“Unless he repents, believes, and works righteous deeds, for Allah will change the evil of such persons into good, and Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 25:70)
﷽
“Do the people think that they will be left to say, “We believe” and they will not be tried?” (Qur’an 29:2)
“But We have certainly tried those before them, and Allah will surely make evident those who are truthful, and He will surely make evident the liars.” (Qur’an 29:3)
Ponder this hadith that is used as a proof text that all Muslims will eventually get to heaven no matter what they have done… (rape, murder, cheating, lying, adultery, fornication etc.)
(ISIS in heaven), (Al Qaeda in heaven)…..
Narrated Anas bin Malik: “Once Mu’adh was along with Allah’s Apostle as a companion rider. Allah’s Apostle said, “O Mu’adh bin Jabal.” Mu’adh replied, “Labbaik and Sa’daik. O Allah’s Apostle!” Again the Prophet said, “O Mu’adh!” Mu’adh said thrice, “Labbaik and Sa’daik, O Allah’s Apostle!” Allah’s Apostle said, “There is none who testifies sincerely that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammad is his Apostle, except that Allah, will save him from the Hell-fire.” Mu’adh said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Should I not inform the people about it so that they may have glad tidings?” He replied, “WHEN THE PEOPLE HEAR ABOUT IT, THEY WILL SOLELY DEPEND UPON IT.” Then Mu’adh narrated the above-mentioned Hadith just before his death, being afraid of committing sin (by not telling the knowledge).
1) “Then Mu’adh narrated the above-mentioned Hadith just before his death, being afraid of committing sin (by not telling the knowledge). “
This is additional information. This is obviously not said by Mu’adh but by the redactor.
2) Such an important theological point notice that there were was no command from the Blessed Prophet (saw) to narrate this to anyone. In fact the indication is that he (saw) did not want this to be public knowledge.
3) Even though it can be argued that the Blessed Messenger (saw) didn’t explicitly tell Mu’adh not to narrate this hadith it does indicate that Mu’adh seemed to know better than the Blessed Messenger (saw) by letting the proverbial ‘cat out of the bag‘ so to speak.
4) It seems odd that a companion like Mu’adh (who knows he could die at any moment) and yet had this bothering his conscience would conveniently wait to be on this death bed before transmitting this information. No way to verify information from a dead man right?
5) It makes the Blessed Messenger (saw) say something about the future which we all know to be patently false. “WHEN THE PEOPLE HEAR ABOUT IT, THEY WILL SOLELY DEPEND UPON IT.”
A) Even the Ash’ari do not rely solely upon it.
They rely upon other hadith like the following:
Narrated ‘Ubada:
The Prophet (saw) said,
“If anyone testifies that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah Alone Who has no partners, and that Muhammad is His Slave and His Apostle, and that Jesus is Allah’s Slave and His Apostle and His Word which He bestowed on Mary and a Spirit created by Him, and that Paradise is true, and Hell is true, Allah will admit him into Paradise with the deeds which he had done even if those deeds were few.” (Junada, the sub-narrator said, ” ‘Ubada added, ‘Such a person can enter Paradise through any of its eight gates he likes.”)
Even the above is an oddly worded Shahadatayn (testimony of faith)
They also rely upon things like the Shafaat (intercession) of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
B) It is not the position of Sunni Muslims who do not hold to the Ash’ari doctrine.
C) It is not the position of Muslims who hold to the doctrine of the Ahl al-Tawhid wa al-Adl (The Proponents of Divine Unicity and Justice)
Thus, the only way possible to salvage point 5 is to simply assume that there was some group of Muslims living past, present or future who will hold such a position. Even this comes across as desperate apologetic.
The previous five points are all arguments from the text and consistency.
The following point is a rational argument.
6) It cannot possibly be a reference to a Muslim who made such a statement with sincerity and than later became a Christian or Atheist or a Hindu. Unless ,now someone is going to argue that it doesn’t matter if they associate partners with Allah (swt), or deny Allah (swt) in total because they said this statement once in their lifetime with conviction.
7) The hadith is against the following verse from the Qur’an
“O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people.” (Qur’an 5:67)
8) The hadith is against the following verse from the Qur’an.
“But the hypocrites say, “We have believed in Allah and in the Messenger, and we obey”; then a party of them turns away after that. And those are not believers.” (Qur’an 24:47)
Wahb b. Munabbih, on being asked whether ‘There is no god but God’ was not the key of paradise, said, “Yes, but every key has wards. If you bring a key with wards the door will be opened for you, otherwise I it will not.” Bukhari transmitted it in a chapter heading.
There is no one among the Muslims who believes that certain statements alone are sufficient to get you into heaven. All of it has to be contingent upon something else.
Allah (swt) knows best and the help of Allah (swt) is sought.
“Our Lord, do not take us to task in case we forget or we make mistakes.” (Qur’an 2:286)
﷽
APOLOGY TO FELLOW MUSLIMS AND TRUTH SEEKERS.
May Allah (swt) forgive me. Praise be to Allah (swt) who guides us to a way that is best.
I used to rely upon a particular translation of the Qur’an 4:31 until upon closer examination I realized the game that was being played upon the unaware.
I’m thankful to Shaykh Hafidh Hamed Al Sawafi for pointing this out to me!
Most people are usually familiar with this translation:
“If you avoid major sins that you are prohibited, We will absolve YOU YOUR MINOR SINS and cause you to enter a generous gate.” (Qur’an 4:31)
Any translation that comes remotely close to that is a FALSE
Take a look at the different translations into English here:
Those people who are either translating this text as such are doing so according to their i’tiqad or without giving much thought about it -according to the i’tiqad of others.
The most correct translation is: the one from Yusuf Ali (1985) which states:
“IF (but) eschew the evilest of the things which you are forbidden to do, We shall expel out of (Saiyiatikum) YOU ALL THE EVIL IN YOU, and admit you to a gate of great honor.” -(Qur’an 4:31)
The reason that certain translators translate it the way that they do is because of their theology. Which is that the small sins get wiped out and the big sins get purified in the hell-which one latter is released from.
Imposing their theological suppositions upon the Qur’an Al-Kareem!
As one Muslim brother pointed out: “Saiyiatikum” is “all evil in you”.
To interpret it as “minor sins” or the likes is but an interpretation.
The literal meaning takes precedence over an interpretation unless there’s a hujjah to support the interpretation.
Insh’Allah in time I will begin to replace the translation with the appropriate translation free from i’tiqad -may Allah (swt) help me.
Kindly take note. My humble and sincere apologies.
“And protect them from the evil consequences [of their deeds]. And he whom You protect from evil consequences that Day – You will have given him mercy. And that is the great attainment.” (Qur’an 40:9)
(We told you), “If you do good, it will be for your own benefit, but if you do bad, it will be against your souls. When the prophecy of your second transgression will come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the mosque as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction. (Qur’an 17:7)
﷽
Recently I was watching a video circulating the internet over our brother, a former IDF soldier who found the light of Islam. Al hamdulillah! May Allah (swt) increase him in faith and bring him to a state of felicity. May many more of them be guided to the light of Islam.
The brother who was interacting with the former IDF soldier was doing an excellent effort in flashing the verses on the screen. However, something jolted me when the brother quoted Qur’an 17:7 and gave a very strange understanding of this verse. It raised the alarm and this is why I felt the urgency to write this post in hopes that you will also warn those you know!
I have personally not come across people understand the verse this way. unless they were from the United Arab Emirates, or Saudi Arabia.
The verse in question is:
(We told you), “If you do good, it will be for your own benefit, but if you do bad, it will be against your souls. When the prophecy of your second transgression will come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction.” (Qur’an 17:7)
Please pay special attention to how the Arabic word ٱلۡمَسۡجِدَ is being translated into English.
Here is a complete list of known translations into English:
Notice the word ٱلۡمَسۡجِدَ has been translated as Temple in 32 translations. Why is this even important brothers and sisters?
This is the video I am referencing:
@22:50 minutes into the video The Muslim Lantern states: “In fact Allah azwajala said that the people children of Israel will take the Masjid,Masjid Al Aqsa from you.”
This is dead wrong. There is no such verse in the Qur’an at all. Surely brother Muslim Lantern will have his reward with Allah (swt). However, I think in this regard he is simply transmitting what he heard without investigating the verse.
Let us look at the context:
“And We gave (Clear) Warning to the Children of Israel in the Book, that twice would they do mischief on the earth and be elated with mighty arrogance.!” (Qur’an 17:4)
Allah (swt) is addressing the Children of Israel (Jacob).
“When the first of the warnings came to pass, We sent against you Our servants given to terrible warfare: They entered the very inmost parts of your homes; and it was a warning (completely) fulfilled.” (Qur’an 17:5)
Allah (swt) is mentioning that he sent against you (Meaning children of Israel) -They are the ones being attacked not the attackers!
“Then did We grant you the Return as against them: We gave you increase in resources and sons, and made you the more numerous in man-power.” (Qur’an 17:6)
Allah (swt) grant you (Children of Israel) a return against them (the attackers of the Children of Israel)
(We told you), “If youdo good, it will be for yourown benefit, but if youdo bad, it will be against yoursouls. When the prophecy of your second transgressionwill come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction.” (Qur’an 17:7)
Allah (swt) is not saying that the children of Israel will be the one’s who will enter the places of prostration and bring utter destruction. It makes no sense! It makes no sense because the place that the destruction will come to is the place that the children of Israel themselves worship!
That is the temple of Solomon (as). Look at the text that are underlined in green. That is what people are getting confused. The Children of Israel will cause corruption in the earth twice and they will be punished by having their place of worship destroyed!
Allah (swt) will use someone else as a means of punishment for the disobedient Children of Israel.
They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did THE FIRST TIME to bring about utter destruction.”
The first time was the destruction of the place of prostration-by Nebuchadnezzar.
The second time that Allah (swt) is speaking about in the future in Qur’an 17:7 was by the Romans.
WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT AND WHAT HAS THIS HAVE TO DO WITH PALESTINE AND AL AQSA MASJID?
This is important because the false interpretation that was given to our brother The Muslim Lantern and not only him but to many Muslims will be used as a psychological weapon against the Palestinian and Muslim resistance when the Zionist eventually come to attack it!
How will it be used a psychological weapon? Because, the false interpretation makes it that the Zionist (Israel) will conqueror Masjid Al Aqsa.
@22:50 minutes into the video The Muslim Lantern states: “In fact Allah azwajala said that the people children of Israel will take the Masjid,Masjid Al Aqsa from you.”
How will you defend a place knowing that Allah (swt) himself said that your enemies would take it from you? Do you see the point brothers and sisters?
In fact, watch the expression of our new brother in Islam (former IDF) when our brother Muslim Lantern says this. The new brother looked quite surprised? Why? Because he knows how the resistance is fighting, even after being almost entirely abandoned by the whole Muslim Ummah. He looks surprised because he can’t imagine the IDF just taking Al Aqsa Masjid. Jordan is the custodian of Al Aqsa Masjid. Jordan would be forced to go beyond just sending ‘a memo of protest‘ if the Zionist wanted to full on take the Masjid.
Rather or not the Zionist attempt to do so is another matter. The point of this post is do not read these verses of the Qur’an incorrectly. Especially do not read them in such away that would give a moral boost to the enemies of the faith!
May Allah (swt) guide our new brother in faith. May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah! May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah!
“He commands them to do good and forbids them from evil, permits for them what is lawful and forbids to them what is impure, and relieves them from their burdens and the shackles that bound them. ˹Only˺ those who believe in him, honour and support him, and follow the light sent down to him will be successful.” (Qur’an 7:157)
﷽
This blessed school was foremost among the Muslims to take firm action on this poison. When the Islamic nation was gripped by its evil and many people around the world are still gripped by this evil our scholars by Allah’s grace and due to their penetrating insights were swift to condemn it.
“He commands them to do good and forbids them from evil, permits for them what is lawful and forbids to them what is impure, and relieves them from their burdens and the shackles that bound them. ˹Only˺ those who believe in him, honour and support him, and follow the light sent down to him will be successful.” (Qur’an 7:157)
“Give to close relatives their due, as well as the poor and ˹needy˺ travellers. And do not spend wastefully. Surely the wasteful are ˹like˺ brothers to the devils. And the Devil is ever ungrateful to his Lord.” (Qur’an 17: 26-27)
“And those who unjustifiably harm believing men and women will bear the guilt of slander and clear wrongdoing.” (Qur’an 33:58)
Can it said that cigarette smoking, is justifiable when the second hand smoke is extremely harmful to children and others around them?
“Did you not see those who have exchanged Allah’s favour with ingratitude to Him, causing their people to be cast in the abode of utter perdition.” (Qur’an 14:28)
Allah (swt) has granted you good health and good condition and you wish to exchange that for what will bring you great harm.
“And do not kill yourselves. Indeed, Allah is to you ever Merciful.” (Qur’an 4:29)
“Spend in the Way of Allah and do not cast yourselves into destruction with your own hands.” (Qur’an 2:195)
Be ever mindful of our enemy, Satan! There are those who will continue to smoke shisha or smoke cigarettes…” it is the same whether you warn them or not—they will never believe.” (Qur’an 2:6)
“but Satan made their deeds attractive to them.” (Qur’an 16:63)
BE WARNED THE FOLLOWING VIDEO IS GRAPHIC.
Brothers and sisters please do give up this habit. It is filthy and vile. Do save money and save your life.
Oh youth of the world. They fool us with a concept called: “Cool”. This is the image they present:
But this is the reality.
Please encouraged your friends, family and dear ones to give this up!
“while if any saves a life it is as if he saves the lives of all mankind.” (Qur’an 5:32)
“O You who believe! Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you. Then if you disagree in anything refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is best and more suitable tawilan(interpretation).” (Qur’an 4:59)
And when there comes to them information about [public] security or fear, they spread it around. But if they had referred it back to the Messenger and to those of authority among them (l-rasuli wa-ila uli l-amri min’hum), then the ones who [can] draw correct conclusions from it would have known about it. And if not for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have followed Satan, except for a few.” (Qur’an 4:83)
﷽
This is the first attempt to respond to an article I have had up on Prima-Qur’an for some time.
If you wish to follow along the points be brought forth you may wish to read the first article below:
Thank you for the graceful and detailed response. To answer your first question, I am an Imami Twelver Shi’i, however I represent myself only.
In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. All praise is due to Allah, the Creator of every thing, and there is no thing like Him. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allah, one and without partner, and I testify that Muhammad is His slave and messenger. O Allah, send blessings upon Muhammad and his purified family, and their righteous companions.
Your points appear to be the following:
(1) Uli al-Amr are from among the believers, hence they are included in the address {O you who believe, obey…}
(2) Uli al-Amr are addressed in verses that issue warnings against disobedience and following personal inclination, thus they are not protected from error
(3) Uli al-Amr are not prophets nor messengers, hence they are not error-free
(4) Uli al-Amr are among the believers, and none from among the believers are protected from error, hence they are not
(5) Blind allegiance and obedience to any human is wrong
(6) Uli al-Amr are not mentioned in other verses that command obedience to Allah and the Messenger
(7) There is no obey command before Uli al-Amr, hence their obedience is conditional.
(8) What position do Uli al-Amr hold in the nation?
(9) Nahj al-Balagha appears to contradict the Imami understanding of Q4:59
(10) The Ashab al-Nuzul in Sunni books contradict the Imami understanding of Q4:59
(11) How can the rightful Imam be identified when there is dispute over who is the rightful Imam?
1) What seems to be alluded to is that I am claiming that Uli al-Amr are excluded from the address {O you who believe} arbitrarily, and that they are in fact included in the address due to the fact that Allah – mighty and majestic – states that Uli al-Amr are {from} the addressees.
There is no contradiction between the use of {among you [منكم]} and the exclusion of Uli al-Amr from the address. In fact, there are many verses wherein an object mentioned in the verse is described as being {from} the subject.
{“O assembly of jinn and men, did there not come to you messengers from yourselves [منكم], relating to you my verses and warning you of the meeting of this day of yours?” They said, “We have testified against ourselves.” And the earlier life deceived them, and they testified against themselves that they were disbelievers.}
In this verse, the disbelievers are addressed, yet the messengers are described as being {from} them. Obviously, the messengers are not included in this address to the disbelievers, and they are placed in contrast to them. Yet they are described as being {from} them, for the messengers are among the jinn and the men. Similar to this is Q39:71. Similar also is Q7:35
{And from wherever you [O Muhammad ص] (sg) set out, turn your (sg) face towards the Sacred Mosque. And wherever you (pl) may be, turn your (pl) faces towards it so that people may not have any argument against you – except those who are unjust from them. So do not fear them, but fear Me – and so that I may perfect My blessing upon you (pl), and that you (pl) may be guided}
{Just as we sent among you [فِيكُمْ] (pl) a messenger from from yourselves [منكم] (pl) reading over you (pl) our verses, and purifying you (pl) and teaching you (pl) the book and the wisdom, and teaching you (pl) what you did not know.}
The Messenger of Allah ص is described as being {from} those addressed. Yet, he clearly is not one of the addressees as he is placed in contrast to them, and is described as purifying and teaching them.
Q4:59
{O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those possessing authority from yourselves; then if you dispute regarding anything, then refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day.}
Similar to the previous examples, Uli al-Amr are described as being {from} those addressed. They are indeed believers. However, they are not included in the address {O you who believe}, for they are being placed in contrast to them, the believers are commanded to obey them ,and, as mentioned earlier, the obvious rational impossibility of them being commanded to obey their selves.
2) As said earlier, Uli al-Amr are from among the believers. Hence, on the apparent, they are included amongst the addressees in the verses cited. However, this is not in contradiction with their ‘ismah. The Messenger of Allah ص is protected from error, yet Allah commands and warns him many times in His book.
Further, you seem to be saying that Uli al-Amr having commands and prohibitions on their shoulders contradicts their ‘ismah. Every slave of Allah – mighty and majestic – has commands and prohibitions that they must comply with. The virtue of Ahl al-Bayt ع, in fact, comes from their obedience to Allah and His messenger ص.
[2/194] Rijal al-Kashshi: Muhammad b. Qulawayh from Sa’d b. Abdallah from Ya’qub b. Yazid from Ibn Abi Umayr AND Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from his father and al-Husayn b. Said from Ibn Abi Umayr from Hisham b. Salim from Abi Hamza al-Thumali who said:
Ali b. al-Husayn (AS) said, “May Allah curse the one who lies about us, I remembered Abdallah bin Saba, so all the hairlets in my body stood up [in apprehension], for he had claimed a grave matter, what is with him?! May Allah curse him! Ali (AS) was, by Allah, a righteous slave of Allah, and the brother of the Messenger of Allah (sw), he did not attain any honor from Allah except through his obedience to Allah and to his messenger, and the Messenger of Allah (sw) did not attain any honor from Allah except through His obedience.”
You also seem to argue that since Q4:135 instructs the believers not to follow their inclinations, and Uli al-Amr are included in the address to the believers, then Uli al-Amr are not protected from error. There is no contradiction here. Ahl al-Bayt ع do not act upon their desires, in contradiction to the Shari’ah.
3) You seem to have queries regarding the following matters: (1) how a non-prophet can be divinely inspired / free from error and (2) how the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt ع attain their knowledge.
The Imams of Ahl al-Bayt ع are neither prophets nor messengers. Rather they are muhaddathun (ones spoken to by angels). They are the preservers of the Shar’ia of Muhammad ص. They are free from error. They are the inheritors of the knowledge of Muhammad ص.
Their likeness is that of Talut and Dhu al-Qarnayn, who were not prophets, but were divinely inspired.
I am not qualified to discuss this topic. However, I will share some materials on this topic that I believe will be beneficial IA.
There are some narrations on these topics also in al-Kafi, v1, Kitab al-Hujjah – https://thaqalayn.net/book/1. Chapters 3, 32, and 53 may be beneficial.
Muhammad b. al-Muthanna – Muhammad b. Ja’far – Shu’bah – al-Qasim b. Abi Bazzah – Abu al-Tufayl:
I heard ‘Ali while they asked him about Dhu al-Qarnayn: “Was he a prophet?” He replied, “He was a righteous servant. He loved Allāh so He guided him. Then, Allāh sent him to his people. But, they struck him twice on his head. As a result, he was named Dhu al-Qarnayn. And among you today is his likeness.
This exact same chain is found in Sahih Muslim 1978c
A number of our people – Ahmad ibn Muhammad – al-Husayn ibn Sa‘id – Hammad ibn ‘Isa – al-Husayn ibn al-Mukhtar – al-Harith ibn al-Mughirah who said
Abu Ja‘far (a) said, “Indeed, ‘Alī was a Muhaddath (one spoken to by angels).” So I said, “So you say he was a prophet?” So he waved his hand (as if to say no). He (a) said, “Or [rather] like the companion of Sulayman, or the companion of Moses or like Dhul Qarnayn. Has it not reached you that he said, “and among you is his likeness”?”
Muhammad ibn Yahya – Ahmad ibn Muhammad – al-Barqi – abu Talib – Sadir
He said to Abi Abd Allah [al-Sadiq] (a) “A certain group of people believe that you are gods. They read to us from the Quran about it. And it is He Who in heaven is God and in earth is God.” (43:84).
He (a.s) said, “O Sadir, my hearing, my sight, my skin, my flesh, my blood and my hair are (all) disdain such people, and Allah also disdains them. They do not follow my religion and the religion of my forefathers. I swear by Allah, Allah will not place me with them on the Day of Resurrection. The only thing from Allah to them will be His anger.”
He said , “Among us there is a group of people who believe that you are messenger and read to from the Holy Quran. “O Messengers, eat of the good things and do righteousness; surely I know the things you do (23:51).
He (a.s) said, “O Sadir, my hearing, my sight, my skin, my flesh, my blood and my hair are (all) disdain such people, and Allah and Hid Messenger also disdains them. They do not follow my religion and the religion of my forefathers. Allah will not place me with them on the Day of Judgment. The only thing from Allah towards them will be His anger.”
He said , “What are you then?”
He (a.s) said, “We are the treasuries of the knowledge of Allah. We are the translators of the commands of Allah. We are infallible people. Allāh – most holy, most high – has commanded people to obey us and prohibited them to disobey us. We are the hujjah (binding-argument) over all that is below the heavens and above the earth.”
4) I am not pre-supposing that Uli al-Amr are free from error, rather it seems from the examples given that you are pre-supposing that it is impossible for any from among the believers to be so. Them being free from error [in matters of their commands and judgements] rather follows from the command given.
Just because the believing people generally are fallible, does not mean that there can be none who are free from error from among them. Just as men generally are not prophets and messengers, however some from among us are.
5) Undoubtedly, blind allegiance and obedience to any fallible human being is misguidance. However blind allegiance and obedience to those whose allegiance Allah has commanded to and whose obedience he has commanded absolutely is true guidance.
Q4:80
{Whosoever obeys the Messenger has certainly obeyed Allah.}
Q48:10
{Indeed, those who pledge allegiance to you, they are only pledging allegiance to Allah; the hand of Allah is over their hands.}
6) Uli al-Amr not being included in other verses commanding obedience to Allah and the Messenger ص does not contradict the fact that Allah has commanded their obedience. Moreover, it is obligatory upon Uli al-Amr to obey Allah and his Messenger ص.
7) There not being an obey command before Uli al-Amr does not indicate that their obedience is conditional. On what basis do you claim this? Rather, Allah commanded the obedience to the Messenger and Uli al-Amr with one obey verb – {obey the Messenger and Uli al-Amr from yourselves}.
8) You ask who Uli al-Amr are in this verse.
The verse says {O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and Uli al-Amr from yourselves}.
Hence, all believers addressed must obey whosoever is Uli al-Amr from the believers. Each individual believer must obey whosoever is Uli al-Amr from among the believers.
There are three groups that can, linguistically, be understood to be Uli al-Amr – (1) those whose authority extends to all [muslims] other than themselves (ie the Imams / Awliya’ al-Amr / Khulafa’) (2) some, if not all, of those whose authority is limited in scope (eg the commanders of the armies), and (3) both groups 1 and 2. We can deduce which group is intended by inserting each meaning into the verse.
Lets say that Uli al-Amr are (2) those whose authority is limited in scope or (3) both groups 1 and 2. If this was the case, then the believers generally would be commanded to obey anyone who meets this criteria. Hence, individuals would be obligated to obey people under whose authority they are not under. For example, a muslim would have to obey someone who is a commander of an army, even if they are not in that army themselves. This is clearly a preposterous notion. Therefore, Uli al-Amr can only be those from the believers whose authority extends to all other believers. They hold the highest position of authority. Hence they are the Imams / Awliya’ al-Amr / Khulafa’
9) Nahj al-Balagha is chainless, and hence it is not hujjah in and of itself. The authentic narrations in the Imami corpus make clear who Uli al-Amr are:
‘Alī b. Ibrāhīm – Muḥammad b. ‘Īsā – Yūnus, and,
‘Alī b. Muḥammad – Sahl b. Ziyād (Abī Sa‘īd) – Muḥammad b. ‘Īsā – Yūnus – ibn Muskān – Abī Baṣīr
…
It was revealed: {…obey Allāh and obey the Messenger and Uli al-Amr from yourselves} (Q4:59), and it was revealed regarding ‘Alī, al-Ḥasan, and al-Ḥusayn ع.”
So, the Messenger of Allāh ص said regarding ‘Alī, “For whomsoever I am his mawlā, then ‘Alī is his mawlā,” and he ص said, “I enjoin you to the Book of Allāh and my Ahl al-Bayt (the People of my Household). For I have asked Allāh – mighty and majestic – not to separate between the two until they return to me at the heavenly-pool, and He granted me this.” He said, “do not teach them, for they have more knowledge than you.” He also said, “they will never lead you astray, nor will they ever cause you to enter the door of misguidance.”…
Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā – Aḥmad b. Muḥammad – Ṣafwān b. Yaḥyā – ‘Īsā b. al-Sariy Abī al-Yasa’
…
He said, “Yes. Allāh – mighty and majestic – has said, {O you who believe, obey Allāh and obey the Messenger and Uli al-Amr from yourselves} (Q4:59), and the Messenger of Allāh ص said, “whosoever dies and does not recognise his Imām (leader), dies a death of jāhiliyyah (pre-Islāmic ignorance).”
And it was the Messenger of Allāh ص, and [then] it was ‘Alī ع, but others said it was Mu’āwiyah. Then it was al-Ḥasan and then it was al-Ḥusayn. But others said it was Yazīd b. Mu’āwiyah, and al-Ḥusayn b. ‘Alī. And they are not equal, they are not equal.”
Then he stayed silent. Then he said, “Shall I increase you [with more knowledge]?” So Ḥakm al-A’awar said to him, “Yes, may I be your ransom.”
He said, “Then it was ‘Alī b. al-Ḥusayn, then it was Muḥammad b. ‘Alī [whose tekonym was] Abā Ja’far….”
Firstly, they are not hujjah upon anyone other than the adherents of those sects.
Secondly, they contradict the verse itself. The Ashab al-Nuzul presented state that the commanders of the armies are Uli al-Amr. If this were the case, then the believing people in general would be obligated to obey Hudhayfah b. Qays, even if they were not under his authority. This is self-evidently preposterous.
Thirdly, the Imami corpus make clear who the verse was revealed for, as cited earlier.
11) You ask how the rightful Imam can be identified when there are multiple claimants to this position. This question has been answered by the Imams ع themselves. See:
12) Finally, I would appreciate it if you could respond to points 1 and 8 in particular. This is the crux of the argument provided in the original message.
You seem to argue that the ayah says the following: “O you who believe (including Uli al-Amr), obey Allah and obey the Messenger and Uli al-Amr from yourselves; then if you (believers including Uli al-Amr) dispute over anything, then refer it to Allah and the Messenger”
And that Uli al-Amr may be those who occupy limited positions of authority such as judges, and commanders of armies, and the like.
As stated before, I find this reading to be implausible because: -Uli al-Amr are necessarily those who hold the highest position of authority in the nation
– It is implausible that Uli al-Amr are commanded to obey themselves, hence they must be excluded from the address.
And there is no power and no strength, except by Allah – the high, the supreme. And all praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. And may the blessings of Allah be upon our chief and master Muhammad and his family.
All praise be to Allah, Peace and Blessings be upon the Last and Final Messenger, the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw), his family and companions.
“Thank you for the graceful and detailed response. To answer your first question, I am an Imami Twelver Shi’i, however I represent myself only.” -Abd’Allah
You are most welcome. I found it engaging and it also helps to sharpen my own responses when interacting with those of the Imami Shi’a in the future. Rather they are known as Jafari, Nizari or Musta’li their arguments will be more known to us.
I noted some concern that your post giving a response to my response did not go through. The comments are moderated as unfortunately not everyone can be respectful. Also, I will not revolve my day-to-day life around this blog/website. I will engage when I have time. Ultimately, all post will be approved (provided they are respectful and free from obscenities)
Lastly, to inform you with any topic here I personally will only do so much back and forth. I feel once major points have been established that is sufficient. I would have no problem with allowing my interlocutor (you in this case) to have the last say.
It is Allah (swt) who guides and not I. Once major points have been established I leave it to the searcher of truth to discern where the bulk of the evidence is.
I found a great deal of freedom and not responding just for the sake of responding. Here or any other medium/platform.
Upon further reflection I have come to realize that I am engaging with yourself as an Imami Shi’a as well as a ghost interlocutor in the form of madhkalism. They want to assign an absolute obedience to the rulers as well. The differences between your self and them being that you ascribe infallibility to the rulers where as the Madhkhalis do not. Also, that you assign to the ruler the ability access certain knowledge from the unseen, where as Madhkalis do not.
So let us get to the points of agreement from the previous interaction.
You state:
“10) I don’t accept the Ashab al-Nuzul presented. Firstly, they are not hujjah upon anyone other than the adherents of those sects.” -Abd’Allah
“Secondly, they contradict the verse itself. The Ashab al-Nuzul presented state that the commanders of the armies are Uli al-Amr. If this were the case, then the believing people in general would be obligated to obey Hudhayfah b. Qays, even if they were not under his authority. This is self-evidently preposterous.” -Abd’Allah
As regard the Ashab al-Nuzul that I presented being a hujjah upon anyone other than those that accept them I agree with you. Just as they would argue that your Asbab an-Nuzul would contradict their understanding of Q 4:59.
As regarding the the idea of people obeying a particular commander if they were under his authority as being in contradiction to Q 4:59. Again, it is an example of putting the cart before the horse. You have yet to establish your interpretation of the Uli al-Amr as being the correct interpretation. We will come to this shortly.
However, while on the topic I am confident that the readers of this exchange would be interested to see your Asbab an-Nuzul of Q 4:83 as well.
As regard your understanding of the Asbab An-Nuzul you stated:
“It was revealed: {…obey Allāh and obey the Messenger and Uli al-Amr from yourselves} (Q4:59), and it was revealed regarding ‘Alī, al-Ḥasan, and al-Ḥusayn ع.” ” -Abd’Allah.
“The Imam said, “This was sent from heavens about Ali ibn Abu Talib al-Hassan and al-Husayn .” I then said, “People say, “Why did He not specify Ali and his family by their names in the book of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High?’” The Imam said, “Say to them, ‘The command for prayer came to the Messenger of Allah but He has not specified (the number of the Rak‘ats) for them three nor four. It, in fact, was the Messenger of Allah who explained to them this matter. The command for Zakat (a form of income tax) came to the Messenger of Allah and there was no specific taxable number such as one Dirham on every forty Dirham. It was the Messenger of Allah who explained it for them. The command for Hajj came to the Messenger of Allah. It did not say walk seven times around the Ka‘ba It was the Messenger of Allah who explained it for them. The verse about obedience came “Believers, obey God, His Messenger, and your leaders (who possess Divine authority). . .” (4:59) It came to declare that Ali, al-Hassan and al-Husayn were the leaders who possessed Divine authority.”
“Had the Messenger of Allah remained silent and would not explain anything about his Ahl al-Bayt (family) the family of so and so would have advanced their claim for Imamate (Leadership with Divine Authority). However, Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, has revealed it in His book to confirm the explanations of His Prophet about Ahl al-Bayt (in the following verse), “People of the house, God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you and to purify you thoroughly.” (33:33) Ali, Fatima, al-Hassan and Husayn were there and the Holy Prophet (s.a.) made them to enter under al-Kisa’ (the Cloak) in the house of ’Umm Salama and then said, “O Lord, every prophet has a family and a gravity, and these are my family and gravity.” ’Umm Salama at this point said, “Am I not of your family?” The Holy Prophet (s.a.) said, “You are in goodness but these are my family and my gravity.”
There are quite a number of very real problems with what you presented here.
People say, “Why did He not specify Ali and his family by their names in the book of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High?’
People do not need to be saying anything if they are to simply to obey the Uli al-Amr (which you claim is Ali and the descendants of Fatima -May Allah honour her.)
Why are the people asking about this belief from the book of Allah -the Qur’an. Have they not heard about Ghadir Khum, the hadith of the two weighty matters etc.?
In fact, why even use examples of prayer, zakat and hajj if you already have such acclaimed powerful testimony. Just use it as a reference.
Using actions that are commanded in the Qur’an is a totally different argument than fleshing out beliefs that are in the Qur’an.
The one who has given this argument in the link you provided has given a poor case.
If your good self (Abd’Allah) and I (PrimaQuran) were to team up to debate Quraniyoon they would make short work of us deploying this type of logic-if we can call it that.
We can make a point to them (Quraniyoon) that these actions are not fleshed out in the Qur’an that is a fair point. However, than to some how make this correspond with beliefs that are not contained in the Qur’an would be a lost cause for us.
“The Messenger ˹firmly˺ believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and so do the believers. They ˹all˺ believe in Allah, His angels,His Books, and His messengers. ˹They proclaim,˺ “We make no distinction between any of His messengers.” And they say, “We hear and obey. ˹We seek˺ Your forgiveness, our Lord! And to You ˹alone˺ is the final return.” (Qur’an 2:285)
“O believers! Have faith in Allah, His Messenger, the Book He has revealed to His Messenger, and the Scriptures He revealed before. Indeed, whoever denies Allah, His angels, His Books, His messengers, and the Last Day has clearly gone far astray.” (Qur’an 4:136)
So we see here belief in Allah his Messengers, Revelations and Angels and we do not see any mention of ahl bayt or infallible imams as essential bare bones pillars of faith. We do find mention of onions, garlic, cucumber and lentils as something of such importance that the All-Knowing, All-Wise, All-Intelligent Creator deemed it fit for us to be informed about. However, no mention of Ali and the Ahl Bayt as those we are to follow.
Which brings me to this:
However, Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, has revealed it in His book to confirm the explanations of His Prophet about Ahl al-Bayt (in the following verse), “People of the house, God wants to remove all kinds of uncleanliness from you and to purify you thoroughly.” (33:33)
Um no. No they(Ali, Hassan or Hussein) are not mentioned there at all. These verses certainly do not speak about Ali, Hassan or Hussein (ra). I have discussed this here:
“Nahj al-Balagha is chainless, and hence it is not hujjah in and of itself. ” -Abd’Allah
I am surprised to see Nahj al-Balagha dismissed as evidence. However, I’ll go by what you take as authoritative sources. . Nonetheless. the appointing of Malik al-Ashtar is a point will come back to.
“12) Finally, I would appreciate it if you could respond to points 1 and 8 in particular. This is the crux of the argument provided in the original message. ” -Abd’Allah.
Very well. so let us get to the crux of the arguments.
“And when there comes to them information about [public] security or fear, they spread it around. But if they had referred it back to the Messenger or to those of authority among them, then the ones who [can] draw correct conclusions from it would have known about it. And if not for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have followed Satan, except for a few.” (Qur’an 4:83)
So here is a way where you can establish some of your points and I can establish some of my points.
The verse above (Q 4:83) is sufficient to show that at least in some situations the information given by the Uli al-Amr can be trusted in the same way that the information from the Prophet (saw) can be trusted. So that point is favourable to you.
And it is obvious that the Prophet (saw) is not omnipresent, otherwise he would not send dais to various parts of Arabia to convey Islam. He would not appoint qadis (judges).
Here we can see they have option. We can only surmise that if the Prophet (saw) was closer to the one with an inquiry he would be the reference point. That would also be practical and pragmatic -refer to the one near to you.
Example: if Hussein was 1 km away from me and the Prophet (saw) was 5km away from me it would be practical and pragmatic to defer to Hussein about the matter.
Those are given authority to speak and divulge information on behalf of The Blessed Prophet (saw).
However, my point is also established by the above verse via your own admission that the Prophet (saw) is an authority over the Ulial-Amr.
You had stated in your previous comment: “What objection is being made here exactly? The obedience owed to the Messenger ص is absolute, yet Allah is an authority over him. Likewise, the authority of Uli al-Amr is absolute, yet Allah and the Messenger are authorities over them.” -Abd’Allah
Here in (Q 4:83) the Prophet (saw) and the Uli-al-Amr are concurrent. In fact, even the Prophet (saw) is Amir al-Mu’minin. However, their authority is not the same. One is an authority over the other. This is by your own admission. So in that case the authority of the Uli al-Amr is not absolute.
So what we see here (Q 4:83) is plurality among ‘those in authority among you’ and a hierarchy established as well.
“O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best interpretation” (Qur’an 4:59)
You are quite right that it could be perceived that to suggest that the Uli-al-Amr are to obey themselves would seem quite ridiculous.
Just as the verse is also addressed to the Prophet (saw) as he is (among those who have believed.)It would be quite ridiculous to suggest the Prophet (saw) obey himself!
Excellent observations that you advanced!
However, to draw the conclusion that the Uli al-Amr are law unto themselves is quite an illogical conclusion.
What we do realize is that the Prophet (saw) is not even a law unto himself. He must obey Allah. Just as the Uli-al-Amr are not a law unto themselves. They must obey Allah and his Messenger. But to walk away with the impression that the Prophet (saw) is a law unto himself from a cursory reading of (Q 4:83) would be equally preposterous.
Remember the ultra-violent verse that Allah (swt) himself directed towards his beloved? He would cut his aorta valve!
“This [Qur’an] is sent down from the Lord of all the worlds. If [the Prophet] had said anything against Us, We would certainly have seized his right hand and cut off his artery, and none of you could have defended him.” (Qur’an 69:43-47)
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
You stated:
“6) Uli al-Amr not being included in other verses commanding obedience to Allah and the Messenger ص does not contradict the fact that Allah has commanded their obedience. “
This is the classic Dr. Carl Sagan: “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” That is a another good point that you made. Just because the verse does not mention Uli-al-Amr it does not mean they are precluded from being obeyed.
Though, I still maintain my point that if they have that absolute authority in the way, you interpret the text, they are rather conspicuous by their absence.
However, the point that you advance opens up the conversation in a very powerful and interesting way; that will also assist me in advancing the truth on this matter.
Your counter point has now opened every place in the Qur’an where someone is appointed as an authority over another (parents, judges, arbiters) as being from the uli al-amr. Just because the accompanying terminology is not there it does not preclude them as such.
Are not parents to obeyed? Why would we refer matters to arbiters and judges if they are not in some sense uli al-amr.
So, your counter to any notion of this is why would the command be for someone to obey the military commander if they are not in the military.
Excellent point. Though we would both agree that ‘if’ in the military one would obey the commander. We would also agree (I am assuming) that if there was dispute between various commanders that one would obey the one that outranks the other!
Which means there can be levels of authority and governance. Just as (Q 4:83) has shown us. The Prophet (saw) is an authority as are those beside him. Yet they are not equal in their authority.
One’s Parents. One’s Elders, School Teachers, School Principal, Municipalities, Governors. Even in the military there are various levels of authority, those who outrank others in authority.
This is how we have a functioning society.
Thus, trying to superimpose your understanding of Uli al-amr as you have attempted to do here is not at all justifiable.
“There are three groups that can, linguistically, be understood to be Uli al-Amr – (1) those whose authority extends to all [muslims] other than themselves (ie the Imams / Awliya’ al-Amr / Khulafa’) (2) some, if not all, of those whose authority is limited in scope (eg the commanders of the armies), and (3) both groups 1 and 2. We can deduce which group is intended by inserting each meaning into the verse. “
You are obviously quite aware of this hence, your attempt to deduce the ‘correct ‘interpretation’ by process of elimination.
When we were in school and we were sent to detention we were asked to call our Wali al-Amr. Wali al-Amr means your father. The person responsible for you. So the term Wali al-Amr does not only mean your leader or your sultan or your amir. It means everyone who is responsible for someone or something. So the Imam of the Masjid is Wali al-Amr. The Father is Wali al-Amr. The Mayor of the city is Wali al-Amr. Anyone who is responsible for others is called Wal al-Amr.
So now we come back to Malik al-Ashtar. Just to be sure you do not dismiss that historically Ali appointed him as governor of Egypt correct? So his establishment as governor of Egypt means that he is an authority is it not? Surely, he was not appointed as a window dressing.
So was Malik al-Ashtar an authority over Syria? Obviously not, as he is appointed as an authority over Egypt.
Next. Is his authority on the same level as that of Imam Ali? It should be should it not? After all if (according to Imami Shi’a) Imam Ali is infallible in making decisions shouldn’t the one he appoints be an infallible decision? If infallibility is always a quality for those in leadership than what is the point in appointing fallible leadership over a people?
Why not transmit that infallibility all the way down through the ranks?
Before you think the above question comes back to me namely: “What is the point in appointing fallible leadership over people.” It does not come back to me in regard to Q 4:59 because I hold the leadership to have the possibility of being fallible. However, the Imami Shi’a are going to have to ask themselves some hard questions.
“Say: If there were in the earth angels walking secure, We had sent down for them from heaven an angel as messenger.” (Qur’an 17:95)
“God-Willing it’s clear. As in, when Prophet Harun said: {Your Lord is the Most Merciful, so follow me and obey my order} [Q 20:90] {so follow me and obey my order} here is only with regards to Tawhid, this is no the obedience of [him having] authority. This is the obedience of: “What I am saying is the truth, thus follow me.” {And he who believed said: “O my people, follow me; I will guide you to the way of right conduct.} [Q40:38] This is not the obedience of Imamate. This is obedience of the truth that has been conveyed only. Not an Imam, such that he is and of himself is to be [absolutely] obeyed. Is it clear God-Willing? Very well. We said that the Imam is the one whose obedience [in and of himself] is obligatory.”-Sayyid Ali Abu al-Hassan.
So certainly Sayyid Ali Abu al-Hassan is not suggesting that people not obey Aaron correct? He is simply saying that this is not the obedience of Imamate. So now we understand when Shi’a make a fuss about the following hadith:
Narrated Sa`d:
Allah’s Messenger (saw) set out for Tabuk. appointing `Ali as his deputy (in Medina). `Ali said, “Do you want to leave me with the children and women?” The Prophet (saw) said, “Will you not be pleased that you will be to me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.”
In other words as Aaron was not an Imam and one not having authority. Ali is also not an Imam in other words as Aaron not one having authority. That is noted.
Examples abound.
The Wilayat Al Faqih. What authority does he hold? If you as an Imami Shi’a (assuming you believe in this strand of shi’ism) – Does the Wilayat Al Faqih hold the same authority as Imam Mahdi? Will come back to this as well because I do not feel my three categories of knowledge question was addressed in my initial response to you. Let me repost this here:
The three mentioned are not the same class of authority.
Allah (singular)
“And Allah is Knowing of all things.” (Qur’an 24:64)
The Messenger (singular)
“And I do not say to you that I have the treasures of Allah and I do not know the unseen, nor do I say that I am an angel, nor do I say about those whom your eyes hold in mean estimation (that) Allah will never grant them (any) good– Allah knows best what is in their souls– for then most surely I should be of the unjust.” (Qur’an 11:31)
“Say: “I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor do I tell you I am an angel. I but follow what is revealed to me.” Say: “can the blind be held equal to the seeing?” Will ye then consider not?” (Qur’an 6:50)
The Uli-al-Amr. (plural)
So in regards to the hidden and the unseen in what category do these Uli-al-Amr belong?
Do the Uli al-Amr know all things? Like Allah knows all things?
Are they like the Prophet (saw) who is in the dark about matters of the unseen unless Allah (swt) reveals to him knowledge concerning it?
To be quite honest with you the above video did not at all do anything to make clear how you understand the capacity of knowledge of Uli al-Amr. Are they all knowing like Allah (swt) or they not aware of the unseen unless informed by Allah (swt). The same with Khidr, or Angels, or anyone else?
“And when your Lord said to the angels, “Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority.” They said, “Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we exalt You with praise and declare Your perfection?” He said, “Indeed, I know that which you do not know.“ (Qur’an 2:30)
A few other problematic statements from: Sayyid Ali Abu al-Hassan in his short video above:
So Prophet Dawud is an Imam. Right?
“He said, “He has indeed wronged you in asking that your ewe be added to his ewes. Truly many associates transgress against one another, save those who believe and perform righteous deeds. Yet how few are they!” And David understood that We had tried him; so he sought forgiveness from his Lord, fell down kneeling, and repented. Thus did We forgive him that. Truly nearness unto Us shall be his, and a beautiful return.” (Qur’an 38:24-25)
So yes Imams can make errors in judgement. Certainly we are not going to say the Qur’an is chainless as in the case of Nahjul Balagha.
“And We blessed him with Isaac ˹as a son˺ and Jacob ˹as a grandson˺, as an additional favour making all of them righteous. We ˹also˺ made them imams, guiding by Our command, and inspired them to do good deeds, establish prayer, and pay alms-tax. And they were devoted to Our worship.” (Qur’an 21:72-73)
The thing is these imams are righteous people. However, often their children are not. In the case of Jacob (as) his Ahl Bayt contained some very mischievous and rebellious progeny. Surely if his Ahl Bayt did not repent of their evil and treachery they would have been among those in the hellfire.
“A Messenger sees the angel. The Muhaddath hears the sound. As in, he receives revelation without being aware of [the deliverer]. Such as sayyida Maryam (upon her be peace). Such as Fatima al-Zahra (upon her be peace). All of our Imams (upon them be peace).”
These terminologies he gives seem so random without merit. The idea of someone receiving revelation without being aware of the one delivering the revelation is a huge problem. How is one to ascertain these are not deceitful entities?
To say that Mary (as) was not aware of the angel is absolutely not correct.
“”And had chosen seclusion from them. Then We sent unto her Our Spirit and it assumed for her the likeness of a perfect man. She said, “Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, [so leave me], if you should be fearing of Allah.” (Qur’an 19:17-18)
Lastly, to put Fatima al-Zahra, and the Imams on the same level of perception as the inhabitants of the hellfire should make one recoil in disgust.
“While the angels are gathering the souls of those who wronged themselves, they will wonder, “What was the matter with you?” They will say, “We were oppressed in our land.” [The angels] will ask, “Was not God’s earth vast enough for you to run away?” These people will have Hell as their refuge, a horrible destination.” (Qur’an 4:97)
There is no indication these people see the angels. However, they hear a sound just like the Muhaddath.
So, as we noted that Uli al-amr is (plural) and there is nothing in the verse of (Q 4:59) to suggest that knowledge, capability nor authority is equal among these Uli al-amr. In fact, verse (Q 4:83) proves that it is not the case.
“O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best interpretation.” (Qur’an 4:59)
“Further, you seem to be saying that Uli al-Amr having commands and prohibitions on their shoulders contradicts their ‘ismah.” -Abd’Allah.
First, this statement contradicts your statement here:
“I am not pre-supposing that Uli al-Amr are free from error, rather it seems from the examples given that you are pre-supposing that it is impossible for any from among the believers to be so.” -Abd’Allah.
You could have worded the first sentence as:
“Further, you seem to be saying that Uli al-Amr having commands and prohibitions on their shoulders contradicts their pre-supposed ‘ismah.”
Second.
I have not stated anything of the kind. I have stated that as the believers are addressed to obey Allah (swt) His commands and prohibitions. This would apply to the ‘Uli al-Amr’ as among those who are addressed. The assumption would be to impute ismah to the ‘Uli al-Amr’ -something you have not established from the text of the Qur’an.
You have stated:
“Ahl al-Bayt ع do not act upon their desires, in contradiction to the Shari’ah.:-Abd’Allah
Allah (swt) knows best. This statement is not something that has been established from the Qur’an and neither has the concept of connecting the Ahl al-Bayt as being the Uli al-Amr.
“whosoever dies and does not recognise his Imām (leader), dies a death of jāhiliyyah (pre-Islāmic ignorance).” -Abd’Allah
“As stated before, I find this reading to be implausible because: -Uli al-Amr are necessarily those who hold the highest position of authority in the nation” -Abd’Allah
You find the reading implausible because it would cause the edifice you have built to crumble.
“There not being an obey command before Uli al-Amr does not indicate that their obedience is conditional. On what basis do you claim this? Rather, Allah commanded the obedience to the Messenger and Uli al-Amr with one obey verb – {obey the Messenger and Uli al-Amr from yourselves}.” -Abd’Allah
“On what basis do you claim this?” On the basis that it does not include obey in front of wa-uli-l-amri. Notice the text does say Obey Allah, and the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you. Nor does the text say Obey Allah and Obey the Messenger and Obey those in authority among you. The obedience to the Prophet (saw) is of course connected to obedience to Allah (swt) but not the Uli-al-amr.
Second on the basis that the text itself tells the people what to do if they fall into a dispute. Does it say obey the Imam or those in authority among you? No it does not. It by passes them and goes straight to Allah and His Messenger.
Third, we have shown conclusively from (Q 4:83) that there is hierarchy among those in authority and they can co-exist.
You see our friends over at Al-Islam have manipulated the above text to say what it should say (if your understanding of the text was correct) but unfortunately my dear friend it does not.
What we get is that ‘those in authority among you’ are completely bypassed by telling ‘you’ and ‘I’ i.e. the believers to refer the matter to Allah and the Last Day.
As regard the link to the article that you feel helps explain how do people know who is the right Imam when there arises a dispute among them?
Where to begin the above article does anything but instill faith in the Imami concept of selecting one from among the Uli al-Amr. It is to be quite frank quite the train wreck!
Here are some jaw dropping quotes from the above article.
“How can we reconcile between this undeniable historical phenomenon with the presence of Nass reports (in which the Imam names his successor) as found in the Shia Hadith corpus today? The solution is simple. The identity of the Imam next-in-line was not public knowledge even among the Ashab, what to say of the common Shia masses, let alone the non-Shia general public.”
“And recognize that the reports we are reading now were at one time privileged information, a secret Nass in the safe-keep of a few companions so that flame of truth does not die out, as far as the majority were concerned, the succession was not a foreclosed matter, but to be decided by general principles as applied by fallible individuals.”
“This means that there is a period of time where someone remains a believer despite not knowing the exact identity of the Imam so long as he is on the search or waiting for the return.”
Prima Qur’an comment: Now the above statement obviously has to fly straight in the face of the claim that: “whosoever dies and does not recognise his Imām (leader), dies a death of jāhiliyyah (pre-Islāmic ignorance).”
“In other words, they have to send delegations to find out and are excused in the interim.”
I mean so the people who live in far away geographical regions first have to wait for the news of the current Imam to have died, send a delegation to find out about the new Imam. So traveling from West Africa or South East Asia by boat or camel took exactly how long? How many people died in the meanwhile without ‘recognising the Imam’. Than once the delegation arrives they have to wait out the smokescreen and wait out the “A Genuine Instance of Taqiyya.” Once the dust settles (however long that takes) than they can begin the journey back to their various geographical locations to inform the people.
So the: ” “whosoever dies and does not recognise his Imām (leader), dies a death of jāhiliyyah (pre-Islāmic ignorance). BUT REMEMBER…their are lots and lots of caveats to this.
The article continues:
“But this meant that even that trusted mechanism of looking at the one the Imam names in his public Will (with the Amma considering it an innocuous appointment, and the Shia understanding its true significance) could not decide the matter decisively.”
“Now Imam al-Sadiq had not publicized his true successor (i.e. al-Kadhim) to the Taifa (sect) apart from imparting this privileged information to a few trusted confidants who knew not to divulge this except when instructed.”
Prima Qur’an comment: These “few trusted confidants” hold A LOT OF POWER and I DO MEAN A LOT OF POWER. They hold the POWER over deciding/telling who the IMAM WILL BE.
What keeps them from having khilaf among each other? What text is there to ensure that they will be honest in their disclosure)? Such a weighty decision in the hands of a few trusted (fallible) confidants.
The article continues:
“These few men to whom the Nass was given had no doubts about the identity of their Imam and would come forward when called upon to provide testimony. They were a guarantee that the whole Taifa would not become misguided and the truth would eventually ‘come to light’ once the ‘storm had passed’.”
“THEY (the fallible few)WERE A GUARANTEE THAT THE WHOLE TAIFA WOULD NO BECOME MISGUIDED ….”
“So we entered upon him (i.e. Abdallah), me and Sahib al-Taq, and the people were around him, and that is because they narrated from Abi Abdillah that ‘The Affair is in the elder provided there is no flaw in him’”
Prima Qur’an comment:Fallible men are assigned to determine the infallibility of a man?
The article continues:
“This report gives us the SOLE basis for their acceptance of Abdallah.”
It was definitely not because one of them had heard al-Sadiq naming Abdallah as his successor or because they were aware of any Nass (report of appointment) identifying him as the Imam (even the Will was indecisive), rather, their only justification was a resort to a general principle (which I call the seniority principle) i.e. Abdallah was elder to Musa
Prima Qur’an comment: Imami Shi’a take ahad reports as qati’i decisive proofs in matters of aqidah? Much like the Salafiyyah? Interesting….very interesting.
The article continues:
“And this is exactly what happened. Abdallah was tripped up by simplest of questions in the Halal and Haram which he could not answer.”
Prima Qur’an comment: So the people give a pop quiz on fiqh to determine if they are going to be ruled by an infallible guide? My goodness! Oh my! What?!
The article continues:
“Abdallah tries to salvage the situation by claiming not to know what the Murjia say, but this only makes it worse, since the Imam should be aware of the positions of all the different groups out there.”
Prima Qur’an comment: A potential Imam lies to save face?! These are the virtuous contenders for the Umr al-Amr?! Oh dear!
The article continues:
“In fact, there was no Zakat below 200 Dirhams, and for a supposed Imam to go against the Established Sunnah and the teachings of the Sadiqayn on the Nisab based on human reasoning (if it is 5 for 200 then it must be 2.5 for 100[18]) caused an immediate red-flag to be raised against Abdallah and re-opened the question of who the Imam is.”
Prima Qur’an comment: DID YOU READ THAT PEOPLE? Fallible men test a would be infallible candidate to see if his verdict goes AGAINST THE ESTABLISHED SUNNAH. If it does that is an IMMMEDIATE RED-FLAG.
Subhan’Allah! Praise be to Allah (swt) for the Haqq!
The article continues!
“Abdallah had been found out! Things would never be the same for him and he knew it. He would later get back at Hisham by stationing a few thugs in the streets of Medina to beat him up.”
Prima Qur’an comment: Well my goodness people! The man (one of the children) of the infallible Imam raises turns out to be some type of straight up street thug!
Dear readers if you find that article and that system of choosing the leadership of the Muslims than May Allah have abundant mercy on you and this Ummah!
However, ‘Abd Allah I do want to give you advise on how you may engage on this issue in the future insh’Allah.
For example what you could do in the future is simply agree with people like me.
How so?
You can take a page out of the Ahl Sunnah Wal Jamah playbook. No! Not the Salafis. I am talking about the four extant madhabs. You see they will use this text Qur’an 4:59 in a much more efficient and effective manner than what your teachers taught you. (All due respect to your teachers). The whole Taqlid/Muqallid debate.
So, they will say: “Yes you refer it to Allah and his Messenger indeed!” [This next part is often said with an air of condescend. Trust me I been there!]
“But who are you little man to approach the Qur’an and Sunnah? You are not trained! You are not trained in rhetoric and logic. You are not trained in the sciences of the Qur’an and in the sciences of hadith.”
Then after making you feel like a tiny pismire, they have established their point! Voila!
It is quite effective really. So at that juncture you can do as they do and insert your Uli al-Amr as those who have authority to derive the evidence from the Qur’an & Sunnah. In much the same way the four traditional schools make their case.
The challenge you have (as Imami Shi’a) is you guys make things way more complicated for yourselves by trying to invest these people (Uli al-amr) with the status of the Prophet, and in some cases Supra-Prophetic status. Yes, I realize there is bit of obfuscation and a word salad involved. It’s just like the word tomato. Some pronounce it as: toe may toe and some say ta ma to. Same difference.
“And hold firmly together to the rope of Allah and do not be divided. Remember Allah’s favour upon you when you were enemies, then He united your hearts, so you—by His grace—became brothers. And you were at the brink of a fiery pit and He saved you from it. This is how Allah makes His revelations clear to you, so that you may be ˹rightly˺ guided.” (Qur’an 3:103)
﷽
As they say a picture is worth a thousand words.
Like any school of Islam of course we believe that our school is upon haqq. Yet our scholars study and take from the works of the great scholars across all schools. That is because we firmly believe on this verse:
“He gives wisdom to whom He chooses, and whoever is given wisdom is blessed abundantly. But only insightful people bear this in mind.” (Qur’an 2:269)
We want more cooperation and harmony among the Muslim Ummah. We want Muslims to work together to solve the challenges confronting this Ummah.
ونحن لا نطالب العباد
فوق شهادتيهم اعتقاداً
فمن اتى بالجملتين قلنا
إخواننا وبالحقوق قمنا
إلا إذا ما نقضوا المقالا
أو أحدثوا في دينهم ضلالا
قمنا نبين الصواب لهم
ونحسبن ذاك من حقهم
And we do not obligate over servants[of Allah] over their shahada any belief. Whoever came with the two testimonies we say our brothers and we treat them with their rights, unless they break the religion; or they created in their religion an error. Than we will show the truth to them, and we will consider this their right.
Source: (From the poem كشف الحقيقة لمن جهل الطريقة for Imam Noor Al-Deen Al-Salemi) -May Allah have abundant mercy on him.
Sheikh Ahmad bin Hamad Al-Khalili أحمد بن حمد الخليليSheikh Ahmad bin Hamad Al-Khalili أحمد بن حمد الخليلي
A special prayer meet was organised at Markazu Saquafathi Sunniyya for Sultan Qaboos Bin Said. Grand Mufti of India مفتي جمهورية الهند led the prayer and he requested all believers in India to pray for Sultan Qaboos Bin Said at Mosques and Madrasas.
Under the leadership of Umar bin Abdul-Aziz the Ibadi school sent a group of six great scholars, J’afer bin A’Simak, Abu AlHur Ali bin AlHusain Al’Anbri, AlHattat bin Kateb, AlHabab bin Kulaib, Abu Suyan Qanber AlBasri, and Salim bin Thakwan among other unnamed scholars,(May Allah have his mercy upon them all)
Non-Ibadi historians mentioned these delegates to Umar bin Abdul-Aziz though they said with their usual insinuation: “The Khawarij sent him a delegation”. However, they did not mention what happened between them and the Caliph Umar and his acceptance of all their suggestions about spreading justice and purging the country of the Umayyad tradition of cursing Ali from the pulpit. The Ibadi delegation said to Umar, “Muslims are cursing from pulpits in mosques, so this evil tradition must be changed”. Thus, Umar replaced it with the words of Allah:
“Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression. He admonishes you that you remember”, (Qur’an 16: 90)
May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah.
May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah.
You may also be interested in reading the following:
“So We did not send any messenger except [speaking] in the language of his people to articulate for them, and Allah sends astray [thereby] whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.” (Qur’an 14:4)
﷽
Shaykh Juma Mazrui (h) began his topic about the use of Majaz in the sunnah by giving us a recap of the previous lesson.
He mentioned some more examples from the Qur’an which I will now proceed to quote here:
“So do not make your hand [as] chained to your neck or extend it completely and [thereby] become blamed and insolvent.” (Qur’an 17:29 Sahih international translation)
“And do not set up your hand shackled to your neck, (i.e., Do not be niggardly) nor outspread it widespread altogether, (Literally: outspread it all outspreading, i.e., do not be a spendthrift) for then you will sit blamed and regretfully rejected.” (Qur’an 17:29 Dr. Ghali translation)
This is another beautiful example of majaz, of metaphor in the Qur’an. In fact if one was to take the literal interpretation of this verse, where exactly would this half-way point between tying one’s hand to one’s neck and extending it fully? Would that look like?
So what the verse is saying, it using hand as a metaphor for that which gives, or distributes. That one should not be stingy, nor should one be a spendthrift. That we should be balanced in our approach to spending.
“Of them some seem to give heed to you; will you, then, make the deaf hear even though they understand nothing? And of them some look towards you; will you, then, guide the blind, even though they can see nothing?” (Qur’an 10:41-42)
Obviously it means those who are spiritually blind. The eyes are used as a metaphor for the ability to perceive, understand and be open to something.
“Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb who do not use reason.” (Qur’an 8:22)
Yet Allah (swt) who created people in such a condition and than blames them for this? So it cannot mean what the apparent text says.
“They will say, “Indeed, you used to come at us from the right hand.” (Qur’an 37:28)
Look at how various translators have tried to deal with the above text!
Here the right hand is used as a metaphor, majaz which means to approach, admonish strongly.
So than moving to the ahadith, contrary to what people today tell us that the Salaaf, the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his companions took everything from their outward meaning on the contrary they understood the use of majaz in their language.
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Allah (mighty and sublime be He) said: Pride is my cloak (upper garment) and greatness My robe (waist wrapper), and he who competes with Me in respect of either of them I shall cast into Hell-fire. It was related by Abu Dawud (also by Ibn Majah and Ahmad) with sound chains of authority. This Hadith also appears in Muslim in another version.”
Are we to believe that Allah (swt) has an upper garment and a waist wrapper?
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Allah (mighty and sublime be He) said: Whoever shows enmity to someone devoted to Me, I shall be at war with him. My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his ears with which he hears, his eyes with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes and his foot with which he walks. Were he to ask [something] of Me, I would surely give it to him, and were he to ask Me for refuge, I would surely grant him it. I do not hesitate about anything as much as I hesitate about [seizing] the soul of My faithful servant: he hates death and I hate hurting him.”
Are we to believe that Allah (swt) becomes the ear of the person? The eyes of the person? The hand and the foot of the person?
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
Allah (swt) will say on the Day of Resurrection: O son of Adam, I fell ill and you visited Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I visit You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so had fallen ill and you visited him not? Did you not know that had you visited him you would have found Me with him? O son of Adam, I asked you for food and you fed Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I feed You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so asked you for food and you fed him not? Did you not know that had you fed him you would surely have found that (the reward for doing so) with Me? O son of Adam, I asked you to give Me to drink and you gave Me not to drink. He will say: O Lord, how should I give You to drink when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: My servant So-and-so asked you to give him to drink and you gave him not to drink. Had you given him to drink you would have surely found that with Me.”
It is clear that Allah (swt) ascribes acts to himself which he does not actually do, such as falling ill, and asking for that which is apparent that he does not need such as food and drink.
On the authority of Abdullah ibn Umar reported:
The Messenger of Allah, (saw), said, “The upper hand is better than the lower hand. The upper hand is one that gives and the lower hand is one that takes.”
The hadith itself while using hand as a metaphor explains the meaning. Thus the word hand is not used as an apparent real attribute of a person.
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Prophet (saw) said:
“Allah the Almighty said: I am as My servant thinks I am. I am with him when he makes mention of Me. If he makes mention of Me to himself, I make mention of him to Myself; and if he makes mention of Me in an assembly, I make mention of him in an assembly better than it. And if he draws near to Me an arm’s length, I draw near to him a cubit, and if he draws near to Me a cubit, I draw near to him a fathom. And if he comes to Me walking, I go to him running.”
Our Shaykh Juma Mazrui reminded us that unfortunately there are among those who take such statements upon their literal important and thus their teacher, Shaykh Al Uthaymeen has advocated for the ‘jogging of Allah’ as a real action and quality that Allah (swt) does. ‘Jogging but unlike our jogging’.
This hadith also poses other problems if taken upon face value.
If a person draws to Allah (swt) be an arms length, than Allah (swt) draws to that person by a cubit.
If that person draws near by a cubit than Allah (swt) will draw near to them by a fathom.
It gives the impression that the opposite can be true in that a person can eventually go so far away from Allah (swt), that Allah (swt) would be out of reach, so to speak.
“When My slaves ask you ˹O Prophet˺ about Me: I am truly near. I respond to one’s prayer when they call upon Me. So let them respond ˹with obedience˺ to Me and believe in Me, perhaps they will be guided ˹to the Right Way˺. (Qur’an 2:186)
Insh’Allah, the third lesson will be this week. Hopefully what has passed from our respected teacher is more than sufficient to dispel the myth that the Blessed Messenger (saw), his companions, the Salaaf did not understand the Arabic language nor did they employ the use of majaz.
“And We have also sent down unto you (Muhammed) the Reminder and the Advice (the Qur’an), that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them.” (Qur’an 16:44)
﷽
In our first lesson Shaykh Juma Mazrui (h) went over some of the disputes the scholars have had in regards to majaz in the Qur’an. Among those who dispute majaz are those who liken Allah (swt) to his creation by stating that he has two right hands, two eyes, and so forth.
Some people are under the mistaken impression that the apparent meaning of certain verses in the Qur’an indicate anthropomorphism. However, most of those who assume as such are either reading translations of the Qur’an into English and/or even among the Arabs those who have forgotten how deep and powerful the language of the Qur’anic Arabic actually is. They have forgotten the use of Majaz.
Such that when a person sees the word ‘yadahu’ they use their mind to scan one of the most common meanings possible for the word. However, not everyone can be said to take that meaning. The context would certainly dictate how one may scan a word search for an understanding.
An example:
And the Jews say, ‘The (yadu l-lahi) is tied up.’ Chained are their (aydihim), and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, (yadahu mabsūṭatāni) , HE spends however He Wills.” (Qur’an 5:64)
So these are words and phrases and terminologies that an Arab in the 7th century would have knowledge of. So when an Arab of that time read this page did they imagine Allah (swt) as being bound (like a prisoner) unable to have use of His “hands”?
Or, did they immediately recognizes the metaphor? That these people are claiming that Allah (swt) does not bestow upon them anything of good and/or is misrely. Where Allah (swt) retorts back that he is boundless in his generosity?
What went through their minds when the yadu (a feminine singular noun in the nominative case switched to yadahu (a noun and a possessive pronoun-the noun being feminine dual in the nominative case with the attached possessive pronoun in third person masculine singular).
Can it be said that they imagine some type of gender swapping happening? Or it can it be said that these people knew the function and style of their language.
Now if one was to give a person the Qur’an without any understanding of who or what Allah (swt) is what is the perception that they would walk away with. (Reading a translation or reading the Arabic).
If for example in our dawah we tell the Christians that Allah is not a man or a woman and Allah (swt) does not have a gender. What would be the impression of that Christian (reading a translation of the Qur’an) or that Arab Christian reading the Arabic Qur’an have when reading the following verse:
“There is nothing likeunto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)
That apparent meaning or the meaning that comes when they use their mind to scan search for an understanding they may walk away with the impression that they were mislead.
Similarly, when reading the Qur’an when the are certain statements which are assumed to be attributes of Allah (swt) in which you will never find the following statement after such assumed attributes: Bila Kayfa meaning: ‘without how’ ‘without modality’
It is very clear that every language is rich in meaning , scope and depth. All languages to some degree or another deploy a range of literary devices. Chief among them is metaphor or as we would say in Arabic majaz.
Shaykh Juma Mazrui (h) has shown us clearly many examples of Majaz in the Qur’an.
“Allah is the Guardian of those who believe, He brings them out of every darkness into light. And those who disbelieve, their guardians are the evil ones; they bring them out of light into all kinds of darkness. These are destined for the Fire, and there shall they abide.” (Qur’an 2:257)
This is an example of metaphor or Majaz. There is no real darkness that we are being brought out of and into a real light. No one has been able to demonstrably prove this by the apparent meaning.
“Ignominy shall be their portion wherever they are found save (where they grasp) a rope from Allah and a rope from men. They have incurred anger from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them. That is because they used to disbelieve the revelations of Allah, and slew the prophets wrongfully. That is because they were rebellious and used to transgress.” (Qur’an 3:112)
This is another example of metaphor or Majaz. There is no real rope from Allah and a rope from men that people are grasping onto.
Again we find:
“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah and do not be divided. Remember Allah’s favour upon you when you were enemies, then He united your hearts, so you—by His grace—became brothers. And you were at the brink of a fiery pit and He saved you from it. This is how Allah makes His revelations clear to you, so that you may be ˹rightly˺ guided.” (Qur’an 3:103)
There no real, physical or apparent rope from Allah (swt) that any of us are grasping on to for every moment of our life. This is a clear example of metaphor or Majaz. The rope that is referred to that we are to grasp or adhere to is the religion of Islam.
“Moreover, will say to those who were oppressed to those who were arrogant, “Nay, (it was) a plot (by) night and a plot (by) day when you were ordering us that we disbelieve in Allah and we set up for Him equals.” But they will conceal the regret when they see the punishment. And We will put shackles on (the) necks (of) those who disbelieved. Will they be recompensed except (for) what they used to do?” (Qur’an 34:33)
This is the majaz of hadhfi or the metaphor of omission. Can it be said that the night plots and the day plots? This is a clear example of metaphor and the overwhelming majority of translators have not translated nor interpreted it by its apparent meaning.
“To Him belong the keys to the heavens and the earth. As for those who have rejected the verses of Allah, it is they who are the losers.” (Qur’an 39:3)
If you translate this literally, or take it apparently it is to mean that Allah (swt) has two material keys. This would be a case of tashbih to liken one thing to another. Like people have keys that they use to start their car or to unlock their homes.
That Allah (swt) would need two sets of keys to lock/unlock the heavens and the earth merits pensive reflection from those who beleive in the apparent meaning of the text.
17 times a day a Muslim says, “guide is to the right way.” That is from the opening chapter of the Qur’an.
Well, where is this ‘straight path, this straight way’? If you to take it from the apparent, from the literal meaning.
“Be patient over what they say, and remember Our servant, David, the possessor of many hands; he was one who repeatedly turned back [to Us].” (Qur’an 38:17)
Plural in Arabic begins with three and not two! So, at the very least David had three hands. However, notice something from the following site:
It is unanimous that they all translate ‘many hands’ as strength! Even the Salafi/Saudi translations do! Even the translation that gives us the most literal word for word meaning possible was too shy to translate David having many hands.
Be patient over what they say and remember Our servant, David, the possessor of strength; indeed, he was one who repeatedly turned back [to Allah ] (Sahih International)
Be patient (O Muhammad SAW) of what they say, and remember Our slave Dawood (David), endued with power. Verily, he was ever oft-returning in all matters and in repentance (toward Allah) (Muhsin Khan & Muhammed Al Hilal)
So we can say to those who believe in literal translations: Why don’t you take these verses on the apparent meaning? If Allah (swt) says that David has many hands then say that David had many hands!
You are shy to ascribe many hands to David but not to Allah (swt)?!
“He is the One who has made the earth subjugated for you, so walk on its shoulders, and eat out of His provision, and to Him is the Resurrection.” (Qur’an 67:15)
The earth has shoulders? As I have?
“And He (is) the One Who sends the winds (of glad news between the two hands of his Mercy, until, when they have carried clouds ” (Qur’an 7:57)
Allah sends winds like herald of glad news, between the two hands of his Mercy.
Now his Mercy has two hands?
So those who believe in literal translations tell us that Allah (swt) has two right hands, and he has an attribute of Mercy and this attribute has two hands. Are they also right hands?
Look how virtually everyone else translates the text!
“Moreover, it is He who sends the winds as good news before His mercy until, when they have carried heavy rain clouds, We drive them to a dead land and We send down rain in that respect and bring forth thereby [some] of all the fruits. Thus will We bring forth the dead; perhaps you will be reminded.” (Sahih International)
“And it is He Who sends the winds as heralds of glad tidings, going before His Mercy (rain). Till when they have carried a heavy-laden cloud, We drive it to a land that is dead, then We cause water (rain) to descend immediately. Then We produce every fruit besides that. Similarly, We shall raise the dead, so that you may remember or take heed.” (Muhsin Khan and Muhammed Al Hilali)
No one wants to take the literal, or apparent meaning of the text and ascribe to Allah’s mercy two hands! Why is that?
“Also, He (is) the One Who sends the winds (as) glad news (from) between (hands) His Mercy, and We send down from the sky water pure.” (Qur’an 25:48)
Even look at those at Corpus Qur’an. They are literally confused about how to translate the Arabic text:
“So, out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say: “My Lord! bestow on them your Mercy even as they cherished me in childhood.” (Qur’an 17:24)
Does humility have wings?
“And lower your wing to those who follow you of the believers.” (Qu’ran 26:215 -Sahih International)
For some reason in this case Sahih International decides to go with the literal, apparent text. But the question needs to be asked does the Blessed Messenger (saw) have a wing?
Allah (swt) said he did. So why can’t what Allah (swt) says be good enough for us?
“So when we accepted your covenant and lifted the mountain of Sinai over you, saying, receive the law which we have given you, with a resolution to perform it, and hear; they said, we have heard, and have rebelled: And they were made to drink down the calf into their hearts for their unbelief. Say, a grievous thing has your faith commanded you, if you indeed be true believers.” (Qur’an 2:93)
Does anyone think they were drinking calf? It means that their hearts were filled with worshipping the calf.
“And a faction of the People of the Scripture say [to each other], “Believe in that which was revealed to the believers at the face of the day and reject it at its end that perhaps they will abandon their religion.” (Qur’an 3:72)
wajha-face. Are we really to believe that the day has a face?
“Give good news, glad news, to the believers upon the foot of the truth.”(Qur’an 10:2)
“Have the people been amazed that We revealed [revelation] to a man from among them, [saying], “Warn mankind and give good news to those who believe that they will have a [firm] precedence of honor with their Lord”? [But] the disbelievers say, “Indeed, this is an obvious magician.” (Sahih International)
Muhsin Khan and Muhammed Al Hilali really went wild with this translation:
“Is it wonder for mankind that We have sent Our Inspiration to a man from among themselves (i.e. Prophet Muhammad SAW) (saying): “Warn mankind (of the coming torment in Hell), and give good news to those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah and in His Prophet Muhammad SAW) that they shall have with their Lord the rewards of their good deeds?” (But) the disbelievers say: “This is indeed an evident sorcerer (i.e. Prophet Muhammad SAW and the Quran)” (Muhsin Khan & Muhammed Al Hilali)
The principle of rejecting the Mujaaz usually comes from those who say that Allah (swt) has two limbs, and two right hands, two eyes etc. Shaykh Juma Mazrui had other examples that I did not have the chance to pin down but insh’Allah I will enquire about the missed examples and plug them into this article..
Shaykh Juma Mazrui will be going over with us in the coming weeks the following lessons: Insh’Allah.
In the traditions of the Prophet (saw) did he use Majaaz when he talks to the companions?
Majaz in the Arabic language.
Tawil in the Arabic language.
“See how Allah does make His revelations clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!” (Qur’an 5:75)
“And they say, “Never will the Fire touch us, except for a few days.” Say, “Have you taken a covenant with Allah? For Allah will never break His covenant. Or do you say about Allah that which you do not know?” Yes, whoever earns evil and his sin has encompassed him – those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.” (Qur’an 2:80-81)
﷽
Every now and again there is someone who stops by this blog/website and leaves an amazing comment. Something that is so eye opening and poignant that it deserves not to be tucked away in the comment section but broadcasted as far as Allah (swt) allows the knowledge to transmit.
All credit to the comment goes to the individual by the name of Zheyn. May Allah (swt) raise their station!
“By the logic of those who argue that sinful believers who earned Jahannam will eventually go to paradise, Iblis himself would eventually enter Jannah because of his “righteous deeds” before he disobeyed Allah. We know according to the Quran he had the rank of the angels.”
“But the undeniable fact that Allah cursed Iblis to Jahannam over ONE sin, not prostrating to a creation Allah commanded you to prostrate too, is more than enough evidence that just because you believe doesn’t mean you will enter Jannah.”
“Iblis NEVER denied that Allah is his lord, rather he became arrogant and disobeyed the command of Allah. It seems this sin in and of itself is far more damning than a disbeliever not believing. It’s because Iblis KNEW about Allah’s power yet he still disobeyed.”
“Even in Iblis’s khutbah to the companions of the fire Iblis denies the association of him as a partner to Allah and he affirms that Allah promised them the truth and he promised them but betrayed them.”
“Anyone who accepts the notion that Jahannam is temporary for ANYONE without explicit proof is only responding to shaytan. Allah promises eternal bliss or eternal torment. Shaytan promises delusion.”
“I pray more Muslims see and understand the severity of this topic.”
What more can be said except Amin! Very well said, Zheyn!
Fore more on this topic you may wish to read the following:
Prima Quran 