF A STRANGE RELIGION.A.M.Jamsheed Basha, Chennai, 12th December 2008.Islam was founded by Prophet Mohammed PBUH, the chosen one, upon the direction from the Alimighty Allah, and it is a religion of peace, love and compassion. Lies, suspicion, back biting, slander and gossip are totally alien to Islam. In fact they are considered amongst the most destructive of major sins, likely to destroy the religion and the society as well. The followers of this great religion are called Muslims and those practice Islam according to authentic traditional Islamic sources, are called Sunni Muslim. The Sunni Muslims (Ahl-us-Sunnah) are those who uphold the Qur'aan as the final book of Allah which is unalterable and would remain uncorrupted giving no roon for Tahrif and the Hadeeth (Sunnah) as available from the recorded and most authenticated books like Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and Mishqat etc. It is through these Sunni Muslims that Allah has protected Islam. They are those who engaged and fought for the glory and dignity of Islam and established the glorious history of Islam. One is either Muslim or not. Therefore Shiite is indisputably, a separate religion, as per their own claim.
Islam demands and expects that our relationship with mankind irrepective of caste or creed should be one of sincerity and responsibility. It should be one where we have respect for the honour, reputation and privacy of others. Islam teaches us that we are not only held accountable for our own attitudes and actions but also for anything else over which we have control or influence, in our society or the world around us.For Muslims, Islam is their nation and the Holy Qur'an is their constitution. This Ummah (nation) is the best among all nations. The best of this nation is the first generation (people at the time of the prophet (pbuh)). Although those people are the most perfect people by their righteous follow to the Sunnah of the prophet (pbuh), Shia claimed that those people are kâfirs (disbelievers in Islam) and were not following the truth even though they knew it! Of the early Muslims, Bibi Khatija RA, the wife of Prophet Mohammed PBUH was the first to accept Islam and support him. Among the elders, it was Abu Bakr RA and among the youngest, it was Ali RA. What followed later was history as the list of believers swelled in a short period.It may be remembered that Abu-Bakr and Umar RAA were the closest companions of Muhammad (pbuh) as all references indicates and Allah confirmed in the Qur'an. His good treat to them is very well known to Shia. They were both fathers-in-law of the Prophet and his right hand both in life and death. Today, the grave of Prophet Mohammed PBUH, in the company of his two trusted companions lying side by side is the testimony of their importance prophet attached to them.
Shiites curses Abu-Bakr and his daughter Aisha RA, the beloved wife of the prophet (pbuh), but they regard his son Abdullah Ibne Bakr, since he fought with Ali. So, they hate the best one in this Ummah after the Prophet and they regard his son who does not have any contribution in raising Islam. Incidentally, he was one of the rebels that attacked and killed Zinnorein Hazrat Usman RA, the third Caliph of Islam. Shiites also claim that they love the family of the Prophet (pbuh), but they curse his wives who are the most important part of his family! What an irony and hypocrisy. For, indeed, it is the Sahâbah (my Allah be pleased with them) who are the ones through whom Islam has been passed down to us. So those people who curse and insult them, in reality, are destroying Islam and they have no right to remain within the fold of Islam. All the four Imams (guides of Islam) condemned such attitude in no uncertain terms as reprehensible and un-Islamic.
If they had any sense, they would know and appreciate that they are in reality cursing the Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself. Abu Bakr and Umar were both fathers-in-law of the Prophet. Also, during the lifetime of the Prophet both were his right hand men; and after his demise, it is they who had great worry feeling for the welfare of Islam. Who else has ever been honoured with such a position and honour as was granted to these two? Again, it is these two who had always participated and had been with the Prophet during all the battles. These facts are enough to refute the Shiite beliefs. As for Uthmaan RA, he was the husband to two daughters of the Prophet. It is clear that Allah does not choose for His Messenger a son-in-law and companions except those who are the best. If the Shiites are true to their claims, then could they explain why The Messenger (pbuh) did not forewarn the Ummah and clarify the alleged enmity of the Rightly Guided Khalifas (i.e. Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan) towards Islam?
History of Islam is replete with instances where these Shiites did not spare even their own first Imam Ali of curse. Their insults and curses are not limited just to the Rightly Guided Khalifas but are also directed towards Ali. Because Ali himself, in Masjid Rabia, gave the oath of allegiance (bai'ah) to Abu Bakr RA and also gave his daughter, Umm Kulthum in marriage to Umar RA. He also willingly gave the oath of allegiance (bai'ah) to Uthmaan RA. Not resting with this, he was actually the right hand man and a well wisher of the Rightly Guided Khalifas. So could Ali had chosen a kafir as a son-in-law for himself? And could Ali had given the oath of allegiance (bai'ah), as he did, to a kafir? Besides, Ali himself named his other three sons after the Great Caliphs one by one, Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman. If he had any grudge against them, as made out by the shiites, he would not have named these children after their names. The Shittes conveniently forget to mention the names of these three children of Ali RA.Another but biggest irony was with regard to their attitude towards Hazrat Mawiyah RA. They did not understand that by cursing Mu'aawiya RA, these Shiites are actually cursing Hasan (May Allah be pleased with him). Because Hasan withdrew from, and gave up the Khilaafah to Mu'aawiya upon the direction of his father Ali RA, who advised him while he was dying as there was none to lead the Ummah better than Mawiyah and purely for the pleasure of Allah. So could the grandson of The Messenger (pbuh) actually had withdrawn from and left the Khilaafah in the hands of a Kafir for him to rule over the people of his faith?
If the Shiite say that Ali and Hasan were forced into doing this, then this is proof enough that these Shiites have no sense whatsoever. The accusations levelled against these two honoured companions of the Prophet (pbuh) are the worst insults ever imaginable and are beyond belief. They should remember that Ali faced the unbelievers in Mecca face to face although Muslims were less than 40 men. So, why does he hide his Islam when Muslims became the majority and why he does not face the hypocrites?Furthermore, how do these Shiite curse and insult Umm ul Mu'mineen (mother of the Believers) A'isha RA when Allah Himself has mentioned her in the Qur'an as the mother of the believers.
Imam Malik stated that anyone who slanders her should be killed right away because Allah forbids us (in the Qur'an) from it forever and because anyone who curses the Prophet (p) or any member of this family should be killed too. This fatwa was also issued by his teacher Imam Ja'far al-Saadiq.
The life of Aishah RA is a proof to humanity that a woman can be far more learned than men and that she can be the teacher of scholars and experts. Her life is also proof that a woman can exert influence over men and women and provide them with inspiration and leadership. The Prophet's affection for Aishah remained to the last. During his final illness, it was to Aishah's apartment that he went at the suggestion of his wives. He breathed his last on her lap. It was to the great credit of Bibi Aishah that the dying moments of the Prophet PBUH were known to the world. In the floor of Aishah's room near the couch where he was lying, a grave was dug in which was buried the Seal of the Prophets amid much bewilderment and great sorrow.
Aishah lived on almost fifty years after the passing away of the Prophet. She had been his wife for a decade. Much of this time was spent in learning and acquiring knowledge of the two most important sources of God's guidance, the Quran and the Sunnah of His Prophet. Aishah was one of three wives (the other two being Hafsah and Umm Salamah) who memorized the Revelation. Like Hafsah, she had her own script of the Quran written after the Prophet had died.
So far as the Ahadith or sayings of the Prophet are concerned, Aishah is one of four persons (the others being Abu Hurayrah, Abdullah ibn Umar, and Anas ibn Malik) who transmitted more than two thousand sayings. Many of these pertain to some of the most intimate aspects of personal behavior which only someone in Aishah's position could have learnt. What is most important is that her knowledge of hadith was passed on in written form by at least three persons including her nephew Urwah who became one of the greatest scholars among the generation after the Companions. Many of the learned companions of the Prophet and their followers benefitted from Aishah's knowledge. Abu Musa al-Ashari once said: "If we companions of the Messenger of God had any difficulty on a matter, we asked Aishah about it."
After Khadijah al-Kubra (the Great) and Fatimah az-Zahra (the Resplendent), Aishah as-Siddiqah (the one who affirms the Truth) is regarded as the best woman in Islam. Because of the strength of her personality, she was a leader in every field in knowledge, in society, in politics and in war. She often regretted her involvement in war but lived long enough to regain position as the most respected woman of her time. She died in the year 58 AH in the month of Ramadan and as she instructed, was buried in the Jannat al-Baqi in the City of Light, beside other companions of the Prophet. As a matter of fact she reserved a place for her next to the grave of Prophet Mohammed PBUH, but she gave way to Hazrat Umar Ra on his insistance. Umar is now living on the other side of the Prophet PBUH, ofcourse, along with another Companion, Hazrat Abu Bakr. How regrettable and reprehensible it is to see that this Great Mother of Believers is being cursed and slandered by these Shiites. What kind of faith they are following where curse and slander of the greats of Islam, is part of their rituals and prayers? This is totally disgusting for a man of honour.
The members of Ahl-ul-Bayt (the family of the Holy Prophet) belong to Sunni Muslims. Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq for instance, is the teacher of Imam Malik and Imam Abu-Hanifa. None of Ahlu-Bayt subscribed to the false beliefs of these Shiites, who never existed then. There are numerous solid arguments based on logic and Shari'ah refuting their religion and false beliefs. These arguments are so many that it would be difficult to recount them all. Therefore they should repent from their false and unfounded beliefs and enter into the fold of Islam.
Indeed, Christians and Shiites are very similar in their way of thinking. For instance, Christians take their priests as gods other than Allah. Shia also take their Imams as gods other than Allah. Christians take Jesus as a son of Allah then they describe his death on the cross as he was a weak man who can’t do anything to support his faith. They made him a target to every kind of accusations, mocks, and humiliations. Shiite on the other hand have a different thinking. They give Ali a higher position than the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and claim that Islam wouldn’t have spread and unbelieving wouldn’t have been defeated without Ali. However, they claim that he too was weak to defend Islam after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and he had to accept all kinds of accusations and humiliations against himself and against Ahlu-Bayt with no attempt to stop that.
According to them the current version of the Qur'an has been corrupted, distorted and tampered with by the Companions of the Messenger of Allah ( Nawoozubillah) and that the original Qur'an has been under the custody of the 12th Imam Mehdi, who has disappeared with it in the high mountains to reappear again. When? Shiite alone know or their Imams in Iran.
Every and all Shi'ites believe in the concept of 2nd Return, be it the Messenger [saw], their 12 Imams, the enemies of their Imams (all AhluSunnah) for the purpose of revenge from those who "wronged" them, but most specifically: Abu Bakr, Omar, Yazeed, and Banu Ummayyah in general, in order to put them to sword. This belief stand out against the basic tenets of Islam and run contrary to the teachings of Prophet Mohammed PBUH. This alone makes them a separate entity other than Islam.
The Shi'a indiscriminately are grave worshipers and have gone to extremes in exaggerating the virtues of worshiping their Imams' graves. For the Shi'ites, al-Imamah is no different from Prophethood since both, Prophets and Imams receive revelation (Wahi) from Allah [swt]. In fact, the great majority of the Shi'ites Rabbis consider their twelve Imams far higher and above in status than any Prophet or Arch Angel of Allah [swt].It is natural then, that they look at those who do not recocognize any of their Imams, to be an absolute Kafir and thus fabricated countless Ahadith to support their claim.
Here I live it to the readers to conclude from their own thinking and reasoning power as what kind of religion is Shiite religion. The rest is in the next. “ Abhi Khissa bakhi hai mere dost”. Wassalam.
A.M.Jamsheed Basha, Chennai-based writer.
For Mr Amir Mughal
Why did you not join the Tax Department? Because you would have excelled in that field and not the one you do. I am saying as best you tax people mind, you tax people patience with your articles and you tax the intelligence with your mediocre answers. How I wished to see you as a taxman.
I’m surprised with your reply. The post was in reply to your foolish and irrelevant post that second caliph Umar (RA) was married to Umme Kulthum, daughter of Ali (AS). It was intended to explode your figment of imagination and to prove what malicious campaign you are indulging. If you are so keen to establish relation in the family of Ali and earn some credibility ( it is the only House Ahulul bayt which can give creditable existence), then you must transform yourself.
Regarding Hazrat Abu Bakr (RA) there is no doubt on his stature and his contribution. More than anything, I liked what Ayatollah Khomeini said about Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar (RA) that the two caliphs did not build mansion or palaces for themselves, they did not indulge in nepotism or corruption and did not nominate any of their family members to the post of caliph or promoted any clans which happened in the tenure of Hazrat Othman for his preference of Ummayyads. This gave chance to Muawiya to hijack Islam and convert it into his fiefdom because he himself was never enamored by Islam and took all steps to annihilate the religion.
Today we have the ill gotten Saudi family who too are indulging in the same game plan to destroy slam by first removing all places associated with Islam history and then maligning Islam by its radical Wahabi ideology
Mr Jamsheed Basha from Chennai,
You are an amazing illiterate who is confused and want to make the world confused. Writing on sensitive issues like Mumbai terrorrism, Basha you jump upon making stupid remarks on shias. There is no relation in the post you wrote nor did it make any sense. If Shias dispute caliphate they too have some genuine grounds. Ghadir message and many of the Prophet (SAW) action indicated he wanted Ali (RA) to make his successor. That was not adhered and history remains that Hazrat Abu Bakr became the first Caliph, although the institution was not finalised. Why Abu Bakr RA nominate Umar (RA) and why Umar set up a shoora to elect Usman (RA). This was because they knew they had taken a wrong step and deprived Ali (RA) his legitimate inheritance.
There was no need to rake up this issue Basha as your voice on Mumbai terror was making some sense. Ultimately you also left away your love and esteem of Jinnah after the Mumbai carnage by attacking Pakistan in clear terms. Both you and I agree that Pakistan is a failed state and a den of terror which breeds people and hardliner like Saeed, Maulana Azhar and theoretician like Amir Mughal who incidentally speak the same language as you do of Zakir Naik and his Wahabi masterAllah hafiz and May you see the light
SAH Rizvi has rightly summed up the mood of the nation in the wake of the dastardly terror attack in Mumbai vis-a-vis the attitude of the Muslims. It is to the great credit of the Indian, more particularly the Muslim community without exception, rallied behind all sections of the society in expressing its solidarity in the hour of crisis. They overwhelmingly condemned the act of terrorism and what better evidence one is needed than their refusal to allow the burial of the dead bodies of the militants, for according to them were not Muslims. The act they carried out against humanity certainly does not qualify them to be called Muslims as the religion of Islam to which they claimed to belong does not teaches terrorism nor permits spilling of the blood of innocent lives. Those killed on the fateful day were Muslims too for the bullets of the terrorists did not distinguish the religion of the victim before piecing the body. As per the official count of casualties, 40 were Muslims out of 195 dead and scores of them were wounded.
I have been maintaining in all my articles posted here and elsewhere that these terrorists belong to no religion and that they were the paid mercenaries acted on behalf of their bosses across the border to kill people and create an atmosphere of hate among different sections of the society in India. Though they succeeded in killing a few innocent people but they did not succeed in their nefarious desgin to destabilise the country and raise communal tensions. The people of this country cutting across religious affiliations displayed immense maturity in maintaining peace and unity at a time, when the whole nation was shocked at the unexpected terrorists attack at Mumbai. The spirit of the people was laudably high and it was full of maturity that a nation can be proud of. It was also a wake up call for Muslims in particular to see for themselves what sufferings such activities would bring to the people who nurture, profess, train and produce extremists elements. There is no room for extremism in community. This was the positive aspect of the terror attack that took Muslims closer to all other communities. This is evident from the fact that all over India, Muslim celebrated Idd in a very subdued manner in a demonstration of solidarity with all those breaved family who lost their kith and kin in the mayhem. Not only that it was to the great credit of the Muslim that they refused to observe the anniversary of demolition of Babri Masjid on 6th December as a Black Day. I wish it becomes a reality in future.
The political leadership of the country, for the first time, showed immense political sagacity and statesmanship in the aftermath of the terror attack. All joined together in a rare display of political unity to condemn terrorism and maintain peace and unity at any cost without playing the usual blame game. This has helped the nation to recover fast from the tragedy to take stock of the situation and measures that are essential to protect the security and integrity of the country.
UPA Govt came in for immense praise for the deft handling of the crisis and maintaing peace. It has made some changes in the security set up of the country. With P.Chidambaram at the helm as Home Minister, he was quick to suggest a federal agency to tackle terror, modernisation of the police force, equip them with modern equipment and vehicles and all other necessities that are required to meet the challenges ahead to protect the lives and properties of the common man. India also held its nerve and never allowed itself to be drawn towards a war like situation. External Affairs Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, without mincing words said in Parliament today that war with Pakistan is not the solution to tackle terror.
While the general media including TV channels and others were busy in conducting media trial, Urdu press was busy with conspiracy theory trying to rope in elements that was unwarranted at this juncture. It is time for them to behave responsibily especially when the Muslim community's interest is at stake following the terrorist attack and the attackers incidentally bearing Muslim names. Even if we denounce them and refuse to accept them as Muslims for they were clean shaven, misguided youth who indulged in wining, dining and womanising before ventured on the deadly mission to cause havoc in Mumbai. But they were Muslims but luckily came from across the borders. Even if Pakistan disown them as non-state actors, as External Affairs Minister said in Parliament, they did not come from heaven or from other planets. These were the people who were born and brought up besides trained on the soil of Pakistan. These facts coupled with unimpeachable evidences, the needle of suspicion points towards Pakistan and it is Pakistan's duty to come out clean in the matter. Not only that, Pakistan should take all such steps to dismantle all the apparatus of terror, arrest the leaders, try them in fast track courts and punish them. They also have to hand over all the leaders of terrorists groups who were responsible for all earlier attacks in India. The 40 odd terrorists and criminal taken refuge in Pakistan be handed over to India for trial and prosecution. Pakistan need to do more to satisfy India before our patience runs out.
While we the intellectuals were busy finding a solution to the coaxed problem of terrorism, small time people like SAF Rizvi, Aslam Khan Barelvi, Kaneez Fathima, Hassan Iqbal and several others indulged in personal bashing out of their own ill cultured behaviour. They have directed their energy in destructive activities like belittling others without understanding the beauty of the contents. I knew pretty well that the contents of my articles and that of my journalistic colleagues are of highest standard which is beyond the understanding of ordinary souls like SAF Rizvi, Barelvi, Fathima and others. To them, the mythology and age old practices of breast beating are more important than solving the problems faced by the nation today. To them, glorification of Ali and his family is more important than the religion of Islam itself. They still harbour ill will against the greatest Khulfae Rashdeen and Ummul Momineen and never waste an occasion to slander them as slander or curse is part of their daily prayer. They still claim to be Muslims, though none of their practices have a semblance of the great religion of Islam. To them Ali is Moula and their first Imam while their 12th Imam, an imaginary figure, is still in the hiding communicating with his represeentatives in Iran. To them Imamat is more important than prophethood. To them, Ali RA had succeeded the prophet Mohammed PBUH but gave him a different title called First Imam, a title never conferred on him during his life time nor was he aware of it neither of his children Hassan and Hussein ever addressed him with that title. To them he and his family were infallible, an attribute reserved only for Prophets. Shiite is therefore a confused religion and so are its followers. Then what is new in their response to my articles born out of hatred and jealousy besides their criticism seemed unnecessrily vitriolic. No man of honour would ever tolerate any more of their puckish behaviour. Their feckless attemept to project the falsehood showed their lack of interest in the reality and facts of history. In the end that cannot be cured has to be endured.
I have enough ammunition left to tackle these slanderous elements of the society. I promise I would continue to torment them in the days to come. Await my next post. "Abhi khissa bakhi hai, mere dost". Wassalam.
Reply to your pre ponderance on your King Abdullah.
Please see how these Saudis are wasting Muslim wealth and then they speak of Islam.
Dont show us the picture of poor in India there are many such in your Saudi Arabia. Do you think it is a welfare state. One more Khomeini and this time from the sunni communoty would emerge to dismantle the ill gotten saudi royal family. Mughal how do you support the institution of monarchy with the knowedlge you have. You can do because anyone who can support yazeed can do anything
The Saudi royal family's wealth is so large that no reliable estimate is available. However, when King Abdullah's predecessor, his half-brother King Fahd, died two years ago, his fortune was said to be worth £30billion. An essential part of family wealth is the Kingdom in its entirety, which the Al Saud view as a totally owned family asset and these include:
- co-mingling of personal & state funds from lucrative government positions- huge land allocations- direct allotments of crude oil to sell in the open market- segmental controls in the economy- special preferences for the award of major contracts- outright cash handouts
The sharing of family wealth has been a critical component in maintaining the semblance of a united front within the royal family. An essential part of family wealth is the Kingdom in its entirety, which the Al Saud view as a totally owned family asset. Whether through the co-mingling of personal & state funds from lucrative government positions, huge land allocations, direct allotments of crude oil to sell in the open market, segmental controls in the economy, special preferences for the award of major contracts, outright cash handouts, and astronomical monthly allowances, - all billed to the national exchequer - all told, the financial impact may have exceeded 40% of the Kingdom's annual budget during the reign of King Fahd. Over decades of oil revenue-generated expansion, estimates of royal receipts have varied, ranging as low as an unlikely $50 billion and as high as over $1 trillion. Be it what it may, wealth-sharing of this sort has allowed many of the senior princes & princesses to accumulate largely unauditable wealth and, in turn, pay out, in cash or kind, to lesser royals and commoners, and thereby gaining political influence through their own largesse.
During periods of high oil prices as were the late 70s, early 80s, and immediately after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, national income has outpaced the developmental needs & social obligations of the Saudi government and the effects of royal skimming were diminished. From the mid 80s through the 90s, when international crude oil prices dropped to the teens and below, the subsequent shortfall in income, and the availability of surprisingly limited financial reserves (when compared to such countries as Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates which continued to grow during crude price droughts because of dividends generated from years of prudent investments) may have contributed to growing national discontent with the Al Saud .Rochester, MN. is the home of the Mayo clinic, a world-class medical facility. It is also home to an airport with runways long enough to allow a 747 to land, which is necessary when the King of Saudi Arabia arrived for a check-up, bringing his entourage.
This excludes travel cost and other expenditure.
You and your concocted version.
You sense of history and your quotes are always dubious and not simple as you are the one who hates to see the light and have the courage to accept what reality is. You are not only refusing to accept history but even trying to distort as your masters are doing in Saudi Arabia by removing any prove with which Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was associated. They are physically removing all traces of history to replace by their own and you are among those who are trying to rewrite history.
How do you justify Muawiya rebellion against Ali whom we claim as Righteous Caliph? In terms of service to Islam and proximity to Prophet who was close Muawiya or Ali. Isn’t it a historical fact that Muawaiya was a usurper who with his vices could gain the control of Syria, Was’ not it Muawiya who assassinated known companion of Prophet like Hujr bin Adi.
Muawiya was a schemer, oppressor and use his hard stand to govern like Saddam Husain. There were many like you who support him.
He obliterated Islam by appointing his debauch and cursed son Yazeed as his successor
Prophet Mohammed's grandson, Husayn (Ali’s son) was killed by the forces of Yazid, the son of Muawiya at the battle of Karbala.His head was cut off and presented to Yazid and kicked around like a football. Such irreverence to the Prophet's family makes me wonder if Abu Sufyan and his family were true believers. More likely, Abu Sufyan (who lost two sons fighting Mohammed at Badr) converted to preserve his life and hated Islam. That is why the Koran and Hadiths recorded that there were many hypocrites who were constantly plotting against the Prophet.I suspect that Abu Sufyan’s family had a blood feud against Mohammed’s family and were never Muslims . Abu Sufyan and his family were never a true believers but hijacked the Islamic movement for their own purposes. This topic could be the subject of a speculative article on Islam’s early days. Decline set in eventually. The Umayyad Caliphs were irreligious For example, Caliph Walid II stuck a Koran on his lance and shot arrows at it! He said to the Koran:
You hurl threats against the stubborn opponent. Well then, I am a stubborn opponent myself. When you appear before God at the day of resurrection just say: My lord, al-Walid has torn me up."His court was full of debauchery. He surrounded himself with poets, dancing girls and musicians. The Umayyads have always been considered “godless” by their opponents and failed to satisfy the pious.According to noted Islamic historian, Rafiq Zakaria, "it was their betrayal of the concept of Islamic brotherhood, irrespective of race and language, that brought them down."He is echoing a familiar theme among Muslim historians. Decline will always come when Muslims forget Allah's commandments as had happened in Uhud. Renewal lies in a return to the first principles as taught by the Prophet.
What to say about you who give preference to Yazeed over Husain. Had it not been Husain and his supreme sacrifice, Islam would have not seen the day-today. But today people who follow Yazeed would be in command with wine, women and debauchery at the best rule of the day. It was Husain who demarcated what is right and saved Islam from digression.
At the cost of repeating, Muslims never name their progeny after Yazeed, irrespective of their sectarian affiliation and other also do not name after Muawiya. There are no traces of the resting grounds the accursed people who fought the battle of Kerbala. Where is Yazeed, Shimr, Ibne Ziyad, Omar Ibn Saad and others. Tell me how many in your family carry the name of Yazeed
Truth eventually won as it stands in Kerbala and the tomb of Imam Husain has become a place of veneration for the Muslims world over. Muawayia and Yazeed were the rulers of the time, mighty and crafty yet there are no traces of them. Mr. Mughal this is despite the fact that history has always been favourable to the ruler. Imam Husain had only 72 supporters and till date it is he who rules the heart and not Yazeed . This is a clear message to you. Truth shall prevail over falsehood, Mr Mughal
I am happy that some sanity has prevailed and you are talking sensible. And day is not far off when you will see the logic of what has been said against yazeed and how true they were. I admit and with my full support your views on Aslam Barelivi. His name sound like a poet because the one I heard was Wasim barelvi. The quality of debate has to be high and denigration of anyone is not acceptable. We tend to learn through this debate I am sure a sensible and qualified man like you must not be supporting yazeed from your heart. And the light has come to you. I am so happy that you mentioned that irelevant people like Naik are making statement every day and if one has objection on his Peace TV. It must be conveyed to the relevant authorities.
Basha I have enjoyed reading your debate in this page, believe me. I am sure you will surely graduate to become the bitterest critic of Zakir Naik. Dont heed to that urdu writing Barelvi, even if makes sense I don.t read him nor do I understand his lingo.
Dr.Zakir Naik, a scholar of Islam is being hounded by people here on the web page without understanding his intention. There is no need for us to agree with all he says, as there are several like him in the community talking irrelevant to the present day life, but then where is the sanity to pull the rug under his feet through systematic condemnation of his Peace TV. If there is anything objectionable, it is our duty to bring to the notice of the authorities to curb it as it is being done for several other TV Channels in the country.
But this Urdu writing Barelvi has not understood what Zakir Naik said but in his blind opposition to his views being a Barelvi himself, continued with the tirade. It is much ado about nothing. He is like a person searching for a black cat in a dark room which is not there. What can we say for people like him. It is not fair to denigrate our own scholars, though we do not see eye to eye with them in many of the issues. Difference of opinion has to exist, then only one can participate in the debate and enjoy the beauty of scholarly discourses. But then, going all out to denigrate all those persons who hold or agree with his views,and not maintaining civility, is not fair at all. I wish sanity and good counsel would prevail over these individuals.
Sirf Baar baar dahshat gardi ko condemn karne se hamaari zimmedaari poori nahi ho jaati hai, hamey dahshat gardi ke peeche kaun log hain, aur Islaam ko badnaam karne ke peeche kaun andaruni dushman hain, aur kaisee unki soch hai, usko pahchanne aur uski mazammat karne ke saath saath, aisee soch waale logon ko zamane ke saamne laake, unko Islaam se kharij karne ki zarurat hai.
Aaj saara aam Muslamaan Osama Ladin ki lanat malamat kar raha hai,kyon ki uski wajah se Islam ka naam Dahshat gardi se jodaa jaane lagaa, to mai yahan pe ek kadam aage jaake ye kahunga, ki Osama Bin Laden to sirf ek chehra hai jisse ham sab pahchante han magar uss chehrey ke peeche kaun si soch hai, usse pahchaaney ki zarurat hai, aur wo hai WAHABIAT/ Salafi / ahle hadith (sab ek hain) jisne ki saare Afghanistan ko tabha barbaad kar diya,Iraq me apni jaden failane ki pur zor koshish kari, Wahabiat aur dahshat gardi ek hee zahreeley Darakht ki do shaakhen hain aur jab tak Wahabiat panpegi tab tak dahshat gardi ko kaabu karna mushkil hai. Ye ek mahez eitefaak nahi hai, ki abb tak jahan jahan bhi dahshat gardi samne aayee, ya fir dahshat gard pakde gaye wo saare ke saare Talibani soch ke Waahaabi hee hain, aur unme ek bhi Sunnat jaamat ya fir shia hazraat ya fir Islam ke kisi aur firkey ka shaks nahi pakdaa gaya hai, To aayen aur ek zubaan ho ke, ek hauslaa hoke, Wahabiat ke asli chehre yaani dahshat gardi ki doctrine wale soch ke logon ko pahchaan ke unka social boycott karen aur Islaam ke daman ko paak Karen.
Aise hi chupey huwye, dahshat gardi se hamdardi rakhne wale Wahabi hamarey Jaan se Pyaarey Mulk Hindustan ki sar zameen pe bhi apnay na paak Iraade dhakey chupey alfazon me failaa rahe hain, uska ek namuna Peace Tv waale Zakir Naik ka ye kahna “ki agar Osama bin Laden America se ladh raha hai to Zakir Naik uske saath hain aur iss eitebaar se harr Musalman ko dahshat gard hona chahiye”, koyee Zakir naik ya fir wo jis Osama Bin Laden ki Himayet kar rahe hain, usse ye pooche ki in jaise Islam ke dushmano ko Islaam ka thekedaar kisne banaya? aur ye kaun hotey hain apne zaati mafaad ke liye Islaam ka naam istemaal karne waale? Aaj mai Hindustan ki awaam se aur Sarkaar dono se hee ye guzarish karunga ki Zakir Naik ne jo Osaama ki himayet ki hai uski jaanch karaye, aur agar elzaam sahi sabit ho, to Peace Tv ko bina waqt zaya kiye ban kiya jaye aur is Peace Tv Channel ke akhrajaat kahan se purey hote hain aur kaun is channel ki funding karta hai iski bhi jaanch karayee jaye aur gunah sabit hone pe aise logon ko Duniya ke saamne laayen aur Inko inki sahi jagah yaani saamaaj se jitna bhi door ho sake kar diya jaaye. Isi me hamarey mulk aur hamare mazhab dono ki bakaa hai.
The Mumbai terror attack has no doubt shocked the nation. The community that has to be concerned with the attack was Muslims of India more than anybody else, because those who attacked the financial capital on the fateful day of 26/11 were bearing Muslim names who came from Pakistan. It is a different thing that the Muslims would disown them for they were looking clean shaven, wearing modern attires, sporting guns and ammunition and above all they were wining and dining, and who knows they were womanising, was not unexpepcted from such elements. To a common man they were Muslim mercaneries on a mission to cause maximum damage as per the directions of their mentors sittiing across the border. They did exactly that and vanished from this world, a fate they deserved most. Then what next? Whatever, Pakistan may try to put a brave face, but it could not deny that they were their elements born, brought up and trained by the terrorists organisation for this day.
The Muslims, particularly the Urdu Press, should behave responsibly. It is no time for a blame game. It is no time for concoction of a theory of conspiracy alleging complicity of the safron brigade at this stage. It may best be left to the investigating agencies to unravel the real players behind this sordid drama enacted at someone's directions sitting somewhere either in India or abroad. The whole of India and every Indian is angry. Not for the loss of life and destruction caused alone, but for the attitude of the politicians and helplessness of the Govt of the day. The peoples ire would be shown elsewhere in the next ballot, but the mood is one of action, a firm action, a decisive message that should go across the borders and the steps that should be taken to secure the nation and insulate it from future attacks. Yesterday it was through land, today it was through sea and who knows tomorrow it may be through air. All these vulnerable places have to be protected and secured for we should allow no incursions into our land from any side. These steps are vital for the future of this country. The prime concern of the citizen today is, how safe and secure we are in our own country. This is the general feeling and mood of the countrymen.
Like me, many such Indian Muslims are equally angry and frustrated and unable to understand why disaster after disaster is staring at them all the time. Whats wrong with our community and why are we in such a position of feelings like strangers and aliens in our own land. We have been living here for centuries and also after we were ditched by the greatest villain of the century, Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Company, who partitioned India in the name of two-nation theory. Don't the Muslims of today feel angry at them for they were responsible for our present state of affairs. They left us, and why are they not leaving us alone to deal with our problems ourselves. Who are they to interfere in our internal matters. Muslims should come out in open and tell the people of Pakistan or any element fighting in the name of Islam to keep off from our problems and mind their own business.
Govt of India did a right thing in issuing a demarche, a strongly worded message to Pakistan, to do something tangible to wipe out the remanants of terror outfits from their soil and hand over all those listed wanted criminals that are enjoying the hospitality of the Pakistani people at the cost of Indins, including the infamous Don Dawood Ibrahim, the kingpin of 1993 Bombay Blasts and whose compliciy in 26/11 terror attack is not ruled out altogether. President Zardari, came on his knees virtually pleading with India to spare Pakistan and not to punish her for the act of a few disgruntled elements. The same voice of concern and anguish came from Premier Gilani and his Foreing Minister currently touring Indian. Mere words would not do, Mr. Zardari and Company, show it in action and deeds alone would gain confidence of the people of India.
Indians cry for firm action in one voice and Indians would not tolerate any more attacks on them. Muslims of India are solidly behind the Govt and the people of this great country. It is said wisemen do not do desperate things in desperate times. It would be wise for Indians to act with restraint, was the call across the globe as the enemy across the borders is armed with nuclear arsenals. Any emotive action at this stage would bring the world to its knees as the world is not prepared to bear any nuclear holocaust at this juncture. It calls for sobre thinking and actions. Pakistan was told in strongest terms that it should act and cooperate with India to solve the terror plot besides curbing the activities of the terror groups that are freely moving in the country. The same sentiments were echoed by Gondalesa Rice, US Secretary of State, expected to tour India shortly.
Muslim intellengentsia and the Urdu Press in particular is advised not to flame passions but to send a clear cut message to all the Muslims that India is our country, where we have to live and die. We are Indian and Muslims and there is no distinction between these two. Our prosperity and well being lie here and no where else. If we have any problems or grievances, it is for us to solve in a democratic manner. No one from outside need to interfere. We the Muslims of India constitute a biggest Muslim population of the world. Though we are leaderless for the time being as no leader is worth the name, yet this community is resilient enough to sort out its own problems without outside help as we have been doing for the last 61 years. The Muslim Press whether it is Urdu Press or any other vernacular managed by Muslims, has a responsible duty of guiding its people in this hour of crisis. Muslims are at a cross road with no guide in sight. The educated Muslim class should rise up to spread the message of love, compassion and brotherhood with malice towards none. We need to reassure the nation that the bullet of the insane terrorists did not distinguish between Muslims and others because those who killed do include a fair number of innocent Muslims too besides others. It was a pathetic description when a bearded Muslim was narrating the ghastly incident at a TV programme, "We,.the People" telecast by 24x7 News channel, how six of his family members were brutally killed on the spot while he was away to fetch a water bottle. His voice was chocking, eyes welled up with tears, unable to describe how he would live along with the orphans, that shook the conscience of one and all participating in the debate. There eerie silence, sombre mood and short of breast beating. We can feel the mood and those who were watching too could not control their emotions whose eyes too welled up, some hid their faces with their hands, and a few were seen fighting the tears. One can immediately feel that as if our own family members were killed there. Imagine how the family of 195 people who were killed would have felt at the loss of their near and dear ones. Then think of the lives of these people without them with a wide world string at them. Think again of the sacrifice made by our great son of India Karkare, ATS Chief, and five others of his team, laid down their lives in the sacred duty of this great nation. I just saw in the TV programme, the family members of the slain policemen were feeling great about their heroes. But then, the loss is so great that it would be hard to replace whatever one may try to fight the loss with a sense of consolation. This was the tragedy that unfolded on 26/11. My heart goes with all those families that is grieving over the loss of their dear ones.
Our nation is great and so are our people. The spirit is high and India will certainly bounce back. Mumbai's spirit is less strong that it is springing back to normalcy, with business as usual. But the incident has left a deep scar and wound on the psyche of the people. Lets all allow our investigating team to probe while people keep a tight vigil in their respective places. Till such time, do not give vent to rumours.It is our ardent duty to guard our unity in diversity with life. Jai Hind.
A.M.Jamsheed Basha, Chennai.
Mr. Jamsheed Basha,
You say you are a Sunni Muslim. You don't hold Yazid guilty of the tragedy at Karbala. You in fact have repeatedly stated that Imam Hussein died in a skirmish. Then how does one explain the Tazia processions taken out by Sunnis and Shias alike during Muharram. While Sunnis hold 'Shadatnamas', Shias hold 'Majlises' to mourn the martyrdom of Imam Hussein. Both Sunnis and Shias alike send curses on Yazid. If your views are contrary to the views of the Sunni Muslims then how do you call yourself a Sunni Muslim? With beliefs that contradict that of the majority of the Muslims how can you call yourself a Muslim at all?
You also say that Shias are not Muslims. May I ask you, what makes one a Muslim? The answer is, belief in God and His Prophet by reciting the 'Kalima'. You say that the 'Kalima' of the Shias is different from that of the Sunnis. The difference as I understand being that they also say 'Aliyun Waliullah, Wasio Rasullah'. What it means is that Ali, the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law was his true inheritor which Shias relate to the event of 'Ghadeer'. Just as Sunnis feel that Abu Bakr (RA) was the first Caliph, based upon his election at 'Saqifah'. So what is wrong in that? If the Sunnis can hold on to a certain belief (Khilafat) why can't Shias hold on to theirs (Imamat). That doesn't make neither of them a Kafir or a Non-Muslim.
In fact if one actually analyses the interpretation of their Kalima by the Shias then 'La illaha il lallah, Muhammadur Rasul-lalah' is God's Kalima and for this is what God directed the Prophet to say and 'Aliyun Waliullah, Wasio Rasullah' is the Prophet's Kalima for this is what the Prophet said at 'Dawate-Zulashira' that 'whoever takes my oath of allegiance today will be my Wali and Wasi'. I am afraid if you are even aware of 'Dawate-Zulashira'. Now please don't call it and Ghadeer two of the concocted stories of the Shias for there are numerous books by Sunni authors mentioning the same.
Zakir Naik whom you rate as one of the biggest living scholars of Islam believes that the Prophet is dead and it is 'Haraam' to ask the Prophet for any favours. Whereas it is one of the core beliefs of the Sunnis, that the Prophet is alive in his grave. By your definition Zakir Naik then should not be treated as a Muslim. But you still hold that he is a great Islamic scholar and has a right to hold a certain view, whereas you hold Shias as outcasts for holding certain views on Imamate, which majority Sunni Muslims have accepted as a reality and live with.
Don't these double standards then make you a ‘Munafiq’?
Hey old man... don’t take this getting caught in the cross fire thing seriously.. I was just trying to prick you and wake you up ....this will help you look younger and would also clear the Wahabi fog in your evil head...by the way you mentioned in your last post, something like ammunition...arsenal...you have a terrorist inside you Basha...flush this character out of your system and try to lead a simple God fearing existence. also i have noticed that you use my style in your posts... basha don’t copy me...use your own shabby lingo to post your messages, Donot copy my language...if you are learning, do so, but not here on newageIslam.com.
tune sab ka jawab diya per mere sawaal ka jawaab nahi diya...tum cinema akele dekhta hai ya fir puri family ke saath? badaa acha Mussalmaan hai bhai tu? aur tu kitna jhootha hai basha
Tune bachi farheen ko ye likha "I think the young Syeda Fareen is sticking her out too much. There is clearly no corelation between her thoughts and her writings. She wanted to say something but ended messing up. I think she is too young to participate in such debates of elders. She is wrong I am not 60 but much younger. Any way age does not matter here but the contents. Somebody in her home must teach her some basic manners of how to address elders"
AUR fir agley message me tuney ye likha " My little fan, Syeda Fareen " BASHA tu admi hai ki Islam ka koye 'CHOTTAA' hai kabhi to ek baat pe attal raha kar bandey? Darr khuda se.
As soon as I read the call of Mr. Sultan Shahin to join him to condemn the dastardly terror attack in Mumbai, I responded immediately with a thought provoking and patriotic article, condemning the terrorists in no uncertain terms, while joining millions in mourning the dead, sympathising with the breaved family and saluting the brave hearts of Indian security forces. SAF Rizvi must know that dead men do not post their articles on this web page. He enquired whether I am still there. For his information I am still here to torment him for his distorted views on Islam.
Hell or heaven is decided by Allah depending on one's 'aamal' and no one can escape Allah's scrutiny. If he has any faith on Allah, he must fear His wrath for all his venomous utterances against scholarly people. In any case, as I said in my post elsewhere, I am not 60 years old nor I am younger than this hot headed guy who claimed to be around 30. However, I am pretty older than him for my views , thinking and attitude towards my great religion called Islam. I for one who value others view points while maintaining my own, without degrating others. I think these guys would learn a lesson or two from leders like us. The sooner they do better for them.
My little fan, Syeda Fareen has already condemned Rizvi for his satanic views on people. My advice to her is keep off from this on going debate and I have enough ammunition in my arsenals to take these people head on.
Tum shahrukh khan ki films apne Amma Aur Abba ke saath baith ke dekhte ho, ya fir akele he Maza karte ho ? Jawab ka entezar rahega Islam ke dushman Ibn abdal Wahab lanati ke manney walon se.
Tum shahrukh khan ki films apne Amma Aur Abba ke saath baith ke dekhte ho, ya fir akele he Maza karte ho ? Jawab ka entezar rahega Islam ke dushman.
Jamsheed Basha hi
You still exist? I thought you got caught in the cross fire and by this time and joined Yazid lanati, your ancestor at his permanent abode Hell...by the way, one bad news for you Basha, that your Pakistani relatives the Wahabi terrorists have been wiped out by our patriot Indian forces and their kind of Jihad bull have been shoved up their .....You know where...
Stop siding with the terrorists sympathisers like Zakir Naik and stop praising the biggest terrorist in the history of Islam the Yazid lanati. If You cannot do this, exit Islam itself as it is, you have reserved a birth in hell.
Basha if you are 60 years, as your ardent fan, your beti Farheen puts it, then I am less than Half your age but Alhamdulillah my IQ is double your age..so by that standard I can still be your guide and mentor and in the end, a friend if only you learn to behave.
Take care old man’
Dear sister Farheen hi
I think you are growing out of your shoes, nobody has forgotten that you are a class ninth student and therefore the youngest participant out here, You should remain within your tender age limit and put your questions like a good girl, a word like challenge is something only arrogant and foolish people use and I don’t think either you are stupid, or the person who is helping you write the rigmarole you have written is foolish. To your question I only have to say that a kid will only behave like a kid and that’s exactly you are doing... If you, or someone expects me to show U my Headache I can only smile away at the stupid Question.
You tried to put sense and civility in the minds of others and now you have stooped down to ‘Batamizee’ yourself, Jamsheed Basha is an old man, as you say he is 60 years of age (he may be a sick in the head) but still you should address him politely considering his age and your own... if you have to ask questions about faith please do, but put it decently I will certainly be obliged to enlighten you, and Yes, please don’t try to behave like an arrogant haughty grown up, which I still believe, you are not.
God bless you’
I think the young Syeda Fareen is sticking her out too much. There is clearly no corelation between her thoughts and her writings. She wanted to say something but ended messing up. I think she is too young to participate in such debates of elders. She is wrong I am not 60 but much younger. Any way age does not matter here but the contents. Somebody in her home must teach her some basic manners of how to address elders. My advice to her is concentrate on study and leave the debate to be handled by elders.
May be after the intervention of gentleman Sultan Shahin, some sanity amd civility have been restored to the debate barring a few hot head comments from Amanullah. Notwithstanding these rash comments, I would continue to torment the story tellers of the events at Karbala and would expose the fallacies associated with the Shia Religion and the mystery surrounding their missing Imam. SAF Rizvi finally seems to have learnt a lesson of poking his nose into a debate which is out of the realm of his knowledge.
Inshallah, I will soon come up with yet another marathon article, this time on the mystry surrounding the "Hidden Imam" called Shia Mehdi.........I reiterate, "Abhi picture bakhi hai mere dost"...Any objection?
Jamsheed Basha, Chennai based Political Columnist.
And Miss sufiya suhail thanks for your positive reply for my comment
An Open Chalenge
Assalam u Aalaikum warhmatullah
Bismillah hir rahman nir rahim
An Open Chalenge to All genius like jamsheed Basha, and his guide Mr Saf Rizvi, Amanullah and others.
I have question to all of you.
If A Non Muslim Ask to you. Why Muslim and Islam Are true religion and How God (Allah) is one? And how to prove it adoration of Idols are wrong?
(Without cut and paste) and provide a better solution for this question, because if this question are not denied by all of you, when the non Muslims will visit this site and see this question.
And Saf Rizvi sb you cant send lanat this time a muslim and non muslim whenever ask this question to you and other, if you are not able to solve this question with satified reply send own self lanat, because guider should have all solutions.
And Mr Basha what You think ownself You are political colimnnist, that is good but you are not a Islamic (history) political columnist. I think you are more than 60s.
Who all men donot understand Ahle bait and his sacrifices for Islam, who are totally misguided and corrupt in Islamic qreed, you are misguided by some unislamic historians.
So dont say You are sunni, because you, Zakir naik, Ibn timmiya (lanati) and his follower are wahabi,
“Ibn timiya is a first man who had said that "who man thinks to go to Mazar only he is mushrik specialy Mazare muqaddaus of Prophet Muhammad sallalllahu wasssaalam."
After this fatwa, all ullema of that time use takfir for timiya lanati. And after that abdul wahab najdi had say like that. Waht you think only you know history. You are corrupt for your comment own yazid sorry to all for my critics.
walaikum assalam janab Aslam sb
I know, I m also Sunni, we Sunni can’t think against ahle bait but this time is against Sunni Muslims. So try to undersrand and use hikmat,
ya aayiyohel lazina aminoostaino bissabre wassala.
Syeda Farheen Fatima
Tu Kaisa Musalman hai ? ek taraf apnee daleelon me Hadeeson ki duhai detay hai aur doosri taraf ussi message me sharukh khan ki pictue ka dialogue likhata hai, "Abhi picture baqi hai mere dost". Wassalam." ye sab kya bakwaas hai ? yahan koyee mazaak chal raha hai? ek navin class ki bachi hee teri bakwas ke bahkawe me aa sakti hai, baaz aao apni ulul julul baton se. Basha tumhe hadeeson ke saath film ka dialogue likhne me sharm nahi aayee? yahan per har chota bada ekdam sahi tumhari lanat malamat kar raha hai, tum issi layekh ho.
editor : NewageIslam.com
Janab Sultan Shaheen sb.
Your intervention, though a bit delayed, is welcome, all this while, I was wondering, how could you allow such messages being posted on your site, when you are the Editor and in that capacity, also the moderator of this site, anyways the offenders should pay heed to your valuable advice, but your reference “The gift of a fresh eye” is intriguing, because for people of loose faith, such an advice in its extended logic, means a third eye which is often controlled by the devil, people like Jamsheed Basha, as is evident, will go to the extent of devising their own parameters of being a Muslim.
We all know that belief in ALLAH swt, MOHAMMAD saww and QURAN MAJEED is sufficient for Iman but according to Jamsheed Basha the status of Sahab-e-Ikram is recently elevated (in some direct revelation to him nauzbillah) and giving them due regard will also be the basis of your being a Muslim, now if this not the DIMAGHI FUTUUR of Jamsheed Basha then he should support his claim from QURAN itself and besides the great Islamic Don Quixote’ janab Jamsheed Basha himself, who is the other authority ? to raise the status of Sahab-e-ikram so much, so that I if you do not pay them due regard you become Kafir? By this standard the Wahabis are all Kafirs, for they fail to pay the due regard, to Allah swt’s most beloved Prophet pbuh himself let alone the Sahabas , Zakir Naik uses words like “JO SHAKS MARR CHUKA HAI” nauzbillah for the Prophet Pbuh himself.
Janab’ As far as faith is concerned, it is my strong belief Alhamdollillah’ that who ever belittles the greatness of the Prophet pbuh and his progeny or equals any two bit outsider with them, or praises any one, especially Yazid lanati, who has blatantly prided in being the sworn enemy of the progeny of the Prophet pbuh is a biggest kafir himself. For this very reason ZAKIR NAIK has been declared a Kafir through fatwa after a lot of deliberations by Sunnis and Shias alike, my advice to Janab mohtram half baked Muslim Jamsheed Basha, is to work for QAUMI ETEHAAD instead of trying to further divide the Muslim world in these troubled times, let there be the message for all enemies of Islam either external or within, that Sunnis and Shias are two inseparable arms of Islam Alhamdollillah and are also two blades of a scissor, who ever tries to come in between and divide the two, would be cut of from the Mainstream Islam and there by, from the path of salvation too, such is the fate of Wahabism today for all to discern and abstain from spreading fitna and kufr.
I had hoped that after the intervention of Syeda Farheen Fatima that now civility will be restored in this debate. I do understand the sentiments involved all around. But that is no excuse for debasing ourselves, allowing the debate to degenerate into a brawl. Debates should always be within the bounds of civilised conduct. We Muslims are indeed an emotionally hyper lot. But we also pride ourselves on our culture which precludes tu-taraq. Our language is that of Aap-Janab. I would be grateful if every one were more respectful of their opponents in the debate on vital issues concerning our community that NewAgeIslam.com intends to promote. This site believes that open, untrammelled debate is the only way forward. Solutions to problems and consensus over disturbing issues in these critical times can only emerge out of open debate, but it becomes difficult to sustain this debate without etiquette and decorum.
What we urgently need today is what Lord Russell called “The gift of a fresh eye”; but we cannot develop this fresh eye unless we start looking at things from each other’s eyes. Debate is not just about presenting one’s own point of view; it is also about trying to see other person’s point of view. The very purpose of debate is defeated if we do not do that. We should always try to learn while we preach.
Another thing I must speak about while I am at it is the Muslim penchant for Takfeer and ascribing motives. These are the weapons of people who have run out of arguments.
I would request all concerned to try and keep the debate on NewAgeIslam.com meaningful. This is only possible if we maintain respect for each other’s viewpoint, even while intensely disagreeing with it.
Dear Sultan Shahin,This is in response to various criticisms to my articles posted under, “Unveiling Zakir Naik: Terror cannot be fought with Terror”.I personally thank you for asking all of us to restore civility, dignity and sanity to the debate going on here on the web site between me and others. Unfortunately despite your sobering advice and intervention by a little lad Fareen, it seems to have not worked on these people who continue their tirade against me. Let me clarify to you the following:First of all, I am not a Wahhabi, as alleged nor do I belong to the school of thought of Dr. Zakir Naik, although I value his scholarly status as being unique among the present creed of Mullahs. I have expressed this in a number of articles posted here and elsewhere that I am a vocal and bititer critic of extremism in Islam whether it is Wahhabi school of thought or Jamate Islami school or for that matter Tableeqi Jamat. I never spared any one who try to impose their form of religion and disturb the placid waters of unity of various sects of Islam. There is nothing like purest form of Islam or adulterated form. It must be Islamic based on the teachings of Prophet Mohammed PBUH or un-Islamic any belief running contrary to such teachings.
I am a liberal Muslim who believe that one should be free from the dogmatic beliefs and practices. I am also a true Indian and I love my country as much as others do and I call upon all Muslims to demonstrate their love to the country in deeds rather than in words. We must have no extra-territorial loyalty while we continue to view the problems of Muslims as ours. When the question of our country comes, We, the Muslims, must be Indian first and Indian last. Why should any one have any problem with these views of Indianness. Indian Muslims are eternally grateful to India for we are treated with honour and dignity barring some riots, by and large, India looked after well especially when we were ditched by Jinnah and Company. All Muslims must stop cheering Pakistani teams whether they play against India or others. We must always support our team where more and more Muslims are playing and performing well. It is really great to see India over taking Australia to take the No.1 spot. Do these views appear hypocritical? If so, what can I do but pity such insolents.My views on Karbala was totally misunderstood. I still hold certain events that have taken place in Islamic history as were more political than emotionally religious. For example the revolt against Ali RA by Bibi Ayesha RA and Hazrat Mawiyah over his failure to bring to book the killers of Zinnorein Hazrat Usman RA, leading to two wars, one Battle of Camel and the other Battle of Saffain, were, defacto, a political uprising. Both were fought on a political issues rather than on religious issues. No body can deny this.Similarly, the so called battle at Karbala, was fought more on a political issue than on religious issue, though there was no such battle as made out by the Shia propaganda. As a matter of fact, Imam Hussein RA, on the insistence of the delegation from Kufa, accepted to accompany them to Kufa along with his family purely on a fact finding mission, and he was unarmed and so his family members. If he had any intention of a war or a fight or a showdown with the forces of Yazid RA, he would have certainly armed himself, prepared an army of some men, and gone on Jihad alone and not with family members. The rest is history as stated in my earlier articles. Even if Imam Hussein RA has attained martyrdom, where is the need to make it a life long mourning event. When we do not mourn the greatest tragedy in Islam like the killing of Umar, Usman and Ali RA, which are more tragic and more Islamic than the death of Imam Hussein RA, where is the necessity to mourn his death for centuries. This is what I was trying to tell our Sunnies not to fall a prey to Shia propaganda. They are not only against Yazid RA but as a matter of fact against Sunnies without naming them. They hold three great Caliphs responsible for usurping the caliphate from the real claimant Ali Ra, that why they indulge in slander of these great Sahabis as a ritual in every majlis. Kindly re-read my latest article and one would find the real truth in it. This is my view on the event at Karbala. Anyone who has a different opinion on it, he or she can refute it with historical evidence, quoting from various authentic books of history as I did. But no one was prepared to stomach it and as you rightly said, these people ran out of ideas, hence indulged in such bashing, losing head, becoming emotional as if heaven has fallen for my views on Karbala. I still stand by them as against what is blatantly spread by Shia historians and “Mersia Nigar” Mir Anees and Mir Dabeer, who using their skill in poetry writing, gave imaginary account of the event at Karbala totally unrelated to the facts on record of history. Allah has termed the poets as mad people in Quran. Therefore, these poets of Shias were not authority on Islam. Ignore those emotional mersia poetry wrote to kindle emotions and bitterness against one community.As far Shias are concerned, I am of the firm view that they are a separate religion and have no right whatsoever to profess being within Islam, while their belief on Prophethood, Hadith, and Holy Qur'an ran contrary to the teachings of the Prophet PBUH.Shias believe in Imamat, a continuation of prophethood, which is totally against the established belief of Islam that our Prophet Mohammed PBUH was the last of the prophets and there would be no prophet thereafter. Even among Shias, there were Twelver, Sevenver, and Fiver. Majority of the Shias believe in 12 Imams, starting from Hazrat Ali RA as the first Imama and the last being Imam Mehdi, who purported to have gone missing with the original Qur'an containing 40 Chapters as against the 30 Chapters in the present Qur'an. According to them, he would re-emerge from the hiding only on the dooms day to take Shias to heaven.The Sevenvers do not believe in Imam Mehdi and is the case with Fivers who too have a different set of faith running contrary to Twelvers. Besides, there are several sects within the Shias. To them Caliphate is the continuing process should have descended to Ali RA after Prophet and till today they hold the same view although it is missing from their own Iran, where Imam and President is not the one and the same person. Is this Islam? It is for people to judge for themselves.It is very clear for all Muslims that the Qur'an was a complete book even during the life time of Prophet Mohammed PBUH and it is uncorrupted. Any body or group who does not have faith in the present form of Qur'an or believe in Tahrif as like Shias, is a Kafir. These Shias allege that the original Qur'an did contain certain reference to Ali RA, Hassan and Hussein RAA, etc., and that the last 10 chapters were deliberately deleted by the Sahabis. That is why their 12th Imam Mehdi went missing with it containing 40 suras including 10 suras relating to Ali RA. Who is this Mehdi, where did he come from and where did he go, is a mystery. The question arises, if that was the real Qur'an, where was the necessity for this Imam to run away with it, and why he had not exposed it before the Shias themselves to tell to the world the real truth? This is a total concoction and distortion of history. Its a mythology of Shias and nothing to do with the reality of Islam. It is highly questionable belief similar to mythology of other religions. On this count alone, they can be declared as non-Muslims or a separate religion like Protestants in Christianity or Ahmadias. Apaprt from these there are several differences between Sunnies and Shias over the core beliefs of Islam. Hence they are a separate religion. We have no objection to this but certainly they are not entitled to call themselves Muslims as they tampered with the establish religious beliefs and practices of Islam designed, preached and practiced by Prophet PBUH himself and other Sahabas. Allah has asked Prophet PBUH to say “ Lakum Deenukum Waliya deen”. Here ends the argument. Let them continue with their form of religion while we the sunnies would continue with our original Islam and Original Qur'an as per our own belief and practices.If any one differs with me on the above, he or she is free to hold his or her different views. But no one has a right to impose his or her views on others. I have every right to say what is right according to me and my knowledge of Islam. I may be right or wrong, it is for Allah to judge. Who are these guys to pre judge a person in his life time. Simply because my views ran counter to their views or faith, they cannot say that they are the true Muslims and others are just Wahhabis. This is not fair. Let Zakir Naik hold his views also and why should anyone have any objection to it. If his lectures are not to one's taste, he or she is free not to attend, but one cannot stifle his voice unless it is blasphemous views. Even then, we have to express our differences within the parameters of decency and civility. Unfortunately, nothing seems to have work on the present creed of people participating in intellectual debate and they continue to show their angers unable to counter my views intellectually. I can only say, “Marde Naadan pe kalam-e-narm wo nazuk be asar”.I really appreciate the concern of SAF Rizvi for more burning problems facing the Muslim community especially in the wake of the recent serial blasts and subsequent arrest of Muslim youth. This is here, really we the intellectuals should concentrate as to how best we can bring back the misguided youth back to the main stream. In this direction, the Ulemas gathered in large numbers in Hydrabad recently on a two day conclave and issued a fatwa condemning terrorism with a plea not to equate terrorists with any religion. Exactly after a month, Advani, used the same language when some of the Hindus were arrested on terror charges like Sadhvi, Pruohit, Pandey etc. It is our endeavour to see that the suspicion in the minds of the majority is removed that the Muslims are as much concerned for the death and destruction of innocent lives and properties as others do. It is time for all of us join to fight this menace. This is more important than to pull the rug under the feet of each other.Next comes the most important problem of the Muslim community. That is the implementation of Sachar Committee report which has suggested due representation. How we can prevail upon the next Govt to implement them so that we can due share in the legislatures, administration, employment and education based on our population. We must form a very powerful Lobby group either in the form of a political party of NGO representing all Muslim interest. Here comes the suggestion from Dr. Ashgar Ali Engineer handy to form a political party of our own, as the present Muslim League and others, have failed to fulfill the aspiration of Muslims so far even after 60 and more years of independence. I suggest that a meeting of the intellectuals among the Muslims may be convened on the same line as the two day conclave of Ulemas was summoned recently at Hydrabad. I am prepared to be a part of such gathering to lend a helping hand in the endeavour. Will Mr. Sultan Shahin take the lead in the matter?
A.M.Jamsheed Basha, Chennai based Political Columnist.
Tu Kaisa Musalman hai ? ek taraf apnee daleelon me Hadeeson ki duhai detay hai aur doosri taraf ussi message me sharukh khan ki pictue ka dialogue likhata hai, "Abhi picture baqi hai mere dost". Wassalam." ye sab kya bakwaas hai ? yahan koyee mazaak chal raha hai? ek navin class ki bachi hee teri bakwas ke bahkawe me aa sakti hai, baaz aao apni ulul julul baton se. Basha tumhe hadeeson ke saath film ka dialogue likhne me sharm nahi aayee? yahan per har chota bada ekdam sahi tumhari lanat malamat kar raha hai, tum issi layekh ho..
Janab’ As far as faith is concerned, it is my strong belief Alhamdollillah’ that who ever belittles the greatness of the Prophet pbuh and his progeny or equals any two bit outsider with them, or praises any one, especially Yazid lanati, who has blatantly prided in being the sworn enemy of the progeny of the Prophet pbuh is a biggest kafir himself. For this very reason ZAKIR NAIK has been declared a Kafir through fatwa after a lot of deliberations by Sunnis and Shias alike, my advice to Janab mohtram half baked Muslim Jamsheed Basha, is to work for QAUMI ETEHAAD instead of trying to further divide the Muslim world in these troubled times, let there be the message for all enemies of Islam either external or within, that Sunnis and Shias are two inseparable arms of Islam Alhamdollillah and are also two blades of a scissor, who ever tries to come in between and divide the two, would be cut of from the Mainstream Islam and there by, from the path of salvation too, such is the fate of Wahabism today for all to discern and abstain from kufr.
If each sects of Islam begin calling others as Kafir, where will it end up? Mr Basha should refrain by giving these versions against our brother Shias. From Christianity to Hindusim and from Bhuddhism to Judaism, every religion has sects or differences. There is a difference between Catholic and Protestants, difference between Brahmanism and other sects of Hindus and difference between Taoism and confuciousism. Difference between Digambari and Neelambari jains. By quoting different hadith Basha is deflecting attack on the burning issue to sectarian conflict. At a time when Islam is so misinterpreted and shadow of terrorism gripping it, we must be united to project the true face of Islam.
History cannot be forced to change its course. My understanding that the central theme of the debate was on Yazeed and Zakir Naik whose clips I have also seen. Support to Yazeed is unacceptable in any society and so what Naik preaches. As Mr Sultan Shahin said debates must have a modicum of decency Mr Basha. If you quote hadith calling one sect as Rafida, then there must be other who can also use disparaging comment. If you feel Yazeed was right in the Iraq battle, the no matter what you say will never hold good. You should have a strong people and leaders to support your claim and Yazeed can never be one of them. Never I say forever never. He is cursed and will remain cursed and so all who supports him. .
TU EK BAHOT BADAA WAHABI KALANK HAI ISLAM KE NAAM PE, AUR TERAA WAJUD SIRF EK NAKAAL KA HAI, JISKE PAAS AAPNA KAHNE KO KUCH BHI NAHI, SIWAAYE EK BAAT KO GHUMA GHUMA KE DAS BAAR DOHRAANE KE, PAHLE TO SAF RIZVI SB KI NAKAL KARTA THA AUR ABB JAB MAINE FARHEEN KO BITIYA KAHA TO WO TERI BHI BITIYA HO GAYEE ? TUJH JAISE YAZEEDI NUTFE KE INSAAN KI KYA AISEE SAMAJHDAR SACHE AQIDEY WAALI BETI HO SAKTI HAI? TEREY JAISE MALUN KE GHAR SIRF EK IBLEES HEE PAIDA HO SAKTA HAI, TU BADEY BADEY HADITH AUR QURAN KE HAWALE DETA HAI , QURAN ME YA FIR KIS HADITH ME LIKHA HAI KI FITNA FASAAD KO HAWAA DE? ANGREZ KI NAJAEZ AULAAD HAI TU, KABHI HINDUSTAAN AA KE DEKH KI YAHAN MUSALMAN BHAIYON KE TAMAAM FIRKE KAISE EK JUTH HOKE ZINDAGEE BASAR KARTE HAIN, JAISE ISLAM KI HIDAYET HAI. TU JO APNI BAAT KO ZOR DENE KE LIYE KHULFA-E-RASHIDA KO BEECH ME GHASEETH RAHA HAI ISSE HEE TERE NUTFE ME KHALAL KA SABOOT MILTA HAI AISA SIRF EK YAZEEDI LANATI KAR SAKTA HAI, LANAT BHEJTA HUN MAI TUJHPE AUR TERI GANDI SOCH PE.
Sister Syeda Farheen Fatima salaamun alaikum’
How I wish to write in roman' and communicate clearly with you, but the problem is ‘Ki meraa haath zara urdu me tang hai’, but I am sure that you may be a class ninth student but, you have the basic guts to challenge the wrong however, formidable the opposition may be, congratulations to you and to your parents for teaching you, the kind of faith that you have. I don’t see that anyone pointed out, any thing wrong about your faith, in fact, you sited a very good example to prove your point, but in your politeness you started with referring to Jamsheed basha as some kind of genius whereas, it was established way back in this debate, that he is a fool of first rate who is infected with false pride and lanced with concocted Abu huraira brand of hadiths, Also being a girl it is not right, in the preview of Islam, to come out and say that you are a fan’ or anything of somebody who is a ‘Na’mehrem’ no offence sister for Allah swt's sake don’t take it otherwise, just thought I should point out so I mentioned. Farheen I am sure you know this fact that Iblees’ was the arch angel at the time of khilkat of hazrat Adam pbuh, but one utterance of his, against the will of Almighty Allah swt this arch angel was debarred from heaven and hell.. The famous words “ NIKAL JAA TU MERI AASMA AUR ZAMEEN SE’’ and ever since the entire Khilkat is sending LANAT on IBLEES, in fact, unless we curse the devil our faith is not complete, right? So what I am trying to communicate here is …how ever smart and well versed and knowledgeable a person may be, but in matters of faith and belief, either a person is complete, or a big zero, you mentioned that we should not curse, but in the light of my above example sometimes it is necessary to curse in order to prove your own faith, that’s why we all say before starting our salaat …OUZBILLAH HAI MINASH SHAITANIR RAJEEM’ what was the big need to curse the devil every now and then when, ALLAH swt surely knows all that transpires in our hearts?.. It is just pronouncing and reiterating our own faith. Just as you reiterated you faith in your second post and declared Yazeed is lanati so there is also no harm in sending lanat on those who support him. Be it Basha or Zakir Naik. Also don’t you ever worry about the fatwas, say what you have to, but evaluate it many times, whether your statement is not contradicting the basic teachings of Islam’ and also be always ready, to reevaluate your statement, when ever, somebody points out a mistake if any. So sister I take your leave and hope I have been able communicate myself the best way I could. Allah hafiz’
SHIA IS A BREAKAWAY SEPARATE FAITH AND RELIGION : IT IS NOT ISLAM SAYS MANY SCHOLARS OF ISLAM.
It is now clear that no one in the debate has the required knowledge, wisdom and intellectual acumen to understand the finer points of Islamic history and view them through the prism of reasons. I have written elaborately the facts of history relating to the events at Karbala, which in my opinion were more political than ideological. The killing of Imam Hussein RA was though unfortunate was not a martyrdom but a political one. There was no battle of the kind the Shia propaganda made out but was only an accidental skirmishes in which Imam Hussein was accidentally killed. I stand firmly by my articles and no body on earth would shake my faith on Islam, though many third rated people on the web site indulged in slander that put a question mark their own faith on Islam, as it never teaches slander or gaali glooch. So much so, it has hurt a 9th Standard student called Syeda Fareen, who chose to condemn the slander in no uncertain terms and called them unislamic. Rizvi, Aslam Khan and others "zara to sharam karo". With these remarks, I close the topic on Karbala, as it would hang fire on records for ever.
I am really impressed with the sentiments expressed by the little lad Fareen and it should open the eyes of slanderous characters on this web site, who have no intellectual honesty to acknowledge others' greatness. I had only one 'fan' in Fareen beti, these people succeeded in polluting her mind also. Any way no regret, as greatmen in history got brick bats in the early stages before the same people threw flowers on them. It would soon happen to me also in the near future. These people would soon realise their folly in opposing my views in a fit of rage rather than through reasoning.
Now the question arises as to whether the Shias of today are really Islamic or a breakaway new religion but claim to be Muslims like the protestants in Christianity but continue to claim to be purest form of Christianity. It is not that I am saying but many scholars of repute of Islam have unanimously opined that Shia Ithna Ashrah Rafida, the largest Shia Sect in the country, is definitely outside the pale of Islam. Why it is so is detailed in the following narrations:
The founders of Shias Religion passed through three historical phases In the first phase, no one among the Shias held the belief that Quran is complete and uncorrupted. However, in the second phase only four persons/priests among the shias professed out of sheer Taqiya that there has been Tahrif (alteration) in the Quran.It was between 318 H to 548 H only . Since their sayings were not based on arguments and were against the un-interrupted narrations of the Shia Religion, the Shia Ulema of the second phase rejected their sayings/findings.
To be brief, the claim of kufr on shias is not solely established by their belief of Tahrif in the Quran but is further supported and augmented by other factors like their belief in Bada and Qudzf (Slander or scandalous suggestions) about the wives of the Holy Prophet PBUH who are ummul momeneen ( mothers of all believers). Allama Bahrul Uloom Farangi Mahal earlier used to issue fatwa to the effect that Shias are Muslims but after seeing Tafsir Majmah Bayan, he came to know about the kufr of Shias and wrote that whoso subcribes to the view of Tahrif in the Qura'n, is definitely a Kafir.
Mohammed Abdus-Sakoor Farooqi, Mohtamim, Dar-ul-Mobaaligheen, Luknow (India) writes that the Shia denial of the companionship of Hazrat Abu Bakr and levelling of false allegations (slander) against Hazrat Aaisha RA, the beloved wife of our Prophet PBUH render them kafir. Allama Ibn Abbidin writes: There is no doubt about a person being kafir who lanuches a charge against the chastity of the Hazrat Aaisha RA or denied the companionship of Hazrat Abu Bakr" (Shami, Vol II P.294). The same Allama has also written in the same book tht Shias are Murtads (Apostates) (Shami, Vol.II, P.683)
Allah says in Qur'an, "Those who resist Allah and His Apostle will be among those most humiliated".
It is also opined by Ulemas that Rafida (Shias are also called Rafida which means deniers of the Cliphate of Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Usman RAA) are not only Murtad (Apostate) Kafir and outside the pale of Islam but also enemies of Islam and Muslims to such a degree that the others would be waiting in the field. Muslims therefore should not have any bonding with them.Mufti Mohammed Abdul Aziz, Khateem Jamia Masjid, Gujranwala writes, " Ithna Asrah Shias are Kafirs and Murtads because they belive that Qur'an has been altered. Several Ulemas were unanimous in their opinion that those who believe that the Quran is subjected to Tahrif (Alteration) is a Kafir without a shadow of doubts. Shias certainly fills the bill.
Mohammed Kaffiatullah Khan, Mufti Azam Hind, Delhi writes, "Shias are in fact kafirs because besides Qadfz (Slander) of Ummul Momineen and reliving of shaikhain ( i.e., Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Usman RAA) and they believe in Tahrif in the Qur'an."
Shias are of the view that Hazrat Ali collected the whole of the Qur'an which comprised of seventeen thousand Ayahs (Usul-al-Kafi p.671). Whereas the present Qur'an contains only 6136 Ayahs (Fasilil Khatab P. 104). That is to say that 10,864 Ayahs have been excluded by the Shabah from the present Qur'an. In addition, the Shi'i world is bereft from the original Qur'an because the same has been taken to the care by Imam Mahdi since centuries(Fasilil Khatab, P.97).
What a tragedy that the Shia Imam has disappeared with the real Qur'an and is not returning the same for the guidance of the Shia followers, then what is the use of such a Qur'an. This was the first proof of their being called Kafir.
The second proof of Shia's kufr comes from the fact of their belief that Allah is subjected to Al-Bada, that is to say that the knowledge of Allah changes from time to time because Allah is not fully aware of the causes and consequences.
The third proof of Shia's kufr comes from the Shia belief in revilling the Shaikhain ( i.e, Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Usman RAA) and launch a charge against the chastity of Hazrat Aisha RA, who is the mother of all Muslims.
The compilers of Fatwa Alamgir (A voluminous book of juristic decisions) write in this context: " A Shia Rafida who curses and reviles Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Usman RAA is a Kafir. Similarly one who does snot accept the caliphate of these three caliphs of Rasul-Allah is also a Kafir (Vol. III, P. 294).
It is incumbent on Muslims to call Shia Rafida as Kafirs. This is said on the authority of Fatwa Alamgir where it is stated:
"To call Shia Rafida as Kafirs is binding on the basis of their kafiric (heathen or un-Islamic) beliefs. These people are outside the pale of Islam and there is no doubt about it. They fall in the category of murtadeens (Apostates) and should be dealt accordinly. Anyone who does not call them Kafir is an irreligious person and by the same token a kafir like the shia (Vol.I P.92).
The fourth proof of Shia's kufr comes from their belief that their Imams are infallible and sinless--attribues and qualities which are reserved only for the Prophets and Messengers of Allah. What to say of Twelve Imams of the Shias, persons who are much higher in status, piety and nearness to Allah like Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat Umar and wives of the Holy Prophet PBUH cannnoteven be called sinless.
It is unfortunate that some of the Sunni Alims out of sheer ignorance think that the Shias believe in the finality of the Prophethood of Mohammed PBUH and as such invite them to their conventins and conferences, whereas the fact is that Shias are openly transgressors of the finality of Prophethood. Shah Waliullah Delhvi in his book P.224 unveils the curtain by saying, " Actually they do not believe in the finality of prophethood of Mohamed though they profess verbally"...Shia belief in the 'Imamte" is nothing but an extensions of the prophethood which ofcourse if followed under a different name. But what is then in name when the intent and contents are the same.
Three Ahadith of the Prophet (PBUH):
(1) " In the latter times, a group will appear who will be called Rafida (present Shias). These people would have given up Islam" (Masnad Ahmad, Vol. I. P.103)
(2) "After me, there will emerge a group who will be known by the name of Rafida (present day Shias). Hence, they are musriks (Polythesists)......these people will abuse Abu Bakar and Umar and whose abuses my Sahabh, will be accursed by Allah, Angels and All "The Human Beings".(Dar-ul-Kutni). (3) "A group will emerge soon who will abuse my Sahabah and endeavour to find faults with them. As such you should not keep their company, nor dine with them nor have marriage relationships with them from either side. You should not greet them either. The curse of Allah be upon them". (Guniatutalibeen, P.179)
Brelvi Ulemas have unanimously opined that people of such a sect who believe Hadrat Abu Bakr Siddiqi (RA), Hadrat Umar RA and Hadrat Usman RA as hypocrates, and Holy Quran as un-athentic and muta which by census of Ummah is haram (unlawful) and such a sect should definitely be declared as a non-Muslim minority. To consider them as Muslims is an error.
Ulema also opined that any person or group who taunts regarding the chastity of Hadrat Aaisha RA is a denier of those verses of Surah Al-Noror which vouchsafe the innnocence of Hadrat Aaisha RA.; And one who denies the Qur'an is a Kafir. Any one does not consider the present Qur'a as the final word of Allah and he who denies the verse of Qur'an is a Kafir. The masoom (infallible and sinless) are only the angels and the Prophets and the caliphate is just and right position and the superiority of the caliphs is in the same order in which they succeeded. It is stated in that it is wrong and misleading to call Hadrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Usman RAA as usurpers because they themselves never aspired or secured caliphate. Rather the Muhajireen and Ansar unanimously elected them as Caliph. Hadrat Ali RA also got the Oath of Allegiance (Baiet) in public from the people. Any one who shows disrespect to Shaba and calls them astrayt puts himself under the curse of Allah.It may therefore be concluded from the above stated Istiftah, a person holding false and misleading beliefs cannot be rightly called a Muslim. It is unlawful for Muslims to keep connections with such a peson or group or participate in their gatherings and cvonventions to the command of the Quran (6:68)...The Muslims should expel such people from their society and do not keep any connection whatsoever with them.
Finally gentlemen, I was left with no other alternatives but to present my research paper, albeit a part of it, as to why I oppose the stories of Shias and called their practices nothing but kufr. It is now for Sunni Muslims to keep away from such stories blatantly spread by these pseudo Shia Mushrikeen to mislead the Ummah. They are Jahannami and no Muslim should follow them.I know my above article would not be received well by the Shia community but I cannot stop telling the truth in its naked manifestation. I call a spade a spade, whatever may be opinion of others. "Al Haqqu Murrun" meaning "Truth is bitter", if you cannot chew it, swallow it. But many more to follow "Abhi picture baqi hai mere dost". Wassalam.
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:45:26 -0800 [11/25/2008 02:15PM IST]
From: Al Bilal
A lot of people are reading your website in my office very often. I think your concept of New Age Islam is very welcome and creates lot of interest. Do give articles on Islamic cultures, architectures, contributions, traditions in other countries so that we may enlighten ourselves. Something for our children also.
Dr Manzoor Ilahi
Its high time that you, accept that Yazeed is one accursed soul and deserves to be condemned by all those who are Muslims, this will be a good way to apologize to all the Muslims that you have hurt by your praising Yazeed and saying absurd things about an old man who is also a known figure. May ALLAH guide us all amen.
It's wonderful to see a student of 9th standard making meaningful comments on an article appearing on a website discussing serious islamic issues.
I hope Mr. Jamsheed Basha who appears to have impressed this young girl through one of his earlier comments on Tableeghi Jamaat, makes sense out of her comments and pays heed to her advice.
Bitiya Farheen assalaam alaikum
Iss buddhe ki kisi ghalti se, hamari itni samajhdar bitiya ko takleef pahunchi to uske liye Maafi , mai bass apni safai me itna hee kahunga, ki saari ghalat fahmi, wahan paida huwi jab aapne Jamshed Basha ko zaheen kaha aur apne aapko uska fan kaha, yahan tak bhi koyee zyada farak nahi pada, magar jab Basha, jo ki waise hee jaane kis kabiliyat ke nashe me hai aur bhi takabbur ki baten karne laga, aur jatane laga ke uske fan bhi hain, to jawab dena, aur usse hosh me laana lazmi ho gaya, khair chordiye aap in baaton ko, aur rahi baat Basha ke nutfe ko gali dene ki to ye gaali aapko nazar aa rahi hai kyon ke aapke nazdeek yazeed lanat ke layekh hai magar Basha ke liye to ye izzat afzayee hai kyon ke wo Yazeed ko RA kahta hai. to mai ek baar fir fakr se kahunga ki harr wo insaan jo Yazeed jaise gunhagar ko RA kahta hai wo khud lanat ke bais hai aur uska nutfa seedhe khud Yazeed lanati se hai, isme mujhe na koee shakk hai aur, na hee kisi ko shakk hona chahiye aur ye mere Thoss Sunni Akeedey ki Baat hai, aur beta aap Bihar ki hain ispe aapko fakr hona chahiye kyon ke aaj bhi Bihaar se Kabiliyet ki Nahre bahtin hain, jo log Bihar ko, ya fahan ke logon ko, neecha dikhate hain wo khud kisi kabil nahi hote honge jo aisa sochte hain.
Salaam to all of you.
I am student of 9th class. But what is the meaning of it, I had not Support Basha and other, but now that time i wanted to say that, without understanding i support jamsheed basha.
How disgust it,
How a genius say like that it means that without read my comments Aslam bsurgwar comment on me. Aslam bsurgwar sb please read my comments again and reply again, what I say. About jamsheed basha. My comment prove it that I m not Agree with jamsheed pasha with this topic.
But if I m supporting this topic:
CHAPTER 6: TABLEEGHI JAMAAT - THE REMEDY OF A MENTAL UPHEAVAL by Maulana Arshadul Qadri
http://newageislam.com/newageislamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=927 What bad i do,
Sorry all guys who is present there.
No one provides prove for defense own comment.
Rasulullaah sallalahu alaihi wassallam says: In debate: use Hikmat for prove something, but here present guys have no prove no quotation of Quran and hadees and any thing, It means that all are unknown to Islamic interpretation knowledge. How fooooooooooool all are here.
sirf zabardasti kerne se kuch prooove nahi ho sakta. aur to aur mujhe lagta hai basha sb to reply sirf ghusse main hi ker rahe hai
aur kuch reason nahi hai,
isliye ki unke nutfe tak ko Aslam sb ne choda jo log yahaan shuru se hai voh jante hai ki editor sir ne use edit kerdiya hai,
ager kuch prooooooooove kerna hai to galiyaaaaaaaaaaan dene se thodi hi naaaaaaaaaaa proooooooove hoga, rasullulaaaaaah ne ferma ya tha ki jo dusroooooooon ko galiyaaaaaaaaaan detaaaaaaaa usne apne maaa baaap ko galiyaaaaaaaan di to nutfe wali baaaaaaaat basha ke liye hui ya phir galiyaaaaaaan dene waloon ke liye, ye bataye mujhe zara koi,
maine to kahaa tha ki jamsheeed basha ye baaaaaaaat kyon keh rahe hai yazid to lanaaaaatti bidyaati hai, itne sare aaaalim aaaye hai kisi ne khaaa ye din me milaawat ho sakti, lekin isse Aqide ke Kharabi proooove nahi hoti.
main mazak udane walon ke traaf se nahio ho sakti chahe voh mere aqide ka ho ya phir mera baaaaaaap hi kyon na ho. isliye samjhane ka tarika maaazak nahi hota, isi liye to aaaaaaaaaap jaise aaaaqalmando ki meher bani se diin yaahaan tek pahunch geya ki deobaand ki jit hone lagi nahi to aaaaaaaap sunni jo ki hindustan main 100 % the, chooooor ho gaye.
kher mere comment ki to Mazak ude gi hi ki MAzak udane wale sunniyon ke bich main ek sunni ladki aaaayi bhi to hamare mazak wali word use na kerke hamu samjhane lagi
Aur haaaaaaaaaaan ek baaaaaat Aqalmando aur bina dalil ke baaaaaat kene walon bata dooooon main Qattar sunni gharane se belong karti hoon zara mere uper apne fatwoon ki bauchaar na hi kare to Achhha hoga, lekin sunniyoon ko bardaasht kahaaaaan hone waala voh to karengae hi mera personal experince bhi hai
Mere comment ko bachhcho ki comment samajh ki bhoool nahi kerna, isliye ki maine badimehnat se comment likha hai
vaise bhi aaaaaaaap log to sahid bihariyon ko jaahil bhi samjhte hoge. isliye meri ragdaiii ker di.
vaise main aaap sabhi ko sochne ki salaah zarooor dungi,
Yaziiid LAnAtiiiiii hai.
My previous comment: where I am wrong. Tell me
11/22/2008 syeda farheen fatima
salaam to all of you.
jamsheed basha saheb
I read alots of comment in newageislam by your. I found you are genius in knowledge of islam and basic concept not only this topic. I read it in tableghi jamat, arab wahabi and wahibism Criticism. I had read it (posting of syed md asadullah) in some
Where in comment. After that i think you are realy genius and you make me as a fan.
Sorry for my suggestion, and I believe it you will understand and with true. But in this topic i think you realy very very confused and misguided by somebody, because in this time saving imaan is very
Difficult because alots of munafiqin in Islam are wondering and expanding such confusionalbe questions. after this question Somebody think it that slightly true because Zakir naik say, as you.
But in whole history nobody questionize this question. Suppose that if Zakir naik is true that means a lots sahaba which were persent that time, kahja moinudeen chisti ra, hazrat ghuse
Azam ra, data ganje shakar ra, alif sani ra and alots of wali,
muhaddisin, fiqhia historian all are wroooooooooong, how it
Possible, Imagine it.
shanaz online, syed ahmad, md ahmad (Zakir Naik: Temples and
Churches should not be allowed in Saudi Arabia, how a scholar says Like that), irfan khan not only Ziya rizvi, saf rizvi, hasan iqbal,
aslam sb, likes alots of men are always with prophet Muhammad
And Ahle bait. Because ahle bait are by born holy. its prove by
Quran and hadees.
A man who is by birth a nabi and wali and ahle bait, how it
pooooooooooossible that he will fight for poltics not for Islam. If
It is possible than quran hadees cocept of allah is all are false. And
Who believe it who is also non believer (kafir)? But i can’t say who is kafir when he recite kalima and say i m Muslim. And here the topic is change also. And a question is also if Zakir naik is true so why is repent and apologize for his statement,
It means that it is only for popularity and misguided some body.
Comment of ashike rasool in last paragraph is 100%true'
Think think and think a lots of time.
How it possible? allah save me, my family and my Muslims, to munafiqin in Islam, who is wondering and spreading such questions and a lots of way.
syeda farheen fatima
BASHA YOU ARE DOOMED. THE COLLEGES FROM WHERE YOU GOT THOSE DEGREES WOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOU. SHOW YOUR DEGREES AND YOUR RESEARCH PAPER TO YOUR R.A. YAZID WHEN YOU MEET HIM IN HELL. WHILE YAZID WILL SURELY APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT, HE WILL BASH YOU UP FOR INCORRECT REPORTING OF FACTS. WHEN IN HELL, TELL YAZID ABOUT YOUR FAILED ATTEMPTS TO CREATE A SUNNI-SHIA DIVIDE ON EARTH. AND MAKE SURE YOUR TALK HAS A BIT OF A JOURNALISTIC FLAVOUR FOR YOUR MENTOR THE GREAT SCHOLAR THE GREAT ZAKIR NAIK WILL BE WATCHING YOU WHILE CONDUCTING HIS DAWAH CLASSES!
Tuney sahi jaana ki mai 80 saal ka hun, magar TERA DIMAAGH TO ABHI AATH SAAL KE BACHE SEY BHI GAYA GUZRA HAI tu apni iss kachi umr me itna bada Iblisee hai to badaa ho ker TU kya saari dunia ko jaalane ki koshish karne wala hai? yaadh rakh Husain ibney Ali Ra ke dushman iss duniya me bhi jaltey hain aur jahennum to unka asli mukaam hai Inshallah'. Tu ek desi gali ke kuttey ke mafiq bhaunkta jaa, abb Aslam terey Muh pe matti daalta hai, bass! To jalke raakh ho ja apnee hee jalan aur hasad me, lanat ho tujpe aur yazeed pe aur zakir naik pe jiske wajah se ye saari bahes shuru huwi aur mujhe tujh jaise neech ke Muh lagna padaa.
Please dont drag my name I joined trhe debate much later after I read this article by chance and the comment later on. The article is on the Google network Your comment amused me and so did the debate between you and Mr Saif Rizvi. My comments were natural that would come out from any Muslim irrespective to any sect he belongs and you are among a handful of people who in the histiry of Islam has eulogised Yazeed (LA) The issue is not shia and sunni. If you think Imam Husain was a shia then his grandaftaher too was a shia so was his father and mother. Nowhere Mr Rizvi in his article said this but as he said that Zakir Naik and his followers are creating a dispute where none exists. How true his words were in the article. You come out of this narrow mind but even if you want you will never as Allah has created a veil of blindness on all the followers of Yazeed. you are one of them, a front runner and you know what hapened to your Yazeed and his men.
A person filled with hatred towards the lovers of the Prophet and his progeny and with intense love for the killer of Prophet's grandson so as to refer to him as RA, cannot be human leave alone being a Muslim. He can at best be described as a Yazidi, a mad man or as an animal although that would amount to insulting the innocent breed. So I see no point in replying to a barking dog.
Sunnis and Shias who together account for over 90% of the world muslim population, despite their differences have lived peacefully for the last 1400 years. Sunnis respect the Imams and Shias accept Khilafat as a fact of history. I have known many Shias and have never seen even one of them ever cursing any of the Caliphs. On the contrary I have never heard them condemning anyone who does.
My suggestion therefore to my brothers in faith is not to get misled by an ill-read man who cannot withstand the amity between the Sunnis and the Shias; and who's only agenda is to create a divide in the Muslim community.
Basha meri jaan sabar karo yaar
abb chupp bhi karo tum, tumhare sathianey ka acha khasa julus nikal gaya hai ,fir bhi tum ho ke baaz nahi aa rahe, abb maine aisa kya kah diya jo aap huqqa paani le ke mujh per chardh gaye, ek hee baat ko baar baar likh ker, kyon apni lanat malamat karwa rahe ho, maine to tumhe pahle hee mashwara diya tha ki Maafi maang lo, Allah se tauba mang lo aur matti dalo iss bahes mubhaise pe, magar tumne to apni neechi zaat dikha di, mujhe bhe apne keechad me ghaseetne ki naakaam koshish kar daali. bass karo yaar, nahi to tum kahin pagal na ho jao, mai to tumhara madadgar hun tumhe ye kyon nahi samajh aata hai ki ye saare log mil kar tumhara khilauna banaye huwe hain aur khel rahe hain tumse ye sab, tum ho ki apna Julus Nikalwane pe aamaada ho.
Jamsheed basha hi again.
You are so timid and foolish at times, in your self praise and bragging you expose your fragile mental balance again and again…You can’t differentiate between S A H RIZVI who is an ex editor of Delhi Midday and is a well known figure among the intellectuals and I am SAF RIZVI, when you feign ignorance, I just can’t help, but doubt that you are actually a Pakistani WAHABI as rightly pointed out by Mr Aslam Khan sb. Had you been Indian you would not have been, so Ignorant so as, not to know MR. S A H RIZVI and his journalistic stature , your eye for detail is so poor that you can not see that SAF RIZVI is different and is not an editor as I have clarified it in my earlier post. This shows how shallow and childish you are ….How would a person who’s article is posted by the editor newageislam.com would come to defend his own article? How can you be so stupid BASHA? In your hatred you can’t even tell and ( H ) from ( F) in a name and you talk of doing some research work and flash your degrees which I know, are for sale in your country, in India we have real people, real Muslims and real intellectuals not pseudo individuals like yourself. Have you ever pondered over the fact as to why you are loosing grip and going over the edge? Its because of your hatred for the progeny of the Prophet pbuh’ and your glorifying the Yazid laanati, your ancestor, this, I am sure is Lanat of Allah talah on you, that you are repetitive and carry no weight in what ever you say, because in your next message you contradict yourself, you so many times tried to divide SHIAS AND SUNNIS here on this site and every time you tryed that, you exposed your own WAHABI SELF and got spitted upon in contempt by educated SUNNI’S and SHIAS alike. ISLAM is one. SUNNI’S AND SHIAS ARE ONE only the events of KARBALA distinguishes Muslims and Yazidees and on which side of the fence you are standing has been established long back in this debate. Burn in hell with Yazeed lanati it is your choice I did my best to salvage you from the clutches of Iblees.
IS IT JAMSHEED BASHA BASHING OR SUNNI MUSLIM BASHING
Finally SAF Rizvi said he was not the ex-editor but how come his name has appeared at the end of the comments here as Senior Journalist and Ex-Editor of Delhi Miday. Are you not the same who wrote that ill tempered article on Dr. Zakir Naik with all fallacy about Islamic history? If you are not the same person, you are pardoned. Or else I would take him to task for writing such stuff with full of contradictions, irrelevant quotations from the life of Prophet Mohammed PBUH and conveniently keeeping aside the defenceless story of Karbala. SAF Rizvi threw the towel even before the bout began at the end of the above article. Any way I have dealt with that article much earlier and would counter all his fallacies later on.
Mr.Rizvi, first tell how old this Aslam Khan Barelvi is. Is he around 80 years. Rizvi pleaded to deal with this old man courtiously, but the way he writes in his shabby Urdu language, making fun of it and unable to say completely what he would like to say, one cannot say he is a man of wisdom. From the blabbering, one can understand that this man is truely aged one and he is intolerant due to his advance age besides being arrogant. These are not the good sign of a wise man. Another thing is that I would never follow his mentor Rizvi or I would rather make him to follow my path. Soon he realises his folly of not believing the shia written stories, is better for him and his followers.
SAF Rizvi came in high defense of his follower AK Barelvi and he receiprocated through his pampering words of praise. Its a mutual admiration society. Prophet Mohammed PBUH and his great progeny in whose name, these guys were spitting venom on their detractors, was totally averse to open praise. Prophet PBUH used to say that a man who praises the other on his face, he infact is spitting on his face. Here in this case, who is spitting on whom. Hazrat Ali RA in whose name, these Shias formed the sect and cause a great split in Islam, said that a true friend is one, who points out his mistake. Rizvi, Barelvi, and others, zara to sharam karo, and stop indulging in mutual praise of one another. This is totally lacking in decency. These learned illeterates of Islamic society think that they are causing some damage to my personality by indulging in such street talks befitting their character. But it is not so. I would continue to torment the hypocrites of Islam, who cause a great divide that has sullied the fair name of Islam.
Dr. Aejaz Ahsan joins the chorus with Aslam Khan Barelvi, SAF Rizvi, Tabrez Ali and scores of others in their one point agenda of condemning Jamsheed Basha. Unable to counter me intellectually, Dr. Aejaz Ahsan, joined the chorus to attack me personally. They are all spitting on heaven not realising that it would not spoil the soil of the heaven, but would fall back on them.
In any case in order to please these ill informed guys I for one would not change my attitudes, views, and style of calling a spade a spade. The debate would continue as “picture abhi bakhi hai mere dost”.
About Jinnah, I still hold the view that he was the chief villain of partition vis-a-vis the sufferings of Muslims of India. By saying this, I cannot stop praising him for his one line utterance that he followed the religion of Prophet Mohammed PBUH who was neither shia nor sunni. This I quoted deliberately because he belonged to Khoja sect, which is a strange sect of Islam, does not follow Islam in totality but of its own like offering dua in a mosque along with women folk three times instead of “salah” much against what was ordained in Quran like “Wa Kheemus salata Watus Zakata”. What is salat and how it is performed, it was designed, practiced and followed by Prophet PBUH and Sahabas but not the kind of namaz performed by Khojas or other shias. That is why I asked them to emulate Jinnah on that score only. Dr. Aejaz quoting me out of context held me as the follower of Jinnah. I was never a follower of Jinnah but a bitter critic of him holding him responsible for the present plight of the Muslims of India. I think this would satisfy all.True, Mr. Aejaz, my name sound Irani. My father thought I would shine like the great persian king who was known for his “Jam-e-Jamsheed”. I too did not like this name, as normal Muslim name is missing. I tried to change my name but in vain for various reasons. But what is there in name Mr. Aejaz. It is all there in the mind of the individual. He is known by his character and deeds rather than by his name. See you guys have beautiful names, like Aejah Ahsan, Rizvi, Aslam Khan, Tabrez Ali but what is the use. You people lack basic character, civility, courtesy, tolerance, decency and dignity which is required of all of you possessing such great names. But nothing of the sort is found in you. Here ends the argument on the phrasing of name of the individual, which is least important. A man who is named as Sheriff turn out to be badmash. Similarly, a man was named as Wali but infact he was number one shaitan in the street. Name has no relevance to the person unless he or she develops the character that befits his religion. In the end I would like to say "nobility comes from birth".....hope all of you got the message. Nani Palkiwala, the famous jurist once said, “The treason of the intellectual consists in his not speaking out loud and clear on behalf of the values, he stands by”. If you guys can understand this, I have done exactly what Palkiwala expected from the intellectual guy like me. I did write certain facts of history for I believed in upholding the highest tradition of intellectual honesty. If some one finds this unpalatable, I cannot but regret such attitude of the Muslims. Is this the reason why Muslims are a divided house? Go to any mosque, any Madarasa, or association of Muslims, one would find not unity but disunity among the cadres. In mosque, people fight over trivial matters starting from ablution, to the offering of prayers, standing in the line, recitation of suras, saying of fathiha, meeting of people after salam, etc., at every point these mosque frequenting Muslims would be quarreling among themselves. The faction ridden society is at logger head with each other. To an outsider, it would appear that Muslims are gathering in large numbers in a mosque for each prayerand they are jealous of their unity. But poor chap does not know that so much bitterness exist there within the precinct of the mosque. One wahhabi does not stand side by side with barelvi follower or a tableeqi jammati would not like to stand side by side with jamate Islami follower and one can find a number of people quarreling over the word “fathiha”. Those who do not believe in it would be conveniently called wahhabi or jamate islami follower or tableeqi jamat follower and vice versa. Similarly, those who visit dargahs are looked down by the wahhabis as biddati. The list of differences among the muslims is endless. The icing on the cake comes from Shias and Sunnis during Moharram over “tazia” procession.Now tell me, Dr. Aejaz, whether you approve of the type of namaz, azan, salam, wazoo and other “Arakine Islam” performed by Shias are truly Islamic. If you agree, then you must be a shia. Because shias have tampered with the religion in the same way the christians tampered with the religion of Isah Messiah. I will just give some differences.You and I believe that we must follow what Prophet Mohammed PBUH preached and taught us within the ambit of the Holy Quran. Does anybody has a right to tamper with those practices? Never. But this is different in the case of shia. They changed the Azan adding the name of Ali RA, Imam Hasan and Imam Hussain RA. My question is this the Azan given by Bilal RA and appreciated by Prophet Mohammed PBUH himself? Is this kind of Azan given in Mekkah and Madinah Munawarah? Then is it not tampering with the practices of Sahabas? The next most important aspect of the difference comes from the utterances of Kalima. We, the Sunni Muslims, say as said by Prophet Mohammed PBUH and Sahabas, Tabayeen, Four Imams and others as “La Ilaha Illal Lah, Mohammadur Rasoolullah”. Now watch what Shias say, “La Ilaha Illallah, Mohammadur Rasoolullah, Ali un waliullah, etc.” Is it not tampering? How can they change the very “Kalima” of Islam.Next comes, the offering of prayers. Here one must understand that Prophet Mohammed PBUH was leading the prayers at Medinah mosque as long as he was there. When he was ill, he asked Hazrat Abu Bakr RA to lead the prayers and he offered the prayers from behind followed by other sahaba karam RAA. This is what is practiced by all Sahabis, Tabayeen, Tabe Tabayeen, Awliya Karam, etc. Till today, all Sunni Muslims offer prayers behind the Imam. But for Shias, there was no Imam. They offer prayers in congregation but without a Imam. The irony is, some one from outside the congregation would be directing the prayers. Now my question is, is it the kind of “salat” offered by Prophet PBUH, even his progeny like Hazrat Ali RA, Imam Hussein RA, Imam Hasan, RA, other sahabas during their life time were performing? Were they offering prayers on clay from Karbala? Where was Karbala then? Why this practice was introduced by Shias after the killing of Imam Hussein at Karbala? Did Ali or Hussain RAA asked their followers to do so? It is sheer a biddate sayiah, a prohibitory practice. This is not Islamic prayer, but it is something innovative one. This is not acceptable to Sunni Muslims. Other major differences between shia prayers and sunnis are as follows:Shias start the ablution from feet, while sunni start from rinsing of hands.Shias offer prayers on clay from Karbala, sunnis offer prayers everywhere.Shias break fast after performing Mughrib prayers but sunnis break fast before Mughrib prayers, exactly after the sunset.Shias offer prayers without a imam in a mosque but sunnis offer prayers behind Imam always.Shias say their 12th Imam has gone missing in the mountains, which mountain no body knows. But still carry the story that he would appear on the doomsday to lead shia community to safety.Shias observe month of Moharram as a month of Mourning; Sunnis observe fast and observe the month of Moharram as a month to rejoice as Allah created the world in this month.Shias perform tazia during the first ten days of Moharram culminating into a “Taziah” procoession; while sunnis observe three days fast till 10th day of Moharram.Shias indulge in cursing of the great caliphs like Hazrat Abu Bakr RA, Hazrat Umar RA and Hazrat Usman RA; No such cursing is permitted in Sunni sect.
If you are a Sunni and claim to be the ardent follower of Prophet Mohammed PBUH and his progeny, do you approve of such innovation of Islam or tampering of the religious practices to suit their sect? If you do approve of it, then Allah's and Rasool's lanat would be fall on every one.
Secondly, do you approve of such abuses against the great Caliphs of Islam, who were declared as Jannati in their life time only. You say nobody has named his children after Yazid or Mawiyah. It may be true for the propaganda carried out against these two greats of Islam. But then show me one Shia, who has named after the great Caliphs of Islam like Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Usman RAA? But Hazrat Ali RA himself named his other three children after Abu Bakr, Umar and Usman RAA. This is the kind of hypocrisy being practiced by Shias and certain people from the Sunni community follow them blindly not knowing that the Shias were, de facto, condemning the Sunnis through Yazid RA. Don't be a party to such lanati practices and earn the wrath of Allah.
Dr. Samuel Johnson said, " Even God does not propose to judge man, until the end of his days. Then why should you and I judge him." Who are these guys to prejudge a person and declare one is lanati, dozakhi or jannati. First peep into yourself andfind out where you stand through your deeds and talks. Here on this web page, many of the ignorant people are indulging in such talks that would cause immense hurt feelings to others. Allah says one can break His Kaaba, but one should not break man's heart because He dwels there. If any decency is left, search for truth and repent what you guys said about me, ask for not my forgiveness but Allah, He will surely forgive for Allah likes those who ask for fogiveness. Say, " Allahumma Innka Afuvan; Tuhibbul Afwa fafu Anni". Allah would surely pardon the ignorants, what was said and written out of sheer ignorance not out of anger or jealousy. Facts of history are in their place, you and I cannot change the events that had happened years ago. Where is the point in quarrelling over the events that have emotional bondings but for the way one looks at it. I look at Karbala event from the political angle but some look at it through prisms of emotions and blind faith on the stories passed on to them from generation to generation. This is the big difference between me and others. Therefore no one but Allah is qualified to say, whether one was right or wrong; one is jannati or jahannami; one is good or evil or bad. Leave the rest to the Almighty to whom all of us shall return to take account of our deeds.
I call upon all my detractors to have some fear of Allah, if you are true Muslims. We have many more problems to solve, political, social, educational and representative. Let's all join to wage a jihad against poverty, illiteracy, social bacwardness, economic crisis that has engulfed the Muslim community, educational backwardness and topping it all our rights to lead a decent life free from guilt. As Dr. Ali Asghar Engineer pointed out, we need a political party of our own to fight for our rights. We must work hard to give the best of education to our children free from bias and prejudices of the religion, we must teach our children to be more proactive and tolerant so that they can live as equal citizens with the children of other religious groups. This is what is exactly needed from the intellectuals of Islam and not a quarrel over Karbala or Caliphate whether it should have gone to Ali RA or Abu Bakr.
As Long Fellow said, " Lives of great men all remind us; we can make our life sublime. And departing leave behind us; foot prints on the sands of time".
Gentlemen of the debate, our greats like 1,24,000 Prophets, the last being our great Prophet Mohammed PBUH, Khulfae Rashdeen, Sahabas from Ashra Al-Mubashira and Four Imams, Wali Allahs and other greats of Islam have left their foot prints on the sands of time so that we can follow them and make our life sublime.
My advise at the end of it is that do not follow beaten path, it is for beaten people. Follow where there is no path and leave a trail behind. Be a trail blazer rather a mediocre follower of a beaten path. Jai Hind.
Abb teri journalism ki badi badi baton aur teri zuban ki chashni ko kya huwa ? Tu itna badaa padha likha gadha hai ki tuney apne message fir se copy aur paste kar diya, takey log mera aur Saf rizvi sahib ka tere muttalik jo message hai wo koyee padh na sake? Kyon tujhe sharm aa rahi hai? Agar aa rahi hai to chullu bhar paani me duub marr aur pahunch jaa apne chacha Yazeed lanat marey ke paas, magar ek he message ko baar baar copy kar ke auron ka keemti waqt zayaa matt kar. Likhna hee hai to kuch naya likh apni farzee qabiliyat ko estemaal me la.
I can understand that why Aslam Khan Barelvi could not understand my wisdom filled with historical facts laden writings, since he cannot understand the language. But I cannot understand that a person of the calibre of SAF Rizvi, who himself was an ex-Editor, did not take pain to go through my articles in its totality but jump to a blind conclusion that I am opposed to Ahle Bait. This is totally unexpected from him. I will deal with him later in the article, let me first answer this jahil Barelvi. He has boasted that two of his daughters are well educated, having better educational qualifications than me and are well placed in life. Congratulations, as not many Muslim families could boast of giving such high education to girls. But what about Barelvi himself? I am still at a loss to understand as to why he is still continue to argue in that shabby Urdu. It appears that he is not only ignorant of English but also Urdu. I am really sorry to hear such third rated comments about me in his demonstration of street talk. Such people are not fit to enter into a debate on such a high voltage historical events.
If you do not know the a,b, c and d, of Islamic history, Barelvi, please do not try to write a book on it. Do not use third rated language to express your anger. If you are angry, there are more sober ways of showing your anger but what can I say to him he is the true follower of equally ignorant person called SAF Rizvi. For his information, I have never revealed my multiple postgraduate degrees in various disciplines including two specialised degrees in Laws besides my knowledge of Parsi, Arabic, Urdu, Tamil, Hindi and English languages. It is no forum for me to demonstrate the prowess of my multi-lingual personality and the position I hold in the society. But with modesty I would admit that I am a humble Musalman who believes in Prophet PBUH and Ahle Bait with Holy Quran detailed by Hadits, which are my guiding principles in life. I am not a wahhabi or a munkir as these guys made out of me. You are hurting the feelings of a true Musalman, who always believe in its prosperity and have been fighting day and night for its rightful place in legislatures, administration, employment and education. I will continue to do so till they are achieved.
Mr.SAF Rizvi, you said so many things about me, my educational qualifications and knowledge of Islam and Islamic history. It is said that it does not matter how tall your grandfather was, you must do your own growing. Such a knowledgeable person SAF Rizvi, as I made out from his past postings, if he indulges in such kind of street talks like Barelvi and joining with them a new entrant was Tabrez Ali of Jaunpur. I do not understand as to why you guys are so agitated over the factual reporting of the history? Why don't you come out with your version of the history and correct me with facts of history instead of indulging in blind opposition to my writings, simply because you project to be in awesome love of Ahle Bait and others are munkirs. This is not fair Mr. SAF Rizvi. Please demonstrate your personality through decency as civility demands without indulging in street like abuses. Show that you too is a gentleman which possess the quality of tolerance for criticism. Prophet Mohammed PBUH and Ahle Bait, are not your personal properties. They are the Amanat of the whole Ummah and I am part of it. I love them as much as you do, if not more. But facts are facts, one cannot deny it. My advice to you and others who joined you in chorus, to kindly go through my articles once again without a prejudiced mind and would then understand the finer points of Islamic history, forgotten by Sunnis due to overpowering of the propaganda being carried out for centuries by Shia historian. Open your eyes and see the reason, Allah would definitely guide you.
Let me clarify once again, that I am not a wahhabi and is very vocal critic of wahhabis and those following the foot steps of Jamate Islami and Tableeqi Jamaat. I have written a few articles against these Jamaats here on the web site as well as elsewhere including my harshest comment on Moulana Moududi. If you have followed my articles still hanging on this web site and elsewhere, you would appreciate like Fareen Mohtharama did on this web page that I have condemned such wahhabi practices.
As a matter of fact, I was the one who wrote a number of articles on the fallacy of two nation theory of Jinnah based on which Pakistan was created leading to misery of the millions of Muslims who stayed back in India after 1947. These articles were written way back between 1981 and 1985 which were published in Arab News and Saudi Gazette, besides other news papers. At that though I was supported by my Indian Muslims but came in for severe criticism from the Pakistanis. I never bothered but continued to hold Jinnah, the biggest villain of the century, who had not bothered about the fate of left over Indian Muslims. and that the creation of Pakistan was the blunder of the century. These words would not go well with the intolerant Pakistanis, who would not understand the pain, the sufferings and the anguish of the Muslims of India as they are sitting pretty there. I still hold the same view and have recently written a few articles in this regards. If you have time, Mr. Rizvi, kindly go through these articles, to know how truely Indian I am. I need not show off my patriotism. I love my country that is India and I am proud to be Indian and declare that when the question of my country comes, I am Indian first, Indian second and Indian last. But the problem with you people was you were all indulging in extra territorial loyalties and fail to demonstrate your Indianness. My only regret is if all Indian Muslims, come out of that mindset of minoritism and doubtful loyalties, Muslims would never suffer here in India. Now tell me, how many Muslims are as liberal and holding the same views as Iam? I wish there must be many and it is the duty of each and every Muslim to spread the message of patriotism, brotherhood and respect for our Hindu brothern, who are equally concerned about our sufferings. Lets spread a message of peace and fight for our rights through democratic means rather than indulging in terrorist activities. One must clearly understand that no one could solve the problems through violence as violence begets violence. See the answer to seriel blasts in the form of Melagaon and Modsa, Ajmer and Mecca Masjid blasts. Are these misguided IM youth were not responsible for the growth of Hindu terrorism which is more dangerous? What would happen to the nation if every group indulge in retaliatory violence is any body's guess.
It is time to tell the people of India, that Muslims are equal partners in its development and swear not to led our children to the path of violence and estruction. The lives and properties of people of India is as much dear to the Muslims as to others. We would continue to live in an atmosphere of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. This is what I believe and would continue to preach to all Indians including Muslims. If you say this is hypocrisy, I cannot help insolance.
While surfing through the net, I got this site and read some of the article especially this one and also as why Jan reconverted from Islam. Living in a Muslim country and as a non Muslim have been a great experience. I have read a lot of Islamic literature since 1987. To be honest Mr Zaklir Naik and his channel has nothing worth a salt to project what Islam a great religion is. He is flimsy. lack depth and too flashy. Even when he visited here sometime back he was not impressive at all. As a non Mulsim who has interest in Islamic literature, I was shocked what he said about Yazeed whom we all eqaute with Ravana, the demon. Shocking it was for me that the demon who killed the granson of the Holy Prophet can derive mercy from Allah you call Bhagwan we.
When Krishna tells Arjun to fight, it was to fight against sin . Prophet grandson Husain too fought sin in the name of demon Yazeed and was martyred at the Karbela, Iraq. We treat this a supreme sacrifice and I am surprised how some people extol and respect him. It is beyond my comprehension that thinker like Mr Naik and his supporters Jasmheeed Basha can come out in support. I am aghast
SABHI HAZRAAT ko Nacheez ka SALAAMAaur ek khaas guzarish hai, agar ho sake to abb iss gadhe Jamshed Basha ki sawaari karnay se ham tamam log gurez karen, aur abb ye bhi zahir hai ki janab saf rizvi sahab ke aqeeday ki Raushni me ye basha namuraad bhi NAHANE laga hai aur unse mutaasir hone laga hai, aur isko ye samajh aa gaya hai ki WAHABIAT achi cheez nahi aur lihaza, ye abb cheekh cheekh ke kahne laga hai ki ye WAHABI NAHI aur ye Zakir Naik ka himaiyti bhi nahi fil haal, itna hee kaafi hai, kam se kam isne koshish to kari, bass ek baar ye tamaam Nabi-e-kareem saww ke khaandaan ke dushmano pe lanat bhej de chahe bina Yazeed lanati ka naam liye hee sahi, to mai bhi apne budhe haton ko utha ke iss baasha ke liye Allah se maafi Talab karunga, aur janab saif rizvi sahab mujhe yakeen hai aap ghalaban, mujhse umr me kaafi chote honge, magar aapne mujhe bhi khaasa kuch sikha diya aur sabse badi baat ye, ki jo dili takleef mujhe BASHA ki nazeba baaton se pahunchi thi usse aapne jo tahzeeb ki sikhlaee dee usse mujhe yakeen ho gaya ki abhi insaniyat aur haqqaniyat dono hi dunia me barqarar hai aur Muashre ki tasveer itni Buri nahi jitni ham sha-er aksar kheencha karte hain. ALLAH aapko lambi umr aur doosron ko achi salah dene ki aur taufeeq ata kare aur hamesha khush rakhe ameen.
JAMSHEED BASHA HI...
Just writing to correct you, that in your hurried and child like approach, you miss upon the serious things in life, you don’t seems to take good advice as well...first I am no editor, never was, nor do I intend to, in future.
BASHA you have been vacillating so much in your previous posts, that, it is really difficult to trust you, when you so vehemently deny that you are not opposing the Ahle-bait in any way, for instance if this is true and suppose I am fooled by your hypocrisy for the time being,,, how can you proclaim your love for the progeny of the Prophet pbuh, especially his beloved grandson Husain Ibn Ali ra when you doubt the basic cause of the events of karbala and giving, so much benefit of doubt to a known criminal and blatant offender of Islam the Yazid lanati? How can you even doubt the Intentions of Husain Ibn Ali ra about the war that took place in Karbala which cleansed the evil within Islam, once and for all times to come, had there been no Karbala, there would have been no difference between you and me...I would not have been my dignified self and a true Muslim as I am now, I would have just been a degraded Nomad in the wilderness of Islam just as yourself. As regard to your comments on Janab Aslam khan sb who I understand is a very elderly person, at least respect his age, unless you reply like this to your elderly father too, if ever he disagrees to your opinion? You have been quoting Bernard Shaw and bragging about your English literature background and bla bla...I am sure you must have read Othello’ I did in class 7th, do you remember, what Othello said to Desdemona’s father when they first met? “SIR, YOU WOULD COMMAND MORE BY YOUR AGE THAN BY YOUR SWORD” so my dear BASHA learn to respect elderly people and do not judge them by their education, this is another bad attribute of yours, which Allah swt dislikes very much. Janab Aslam khan sb is a well known Shair’ and a renowned Poet (you will appear like a little mice when you compare his stature with that of yours) and I am sure he did not feel decent enough to stoop down to your own level and brag about his status and education, so he decently left a hint that even, his youngest daughter is more qualified than your bloating self. Lastly I reiterate that all the harshness is stemmed in the fact that you deny unconditional love and respect to Prophet pbuh and his progeny and on the contrary you give respect the biggest criminal in the history of Islam the Yazeed lanati who was the enemy number one of Islam and hated the progeny of the Prophet Pbuh....and today in your post, you took a U turn and said that, you love and respect the Ahlul-bait and the Prophet pbuh’ Basha I think my patience is required elsewhere, in more constructive work than dragging you away from the fire of hell, so I take your leave and come back again to BASH you more lols...by the way, literary man ..have you read THE TAMING OF THE SHREW? Read it , you will identify yourself with the beautiful heroin, who was nasty and stubborn but was later on tamed. If this happens in your case, I will be the happiest guide and friend ever and both your worlds will be saved.
It is time to tell the people of India, that Muslims are equal partners in its development and swear not to led our children to the path of violence and estruction. The lives and properties of people of India is as much dear to the Muslims as to others. We would continue to live in an atmosphere of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. This is what I believe and would continue to preach to all Indians including Muslims. If you say this is hypocrisy, I cannot help insolance-- Jamsheed Basha
You sound so preposterous. You talk about terrorism, violence and destruction witrhout realising the fact that your leader Yazeed LA was the biggest terrorist of his time and your preacher that Zakir Naik supports Osama and wants Muslim to become terrorists. As for Jinnah your statement are recorded in these columns where you have asked Muslims to emulate Jinnah. Dont give this crap as I said anyone who supports Yazeed and his crime cannot be a true mationalist. Also it sounds so humourous from your words that you love Prophet (SAW) and the ahlul bayt for anyone who has great love for the wrteched man like Yazeed, no Muslims ever prefer to take his name in the morning for fear of inviting Allahs wrath, can never have the right guidance to love these noble soul. It is only pity that I have for you
Janab jamsheed basha sahab salaam
Mujhe aisa lagta hai ki abb aap, ek achayee ka sabut den, aur buzurgwar Aslam sb se, aur apake khaas dost aur guide janab Saf rizvi sb se, aur tamaam sunni aur shia hazraat jinhone aapke message padha hai unse maafi maang len aur apni ghustakhi jo apne nabi kareem sallahu waale hee wassalam aur unke khandan ke dusmano ki tareef kar ke kari hai uske liye haath jodh ke Allah subhan tala se bhi maafi mange aur is lambi hoti ja rahi bahes ko yahin khatam karen Allah aapko akal de hamari aisee dua hai aur gujarish hai ki meri urdu ka meherbani kar ke mazak mat udaiyega apne pahle he Aslam sb ko ki qadr ka naraz kar diya hai.
Basha, tu kab sudhrega, tune likha mujhe english nahi aati iss liye mai teree ghair Islami guftugu ko samajh nahi sakta, aur blindly Janab SAF RIZVI sb. ka suport kar raha hun? Tu apni padhai likhayee ke nashe me ye bhul gaya ki AQEEDA KI TAUFEEK ALLAH TALAH AZEEM ATA KARTA HAI, USNE MUJHE DIYA AUR TO ISS SACHE AQEEDEY KI RAUSHNI SE AB TALAK MAHRUUM HAI, WAJAH SIRF ITNI HAI KI TU AHLE-BAIT KE DUSHMANO KA HIMAYATI HAI AUR AISA KARNA GOYA JAHENNUM KE RASTE PE SAR PATT DAUDNAY JAISA HAI, ABBHI WAQT HAI AQEEDEY KI THOKAR KHA KE GIR JA, JAB UTHEGA TO MUSSALMAN BAN JAYEGA TUNEY APNI QABILIYAT KA ZIKR KIYA HAI TO MAI BATA DUN KI MERE DO BETEY HINDUSTAN KE AALA EDAIREY ( UNIVERSITY ) ME PROFFESSOR HAIN AUR EK BETA QUEENS UNIVESITY TORONTO CANADA ME TALEEM DETA HAI, MERI SAB SE CHOTI BETI TEREY SEY ZYAADA PADHI LIKHI AUR USKA DIMAGH ILM AUR IMAAN SE RAUSHAN HAI TERE SE KAHIN ZYADA. TU ITNA BADAA PADHA LIKHA JAHIL HAI ,KI EK MOHTARMA NE, KYA TERI UTH PATANG BATON KO BINA SAMJHE TAREEF KAR DI TO USKE NASHE ME JHUM KE KAHNE LAGA KI KOYEE MOHTARMA TERI BAKWAS KI FAN HO GAYEE? KIS KISM KA OCHA INSAAN HAI TU BASHA? HOSH ME AA AUR DARR KHUDA VAND KAREEM SE, AUR YE BAAR BAAR TU SHIA AUR SUNNI KI KYA BAKWAAS KARTA RAHTA HAI IS SITE PE 60 SEY ZYAADA MESSAGE HAIN MAGAR EK TU HEE HAI JO BAAR BAAR IS FITNA PARASTI KO HAWA DETA HAI, NIKAL AA APNE JEHALAT KE DALDAL SE AUR JAAN LE ISLAAM EK HAI KYA SHIA KYA SUNNI.
What makes you think the Shias have changed Azan. namaz and so on and they may be following the real one so you should follow them. Your arguments can never hold good as no Muslim and anyone with an imaan can ever believe a man who praises Yazeed, your ancestor. You may cast aspersion on the Shias, Sunnis Shafi Maliki or Hambali except the wahabis, but your degrees, edcuation is a big zero if you dont decipher what is right and wrong. You can argue on the belief but calling Yazeed RA, I am ashamed of you. Please change your name which also comes from an iranian origin ( Parsi do have this name like the late Jamshed Tata) to rhyme with Yazeed. Have some shame. I also disagree with Mr Saif Rizvi for his insistence on making you see light when you are plunged in total darkness. Please dont prove your nationality, anyone who praises Yazeed can never be a nationalist
(except those who are against the progeny of the Prophet pbuh and thus against the Prophet pbuh himself)
Salaam un Alaikum’
There has been so much of BASHA BASHING by all and sundry, that this enemy of the progeny of the Prophet of Islam is fast losing his grip and soon would go over the edge, as he is already showing signs of complete collapse of his reasoning faculty ...the first sign is self conceit and bragging, I ask this aged but foolish man who lacks maturity, that what has high Qualification got to do, with matters of faith and following the right Path of Islam, that ultimately leads to salvation? You mean to say, a person who does not hold a high qualification in worldly sense, cannot be a better Muslim than yourself? Shame on you JAMSHEED BASHA! You have a striking similarity with ZAKIR NAIK, who never fails to mention his Medical degree every now and then in his lectures, though he conveniently avoid mentioning, as to why, he abandoned such a noble profession, for money? Greed of other materialistic things ? What good is the mention of his medical qualification considering the platform he stands on? Self praise is something which Almighty regards with extreme repugnance and so is, ungratefulness to towards his most beloved Prophet pbuh and his progeny. BASHA you possess both attributes that Almighty strongly disapproves... my suggestion to you is ...you can be the best beneficiary from the bitter/ sweet debate on this page, if only you open up and shun your timid and short sighted approach, at least attempt to cure yourself of the disease called Wahabism and join the main stream Islam, which is nothing, if you minus the Prophet pbuh and his progeny from it.....This is the will of Almighty all along, be it Quran, be it hadith, or even historical facts penned by various learned historians, that no faith would qualify in the eyes of Allah Almighty unless, you realise and accept the greatness of the Prophet of Islam pbuh and his beloved progeny, If you cannot benefit from my faith oriented Guidance then you are the most unfortunate and the loss is entirely yours, don’t just see the contempt in my writing, for it is not aimed at you as a person, and I really have no interest in your nationality so relax on that front, my contempt is only directed at your distorted, biased and manipulated understanding of the simple and beautiful Islam, try to rectify that, you can still be a better Muslim, believe me your worldly qualification degrees will carry more weight if you correct yourself, really, the best part is, you would never have to flash your degrees to make people, to listen to you. Make little effort and Allah swt will Insha Allah guide you to see the light.
WHY MUSLIM UMMAH IS A DIVIDED HOUSE?
Islam is the finest religion on earth but its followers are worst, said George Bernard Shaw, the famous English dramatist. He was not wrong altogether. This hypersensitive Muslim community are the most reactive community in the world. They not only squabble with all the detractors but also among themselves. That is why Muslim Ummah is a divided house. Prophet Mohammed PBUH had warned his followers not to have any quarrel among themselves over trivial matters and divide the religion. The followers did the opposite exactly after his death playing into the hands of the munafiqeene Islam waiting for an opportunity.
It all started with the succession to the caliphate right after the death of Prophet Mohammed PBUH. The entire Muslim Ummah then was stunned at the death of our beloved Prophet PBUH. They were unable to reconcile to the fact that he too was human and had to taste death. Hazrat Umar RA took out the sword and declared that he would kill anyone who dare to say that the Rasool PBUH was dead. Hazrat Bilal RA who was so close to the Prophet PBUH, wept and left for unknown destination unable to bear the tragedy and would not believe the death of the Prophet PBUH. A pal of gloom descended on the entire Muslim Ummah. It was then left to the great leader in Abu Bakr RA to take over the reign and pacified Umar RA to the fact. He took command of the cliphate after being elected unanimously by the first Muslim parliament or Majlise Shoora that assembled at Medina Mosque. It was he who told the Muslims to be united in that great hour of grief. It was an herculean task to keep the flock united. But then the munafiqeen who were there planning to break this unity secretly. Its leader, Abdullah bin Saba, had engineered the split with the false propaganda that Hazrat Ali RA should have been the real choice of succession to the Prophet and that he was not consulted in the matter. But the fact was otherwise. The rest is history. The divide then was widening as more and more people in the tribal areas started believing the story spread by Ibne Saba. This gave way to the birth of shia sect which ultimately took a deep root after the untimely killing of the beloved grandson of the Prophet PBUH at Karbala. The tragedy unfolded the greatest conspiracy of divide among the Muslims.
If the Shias had not tampered with the religion changing the kalima, azan, namaz, roza and other practices, indulging in using abusive language against the greatest Sahabis like Hazrat Abu Bakr RA, Hazrat Umar Ra and Hazrat Usman Ra, Sunnis would not have any objections at all. But the shias started calling themselves a separate religion saying "shia mazhab ja baja". They took the killing of Imam Hussein RA at Karbala seriously and made it a life long mourning event. Till today it is being followed. Every year one can hear the clashes between Shias and Sunnis during the Moharram procession as if both belonged to different religion. This is the greatest tragedy of Islam. If at all Muslim should mourn, they should mourn the divide rather than on Karbala. There were greater tragedies in Islam like the killing of Hazrat Usman RA, Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Ali RA, who laid down their lives in the path of Allah. They were the real martyrs. We never mourn these deaths, then where is the question of mourning the political death happened at Karbala. It makes no sense. One must respect Ahle Bait and it is our duty but mourning is something which has no sanction in Islam. We are following the teachings of our beloved Prophet Mohammed PBUH and not the teachings of Hazrat Ali RA or Imam Hussein Ra. Incidentally both never wanted Muslims to split the Ummah. Even before his death, Hazrat Ali RA called Imam Hassan directing him to accept the leadership of the Amir Ul Momineen Hazrat Mawiyah RA as their ruler since there was no one better than him at that time to keep the Muslim united. Ali RA wanted no further split in the Ummah and directed his both sons to be united and support the caliphate of Hazrat Mawiyah. That was the greatness of the greatest fighter and commander Hazrat Ali RA was known for. Shias, the hypocrites of Islam, are trying to split Islam using their names. This is the tragedy associated with this sect of Islam.
Unfortunately for Muslims, the propaganda made by shia ghali historians has taken deep root into the society and they believed as if it was true, especially the story written by Zorastrian turned Muslim shia historian Tibri, whose grandfather's name was incidentally Yazid, some three hundred years after the event of Karbala. This is being repeated year after year by them during Moharram for the past 1400 years and the split would continue for ever. Some one in this web site suggested unity between shia and sunni but I for one believe that it would never happen as the fissures are so deep, it would be impossible for them to renounce all the biddat practices and join the main stream sunni Muslims. But some one should tell them that the kind of Islam they are practicing is not the one preached by the Prophet Mohammed PBUH and followed by their own Hazrat Ali RA and Imam Hassan and Imam Hussein RA. If they agree to this, then the unity is possible. Till then we have to remain a separate entity. But one thing can be achieved till such unity is achieved. Shias must desist from abusing our great Caliphs and we, the Muslim should have no objection to the Tazia procession. This is the only way out to save Islam, if they still believe in the Islam of Prophet Mohammed PBUH.
If the readers are willing for a greater debate on the issue, I am prepared to present my papers on the research work carried out by me. I feel that people like Fareen, who has been following my articles, came out in my defense and became my ardent fan as well. If some one like Rizvi, Barelvi and others too understand my articles and look at them in proper perspective, then they would appreciate the wisdom filled writings. I cannot force opinion on them but they must desist from calling me kafir or equating me with Dr. Zakir Naik, Yazid RA, etc. Whether I am jannati or zozaqi, it is for Allah to decide. Keep your aamal intact by not accusing others or abusing others. Its not Islamic either to term others kafirs, simply because his writings were not palatable and for he was speaking the bare truths, which they are trying to hide. Let the cat come out of the bag and the whole world would come to know the truth of Islam.
As for the accusation of Barelvi about my English prowess and knowledge of Urdu, it is not necessary for me to explain to him that I am a political scientist with masters degree in English literature and a distinction holder in the Urdu language itself. I did chide Barelvi for writing in Urdu but my point was whether he was qualified to criticise some one's articles in English when he does not understand that language at all. Besides, he was blindly supporting SAF Rizvi, who equally ignorant of history. My suggestion to these guys is to go to right people and get right tutition about the orginal history. As for my nationality, unlike pseudo nationalists, I am a true Indian and I love my country besides I am proud to be Indian. Jai Hind.
GIVE THE WORLD THE BEST YOU HAVE THE BEST WILL COME BACK TO YOU. Imam Husain gave the best and thousand of year later he is rememberd with reverence, his memories afresh and his supreme sacrifice still guide this troublesome humanity to the path of righteousness and glorification. Yazeed, May Allah Curse be on him and his supporters lie cursed, damned and facing the worst of fire in hell. There is nothing more to say on the controversy. I have read the wonderful article and the comment thereof and enjoyed the debate especially by one SAF Rizvi and the other Jamshed Basha. Comgratuilation to the New Age Islam. The site is really good
Dr Aejaz Ahsan, Kuwait
Asslam alaikumbasha sb ko maidan chodna padega ya phir yazeeed maloooooooooon kahne padegaya phir thetrology se ade rehna pdega after that when you will winsome body sayBasha (RA)kaisa raha jo jo chahta hai use to voh milna hi chahiyewassslaaaaam
Janab Fayaz sb. salamunalaikum’
I really appreciate your posting a message, which amounts to an apology, after what you have said in the past, which was not acceptable to so many believers including me, but Mashallah’ you have this basic courtesy to accept the wrong done and stand up like a man to rectify the same, now this requires guts beside Taufeeq’ from Allah swt , congratulation to you, for you certainly have that blessing. How I wish, that ignorant like JAMSHEED BASHA, should also see the light of the day and behave like a civilised person and a true Muslim, should stop his tirade against the progeny of ALLAH swt’s most beloved Prophet pbuh’, If he accepts his sin, I am sure no one is a permanent enemy of his, the BASHA BASHING will certainly stop, ALLAH swt IS MOST MERCIFUL AND MOST FORGIVING.
Dear all Readers
My aim was never to hurt anyone's feelings or break any one's heart, but i felt there should be all types of answers to the comments posted by the editor , including mine. I have not taken any serious note about the comments against me. If my words hurt anyone's feelings or break any one's heart, i am sorry for that & take all my comments back except those where i say that Quran is relevant till eternity. not because of the fear of being procecuted by any human, but because of the fear of Allah, i dont want to bring his anger upon me by hurting someone's feelings or breaking their heart. I might be right or wrong about my ideas , but i must not write degraded comments about any person or any country as all of this is the creation of Allah. I say sorry to all the readers for hurting their sentiments, and from now onwards will not write any comments on this site.
Sorry again to ever one & Goodbe
Message ek Dhiriye ke Naam jisse aap sab Jamsheed Basha ke naam se Jante hain
Ye meri ghairat ke khilaaf hai ki baar baar mai Basha jaise Oche Insaan ki ghair Islaami Baton ka jawaab dun magar, chun ke iss shaks ne abb meri Urdu zaban mey message karne ka bhi mazzaak udaya hai, iss liye jawab dena lazmi ho gaya hai, Kya Basha apni zindage ke pahle nau mahine me angrezi seekh ke paida huwa tha jo ye paida hone ke baad, Madri zuban ko hee hiqarat se dekhne laga? Iski Maa Angrez hai ya fir Iska baap Angres hai? Janab Mohtaram Sultan Shaheen sb jo New age Islam ke editor aur saaf go insaan hain, jab unhe mera message apne site pe jaari kerne me koyee eitraz nahi huwa to Jamsheed Basha ki kya hasti hai? AUR MAI ISS BASHA KO HAR SACHE MUSALLMAN KI TARAF SE BATA DENA CHAHTA HUN KI ISS SHAKS KE LIYE HAMARE DILON ME JO HIKARAT HAI, USKI WAJAH KOYEE PERSONAL WAJAH NAHI HAI NA TO MAINE KABHI ISS SHAKS TO DEKHA HAI, LANAT MALAMAT KARNE KI SIRF AUR SIRF EK YAHI WAJAH HAI, KI ISNE HUSAIN IBN ALI RA AUR NABI-E-KAREEM SAWW KE KHANDAN KO NEECHA DIKHANE KI KOSHISH KARI HAI (NAUZBILLAH.. AUR ISKI AUKAAT KAHAN KI YE KAR PAYE) AUR ISKI ISS KOSHISH NE ISSE AUR ZAKIR NAIK JAISE MALUUNO KO KITNA NEECH BANA DIYA KE SARAA ZAMANA INKE UPER THU THU KAR RAHA HAI, ABB SAR PATAK DAALO ISLAM KE DUSHMANO, TUMHARI DUNIYA AUR AKHIRAT DONO TUMHARE HATHON SE NIKAL GAYEE, MAAFI MANGNI HAI TO NABI-E-KAREEM SAWW SE MANGO AUR HUSAIN IBN ALI RA SE MANGO AUR ALLAH SWT SE BHI INHI MASOOMON KE HAWALE SE MANGO, TO SHAYED JAHENNUM KI AAG SE BACH SAKO.
Message for Jamsheed Basha ( sometimes Pasha ..conveniently Indian Actually Pakistani Wahabi) in reality enemy of Islam.
See, you are aggravated again and this time so much, that your self proclaimed journalistic flavor has gone awry and your reason is clouded, in your blind hatred you have started quoting me and writing exactly the same things, which I have written for you, good, this is how you will learn and grow up to be a better human being, if you repent and practice asteghfar you might free yourself from your gutter existence and become a Proper mainstream Muslim, who has unconditional respect and love for Allah swt’s most beloved Prophet of Islam pbuh and his Progeny…as regard to your lineage that matter is settled in my previous post, as it is, you are proving my point again and again in your own words, but don’t worry in Islam everyone is equal, provided you behave like a civilized person and a proper Muslim, I can still be your best friend and guide until the time you join the mainstream Islam and purify your blood of Wahabism’ and then we will be brothers in faith.. do give it a try, you will save yourself from the clutches of Iblees and will also do a favour to your children and their coming generations, Allah swt is most merciful, most forgiving , most benevolent and most beneficent… so don’t loose hope, unwind, stretch and practice Tauba'
11/22/2008 11:34:56 AM Syeda Farheen Fatima
Jamsheed basha saheb
I read a lots of comment in www.NewAgeIslam by your. I found you are a genius in knowledge of Islam and basic concept not only this topic. I read it in tableghi jamat, arab wahabi and wahibi critics. I had read it (posting of Syed Md Asadullah) in some where in comment. After that i think you are really genius and you make me as a fan.
Sorry for my suggestion, and I believe it you will understand and with true. But in this topic i think you really very very confused and misguided by somebody, because in this time saving imaan is very difficult because a lots of munafiqin in Islam are wondering and expanding such confusion-able questions. After this question somebody think it that slightly true because Zakir naik say, as you. But in whole history nobody questionize this question. suppose that if Zakir naik is true that means a lots sahaba which were present that time, kahja moinudeen chisti ra, hazrat ghause Azam ra, data ganje shakar ra, alif sani ra and alots of wali, muhaddisin, fiqhia historian all are wroooooooooong, how it possible, Imagine it. shanaz online, syed ahmad, md ahmad (Zakir Naik: Temples and churches should not be allowed in Saudi Arabia, how a scholar say like that), irfan khan not only Ziya rizvi, saf rizvi, hasan iqbal, aslam sb, likes alots of men are always with prophet muhammad and Ahle bait. Because ahle bait are by born holy. Its prove by Quran and hadees.
A man who is by birth a nabi and wali and ahle bait, how it pooooooooooossible that he will fight for poltics not for Islam. If it is possible than quran hadees cocept of Allah is all are false. And who believe it who is also non believer (kafir). But i can’t say who is
kafir when he recite kalima and say i m Muslim. And here the topic is change also. And a question is also if Zakir naik is true so why is repent and apologize for his statement,
Comment of Ashike rasool in last paragraph is 100%true'
Think, think and think a lots of time.
How it possible?
Allah saves me, my family and my Muslims, to munafiqin in Islam, who is wondering and spreading such questions and a lot of way.
Text of Dr. Zakir Naik's "letter of repentance"
By Abdul Hameed, TwoCircles.net
Mumbai: Controversy regarding Dr. Zakir Naik's statement that offended a section of Muslims and threatened to disrupt his ten-day Peace Conference was laid to rest by him signing a "letter of repentance" and offering apology for his remarks.
A copy of the letter made available to TwoCircles.net displays Dr. Zakir Naik's signature in English. Text of the letter is in Urdu and is on plain paper.. In it Dr. Naik says what he said was an unintentional slip of tongue and he takes back his words.
Dr. Naik, who is famous for inter-religious dialogues and Islamic preaching also said that he will never repeat those words again.
The Peace Conference that started on 14th November will continue till 23rd November in Mumbai.
Full text of the letter:
"I gave a controversial statement that it is forbidden for us to
Follow Prophet Muhammad (saw). After listening to it I, a true
Muslim, who believes in Allah and the Prophet (saw), can never utter such a thing. And in the future also I will never repeat the same. Whatever I spoke was unintentionally due to the slip off of the tongue for which I seek forgiveness of Allah and take back my words.
This is in response to SAF Rizvi and other Jahils on my articles.
SAF Rizvi, wali ra wali shanaz. If I am evil or satan you are no less. Civility demands that people of knowledge do not indulge in such third rated comments like bad blood flowing in the veins, unless you doubt your own lineage or upbringing. It is said, if you want to know a man, watch him when he is angry. How true it is in your case. You have proved that you are not only jahil like the one who posted in comments in support of you, say Bralvi, in Urdu, that any amount of Islamic teachings have not refined people like your clan. It is said education refines a man but he again goes back to jahiliat, then one must be a follower of satan. Even Iblis was a well learned man and then what is the difference between SAF Rizvi, Bralvi and others and the Iblis. Nothing. I hope you will learn a lesson or two from my writings and rectify your mistakes.
There was another gentleman, equally jahil, wanted to call me Jamsheed Basha RA and Dr. Zakir Naik RA. It appears that this site is being browsed by not educated but illeterates among the literates. It is relaly a pitiable sight and I am wasting my wisdom trying to counsel people who do not wish to reform.
As for Dr. Zakir Naik is concerned, I still hold him in high esteem. None here on the web site could match the greatest knowledge of Islam and other religions possessed by this Great Scholar of Islam. I do not agree with him on all points, but would respect him for his knowledge, wisdom and anylytical mind. He is an answer to the greats in other religion. He may hold certain views on Islam, its fine with me as long as they do not harm the community. The yeoman service being rendered by him through his lectures to the cause of Islam, is unparelled in the contemporary history. He is revered by many except those who could not understand him like SAF Rizvi and others on the web site.
This is what exactly wrong with the Muslims of India. They are like crabs. They would not allow others to climb the ladder of success. That is why we are suffering unable to tolerate fellow Muslims prosperity and success.That is this more than 20% of the Indian population are leaderless community in India. We have no Indianness in us. India is our country and we must equip our children with modern education and not the kind of education in Madrasas being given at Bralvis and elsewhere.
As for Karbala is concerned, there was no battle of the kind being propagated for centuries by Shias and Sunni ignorants alike. It was only a political uprising where Imam Hussein was involved, albeit innocently. He never intended to wage a war but went on a fact finding mission. But became a victim of the conspiracy of shias, led by Ibn Saba party deeply entrenched in the politics of Iraq then. We are all sorry for the killing but to make it a life long mourning event is nothing but stupidity as mourning is not allowed in Islam. If you claim to be in Islam, follow the teachings of Prophet Mohammed PBUH and not shias. The Shias is a divided sect into a number of splinter groups, each having a imam of its own. The Bohras, the Ismalisi, Khojas, Khomenis and scores of other sub-sects. It is a divided house. These Shias are ruthless people who were actually behind the killing of Hazrat Ali and Imam Hussein RA as well. To escape from the blame, they started blaming the greatest Caliph Yazid RA. They have no remorse, but every year they perform Taziah, the beating of the chest and back as a repentence of the treachery this community did to Imam Hussein in Karbala, where he was killed, albeit accidentally, by the arrow of the Shia rebels who took Imam Hussian RA to Kufa. If Sunnis are following Shias, then they are equally guilty of the crime against Imam Hussein. There was no martyrdom of Imam Hussein as he was not killed in a Jihad against Kafirs, but was the victim of political conspiracy. In any case, assuming he was a martyr, then we must rejoice as he attained the greatest feat and he would be in Jannat. Why should one mourn his death. Are we mourning the death of the killing of Hazrat Umar RA, Hazrat Usman, or for that matter Hazrat Ali RA and scores of Sahabis who laid down their lives in the path of Allah. They were the true martyrs of Islam. When we do not mourn their death, why should one mourn the death of Imam Hussein, who was killed in the skirmishes at Karbala and who cause was not Jihad but political. Muslims, especially ignorant people like SAF Rizvi, Barelvi and others, ponder seriously and come to a fine conclusin as to what you people are preaching is good or bad.
Dr. Zakir Naik was right in saying Yazid RA and he is trying to rectify the wrong in history. Of all said and done, Muslims are wasting time in digging old graves and mourning over the past events. These Arabs have no love for the Ajmis, and we are here shedding tears for them. We the Ajmi Muslim outnumber the Arabs yet Arab supremacy rules the roost in Islamic world. Are they worried about the plight of Indian Muslims and their sufferings? Did they ever condemn the atrocities, killings of innocent Muslims in Gujarat riots and Melagaon blasts and others blasts. They would never do and we only talk of Palestine problem, Iraq problem and Afghanistan problems. Why should we bother too much about it. If they are suffering because they are not united. If they are suffering, there is no true democracy in these countries. These Kings, Sheikhs, and Amirs of Arab countries are enjoying the life, indulging in pomp and pleasure. Is this Islamic way of life. Reform these people and let them correct their Aamal, then Allah will surely help them regain their lost prestige. If they repent and have any remorse for their past sins, Allah would surely forgive them and make them rule over the world once again. Till then, they would continue to suffer.
As for Indian Muslims are concerned, as rightly called by Dr. Ali Asghar Engineer, though Shia, but has concerned for Muslims. He wanted that Muslim organise a political party of their own. Perhaps he has heard as many a time, I laid emphasis for a political party and an astute leadership to take Muslims to a common platform. I have been advocating the need for such a political party as I lost faith in the present third rated leadership of Muslim league and others. The traitors like Arif Mohammed Khan, Kidwai and others have left and joined BJP for further their nest. These Ghammaze Chaman of Islam, started speaking the language of Safron brigade calling upon Muslims to do this and do that as if the entire population is harbouring terrorists. Now that Sadhvi, Purohit and others were caught, these Arifs have no place to hide as the Hindu terror and its design have been exposed to the whole world. The blood of the innocent Muslims spilled by these groups, was crying for justice and Allah heard their cry. Soon many leaders of Hindutva would be exposed for their role in Hindu terror attach.
Advani, the hawkish Hindutva leader, now singing a different tune. Once he called all terrorists are Muslims while all Muslims are not terrorists. Now many say in his own language that all Hindus are not terrorists but all terrorists are Hindus. Since BJP and safron brigade have no face to save, Advani came out with another statement. He now says, what I said many a time that terrorists have no religion and they are crimnals. This is what I have been saying when Muslim youth were caught on suspicion for their alleged role in serial blasts that these terrorists, if they are, are not Muslims. They are anti-social and anti-national elements and it is not fair to equate them with Islam. This is what asserted by more than 6000 Ulemas in their fatwa issued from Hydrabad. Did any Hindu seer or religious leader or leaders came out with such a strong statement?
I call upon all the Muslims to come out of the denial, see the reality, assimilate in the main stream and fight for rights democratically. There is no point in mourning over the death of Imam Hussain RA at Karbala. Its an event gone deep into our history and let it be there. There were more tragedies in Islamic history than the Karbala, and we do not mourn them. Its fine since mourning is haram in Islam. If the educated muslims see any reason inthis, then the nation would emerge stronger. We need a political party, if you any suggestion please make it to Dr. Ali Ashgar Engineer and like of me who is a strong supporter of such a move. I wish this to come soon, inshallah.
In the end India is my country and I love it as every Indian Muslims should do. I hate Pakistan and its leaders for they were the root cause of our present plight. All Muslims should shed this Pakistan supporting mentality and cheer Indian victories every where. India is marching ahead, while Pakistan is deeply entrenched in its internal squabble. Its Shia President Zardari, a debonair and Mr.10% would take Pakistan to its destined place of destruction. Let us hope the present generation of Muslims would be more Indian than the old generation. Let us all condemn Jinnah and his followers for they did greater harm to our Indian nation than the Britishers. Jai Hind, Jai Hind and Jai Hind.
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:32:04 -0800 [08:02PM IST]
From: Dr Mansoor Ilahi
I am surprised to see the article Zakir Naik, Terror cannot be fought with terrror disappearing from the page and pushed inside. Please revert back the article on main page as it is evoking considerable response for debate.
My thanks for creating this website as New Age Islam is very interesting. I have begun to read it regularly.
Regards and wassalam
Dr Mansoor Ilahi
Assalam Alaikum see, we should try to speak jamsheed Basha rahmatullah alaih and also with Zakir Rahmatullah Alai. Because both are more genius than whole history of Muslims And Islam. After 1400 yrs yazid is proved radiallaallahu anhu, and great gentleman of Islamic history. maqasid of Zakir is Prooved.But I wanted to Say if munafiqin who in islam are alots but no benfit because without muhammad and ale rasul No body can get jannat. which knows all muslims in whole world, but it is matter of fact somebody always ready for tauhine rasul like denmark, Zakir naik, Basha, and alots of people of world especily muslims.Dua for me
Janab mohtaram SAF RIZVI sb sallam
Apko iss Maluun Jamshed Basha ki jehalat se labrez baton ka jawab dene ki zarurat nahi thi kyon ke yahan pe pahle se hee kayee nek seerat logon ne aapki taraf se iss Basha wahabi ki bahot lanat malamat kari hai magar ye jaise aapne kaha, ki Yazid ke Nutfe se hai kahan manney wala hai, hamari tahqikat se ye ilm huwa hai ki ye basha darasal ek kattar Wahabi Pakistani hai ya fir shayed Talibani hai aur in logon kI gandi harkaton aur ghaleez soch ki wajah se aaj inka mulk tabah hai ye saks jaan bujh ke apne aapko chennai ka batata hai aur apne message ke akhir me JAI HIND likh ker ye jatana chahta hai ke ye ek sacha HINDUSTANI hai, iss gadhe ko ye nahi malum hai watan parasti sirf Naaron me nahi hoti, dill me hoti hai, Pahle Jai Hind likhta hai aur fir JINNAH jaise logon ki pairwee karta hai jisse aaj hamarey Hindustan ka har ek shaks batwarey ka gunahgar manta hai jisne khudd ke zaati mafaad ke liye ek shaandar mulk ke do tukde kar diye.. iski baton se iss basha ki kalayee khull gayee hai, khair aap lanat bhejen aise Islam ke dushmano pe aur aap apni HAQ ki awaaz ko khub bulundh rakhiye.
Jazzak Allah khair Allah muhafiz
This is a reply to the rubbish unconnected with history written by the likes of Dr. Mansoor Ilahi, Rizvi and Tashoo Alvi. These people seem to be still under the influence of the shias and are often repeating the stories concocted history written by Shia historians. What Tashoo Alvi has quoted the passage said to have been uttered by the grandson of Yazid, is nothing but a sheer non-sense of yet another attempt to defame Yazid RA. What happened to these guys is not understandable. Either they are under the influence of Shias if they are not sunnies or they are shias ; if they are not both, then they are a bunch of ignorant people unable to understand or do not possess the analytical mind. Sunnis especially must come out of the shias mindset and view the entire history in proper perspective. Or else kindly keep quite, if you cannot understand the true Islamic history. I still reiterate what I have already written about Yazid RA and I stand by it. One thing is very clear here that one can wake up a person who is asleep but one cannot wake a person who pretends to be asleep. All the above guys fall within this. Here ends the argument about Yazid RA.
As for Dr. Zakir Naik is concerned, though I have no love for him, yet I stand by him to say what he uttered was not all wrong. Muslims must acknowledge that he is a very learned man and he is a scholar of repute among the Muslims. If you cannot understand him, kindly do not go to his congregation as I used to do. I never attended any of his lectures. I differ with him but would not stoop to condemn him for we are not equally qualified to understand such a great scholar. This is totally unfair for the above guys to go after this scholar of repute for he said nothing but truth. Truth is always bitter. if you cannot digest it, then chew it out. If you guys have any decency left, apologise to this great man and close the chapter.
As for Karbala is concerned, I am prepared for a decent and larger debate, if any one match my wisdom, knowledge of history and a bit of journalistic flavour.
What is this tamasha? Whenever I read your mail I laugh and pity you. Either you a prankster or too hard a skin to realise the chill of death and life thetreafter. You say Yazid lead the Janaza prayer of a prophet companion,. but there are evidence that he never prayed and I am sure he never knew how to pray even. There is also a historical evidence that Yazaid (LA) came in an drunken state at Mecca. It can easily be beleived necause he had nothing to doi with Islam. I am suire you will defintiely be pleased to meet him and be with him in the same place once the flame of life extinguishes. You also carry the same trait as him. My dialoge with you ends here I am sure there are many like Tashoo Alvi and saf Rizvi, Faraz Haq to take on you
Basha, Is there any one better placed to judge Yazid LA, most impartially, than his own son! While quoting various references in praise of Yazid LA, you have carefully chosen to ignore the remarks made by his own son Mu'awiya bin Yazid who had the following to say before refusing Khilafat when he was offered the same upon Yazid's death. (As recorded by Ibn Hajr al-Haythami a prominent scholar of the Ahl us-Sunnah)
“Khilafat is from Allah. My grand father Mu'awiya bin Abu Sufyan fought for khilafat against an individual who was more entitled to it, that being Ali. He (Mu'awiya I) performed actions that you are all aware of, and he is suffering in his grave for that. Then my father Yazid became the khalifah even though he was not deserving of khilafat. He fought the grandson of Rasulullah (Husayn) and is suffering in the grave on account of his sins.'
Mu'awiya bin Yazid (Muawiyah II) then proceeded to cry, 'It is a terrible thing that we are fully aware of Yazid's bad deeds: he slaughtered the family of the Prophet, he deemed alcohol Halal, and set fire to the Ka'ba.”
What do you have to say about the numerous Sunni books which quote the above statement of Mu'awiya bin Yazid? Or are the above statements also concocted by the Shias?
Hope you have the decency and the guts to reply.
I thought Dr. Mansoor Ilahi is a saner man and that is why I offered support for banning Peace Tv. But after reading his recent comment on Yazid, I am sorry to change my opinion about him. He is too foolish to quote some thing irrelevant in the case of Yazid. When I said Yazid was good or bad, let Allah decide because he is no more. But Mansoor talks about the laws of cutting hands, lashes and death penalty etc., in Sharia meant only for those who are alive and not to the dead. At best you can condemn and you people have already done against Yazid much more than he deserves. You again came out with such concocted stories spread by Shia historians that he indulged in looting, rape and destruction in Mekkah and Medinah. Tell these bed time stories to your followers who will listen to you and not to saner people here on the web site. Read carefully all my postings without a dark glass with a calm mind. Remember, in a calm and still waters alone one can see a clear vision undistorted. Mind and parachutes function only when they are open. Keep open your mind for all the historical details of Islam. Be a learner and do not be in hurry to post your comments against an enlightened person like me. Its not fair, Mr. Mansoor. Are you a Shia?
Yazid RA was known for his piety and that is why he was made the Amir-e-Hajj by his illustrious father and Katibe Wahi Hazrat Mawayiah for three years in 51, 52 ane 53 Hijri. During his visit to Medinah, he used to visit Imam Hussein RA and even he married his cousin. By that marriage Imam Hussein became his brother-in-law. In another instance when he commanded the first Islamic Naval Force that attacked Constentenopole (now Istanbul) he performed regular prayers and led the prayers and those participated in the war and prayed under him included Imam Hussein RA, Ibn Abbas RA, Ibn Umar RA and scores of Sahabis including the Host of Prophet Mohammed PBUH Hazrat Abu Ayub Ansari RA. When Abu Ayub Ansari died, Yazid led the Janaza prayer and buried his body deep inside the enemy territory with a warning to the Christian army not to harm the grave of this great man or else the Islamic forces would destroy them and chase them till the corner of the Globe. Such a fine commander of Islamic Army who later led and waged a number of wars against the maurading Christian army elsewhere, could turned out to be a drunkard overnight, is nothing but silly, fallacy and unbelievable stories. Kindly read the account of Yazid in Ibne Timiya's Book Minhajul Islam where you will find all the answers about your misgivings about Yazid RA and his great father Hazrat Mawiyah RA. One can be wrong in opinion but one should not be at fault with facts of history. And you fellows without examining the facts of history come to a conclusion from the stories spread by Ismailis Shia, Khoja Shias and Irani Shias besides Iraqi Shias and top of that India and Pakistani Shias. I can only pity you people having believed those stories spread by the modern Ibne Sabas of Islam, the hypocrite responsible for the great divide in Islam.
As for naming of Yazid was concerned in the early century Hijri many learned many lerned people had named after Yazid including a few Shia literary figures. Even the Zorastrian Shia historian's Tibri's grandfather's name was Yazid. Even Hazrat Ali had three more children and he named after three Great Caliphs of Islamd, namely, Abu Bakr, Umar and Usman. If he had any grudge against them as made out by the Shias led by Ibne Saba about their appointment as Caliphs, he would not have named his children after them. Kindly understand these bare facts of history.
Besides, after he was attacked by one of the Saba Party members with a poison laden sword as he was returning from the battle of Saffain, Hazrat Ali lived for three days only. One day before his death, he called Hazrat Imam Hassan RA and advised him to accept the leadership of Amir-ul-Momineen Hazrat Mawiyah RAand take a bait as he was the best available Amir to defend Islam and save from the machinations of the Saba Party members who ruined him. This is only a brieF account of Hazrat Ali and Imam Hassan. As Imam Hussein was very young during those days, Imam Hassan never allowed him to interefere and finally took bait and accepted the leadership of Hazrat Mawiyah. In Damascus, he visited the Amir and stayed there as his guests. He respected him and Imam Hussein RA and giften them with pension. He shovered all love and affection on the grandsons of Prophet Mohammed PBUH as is required of his as an Amir. Be wary of Shia propaganda, which is not only aimed at Yazid but as a matter of fact aimed at all Sunnis.
Rest of the details, I shall post them in my next.
RE: ALHAMDULILLAH OUR BELOVED PROPHET MUHAMMED sallallahu alaihi wasallam IS ALIVE
If Mohammad [PBUH] is alive then what these Quranic Verses are doing in Quran [these should be discarded forthwith]
“Muhammad is no more than a Messenger, indeed (many) Messengers have passed away before him. If he died or is killed, will you then turn back on your heels (as disbelievers)? ...” (Al `Imran: 3 - 144)
Either you follow the Quranic Verses above or have faith [Eemaan] on the Deobandi and Barelvi Trash below [Courtesy: Dr Shabbir Ahmed www.ourbeacon.com]. By the way I have read the original and this is just the start of Blasphemy which Muslims themselve commit, read the details in the links at the end.
The great Pir (master saint) of the 19th century, Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi, has been quoted in his Malfoozat p.32 that "Prophets are alive in their graves like ever before . They eat, drink, pray and receive their wives in the grave and engage in sex with them."
The holy messenger came to Shah Waliullah (in the 18 century!) and said, “Why do you worry? Your children are the same as mine.” (Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Hikayat-ul-Awlia)
The prophet laid the foundation of Darul-Uloom, Deoband, India (in the 19th century) He comes to check accounts of the school. He has learnt the Urdu language. (Mubasshirat-e-Darul Uloom, and Deoband Number of the Darul-Uloom)
The prophet laid foundation of Darul-Uloom, Deoband, India (in the 19th century). He comes to check accounts of the school. He has learnt Urdu language. (Mubasshirat-e-Darul Uloom, and Deoband Number of the Darul-Uloom)
When, "Maulana" Zakaria, the father of "Maulana" Yousuf Bannuri would fall sick, the prophet would come. He told the house servant, "Badshah Khan! I (the holy prophet), am also serving Zakaria. (Bayyanat 1975 Ashraf Ali Thanwi p. 7)
The prophet said to sister-in-law of Haaji Imdaadullaah Muhajir Makki, "Get up! I will cook meals for guests of Imdaadullaah." (Bayyanat p. 8, Ashraf Ali Thanwi)
The holy messenger comes to Mulla Qasim Nanotwi and other big shots of Deoband, U.P to learn Urdu. He also checks accounts of the Madrasah. (Numerous references such as Haqaiq-o-Maarif, Deoband May 1975).
Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 1
Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 2
Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 3
Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 4
Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 5
We appointed immortality for no mortal before thee. What! if thou diest, can they be immortal! Every soul must taste of death, and We try you with evil and with good, for ordeal. And unto Us ye will be returned. [AL-ANBIYA (THE PROPHETS) Chapter 21 - Verse 34 and 35]
We sent not before thee (any messengers) save men whom We inspired from among the folk of the townships - Have they not travelled in the land and seen the nature of the consequence for those who were before them? And verily the abode of the Hereafter, for those who ward off (evil), is best. Have ye then no sense? – [YUSUF (JOSEPH) Chapter 12 Verse 109]
Their messengers said: Can there be doubt concerning Allah, the Creator of the heavens and the earth? He calleth you that He may forgive you your sins and reprieve you unto an appointed term. They said: Ye are but mortals like us, who would fain turn us away from what our fathers used to worship. Then bring some clear warrant. Their messengers said unto them: We are but mortals like you, but Allah giveth grace unto whom He will of His slaves. It is not ours to bring you a warrant unless by the permission of Allah. In Allah let believers put their trust! [IBRAHIM (ABRAHAM) Chapter 14 Verse 10 and 11]
Say: I am only a mortal like you. My Lord inspireth in me that your Allah is only One Allah. And whoever hopeth for the meeting with his Lord, let him do righteous work, and make none sharer of the worship due unto his Lord. [AL-KAHF (THE CAVE) Chapter 18 Verse 110]
Lo! thou wilt die, and lo! they will die; [AZ-ZUMAR (THE TROOPS, THRONGS)Chapter 39 - Verse 30]
You sound so ridiculous at times that I cannot but laught. You say if Yazeed is right or wrong it is upto Allah to decide. Then why do Islam has punitive laws like cutting hand of thieves, stoning to death, execution for rapists. If Allah has to decide in the end, why punish them here. So if anyone rape someone in a Muslim society ask the Sharia to do nothing and you must dance your head out if someone is executed in the Wahabi Saud Arabia where extreme puntive laws exists for charges of murder. In fact not only Islam, even the German should refrain from saying anything to Hitler by your logic. Basha, please do read. The article by Mr Rizvi has mentioned that Yazeed must be condemned and cursed for the massacres of Muslims and rape of innocent woman by his forces in Madinah and also for defiling the sanctity of holy Kaabah. in the years of his ignominous reign. He killed our Prophet grandosn and his family and for you it is not a crime but for all of us the Sunni muslims he has been a target of hate and curse. God willing who ever supporters tyranny and Yazid will be doomed and Basha there is life after death. Zakir Naik as you say is an ignorant man but I treat him as the most despeicable character in the modern times. I accept your support on Peace TV
From: shanzonline <firstname.lastname@example.org>Date: 2008/11/18Subject: Re: Dr.Zakir Naik Apologies in front of Police.To: email@example.comIf we let suppose that following information is true and believe that this email is enclosed with an official scanned letter in IRF letter head with the singed and stamped copy for Mumbai Police in Hindi or English as these are only two muduim for Lawful exchanges in india, and if i believe that Zakir naik is fluent in urdu writting and mumbai police accepted this unofficial letter by accepting that IRF is running out of stationary then and consider this letter as authentic then even "here in this letter who has written that if any thing such which has been told in some specific way and hurts somebody so we turn back his world and say an apology" but it is not mentioned in any such letter from opposite sect. which we believe is non-muslim altogether that how Mr, Naik is wrong in his statement nor they have given any logic or sensable reply. So the consequently it mean that whatever Zakir Naik is said was right and fully authentic but due to influence of the opposit party and their widespread condemnation Police as asked Zakir naik to extend hi opology in sake of peaceful coexistance, in otherwords provide the way that a Bad thing can live with good one for the time being regardless of its naturality. You all must be ashmed of that a person who always peaks truth is forced to be said so, however i believe that untill unless and authentic document by the of IRF is not there in their official langauge english, we will not believe.
Anti Yazid ( Barelvi and Shias)I think there are lot of Anti Zakir Naiks in India and abroad right now.. They were running thier shops and all thier shops got closed. now no income from Dargah and mosques.They are jealous with Dr Naik"s popularity mainly Barelvis and Shias..They hate everyone either Jamat E islami or Tablighi Jamaat.Dr Tahirul Qadri from pakistan is the leading player in anti zakir naik propoganda..I think these shia and barelvi molvis financed by Hindutva organizations (RSS..) and jewish group not Dr Naik.You asked who is financing Peace TV and tell me who is financing Dargah of Langde Shah, Loole Shah in different parts of India. who is doing marketing of Ajmer Shareef and Nizamuddin Dargah..??Its easy to point out mistakes in other but people dont see in thier own circle what they are doing..people are not interested in controversy right now..people like Dr Naik and they love him even non muslims.if you dont want to listen him dont listen him who is forcing you..Howz the situiation in Bangaladesh? no flood?Dr Zakir Naik is visiting there also very soonAllah HafizYazid (R.A.)
ALHAMDULILLAH OUR BELOVED PROPHET MUHAMMED sallallahu alaihi wasallam IS ALIVE
In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,
The belief (Aqidah) of the mainstream Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah is that our beloved Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) and all the other Prophets are alive in their graves..
This life is physical and worldly (dunyawiyyah), and not just a spiritual one with the soul (barzakhiyyah), as the latter is common for all the people. They are usually involved in performing prayer and worshiping Allah (out of their own free choice without it being obligatory on them), and we can normally not see or feel them.
This is the Aqidah held by the Sunni Muslims throughout the ages, and many books in Arabic have been written on this subject.. The great Imam Suyuti (Allah have mercy on him) compiled a whole work on this subject titled 'Inba al-Azkiya bi Hayat al-Anbiya' (Informing the intelligent regarding the living of the Prophets), in which he quoted many evidences in support of this belief. Similarly, other scholars such as: Imam al-Bayhaqi, Imam Abdul Wahhab al-Sha'rani and Imam Ibn al-Qayyim in his book 'al-Ruh' (The Soul) have also written and gathered evidences with regards to this.
Evidences on the prophets remaining alive in their graves:
There are many evidences in the Qur'an, Hadith and sayings of the predecessors regarding the prophets remaining alive after death. Some are reproduced here:
1) Allah Most High says:
"And Question thou our Messengers whom we sent before you. Did we appoint any deities other that Allah, Most gracious, to be worshiped"? (Surah al-Zukhruf, 45).
Many commentators have stated in their respective exegeses of the Holy Qur'an that the living of the Prophets can be proved from this verse (See: Durr al-Manthur of Suyuti, Ruh al-Ma'ani by al-Alusi and others).
2) Allah Most High says:
"And say not of those who are slain (martyred) in the way of Allah, "they are dead", nay, they are living, though you perceive it not" (Surah al-Baqarah, 154).
Regarding this verse, the great Hadith expert (hafidh), Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (Allah have mercy on him) states in his monumental commentary of Sahih al-Bukhari, 'Fath al-Bari':
"When the living of the martyrs is proven from the text of the Qur'an, then this is also proven from a analogical point of view. And the Prophets are superior then the martyrs" (Fath al-Bari, 6/379).
3) Sayyiduna Anas ibn Malik (Allah be pleased with him) narrates:
"On the night of Isra, the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) passed by the grave of Sayyiduna Musa (Allah bless him), and found him praying in his grave" (Recorded by Imam Muslim in his Sahih, and others).
4) Anas ibn Malik narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wsallam) said:
"The Prophets are alive in their graves performing Salat" (Recorded by al-Bayhaqi in his 'Hayat al-Anbiya' and Abu Ya'la in his Musnad).
The above Hadith has been authenticated by many Hadith scholars, such as: Ibn Hajar, al-Haythami, Ali al-Qari, al-Munawi, al-Shawkani and others.
5) Aws ibn Aws narrates the Messenger of Allah as saying:
"Send salutations in abundance on me on Friday, as your sending salutations are presented to me. The Companions inquired: "How is it possible that you receive our salutations when your body will have been decayed? The Messenger of Allah said: "Verily Allah has made forbidden on the earth that it eats the body of the Prophets,the prophet of allah is alive and given Rizk" (Recorded by Abu Dawud, Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, Darami and others, and authenticated by many, such as Ibn al-Qayyim).
6) Abu Hurairah (Allah be pleased with him) Narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Peace and blessing be upon him) said:
"None of you greets me except that Allah returns my soul on me until I return his greeting" (Musnad Ahmad, 2/527 and Abu Dawud, 1/279).
7) Anas ibn Malik narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said:
"The Prophets are not kept in their graves for more then forty nights, but they remain worshiping Allah until the trumpet will be blown" (Sunan al-Bayhaqi).
Due to the fact that there are many narrations regarding this (of which we have only reproduced a few, as an example), Imam Suyuti is of the view that these narrations have reached the level of certainty (tawatur).
8) The great Hadith Imam, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani states:
"Death will never come to the Blessed Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) in his grave, but he will remain alive, due to the fact that the Prophets remain alive in their graves" (Fath al-Bari, 17/22).
9) Imam al-Subki states:
"It is from our beliefs that the Prophets are alive in their graves". (Tabqat al-Shafi'iyya al-Kubra, 6/266).
10) The great Hanafi jurist, Ibn Abidin says:
"The Prophets are alive in their graves, as proven from the Hadith" (Rasa'il of Ibn Abidin, 2/203).
11) Imam al-Shawkani (whom the Salafis normally refer to) states:
"The Prophet (Peace and blessing be upon him) is alive in his grave, as has been established in the Hadith "The Prophets are alive in their graves". (See: Nayl al-Awtar, 5/101).
12) Also, one of the major incidents that prove this, is the incident of Me'raj (Ascension of the Prophet (peace and blessing be upon him) to the heavens), where he met and conversed with many Prophets. He also led them inprayer in Masjid al-Aqsa.
The above evidences from the Qur'an, Hadith and the sayings of the predecessors are sufficient to prove the fact that the Prophets remain alive in their graves after they pass away from this world. There are many other evidences which are not mentioned here
This is the reason why this Aqidah has been held by the mainstream Sunni scholars throughout the eras right from the time of SahabasIt is only recently that some people (like ZAKIR NAIK--Who recently said that Prophets our dead (maazallah) and innocent muslim people lauged and clapped at his sayings and lost thier most important thing IMAAN)have objected to this aqeedah/Belief of muslim people and trying to remove the LOVE and RESPECT for OUR BELOVED PROPHET MUHAMMED sallallahu alaihi wasallam from the hearts of innocent muslim who have very less knowledge about Islam Do not stop this link..Please forward it to as much as u can and save the Innocent Muslim from getting trap by people who are Gustakhe Rasool.Please do not get Impresed by people speaking in English,wearing tie and coat.........these people are trying to remove the Love and Repect of prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam from the hearts of innocent muslimPlease do not forget to forward... even if you save one innocent muslim from trap of people having wrong beliefs you will be rewarded in both the worlds Inshallah azzawajjalMay Allah guide us all to the straight path (Ameen).And Allah knows best
From: "Irfan Khan" <azizir...@gmail.com
Who Killed Al-Hussain? (Read Carefully)
Yazeed Lanati is the cause for all the attrocities against Muslims in general and Imam Ali Muqam Imam Hussain (Radi Allahu Anhu) in particular. It is under his command that his followers/army martryed the great imam (Radi Allahu Anhu).
Those who did not understand the reason for Imams Hussains (Radi Allahu Anhu) Martyrdom were the very people who sold themselves to kuffars and betrayed millions of muslims. Muslims today (even after being in majority) are being oppressed because they lack proper leadership. The Rulers who for the sake of worldly pleasures have sold their iman and are acting as are puppet of the kuffars.
Yazid Lanati was one such leader, who had sold his iman for the sake of
worldly pleasures, and he was indulged in every bad act imaginable. If such
a person would have become a Leader, islam would have been vanished long back.
Imam Hussain (Radi Allahu Anhu) gave a lesson to all the muslims till the last day, that muslims will not accept any currupted person to be a Muslim Leader. The Martyrdom of Imam Hussain (Radi Allahu) is a major turning point which reestablished the just leadership in islam. Martyrdom of Imam Ali Muqam (Radi Allahu Anhu) and his blessed family is a lesson for Momineens and not for Munafiqeens.
Shah ast Husayn, Badshah ast Husayn,
Deen ast Husayn, Deen panah ast Husayn,
Sar dad, na dad dast, dar dast-e-Yazeed,
Haqaa key binaey lailaha illAllah ast Husayn
Husayn is the Master, Husayn is the King,
Husayn is Faith; Husayn is refuge for the Faith,
He gave his head but not his hand in Yazeed's hand
Verily Husayn is the foundation of 'lailaha illAllah' *
Hazrat Mu'inuddin Chishti Ajmeri (Radi Allahu Taala An*
(JD Edwards Consultant)
Finally Dr. Mansoor Ilahi, saw the reason and requested me to join him to petition to Govt of India to ban the Peace TV. I reiterate my support to such a ban on TVs that spread canard against the established religious beliefs of Islam. These Wahhabis think they are practicing a pure form of Islam based on the teachings contained in the Holy Quran. These people have no regard to the Hadis which are as important as the Holy Quran itself since what the Prophet Mohammed PBUH had said and practiced were based on the true interpretation of Holy Quran. Allah Himself said in Quran, "Wathiullah wathi ur Rasoola" meaning " Follow Allah and Follow Rasool". Anything contrary to this is unislamic.
As for comments from other readers are concerned, my advice to them is not to fall a prey to the propaganda of Shias. Whether Yazid was good or bad, it is for Allah to decide. But then the Shias by accusing Yazid, they have not targetted Yazid alone but the whole of Sunnis through Yazid. If this is not understood by our Sunni followers, then I can only pity them. The entire history has been distorted by successive Shia historians to project Hazrat Ali RA as naib Rasool, nawozubillah. Prophet PBUH himself had said that if there were to be any Rasool after him it would Hazrat Umar Farooq RA. Such was the importance attached to some of the innovative things introduced by Hazrat Umar during the life time of Prophet PBUH himself like, like open Azan, prayers in mosques ( it was confined to private earlier) and banning women from entering mosque or praying with Males. He was the one who suggested to Prophet Mohammed PBUH to direct the women folk to offer prayers in their homes. But such a great man in Islamic history was being abused by the Shias regularly. Is it Islamic to abuse a great Caliph? Is it not a sin? These Shias indulge in Tabarrah or Gali Galooch or curse the three great Caliphs of Islam, to whom Allah sent the tidings of being Jannati in their life time itself. Such great Sahabis of Rasool and Qulfae Rashdeen who were among the ten Sahabis given the tidings of Jannati in their life time itself, being subject of redicule, curse and abuse, itself speak of the Shia bend of mind. By doing this, they have played into the hands of the jews and christians in maligning Islam. These Shias have not done anything good for the cause of Islam but bad. They projected Islam in a bad taste to the non-believers. These Shias believe in mythology like the 12th Imam went missing in the mountains and that he would come back alive one day and that day would be the doomsday etc., is nothing but a myth. Then making the month of Moharram in which Allah had created the whole world and the month of rejoice, converted it as a month of mourning. Mouring per se is haram in Islam itself nagate their level of thinking of Islam. These Shias also changed the very Kalima, where the name of Ali RA has been inserted to give a new meaning. Is this an Islamic practice? They pray on the clay of Karbala, is it allowed in Islam? The incident of Karbala happened some 30 years after the death of the Prophet Mohammed PBUH and to give so much importance to the soil of Karbal, where Imam Hussein had been killed, is nothing but the mockery of Islam. They do not have a Imam to lead prayers. They pray but some one from outside the prayer lead them, which is totally out of place in Islamic tradition and never practiced by Prophet. Prophet PBUH himself led the prayers himself and in his absence Hazrat Abu Bakr RA led the prayers. Nowhere it is stated that the prayers could be led by an outsider. To them 12th Imam, an imaginary figure, went missing in the mountains and until his return nobody is qualified to lead the prayers. Is it not funny? Take their prayer itself, where they face and pray and what they utter. If you have a chance to go to their mosque you will listen a different kind of Azan, which was not the Azan given by Hazrat Bilal Habshi RA. Every thing they do and practice, have no rlevance to the teachings of Prophet PBUH and far from wahat was said or practiced by Prophet Mohammed PBUH. To them, the only person from whom they could draw an inspiration or following is Hazrat Ali RA and Imam Hussein RA. These two greats would be turning in their graves seeing how these Shias have been misusing their names. They themselves never practiced such things. How could these Shias claim to be their followers and Prophet Mohammed is their Rasool, when they do not follow his teachings.These are some of the things, we the Sunnis should seriously ponder and desist from Gali Glooch of Yazid, however bad he may be.
I happened to meet some Khoja Shias as they were coming out of their prayer hall near Abids Raod, Hydrabad some times back. When I enquired, they informed me that they do not perform prayers like Sunnis do but meet three times in a day and offer only "Dua". Ironically, the prayees include the jean and modern clad young girls and women. Is this true Islamic prayer? Khojas too are Shias, but they have a different set of prayers. As far Ismailis and Bohras were concerned their Imams are different. Moulana Burhanuddin is their spiritual guru and they pray only three times instead of five times. Similarly Agha Khan who live in 'European' country is their traditional spiritual guru. Is all these are Islamic? Sir Mohammed Iqbal said, "Ba Mustafa Ba Rashan Kheesh Ra Ke Hama Usth; Agar Bawoo Na Raseedi, tamam Bo Lahabis" meaning any act of a Muslim that has direct connection with the teachings of Prophet PBUH is Islamic and rest is kufr. Here ends the argument. I leave it to the readers to form their own opinion about Shias and their practices and whether one should believe all the stories told by their historians for anything connected with Islamic history. Whether such people who have distorted the very religious beliefs and practices, who ruthlessly altered the Kalima, changed the regular prayers, could their historians be believed? Karbala was one of the many events in Islamic history. It is there in its place and there is no logic it in making a life time mourning event. There are more greater tragedies in Islam. Hazrt Hamza RA, the Chacha of Rasool was not only killed in the battle, his body was mutilated by the wife of Abu Jahel, removed the liver from the body and crushed them in her mouth. Is this not the greatest tragedy of the time? Did Prophet made it an event of mourning, though he was very much perturbed and mourned the death of his beloved chacha. Hazrat Umar RA, the greatest among the Caliphs was assassinated by a jew, Hazrat Usman RA, Zinooren, was killed by rebels led by Ibne Saba and finally the death Hazrat Ali himself in tragic circumstance . Are these not the events worth mourning? Were these great Sahabis who were informed of their place in jannat in their life time itself and to whom Prophet PBUH showered his blessings, not worthier than Imam Hussein RA. Then when do not mourn the tragedies of such great people who fought and died for Islam, why one should mourn the death of Imam Hussein RA, who was killed accidentally in a political battle? We all love Ahle Bait and it is our duty, but mourning has no sanction in Islam. I appeal to all our readers to examine these issues dispassionately and come to a conclusion. There is always a place for healthy debate to know the finer points of Islam. There is certainly no place of denigration of individuals who express their opinion on such issues. Indulging in abusive language or Gali glooch, is not the character of learned people particularly Muslims. Unfortunately, here on the web site, majority of the readers have not shown any semblance of character, tolerance and forbearance so dear to Islamic culture and practices but indulged in use of vituperative language as what was written was palatable to them. This is totally unfair. With this I close the debate on Karbala.
As far Dr. Zakir Naik is concerned, he had visited and given lecture in our city many a time. There was a beeline to enter the hall to listen to his histrionic. But I never attended any of his lectures as I felt he was trying to demonstrate his knowledge of Islam and other religions, his memory power, than anything else. His histrionics were not appealing to me, while I continue to hold him good stead as an Islamic scholar of repute, that's all. Let him have his views and there should be no quarrel over it. If you do not like him, do not listen to him or watch his Peace TV programmes. I hate these Wahhabis, who pretend to practice purest form of Islam, but in fact they are the most hypocrites of Islam. They practice more in breach. Watch these Wahhabis, you would find no noor on their faces unlike ordinary prayer going Muslims. Its because, their form of Islam is different. We, the Sunnis, respect all the Sahabis, Prophet PBUH teachings, visit Darghas of Sufi Saints, hold the Waliullahs in high esteem as they friends of Allah, perform all the Fathihas, and in my opinion none of the above are unislamic. I have seen the houses where these rituals are followed make one feel happy to stay for some times as the vibrations are good, the rest of the Wahhabi houses, give a gloomy picture without any rounakh.
All said and done, I reitrate that Sunnis beware of Shias propaganda.
You say in your first mail that you are not the supporter of Zakir Naik and among the strongest critics of his Peace TV and his rehtorics. Let us join a common cause and seek a ban on Peace TV and let both of us sign a petition to the Government that this channel be banned for fanning hatred and violence and its funding be probed. I am sure learned scholar like you who hate Peace TV would lead the movement from the front. Your comment is as follows. Let me first introduce that I am not a supporter of Dr. Zakir Naik but as a matter of fact a very vocal critic of his Peace TV and his rhetroics .
CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME
Zakir Naik: Temples and churches should not be allowed in Saudi Arabia
Posted by jagoindia on May 17, 2008
Interviewer: Here is a question from a non-Muslim from India. Are non-Muslims allowed to preach their religion and to build their places of worship in an Islamic state? If so, why is building of temples and churches disallowed in Saudi Arabia, whereas Muslims are building their mosques in London and Paris?
Zakir Naik: I ask the non-Muslims, suppose you are the principal of a school and you intend to select a mathematics teacher. Three candidates come and you ask them, what’s the total of 2 plus 2? The first replies: 2 plus 2 equals 3. The second answers: 2 plus 2 equals 4. And the third one answers that 2 plus 2 equals 6. Now, I ask these non-Muslims, will you allow the candidate to teach in your school who says that 2 plus 2 equals 3 or that 2 plus 2 equals 6? They’ll say, no. I ask, why? They’ll say, because he does not have correct knowledge of mathematics. Similarly, as far as matters of religion are concerned we (Muslims) know for sure that only Islam is a true religion in the eyes of God. In the Holy Quran (3:85), it is mentioned that God will never accept any religion other than Islam. As far as the second question, regarding building of churches or temples is concerned, how can we allow this when their religion is wrong and when their worshipping is wrong? Therefore, we will not allow such wrong things in our Islamic country.
Interviewer: But is it not that they (non-Muslims) also think that their religion is true, whereas we (Muslims) think that our religion is true?
Zakir Naik: In religious matters only we know for sure that we Muslims are right. They (non-Muslims) are not sure. Thus, in our country we can’t allow preaching other religions because we know for sure that only Islam is the right religion. However, if a non-Muslim likes to practise his religion in an Islamic country, he can do so inside his home — but he can’t propagate his religion. It is exactly as if a teacher thinks in his mind that 2 plus 2 equals 3. He has the right to do so, but we can never allow such a person to teach this to our children. Non-Muslims are no doubt experts in science and technology. But they (non-Muslims) are not sure about religious truths. Therefore, we are trying to get them to the right path of Islam.”
Naik’s views provoke a troubling question in my mind: “Why do some Muslims demand secularism and more than equal treatment in countries where they are a minority, but aggressively turn anti-secular and deny even equal treatment to non-Muslims in many Muslim-majority countries?” Muslims cannot escape their responsibility to answer this question.
Naik’s defense of the denial of fundamental human rights of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia is not unrelated to an unbelievable incident that happened recently in the land where Islam was born. On February 26, four French nationals — all non-Muslims working in Saudi Arabia — were killed by gunmen. Their crime? They were resting on the side of a desert road about 10 miles from the holy city of Medina, which, like Mecca, is restricted to Muslims only.
Whenever non-Muslims, including those who admire Islam’s positive features, express alarm at incidents like these, or at views such as Zakir Naik’s, they are accused of spreading “stereotypes” about Islam and Muslims. But shouldn’t Muslims themselves be debating what produces these stereotypes?http://islamicterrorism.wordpress.com
Who is responsible for Holocaust??????? Ans: Hitler Did he killed each & every Jews by his hand? Ans No.Than why he held responsible????? Because he was the ruler & It happened because of his policy.You may found thousand of example in which ruler is held responsible for crime happened in his regime.Yazeed is directly & in-directly involve in Sahadat of of Ahle_bait(ra). Even he did not punish the culprits. Ibn_e_Saad & Ibn_e_Ziyaad. He raised their ranks.What does it shows ?????Yazeed (LA) is directly responsible for his Army's brutal crime. And those who support Yazeed's act also consider the prat of Yazeed's Army , and Muslim should use with their name " Lanat_Allah " & Lanat _Rasoul Allah". Irrsepective of the era, Even if any one praise Yazeed today ,he should treat in the same way " Lanat Allah" and "Lanat of Rasoul Allah"Thanks.Gul Badshah Khan
Date: 18 Nov 2008 07:31:21 -0000 [01:01PM IST]
Subject: Mr. Zakir Naik has Good Knowledge but with out any Logic
I would like to suggest Mr. Zakir Naik to get into the reality of Islam, then he will understand the logic of Islam. Every thing has a logic behind itself. Mr. Zakir Naik in his video he urged muslims to seek help from Allah alone. He said Muslims should not seek help from Prophet Mohammad (s.w.a). I really dont understand that, why Zakir Naik made this statement. He really thought about it before releasing his words on Prophet Mohammad.
I am only 23 years old, i dont have enough knowledge about Islam, but what Zakir said about Prophet Mohammad is totally wrong statement because Zakir Naik is very far from reality and logic of Islam. I have plenty of reasons which can prove Zakir Naik is wrong in his statement. Because what Allah has shown to me, has not been shown to Zakir Naik that is why he made statement on Prophet Mohammad. I dont have permission to disclose that to anybody or Mr. Zakir Naik what Allah has shown to me.....
I am a big fan of Zakir Naik, I respect Mr. Zakir Naik, i would like to convey one message to him that he should applogies before Allah in his one feet and on his knee.....because he made a bullshit statement for that Allah will never forgive him so please Mr. Zakir Naik applogies before Allah on your knee.....
Please Mr. Zakir Naik you made really a wrong statement infact you dont know what you said about prophet mohammad...you are very far from the reality of Islam...You have not seen any miracle of Prophet Mohammad from your eyes....so please i request you to applogies for that.....
if i will get a chance to meet Mr. Zakir Naik then i will explain about some deep logic and reality of Islam, what i have seen from my eyes.....
Syed Faisal Karim
Plz forward this to Mr. Zakir Naik....Its a request.....
Didn't your hand shake while writing all this nonsense about Karbala, the greatest tragedy the world has witnessed. What kind of a Muslim are you? Don't you believe in life after death. What do you get by protecting Yazid, the most cursed individual of all time. Is it that your hatred for the Ahlulbayet is so pronounced that you would even go to the extent of calling Karbala a concocted story. How can you be a Mulsim and hold such a stupid opinion? You must know that the Ulema of Ahl'ul Sunnah are united that Yazeed was a Fasiq. I reproduce hereunder what Yazid’s son Mu'awiya had to say about his father when he came to power upon Yazid’s death. (As recorded by Ibn Hajr al-Haythami a prominent scholar of the Ahl us-Sunnah)
Mu'awiya bin Yazid (Muawiyah II) then proceeded to cry, 'It is a terrible thing that we are fully aware of Yazid's bad deeds: he slaughtered the family of the Prophet, he deemed alcohol Halal, and set fire to the Ka'ba.”
Now after having read what Yazid's own son had to say about that his father within just three years of the tragedy of Karbala; that Yazid "fought the grandson of the Prophet and is suffering in his grave on account of his sins" and that he "slaughtered the family of the Prophet" would you still be naive enough to use RA after the tyrant's name quoting references from books written by people born hundrerds of years later.
And Mr.Basha before casting aspersions on SAF Rizvi for any of his comments that may have hurt you, please read your own preceding comments once again and realise that there is a lot of shit that you have yourself uttered which would have deeply hurt the sentiments of SAF Rizvi, Dr.Mansoor Ilahi, Meraj, Faraz Ahmad Haq, Ali Abbas and all lovers of Prophet and Ahlulbayet, including me. It's fine to debate and present an opinion but it is completely unfair to distort history, just to prove your point.
Distortion of history is the worst form of ignorance that I read in the comments of Mr Basha. It is your individual mind that should accept a fact or not but you cannot discard an event that has been prominently written and preserved. Especially the Arabs were the masters and gave the world the art of writing history.
There is no doubt that Hasan and Husain was the beloved grandson of Prophet Mohammad (SAW) and he called them as the leaders of the youth of Paradise. The Holy Prophet doted on his grandson and there are hadeeth that he even extended the prayers when one of his grandsons stood atop him. Mr Basha this is a fact and you cannot deny. Every Muslim after the prayers give durud to Alahe Muhammad because of their high statures. Your use of word against these illustrious personalities is pathetic and condemnable and I say abhorrent. Please think of life after death.
The debate on Zakir Naik can go on but no one should stoop to a level of casting aspersion on the Prophet grandson. This is unacceptable to all Muslims, irrespective of which sect they belong. Mr Basha.
You are ignorant man. If you read comment posted on this site it would tell you the following things.
None of the companion of the Holy Prophet ever claimed they were above the Ahlul Bayt, the family of Hadrat Muhammad (SAW) and this included the righteous caliph.
No Muslim has ever named their progeny after Yazid. Why?
In Iraq there is huge Mausoleum in Karbala reminding people of what happened 1400 years ago (comment already posted) and I have read it hope it is still there).
I totally agree to the comments made here as to where is the grave of Yazid and his followers like Ibn Ziyad, Onar saad. Shimr and others were Not you know and not Zakir Naik even though this would be your pilgrimage centre. But I tell you why. Yazid and his team were doomed after the battle in which Prophet grandson was killed.
Don’t spit fire. You are too small, trivial to talk of eminent personality like Husain and the battle of Karbala. Ignorance is a bliss but not always
JAMSEED BHASHA / PASHA AAPKE KAYEE NAAM SE AAPKE NUTFE PE BAAR BAAR SHAKK HOTA HAI
AAPNE MOHTARAM SAF RIZVI SAHAB KE BAARE ME KAYEE NAZEBA BATEN KAHIN AAPKO BATAA DUN KI MAI UNKE COMMENTS EK ARSE SE PADH RAHA HUN AUR HAME UNKEE BAATEN ILM AUR YAKEEN AUR TAQWE SE LABREZ PAYEEN AUR AAPKE UTH PATAANG BAATON KE BAAD MAINE FIR SE UNKE SAARE COMMENTS PADHE AUR KAHIN NAHI PAYA KI UNHONE AAPKO YA KISSI KO BHI KOYE AUL- FAUL BATEIN LIKHIN AUR UNHONE SIRF AAPKE KAALE CHEHRE KO AUR UJAGAR KAR KE AAPKE DOGHLE HONE KI BAAT ENTEHA SALIKHE AUR SHARIFANA ANDAAZ ME LIKHI HAIN AUR AAP KHUDD KO DEKHIYE AAPNE AISE ALFAAZ ISTEMAAL KAR KE SAF RIZVI SAHAB KI HARR BAAT KO SAHI SABIT KAR DIYA ...LOMBDI (FOX) CHAHE JITNA NEEL LAGA LE WO LOMDI RAHTI HAI... AAP KUCH NAHI BAS EK WAHAIBI NAJASAT KI PAIDAISH HAIN AUR YE AAPKE KALAAMON SE SAAF ZAHIR HOTAA HAI JAHIL TO AAP HAI HEEN AUR AAPNE YAHAN WAHAN SE ULTE SEDHE DASTAWEZ EKHATTA KAR KE AAPNE AAPKO KAABIL GADHA SAMAJHTE HAIN... PARHEZ AUR TAKWE SE NA TAKRAYEN WARNA TAHES NAHES HO JAYENGE NABI-E-KARIM SAWW KE KHAANDAAN SE BUGZ RAKHENGE TO DUNIYA BHI LUT JAYEGI AUR AAKHIRAT ME TO YAZEED, SHIMR, PHIROAUN AUR IBLEES KE SAATH AAP NAZAR AYENGE .
JANAB RIZVI SAHAB AAP IS NA MURAAD SAKS KI BAATON KO IBLEES IS GUFTUGU SAMAJH KE LANAT BHEJ DIYEGA AUR APNI HAQQ KI AWAAZ KO KHUBB BULAND RAKHIYEGA
ISS BASHAA / BATASHA KI WAJAH SE MUJHE BHI APNE MESSAGE KA KADD BADAA KARNA PADD RAHA HAI DOGHLON KA JAWAAB DENE KE LIYE AISA KARNA MAJBOORI HAI ISKE LIYE MAAFI CHAHOONGA'
I have been posting my comments on this web page thinking that the readers would belong to a decent clan. But people like Saf Rizvi, had nothing to present intellectually, indulged in filth, using abausive languge that revealed his leneage or his upbringings. If you have stuff worth reading, come out with facts of history than to attack personally. His comments not only smell filth but also exposes his true character as an intolerable worm of the gutter. Except saying this, I have nothing to rebut as he did not write anything worth commenting intellectually. I am sorry to write such a bad stuff against that individual as I believe that one should speak the language he understands. "Marde Nathan pe kalame narm wo nazuk be asar". Such filthy people would always indulge in street talk like market maids, if they have nothing to defend. It is the same case with Saf Rizvi and others joining him in chorus. Emotions have no place in relating historical facts. Any sane man would discuss seriously such historical facts through substantive documents without indulging in such street language. It is not necessary one should always agree with the views of others. If there is anything eternally wrong with such views, it is for the readers to present their point of views within decency without indulging in filth and mudslinging simply because the views uttered by him were not palatable. The same was with Dr. Zakir Naik, a scholar of repute was being hackled for his views of Yazeed RA. Allah should guide them aright.
The episode of Karbala is emotive subject to one and all for centuries more to the Shias than to the learned Sunnis. However, a few ignorant Sunni too believed in the Zorastrian story penned by a new convert Shia historian Tibri, who distorted the story of Karbala where imaginations were running riots. This concocted story was written by Tibri some 300 years after the event was over. Nobody in history has ever answered the question that the bare facts and truth recorded by none other than Ibn Khuldouom in his famous epic history book called "Mukhaddima" in which a separate chapter was devoted to the events that led to the killing of Hazrat Imam Hussein RA at Karbala was found missing. Unfotunately, the rulers of the day, removed that chapter so that it became easy for story writers to write according to their convenience. Today, the same story is being repeated year after year especially during Moharram like, "Karbala Me Nabi Ke Nawase; Teen Din se the pani ke pyase"etc., where as the fact was Imam Hussein RA arrived with his family on the 10th day of Moharram and died within hours in the skirmishes that erupted there at Karbala. This was distorted by all Shia Hisotorians and presented a new story that was believed after three hundred years of the event as if the entire family was denied food, water and even tortured etc. Unfortunately, majority of the Shia and Sunni Muslims still believe that story of Karbala. Inna Lillahi Wa Inna Ilaihi Rajiun. But Dr. Zakir Naik became the object of redicule when he referred Yazeed ibn Mawaviah, the Caliph of that time as RA, as if he had committed a greatest sin. Kindly read the well documented research book called " Khilafate Mawiayah wo Yazeed" by Mahmood Ahmed Abbasi, a Pakistani Shia Historian in 1953. It is irony that even the Shias were not willing to believe what a member of their community had documented the event through years of research. He came out with certain facts about Karbala that would put every Shia to shame.
I have nothing but sympathy with those innocent Sunni populace who believed the Karbala story as presented to them by the Shia historians as truth. The Shias not only distorted Islamic history to project Hazrat Ali RA, in a larger than life size, but also distorted the very religion of Islam. They even changed the Kalima inserting the name of Hazrat Ali, changed the salat, the zakat, the roza and what not, as if they belong to a new religion. They offer prayers on the clay of Karbala. They break fast after the Mughrib prayers oo their own but without a Imam which has no sanction in Islam. They have no Imam to lead the regular prayers and even today they offer prayers without a Imam and someone guiding from outside. Is it what Prophet Mohammed PBUH taught us during the life time. He led the prayers always and when he was ill, he offered prayers behind Hazrat Abu Bakr RA, who led the prayers in his absence . But according to them, their 12th Imam had gone missing in the mountains and would appear one day before the doomsday to lead all the Shias to safety. The sect that believes and thrives on such stories, could hardly be called an Islamic sect. No one has a right to distort what is ordained in the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of Prophet Mohammed PBUH. Hazrat Ali RA was his companion and son in law. The two children from Ali-Fathima RA were Imam Hassan RA, a sober man by himself and Hazrat Imam Hussein RA, docile by nature and was leading a peaceful retired life after the killing of Hazrat Ali RA in Medinah until a few rebels came from Kufa to mislead him with all stories of atrocities purported to have committed by Yazeed and his followers in Kufa. That here Innocent Imam Hussein was wrong in believing those rebels but undertook the long and arduous 45 days journey to Kufa to see for himself what was actually happening there. It was a fact finding mission and he had no intention to fight against Yazeed RA. Had he had the intention of waging a war with Yazeed army, as projected by Shias, he would have gone prepared with an army not with his family. It was really unfortunate that a lovable grandson of Prophet Mohammed PBUH had to die in the circumstances that nobody would have imagined. But to present those events in a distorted fashion to make it a life long mourning event was nothing but a mockery of the facts of history.
In berief, the great divide in Islam was engineered by a jew who converted to Islam named Abdullah bin Saba. He became Muslim but was one of the Munfiqueen of Islam. He wanted to divide Islam from within. He formed a small party of his followers called Saba Party at that time and spread the first canard that Hazrat Ali RA was not consulted after the death of Prophet Mohammed PBUH as for the succession as Caliph. He also spread the rumours that Hazrat Ali RA was unhappy at the selection of Hazrath Abu Bakr RA as the first Caliph of Islam. It was not true, as Ali RA was busy digging a grave at the House of Prophet, so he could not participate in the Majlise Shoura at Medinah Mosque, where people assembled in what is called the first democratic assembly of Islam and unanimously elected Hazrath Abu Bakr RA as the true successor to Prophet Mohammed PBUH for his past record of association with him. Later, when Hazrat Ali RA was informed he too took a 'baiet' and whole-heartedly supported him.
That was the beginning of the split and it was a great conspiracy in Islam to divide from within. Ibne Saba succeeded as poor Muslims innocent they were, totally misled to believe the story of Saba. He could not do much during the Caliphate of Hazrat Umar RA, though he again pressed for the claim of Hazrat Ali RA after the death of Hazrath Abu Bakr RA. But Hazrat Ali RA had no grudge to the appointment of Hazrat Umar RA as the second caliph.
Later after the death of Hazrath Umar RA, the appointment of Zinnoorein Hazrath Usman RA was the focal point of rebellion. The house of Caliph of the day was encircled by the followers of Ibne Saba for days together. Hazrath Ali made a monumental mistake by not interfering, though it was his duty to do so to break the seige of the house of the Caliph. Later Hazrat Usman was killed by Ibne Saba party members and installed Hazrat Ali RA as the fourth Caliph of Islam. Here there is no dispute to his becoming the caliph as he was the rightful choice to be the fourth caliph. But the dubious circumstances in which he became the Caliph by the very killers of Hazrat Usman RA was the basis of revolt by all including Ummul Momineen Bibi Ayesha RA and Hazrat Mawayiah RA, the Governor of Egypt and scores of others. Their demand was to take action against the killers of Hazrath Usman RA called "Khassas" and without taking that Ali's becoming the Caliph was not acceptable to everyone including his cousin Abdullah bin Abbas RA and many more respectable Sahabis who were alive then. The result was mutiny culminated in the battle of Jamal, and the rest was history. But the divide continued though at the time of death of Hazrat Ali RA, he directed Hazrath Hassan and Hazrat Hussein RA to accept Hazrat Mawaiyah as his successor and take a 'baiet' and even in his death, Hazrat Ali RA wanted to save Islam from further split. That was the greatness of Hazrath Ali RA. He was a great warrior of his time known for his valour and quoted even today. But he too was human and erred in assessing the situation before becoming the Caliph. But the divide continued even after his death, as the future events proved. Here one should not be misguided by the concocted history as propagated by the Shia historians. One should not have a grudge as to the question of succession to the caliphate as Islam stood for democracy and not kingship. The baton of caliphate was rightly passed on from one caliph to the other based on his contribution to the cause of Islam during the life of Prophet Mohammed PBUH. Sunnis therefore be wary of Shia propaganda.
Similar is the propaganda being carried out by the Shias regarding the battle of Karbala and the circumstances under which the great grandson of Prophet Mohammed PBUH Hazrat Hussein RA died. As for Yazeed was concerned, Sultan Shahin, the Editor of New Age Islam, has written somewhere here quoting history that Yazeed was the first commander of first Islamic Naval Armada that invaded Canstentenophle (now Istanbul) which was forseen by the Prophet PBUH himself with a tiding that whoever participate in that battle would be assured of a rightful place in Jannat. Incidentally under the Commandership of Yazid RA, Hazrat Hussein RA, Ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas and scores of others participated. One such great Sahabi was Abu Ayub Ansari RA, the host of Prophet PBUH. He was sick at that time and he wanted to participate in the battle because Prophet PBUH had gave the tidings of Jannat to all those who participated. Eventually he died there and burried with due respect. This is history but the rest is story as narrated every year by Shias. Sunnis beware do not believe the Shia version of Karbala episode. Kindly go through the pages of historical facts well documented by Ibne Timiyah and others without distortion and you would come to know the real truth.
Here I have done my duty and told the bare facts of history and truth. I leave to the readers to make their own assessment and judgement in a decent way.
Bahut bahut Shukriya aapki duaein ki. Maine to farz nibhaya. Humsabko chahe kisi bhi firqe me ho muttahid hokar in logon ko expose karna hai. Ahmad raza saheb jo ki bareily ke hain unhone bhi bahuit accha bayan diya hai. Dua karen ki quam sahi rate par chale aur Zakir Naik aise log jo sirf nafrat ke qabil hain quam se bahar kar diye jaayes. Bhai kabhi UAE aaye to milen. ALLAH HAFIZ Jazaak ul Khair
I fully agree with Mr Inayat and thank him for taking up the issue. I have been reading New Age Islam for months and have found this website above sectarian conflict and dedicated to the cause of Islam. Sultan Shahin Saheb or saheba is doing creditable work at this crucial juncture when Islam is being attacked from all corners by the Wahabbis, Jews and the Western Christian world. Of the worst are the likes of Zakir Naik and at least on this site there is a platform to discuss and debate the burning topics. Well said Mr Inayat, no one should suspect Sultan Shahin Saheb. He has done commendable job. I am happy to read the article by Mr Razvi and for all Muslims and non Muslim it would make sense. I hope good sense shall prevail in the end and bring larger unity among the Muslim ummah.
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:04:34 -0800 [09:34PM IST]
From: Mubashir Inayet
To: Editor, NewageIslam.com firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: People, please!!
Please stop suspecting Sultan Shahin just because he reports the truth. It is like shooting the messenger just because he sometimes has bad news for you!!! Why he picks on Islam. I will tell you why. Charity begins at home. Why should he not point to bad acts of Muslims who claim to live and die by their faith? Is that, he asks, the way to go? Once he has reasonably cleaned his own backyard, he will worry about others.
As for the Messenger allegedly marrying a 6 year old and consummating the marriage when she was older, search this website for articles that prove (from various ahadees) that that was not the case and it is just a fabrication. Hadees are not the Word of God and there are good bad and the ugly mixed up. No wonder, such is the case as it happens to stories based on hearsay written down more than 230 years after The Messenger passed away!!
DID SAYYIDA AYESHA (ra) MARRY MUHAMMAD (P.B.U.H), THE PROPHET OF ISLAM, AT AGE 6?
11/17/2008 2:12:53 PM Meraj
Some points raised by Zaki Baqri against Zakir Naik
First thing I would like ask is that, is he ready to do munazarah with me in this subject as he loves to do it with Hindus and Christians? It seems he doesn’t believe in the books of Sihahe Sittah which are the most authentic books in accordance with the Sunni believe.
Following are some examples:
As per Holy Qur’an Chapter 2:44.’ATA’MUROONAN-NASA BIL-BIIRI WA TANSAUNA ANFUSAKUM WA ANTUM TATLOONAL-KITABA AFALA TA’QILOON ‘.
‘ What ! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your awn souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense? ‘
Is naik having no sense that he adds word ‘ May ALLAH (S.W.T.) be pleased with him ‘ for that yazid who was making mockery of HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.) and revealation.Naik should refer to the books of scholars from all muslim sects who have many differences in other things but in the matter of yazid they stand united.There are unanimously accepted famous couplets of yazid.The cursed yazid was reciting these couplets while he was drunk.Just one of it is sufficient to know that Yazid was rejecting the revealation.’ MA KHABARUN JAA’A WALA WAHYUN NAZAL ‘ i.e no news came and and nothing was revealed.
Is naik having no sense in claiming that karbala was a political war.Is naik not inviting the wrath of ALLAH
(S.W.T.) by rejecting the saying of IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.).
IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) himself said that ‘INNAMA KHARAJTU
LITALABIL-ISLAHI FI UMMATI JADDI ‘(Indeed I have taken a step (I came out) for the Islah of my grandfather’s (i.e. HOLY PROPHET’S) Ummah).How can naik’s version of Islam be accepted while he rejects the authentic saying of Truthful Imam and grandson of HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.)
Is naik having no sense that IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) was from amongst AHLULBAIT (A.S) who are purified by ALLAH (S.W.T.) and this is announced in 33:33.Sahih bukhari, sahih muslim and other source of traditions explain the great merits of AHLULBAIT (A.S.).Hence the enemy and killer of IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) will be none but impure and unjust as per QUR’AN. Then where does naik stand?
Is naik having no sense that he is adding the words ‘ may ALLAH(S.W.T.) be pleased with him ‘ after the name of cursed yazeed who killed the leader of youths of paradise as per unanimously accepted hadith of HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.) ” AL-HASANU WAL-HUSAINU SAYYIDA SHABABI AHLIL-JANNAH .’ (The HASAN and the HUSAIN are the leader of youths of paradise).Does naik think that yazid was not unjust in killing AHLULBAIT (A.S.) and leader of youths of paradise.
Which verse of holy Qur’an justifies the oppressions done on the family of HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.) in karbala.On what basis can he call the ‘supreme sacrifice ‘to be a political war? naik quotes references to prove his point from other books in interfaith dialogue, hence naik is either hiding the truth about karbala if he has read or one can conclude that when it comes to discussion about Islam, AHLULBAIT (A.S.) and KARBALA, he is totally ignorant and he needs to come out of darkness about supreme sacrifice of karbala.
Is naik having no sense in praising the killer of IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.), who in a way killed HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W)
This is because both in sahihain and hundred of other books it is quoted from HOLY PRPHET (S.A.W.W.):’ HUSAINU MINNI WA ANA MIN HUSAIN which means HHUSAIN is from ME and I am from HUSAIN’. This is not an ordinary saying explaining an ordinary relation of a grandfather and a grandson, because its the saying of that PROPHET (S.A.W.W.) for whom ALLAH (S.W.T.) has announced in Holy Qur’an, Chapter 53:3 ‘WAMA YANTIQU ANIL-HAWA IN HUWA ILLA WAHYUN YUHA ‘i.e He (HOLY
PROPHET) doesn’t speak out of desire; it is not but revelation that is revealed.’ Hence ALLAH’s PROPHET has announced that HE (S.A.W.W.) and IMAM HUSAIN
(A.S.) are related to each other through the supreme sacrifice which would the message of Islam.
So rejecting IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) is rejecting PROPHET MUHAMMED (S.A.W.W.) and killing IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) is killing the HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.).Hence as per this true hadith, yazid actually killed HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.).
Is naik having no sense that he supports a killer while ALLAH (S.W.T.) says in HOLY QURAN Chapter 5:32 ‘ MAN QATALA NAFSAN BIGHAIRI NAFSIN AW FASADIN FIL-ARZ FAKAANNAMA QATALAN-NASA JAMEEAA ‘which means ‘ And whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men. Now that Muslims unanimously accept IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) to be RIGHTEOUS GRANDSON OF HOLY PROPHET, IMAM, TRUTHFUL, FROM AMONG AHLULBAIT, LEADER OF YOUTHS OF PARADISE’, then all Muslims have to accept that each and every move of IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) is authenticated by HOLY QURAN and TRUE AHADITH. Hence there is no choice left but to condemn yazid the killer of IMAM
HUSAIN (A.S.).The crime of yazid as per the verse mentioned is very big in all sense, because if killing of one innocent man is like killing all men, then killing of leader of paradise is like killing all the people of paradise.
TRUTH is that for naik there is not even one verse in QURAN or one authentic hadith mentioning his name to guarantee paradise for him and his followers, but IMAM
HUSAIN (A.S.) is not only mentioned by name and is guaranteed paradise by TRUTHFUL PROPHET (S.A.W.W), but he will also be the leader of the youths of paradise.
TRUTH is that naik is not from among pure AHLULBAIT (A.S), hence naik can turn out to be impure and can always go wrong but IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) is pure and he didn’t go wrong for a moment.
TRUTH is that naik is not absolutely righteous but IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) is absolutely righteous.Because naik is not the righteous grandson of HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.) nor the PROPHET said that He is from him, hence naik can always go astray but not IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.).
TRUTH is that naik is not directly taught and guided by HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.) hence he himself can be be misled and he can mislead others due to lack of knowledge, prejudice, evil self (nafsil-ammarah), evil deeds and whispering of satan.But IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) was directly taught and guided by HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.) , He is the guided one and guiding others towards paradise.
TRUTH is that naik has become devils advocate by
saying ‘may ALLAH (S.W.T.) be pleased with him ‘ for
yazid.IMAM HUSAIN (A.S.) the rightly guided IMAM didn’t do bay’at of cursed yazid and sacrificed his, family member’s and companions life but naik is trying to because yazid was Usurper as he was not an appointed caliph of ALLAH (S.W.T.)
Drunkard ‘ SHARIBUL-KHUMUR ‘
Murtad due to rejection of QURAN and revelation. Oppressor who oppressed HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.)’s family members, women, children and some companions of
HOLY PROPHET (S.A.W.W.).
Killer of the great and pious companions of HOLY
PROPHET (S.A.W.W.), righteous BANU HASHIM and IMAM
HUSAIN (A.S.) the leader of youths of paradise.
All wahabis and deobandis support Zakir naik's statement.Only Sunnis and Scholars Against Zakir naik's statement.
Sunni Muslims demand ban of Zakir Naik’s talkDNA CorrespondentSunday, November 09, 2008 03:24 ISTOn November 8, 2008, members of India’s premier Sunni Muslim organisation, Raza Academy came together to demand a ban on Zahir Naik’s programme ‘Insaniyat Ke Liye Hal’ to be held from November 14-23 at Somaiya grounds.
Maulana Ashraf Raza of the Darul-Uloom Hanfia Rizvia, Colaba also issued a fatwa against Naik. Members alleged that Naik had made derogatory statements about Islam’s prophet. Maulanas from the All India Sunni Tableeq Community were present.Members complained that on many occasions Naik had urged crowds to pray to Allah alone instead of Prophet Mohammed Paigambar, as he claims the prophet is human.
They also alleged that Naik had praised, Yazid, the murderer of Imam Hussein. Saeed Noori, general secretary of Raza Academy said, “Naik has been very indifferent about Osama Bin Laden. He hasn’t said anything about Osama, even though we see him as a terrorist.”
Ebrahim Tahil, member of the academy said, “He earlier targeted Christians and is now against Sunni Muslims. We have met with RR Patil and KL Prasad urging them to ban the programme.” He added, “We want to know from where Naik gets his funds?”
What if the ban is not enforced? Noori said, “Maulanas from the Sunni community plan to confront Naik on his knowledge of Islam before the public during the programme.”DNA tried getting in touch with Naik, but he was unavailable for comment.
Zakir Naik apologizes for his statement, Peace Conference to go on14 November 2008.Mumbai: Famous Islamic preacher Dr. Zakir Naik, who was under attack for some of his statements have apologized for hurting the sentiments of other Muslims. A meeting was organized by the Mumbai Assistant Commission of Police yesterday where Dr. Naik apologized and signed a letter of repentance.In the meeting Mufi Mahmood Akhtar and Mufti Ashraf Raza objected to Dr. Zakir Naik's statement regarding Prophet Mohammad that it was insulting to the Prophet. Dr. Zaik acceted his mistake and said it was unintentional on his part.A Letter of Repentance was prepared in front of the Joint Commission of Police L K Prasad which Dr. Naik signed and promised that he will never repeat this statement that can hurt the sentiments of the followers of other sects.Representavie of Ulama Ahl-e-Sunnat Maulana Mueen Mian, Hafiz Athar, Saeed Noori, and Maulana Yusuf Raza participated in the meeting. Meeting also decided that since Dr. Naik has apologized, the ten-day long Peace Conference may go on now.Peace- The Solution for Humanity is organized from 14th Nov to 23rd Nov in Mumbai on Somaiya Grouds. A number of speakers from India and abroad are expected to participate. Source: http://www.peaceconference.in
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 01:48:55 +0530 [01:48AM IST]
From: Sarkar Haider
Subject: Latest Zakir Nayek controversy- my Dilemma
Zakir Nayek is the middle name of the controversy, so writes the Times of India- 16.11.8 ( Sunday)
This time he feels Prophet Mohammad is (naoozobillah) not fit enough to do SHAFAAT... ( Intercession) Qoran clearly mentions his status as SHAAFI but then Zakir nayek has his ways...( I,m attaching the scanned copy of the news in today's TOI)..
At times it becomes difficult for an average observer like me to decide who is talking on television ??...someone who CLAIMS as FRIEND?....or someone an unbiassed mind PERCIEVES as ENEMY...???...........
This evening a group of committed Muslims( Committed to spread Islam- infact more committed than christian Missionaries probably ever were, ) well. after the DAAWA ( Invitation to join Islam) - but wait... were not all present inside auditorium were moslims?... Ah.. may be IMPURE and IMPERFECT as we all are from their point of view..!!!...they were running a signature compaign addressed to the District Magistrate / Commissioner & Ministry of Communic. titled " WE WANT THE TELECAST OF PEACE TV in our city on T.V channels" ( we all know that Zakir Nayek speaks through this channel).. I just did not know how to react to such kind of application...i just said " let me figure out who he is?.. many people looked at me as if I am the most ignorant not to know who the new prophet is...?.. but this moment of confusion was enough for me to get out of the auditorium and drive off...
Only thing I could think of doing right now is to compile this e-mail and send to few friends and ask them for their opinion . see for urslf.....and do write back your valuable feedbacks please...
Mr.Jamsheed Basha, you appear to me to be a misinformed confused man. After reading your comments all I see are self-contradictory statements one after the other.
Some of your self-contradictions are...
On one side you say "I am not a supporter of Dr. Zakir Naik" and on the other side you say "He is a Muslim Scholar of repute. Secondly, he is doing some service to the Muslim community through his knowledge of all religions and removing misgivings associated with it"
Again on one hand you say "What kind Muslims we are watching haplessly all the atrocities committed by US in Iraq and Afghanistan" and "No Muslim should watch silently what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan" and on the other hand you say "The Jihad was situational and not continual. The Jihad today has no relevance... "
In another instance while on one hand you call Yazeed as Zalim and Imam Husain as Mazloom in the next line you say "Why should we waste time on it, whether Yazid was wrong or right, whether Imam Hussein erred in going to Karbala and got killed in the skirmishes etc."
You don't seem to be sure of what you are trying to say. May be it's the age, which one can't help. I therefore consider it a waste of time to respond to your comments any further than what Faraz Ahmad Haq, SAF Rizvi, Ali Abbas and Meraj already wonderfully have. And yes "Imam Husain didn't get killed in a skirmish". If you continue to hold that idiotic view, after the fatwa on Zakir Naik, your brother-in-faith, you could be the next in line to be called a 'Kafir' and again not by a Shia alim but by a Sunni mufti and this time not from Lucknow but from some mosque in Chennai.
Sorry that was like this.....
" AJAB TAMASKHUR HUA ISLAM KI TAQDEER KE SAATH
SHABBIR* ZEBAH HUE NAARA-E- TAKBIR KE SAATH....!!!
A SHER FOR YOUR KARBALA EPISODE CONTROVERSY
" Ajab Tamaskhur Hua Islam ki Taqdeer ke Saath,
Shabbir* Zebah hue..NAATA-E-TAKBEER ke saath !!!!
hope this sher explains the whole debate...
Assalam AlaikumA demand: saf rizvi, hasan iqbal, FARAZ AHMAD HAQ, ASLAM KHAN BARAILVI, asrar ahmad, A.M.JAMSHEED BASHA, Ali AbbasWe Should always use lanati bidati with yazid.who are supporter of Hussain ra.Thanks
Why do Muslims hate Dr Zakir Naik?M. Hasan and Sweta Ramanujan-Dixit, Hindustan TimesLucknow/Mumbai, November 09, 2008
He insists he has never uttered a blasphemous word. But a large number of Muslims across the country, both Shia and Sunni, say he has, and want Dr Zakir Naik expelled from the community.
Dr Naik, 43, a Mumbai-based practising doctor and president of the Islamic Research Foundation, has been a controversial figure for Muslim theologians for long. But he shot into prominence only recently when, at the urging of local ulema, the Uttar Pradesh government on October 30, barred him from addressing meetings in Allahabad, Kanpur and Lucknow. Since then arguments, both against him and in his favour, have been raging in the Urdu press.
"I do not consider him a Muslim," said Maulana Hashim Kachauchwi, a respected Sunni scholar in Lucknow, on Saturday.
"The campaign against Dr Naik is politically motivated," declared Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahli, the Naib Imam of Lucknow's Idgah.
What exactly has Dr Naik said that has riled some Muslims so much? For one, he is accused of openly praising Osama bin Laden in his speeches.
"The Quran says it is important to crosscheck all information," Dr Naik countered. "I would say the person who destroyed the Twin Towers in New York was a terrorist. But did Osama? I don't know. I don't know if he is good or bad."
"He has repeatedly said that Muslims should not in their prayers seek favours from the Prophet, but only from Allah himself," said a Lucknow scholar who did not want to be named. "He has claimed that the Prophet died centuries ago, and no dead man can bestow favours. This is blasphemous for both Shias and Sunnis who maintain that the very utterance of the La Ilaha expression in the present tense ('There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his Prophet') implies that the Prophet can never die."
"I don't know why I'm being singled out," Dr Naik told HT. "Hundreds of scholars across the world have said the same things I have."
For Muslims the most controversial of Dr Naik's statements, however, relate to Yazid, the quintessential villain in Muslim theology, whose army was responsible for the killing of Husain, the Prophet's grandson, in the battle of Karbala in 680 AD. At a conference in December 2007 in Mumbai he used the expression Radiallah tala anho (May Allah be pleased with him) while referring to Yazid, which outraged his audience.
"The Prophet has said, 'If you praise someone who does not deserve praise, no matter; but if you curse someone who should not be cursed, the curse comes back to you'," responded Dr Naik. "Thus I preferred not to curse anyone, not even Yazid."
Muslims scholars though note that his approach comes close to that of the Wahabi sect.http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=&id=c15f2192-aad6-445e-8ae4-4b34bfcf4eb6&&Headline=Why+do+Muslims+hate+Dr+Zakir+Naik%3f
Jamsheed basha jee namastey’
When a person is a liar and whose faith is already gone to the drains, the first sign is that he behaves like a hypocrite and second he becomes repetitive of the garbage again and again…. as in your case, in your hurry to reply to various comments pointing out to your bull…. you have only repeated your rigmarole again, exposing yourself and your linkage to Abu huraira who must have been somewhere in your family tree ….as regard to your mention about ignoring and distorting the history I have no doubt about the category of people who do this…people with shady parentage and unknown family tree always try to cover up and cut any discussion that might point out to their real Nutfa and expose their faulty origin…no matter how much they avoid or try to distort history but their real lowly self is brought about in the open by their own faces which are devoid of grace and by their utterances which is devoid of truth, this is a permanent Lanat on such people by the will of almighty Allah swt. Avoid reading the garbage that you have been reading and believing in the past, as everything in the printed form is not necessarily worthy of reading…get down to serious stuff and try to become true Muslim who is not ungrateful to Allah swt’s most beloved Prophet pbuh and his progeny…..Ibn Abd-al-Wahab died, while on board a ship and his body was disgracefully thrown of board into the sea, since the one who started Wahabism did not get a grave does not mean that all dead of the world need not be remembered and prayed for their salvation. MARR GAYE MARDUUD NA FATIHA NA DARUUD is only applicable on his followers (Wahabis) and not on the rest of the saner Islamic world. Who still have their faith with them and their unconditional love and reverence for the Prophet pbuh and his progeny intact… Alhamdollilah’
How can anyone trust you or a chameleon? This is the problem of people who come directly from Yazidi and Naik lineage. In your post you have clearly mention Quaide Azam Mohmmad Ali Jinnah and even went to give his example Excerpts mentioned below. If you do not love Jinnah from your heart, there was no reason to give his example. Mind it, Jinnah was never the last word in Islam.
Readers of this site can easily discern as I said you are here and there also Jamshed Basha or pasha.
It is preposterous to reply even to your mail on Kerbala and your ignorance about it. This is what I say of Zakir Naik whose followers are so ignorant then how the teacher must be. Go to Iraq see the huge golden mausoleum at Karbala standing and reminding people what happened there 1400 years ago.
Basha your view on Jinnah
What better example I can give than to quote Quaide Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah. He was Khoja by birth, but remained Muslim by heart and soul. When he was asked to his sect, whether he was sunni or shia, he shot back and enquired to which sect Prophet Mohammed belonged? Was he Shia or Sunni? There was no answer to his question. Then he declared I follow the religion of Prophet Mohammed PBUH. Let us all learn a lesson from Jinnah and follow what Prophet Mohammed PBUH has directed us to do.
A Wonderful article which exposes the real face of Dr Naik.
Mr. Pasha: You can not say that both Yazid and Imam Hussain(PBUH) are dead so we should leave this (karbala) behind. Can you go and ask schools to stop teaching about Hitle and the Jews he killed just because everyone is dead? History has to be told Mr. Pasha, because it guides us. If you read Quran you will see that it mostly contains history, from Adam to Jesus. There was a reason why God wanted to tell us about this history.
Dr. Zakir Naik and some of his followers here have described Karbala war as a "Political War." Lets for a moment leave Karbala aside. I would like to know what explanation Dr. Naik and Wahhabis in general have for what happened in Battle of Harrah. For three days Yazid's army raped, murdered and looted the city, most of those who sufffered were common people who had nothing to do with the war. The holy kaba was damaged during the siege of Mecca. Can we ask for God's grace for such a person?
As far as Karbala, it was an imposed war, if you read history you will see that till the end Imam Hussain MPBUH tried to avoid the conflict by asking for permission to return to go to India.
A few Christian leaders can not sit and decide that Hitler was a good man. If you have sense you know the truth. Hardly any German mothers name their sons Adolf, and same applies for Yazid, (and I am surprised to see that even most extreme of Wahhabis cant even name their sons Yazid!) The fact remains that Yazid was a very big tragedy for Islam.
For those who are crying foul about America invading Afghanistan & Iraq, please refresh your mind and try to remember the day when Coalition forces entered Kabul and Baghdad. Do you remember the joy in people's face, do you remember them running to streets, dancing and jumping in happiness? They were celebrating as if they were liberated from claws of death.
Have you asked yourself why? Because the life under zealot leaders like Taliban (read Wahhabis) had made their conditions worst than animals. You cry foul when a misguided US missile kills a few innocent people. Where were you when Taliban massacred innocent people in Mazare -e-Sharif and when they committed genocide on Hazaras? Where were you when Saddam did the same to Kurds? Taliban made Muslims look like barabarians and yet you appreciated them. It is true that Americans have done many horrible things in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the fact is that life under them is much better than life under Saddam and Taliban.
DR. Naik has taken a very dangerous route by what he has said about Osama, no matter whatever the context may be. We dont know if Osama actually was responsible for 9/11, but we know that he was a Taliban sympethiser and supported. This is enough to distance oneself from him.
Today we Indian Muslims are being labled as ani-national and terrorists. And we can not deny the fact that some of us have taken the wrong path. Instead of using his influence to guide Indian Muslims (specially youngsters) to the correct way, what message is he giving by saying that he supports whoever is the enemy of enemies of Islam? In his definition who is the enemy of Islam? And whats his solution for this?
Dont listen to this man. He is doomed.
This is in response to the critics of my comments of Rizvi's tirade against Dr. Zakir Naik.
Ignorance galore in all the comments posted by my critics. It is awful that over zealous supporters of the story of Karbala gave vent to their feelings forgetting totally the bare facts of history. First and foremost, the entire episode of political campaign against Yazid that led to the killing of Hazrat Imam Hussein at Karbala on the 10th day of Moharram, was first recorded by the greatest historian of the time, Ibne Khuldoum in his famous book called "Muqaddima" or "Judgement". But unfortunately, the rulers of that time, who wanted to take advantage of the Shia-Sunni divide, removed the entire chapter from that historic book. What Imam Hussein started was a political campaign at best, but the killing though unfortunate at Karbala was not a martydom as many believed but was an accidental killing which may be termed as political murder at the worst. Thereafter, all concocted stories were written by supporters of Imam Hussein to project him as a 'Martyr" of Islam and that the battle of Karabala was the mother of all battles etc., etc.. All these were stories written by a Zorastrian historian Tibri to divide Islam for it was spreading like a wild fire every where. Many of our Muslim brethren believed as if there were massacre at Karbala of the family of Imam Hussein. If this story is narrated to non-Muslims, it would appear in bad taste and it would give them an opportunity to say that the religion of Mohammed PBUH was weak and its followers killed the very grandson of the Prophet PBUH. It was not to be. Islam remained strong thereafter and spread to far off places as far as China, Russia and remotest corner of the world.
In short, no epic battle was ever fought at Karbala. Hazrat Imam Hussein with his family reached Karbala on the 10th day of Moharram, from Medina after travelling for 45 days. He was received at Karbala by the then Governor of Kufa, who happened to be his relative and explained to him that every thing was alright with the rule of Yazid and that some who did not like him might have carried some disinfomation campaign against Yazid. At that time, Imam Hussein, placed three conditions. First he would return to Medinah and retire from politics. Second, he may be allowed to fight along with Muslim army on the borders. Third, he may allowed to meet Yazid. Here one must remember that what prompted Imam Hussein to place three conditions there? If the conditions or the rule of Yazid was too bad as some projected, he would not have entered into any negotiation or placed certain conditions. That means he was fully satisfied with the briefing of the Governor of Kufa, then only he expressed his desire in the form of three conditions. As they were discussing this, the people who accompanied Hazrat Imam Hussein from Medinah, started to attack the forces of the Governor assembled there as they did not want any peacful agreement and wanted to avenge the killing of one of their associate who was hanged for treason. Immediately Imam Hussein intervened and wanted to stop the skirmishes. But in the melee, he was killed by an arrow. This is the actual history. Then the rebels were arrested. The entire family was then taken to the palace of Kalifa Yazid, who received them with due respect, granted them a pension and sent them back to Madinah. When this is the history, where is the question of Imam Husseiin and his family were denied water for three days, they were tortured and killed arise. It was also reported that the head of Imam Hussein was severed and taken to Yazid. How can one believe that a Muslim rule of the time, who was also related to Imam Hussein, would ever indulge in such an act of insanity, being a Muslim himself and only a few years ago the Prophet PBUH had died? It is an unbelievable story repeated on every Moharram by Shia and Sunnis alike. If anybody disagree with this, he or she is requested to go through the history of Islam well documented in the established and recognised history books written after much research on the subject. One such book was "Khilafate Maawayia wo Yazid" By Mahmood Ahmed Abbasi. It is a marvellous history written after years of research by the Author. All praise to him for his monumental achievement in annulling all the myth associated with the so called battle of Karbala. I shall debate on this in detail after sometime depending upon the feed back I receive from the readers.
As for my reference to Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Zakir Naik, some of the critics said that I am a supporter of these two personalities. In the beginning of my article itself, I made it very clear that I was the worst critic of Jinnah's policies and Zakir Naik's histrionic. If any one has read my earlier articles on Pakistan and Jinnah posted and still carry weight on this web page, readers would find that I was very harsh on them. I called on several occassion that the creation of Pakistan was the blunder of the century and that Jinnah made a monumental mistake of doing it. He never bothered about the fate of the largest Muslim population that would be left behind after partition. Jinnah and Company were utterly foolish and selfish and they achieved what they wanted in Pakistan. Who suffered most after the creation of Pakistan? It was Indian Muslims. But majority of the foolish Indian Muslims so enamoured by the personality of Jinnah, they loved him and supported him. Finally they got the lesson of their life when they were ditched by Jinnah and his followers, leaving them in lurch. What the left over Muslims got in return? They were humiliated, discriminated, riots all over India, many were killed, butchered, properties looted, viewed with suspicion as the people responsible for creation of Pakistan, denied the separate electrorate system, denied further representation in the legialatures, administration and every thing the Muslims faced. It was only due to the monumental mistake of partition and the architect of that tragedy was Jinnah and no one else. Does anybody thinks that Jinnah would be revered in India by Muslims. Never. He is looked upon as the greatest villain of the Muslim community in India. But for him, Muslim would have enjoyed a better status in undivided India. This is history and except regretting the events, what one can do. But it is to the great resilience of this Muslim community that through hard work, sincerity and devotion, they made a name for themselves and gave birth to greatest son in Dr. Abdul Kalam, a Scientist par excellence, the father of Missile Technology who took India to the world map and today he is the proud father of Moon mission.. The MIP that landed on moon recently was his brain child. Similarly Muslim community has produced a number of personality in all fields, whether it is scientific field, or IT revolution, or cine field, music industry, sports like Tennis and Cricket etc., Muslims every where with their name engraved in history. This we the Muslims of India achieved without any support from anyquarters. We the Muslims of India should thank the Indian leadership for giving us freedom to live and practice our religion without much interference. We have some grievances of unequal representations in legislature, administration, emplolyment and education. But that we would fight and get them through democratic means and not through violence.
As for Zakir Naik, what I wanted the readers is to respect the man for two reasons. One he is a Muslim Scholar of repute. Secondly, he is doing some service to the Muslim community through his knowledge of all religions and removing misgivings associated with it. To denigrate such a person for he holds certain views about Yazid which may not be palatable, is not fair. It is his right. You may agree or may not agree, but he has a right to say what he thinks it is right for him. I do not agree with him totally, but then I will not stoop to a level to call him a "kafir" which is a sin in Islam. He is a Muslim and no one has a right to call a Muslim a "kafir". This is what is ordained in the Holy Quran. Please read it and behave like what is expected from a Muslim. Like Zakir Naik, every reader has a right to hold certain views. Disagreement is necessary,. then only truth would come out in a debate. After reading this article of mine, some readers may also hold the same view as that against Zakir Naik. I am least worried as I did my duty and brought before you nothing but truth...Wama Alaina Illal balaq.
NAIK NAHI KHALNAYAK HAI,
JOOTA KHANE LAYAQ HAI
YAZID KA HAAMI MURDABAD
koyee shareef zyaada Musalman bhai mujh unpadh ko ye bataye ki Mullah zakir naik ki shakal pe is qadr ki phittkaar kyon hai agaro wo itna hee padha like addeeb aur kamil hai aur tamaam MAZAHIB ka sab se badaa jaankaar hai to uske chehrepe Allah ka ata kiya huwa noor hona chahiye na ki shaitaan ki de huwi phitkaar jab se is zakir naik ne Nabi-e-kareem saw ke khilaaf aul faul bakaa hai aur jab mai iski surat dekhta hun to ek sher baar baar zahen me aata hai " Zakir naik hai Nutfa yazeed ka dekha hai jisne chaand moharram me eid ka..jahennum' me aalaa mukaam payega harr ek parokaar yazeed ka'
ameen sum ameen
I have read the article by Mr Rizvi and the response to it by Mr Jamshed Pasha. As an academician, I would like to point the following observation. Mr Pasha is wrong that the battle of Karbala was written three hundred year later by a Parsi historian. The first written book was by Abu Mikhnaf by the title Maqtal al Husain some 60 years after the tragedy happened. Mikhaf died in 157 hijri . Original copies of this historical work are available in Germany and other libraries. Within hundred years, several books had also come
Basha allusion on the battle of Karbala is wrong. Arab gave the world the art of writing history and a tragedy like Karbala was so well documented. You are ignorant
And I totally suspect Mr Basha intention when he calls Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the creator of Pakistan as Quaide Azam. You may have love for this man Mr Basha but Muslim in India by and large dislike him and what he did.
I agree with Mr Rizvi that communalism cannot be fought with communalism.
Whenever a bomb blasts occur and names of some organisation props up, if the majority community retaliates in the same way, the result will be disastrous. The need of the hour is to isolate all those involved in such terror acts by identifying and thus marginalizing them.
If US attacked Afghanistan and Iraq and pursued policy of hate and aggression, believe me hundreds of organisation mostly of Christians came out to protest against him. Finally Bush party lost the election in one of the biggest defeat ever. Democracy was used as a weapon to dislodge this man whose hands were soaked in the blood of innocents. I cannot but totally agree with Mr Rizvi. Even in our country, the BJP lost power in 1994 because of the carnage in Gujarat mainly because the Hindu psyche did not approve the massacre. The tool again Mr Basha was democracy and not what Dr Zakir Naik preaches.
At the same time I also disagree to an extent of Basha comments ( he is here and there also) when he says Muslim community got in return was humiliation, killings etc. This is again the venom which Jamaat preaching hatred gives fodder to the communalist on both sides of the fence.
Today, it is the Hindu community, I say vast majority of them who which is fighting the communal elements and I am happy that Muslim too are coming out in the like of MJ Akbar, Sadia Delhi, Mr Rizvi,. Mufti and Shaher Qazis against the machination of Zakir Naik and his likes.
Mr Basha, your understanding of the history is very weak and your approach is too narrow. Yes for Yazid, I say he was the biggest tyrant, oppressor and the biggest shame and scar to have been a ruler of the Muslim commonwealth. Jai Hind
Jamshed basha jee namastey’
A jackal is always a jackal no matter how much indigo you pour on yourself…I have read your posts in the past where you have been vehemently supporting the hitherto established and declared Kafir’ who goes by the name…Zakir naik.. and look at your hypocrite self here where you have started your post, by saying that you are not a supporter of Zakir naik…this proves the fact that in the heart of your heart you know and believe, that you be better heard, If you proclaim not to be his supporter..…this is exactly what happened with all hypocrites during and after the time of khulfa-e-rashida’…. Jackals who disguised themselves as supporters or non supporters as per their convenience and were later exposed as worst enemies of Islam’ and that of the Prophet pbuh and his progeny…how I wish to leave you alone with the telawat of sur-e-kafiroon…for this is one apt occasion for which Allah swt has given us this beautiful peaceful sur-e’ but then I am reminded of my duty towards Islam (as I think a little of Islam is still left in you) and tell you for your own good and the benefit of your next generations if they still continue to be Muslims, ‘that Who ever belittles the Greatness of Allah swt’s most beloved Prophet Mohammad saw and his progeny’ or mixes any two bit outsider or equals any indigo jackal with them, (nausbillah) is only inviting the wrath of Allah swt ..will be disgraced in this world and severe punishment awaits such a person hereafter. Jamshed basha jee this is basic faith of true Islam’…and anyone who contradicts this, in word or deed is blatantly aligning with the Iblees and I am sure you know, where it leads to, on the day of judgment….Wahabis are doomed, distance yourself from this devilish school of thought and join the mainstream Muslims there is nothing like SUNNI / SHIA crap when it comes to the five pillars of Islam and its Prophet pbuh’ I am leaving you with best advice and if taken, it will change your existence for the benefit of you and all those whose life you touch.. ‘Immerse yourself in estegfaar while there is still time and hope’. Allah swt is most merciful, most forgiving besides being Rehman and Raheem’
This is in response to the venom spitting article written by SAH Rizvi on Dr. Zakir Naik. Let me first introduce that I am not a supporter of Dr. Zakir Naik but as a matter of fact a very vocal critic of his Peace TV and his rhetroics.
When Rizvi says that terrorism cannot be fought with terrorism or for that communalism cannot be fought with communalism, how is that he is justified in denigrating a great scholar like Dr. Zakir Naik in the same vein as he did with rhetorics and his views about Yazid. Was he trying to justify communalism or terrorism is not clear. From the article, it appears that somewhere Dr. Zakir Naik has justified the rising of Muslims against the tyranny of US. May be he has held those views in view of the atrocities of the US and Israelis committed against combined Muslim Ummah in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. What is wrong with it. He is not asking the Muslims to rise in revolt or take up arms to fight the US. What kind Muslims we are watching haplessly all the atrocities committed by US in Iraq and Afghanistan and are too afraid to say that what US is doing there was wrong. It is sheer cowardice and stupidity on the part of learned people of the community. Today Muslims are at receiving end of the sinister propaganda that Islam is associated with terrorism. This need to be dispelled. At the same time, no Muslim should watch silently what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is a complete rape of the Islamic nations. Where was the justification for the US to invade Iraq on the pretext of WMD, but intended to kill Saddam in a US-Zionist conspiracy to tame the powerful army of Iraq. We are wasting time in digging old graves on Yazid and Imam Hussein. The Zalim and Mazloom are dead and gone and Allah will settle their Aamal. Why should waste time on it, whether Yazid was wrong or right, whether Imam Hussein erred in going to Karbala and got killed in the skirmishes etc.
I am in no way condoning the activities of Osama Bin Laden nor justifying what Dr. Zakir Naik has said about Yazid. It is his view and he is free to hold it, why Razvi should have any problem with it. Nobody has analysed or read the real Islamic history and every believed in the story of Karbala written after 300 years of the event that to by a new convert Zorastrian called Tibri. He concocted the whole episode and written a story far from the whole truth. This was done deliberately to divide Islam and they succeeded in creating a Shia Iran. The Shia-Sunni divide is historic and eternal and it will never be undone till the doomsday. This is for sure as there is no attempt on either side to follow the religion as brought by our Prophet Mohammed PBUH. What better example I can give than to quote Quaide Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah. He was Khoja by birth, but remained Muslim by heart and soul. When he was asked to his sect, whether he was sunni or shia, he shot back and enquired to which sect Prophet Mohammed belonged? Was he Shia or Sunni? There was no answer to his question. Then he declared I follow the religion of Prophet Mohammed PBUH. Let us all learn a lesson from Jinnah and follow what Prophet Mohammed PBUH has directed us to do.
About Jihad, majority of the Muslims have misunderstood the real meaning and its application. The Jihad was necessary then when Islam was in nascent stage. In many battles our Prophet Mohammed PBUH himself partook and even was injured in the Battle of Ohad. That was then the necessity and Prophet PBUH gave a call for Jihad. The Jihad was situational and not continual. The Jihad today has no relevance particularly in the sub-continent. Many half-baked Mullahs would have incited the youth narrating the old history of Jihad to justify rising against oppression. This is how the radical Jamaats in India and Pakistan have misguided the youth of today and sullied the fair name of Islam. That is why the whole world is associating Jihad or terrorism with Islam. To day in India what we needed is peaceful co-existence with all other communties. There is no point in settling scores over the killings that has happened in Gujarat or elsewhere. We can at best guard against such forces in future. What we the Muslims of India, needed to do is to remove the suspicion in the minds of the majority community about the indulgence of a few in violence is not the representative thinking of the entire community.
A few months back Muslim community was on the backfoot at the spate of arrest of Muslim youth in the serial bombing that rocked India. Today it is the turn of Hindu community to bear the brunt of attack after the arrest of Sadhvi, Lt. Col. Purohit and several others for their alleged involvement in the Melagaon blast. Today as the investigation is on, the Hindu terrorists involvement in earlier blast would be exposed like Ajmer and Samjhauta Express blasts, where their involvement is suspected. This is a dangerous trend that if one community rises against the other violently, then the whole national interest would at peril. Today in such a situation what is urgently needed is that we the Muslims should redeem ourselves and support the rule of law, dissuade our youth from joining the readicals, give the youth modern education and free ourselves from the narrow view of the religion. Islam is a great religion of peace and it should be demonstrated in deeds.
I am not sure whether Mr. Rizvi is a shia or sunni but then he quoted extensively that many who condemned Zakir Naik were sunnis. What did they achieve in condemning Zakir Naik. Its not fair, he is a scholar and he holds certain views, and let him have them. We should not have any quarrel with it. But what Rizvi quoted ProphetPBUH character like he went and enquire about the health of Jew woman who used to throw garbage on him and never retaliated when people threw stones on him in the streets of Mekkah while walking to the Mosque. But was quick to wash off the wounds without a murmur. That the character of Prophet Mohammed PBUH. But he never said that one should tolerate all the oppressions. Then where was the necessity of war in his period like Battle of Badr, Battle of Ohad and others? It was then necessary and the similar wars cannot be fought today. Therefore, one can fight through democratic means rather than through violence should be the message.
Here in India we live as free citizens particularly when Jinnah made a monumental mistake of creating Pakistan without minding the fate of a large Muslim population that would be left behind. He was selfish and so his followers. What we the Muslim got in the bargain, humiliation, killings, discrimination and suspicion of the majority community in India. But thanks to the great resilience of this community, it withstood all humiliation and created a niche in the body politics of this great country. Indian Muslims should be eternally grateful to the leaders of this country for the unstinted support for the cause of this community. No Muslim leader worth the name is available who is ready to sacrifice his life for the sake of this community. It is now left to the great leaders like Karunanidhi in South, Mulayam Singh Yadev, Lalu Prasad, Paswan and Mayawathi to take care of the interest of Muslims. In a pluratistic society like India, Muslims should try to live in perfect harmony with others as they are living with friedship with all and malice towards none. Anyone indulging in teachings other than peace and love should be thrown out of the society. Muslims are as a part of this country as others and it would be our endeavour to rejoice in the country development and achievement in every field. Lets us cheer our cricket team and not the dirty Pakistani team. We are nothing to do with our Islamic neighbours. They may be Muslims but our real loyalty should be with India as it is our country, where we have to live and die. Jai Hind.
I have read numerous articles on the controversies generated by the statements of Naik, but this one by Mr. S A H Rizvi stands out as the most comprehensive reply. A villain like Zakir Naik surely needs to be unveiled.
By declaring revering of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by Muslims as ‘haraam’ Naik has gone a step further than the Wahabis who while denying ‘wasila’ (intercession) have so far restrained from using such harsh words for the Prophet. Naik should ideally stop reciting the ‘Kalima’ for it says Muhammad (SAW) is the Messenger of God.
His hidden propagation and support for terror is actually more dangerous than Osama’s. By supporting Osama Bin Laden on his channel which goes by the name Peace TV, Naik deserves to be labelled as a ‘Munafiq’.
After saying that ‘Quran-khwani’ for ‘eisale-sawab’ of the dead ones is a ‘bidat’ (innovation) and declaring that praying at the shrines of the Saints is ‘haraam’, Naik should stop offering ‘Namaz-e-Mayyat’ for that according to his belief would be a ‘shirk’.
If repeatedly glorifying and defending Yazid gives him such a high, I am forced to think that the guy perhaps owes his lineage to Yazid. Zakir Naik’s larger agenda of dividing the Muslims should to be exposed and his source of funding needs to be investigated and his Peace TV banned, so that this nonsense indeed can be stopped.
Thanks Mr.Rizvi for this wonderful article and for exposing the lies of this self proclaimed Islamic scholar, whom I consider as the Ibne Wahab of the 21st century, who is trying to establish a new religion ‘Naikism’.