Ahmed Ibn Hanbali says Ikrima was upon the view of the Ibadi

“O my Lord! advance me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)

Ikrimah (r.a) was an Ibadi

Omar bin Qais al-Makki said, on the authority of Ata: Ikrimah was an Ibadhi. Aand Ibrahim bin Yaqoub al-Jawzjani said: I asked Ahmed bin Hanbal about Ikrimah, he said:

“He was of the opinion of the Ibadhis .”

Source: (Refinement Of Perfection For Mazi – Imam Jamal Al-Din Abi Al-Hajjaj Yusuf Al-Mazi)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Shafi’i Muhaddith (Salah al-Din al-idlibi) questions age of Aisha in Bukhari

“Follow not that whereof you have no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart – of each of these it will be asked.” (Qur’an 17:36)

A very interesting discussion Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-’idlibī, a contemporary Muḥaddīth using matn critique to show that the age of Aisha as reported in Bukhari and understood by the majority does not add up when all evidence and factors are considered.

This is all too important because time and time again we hear that anyone who challenges the hadith corpus is some modernist Muslim who has no grounding in his/her faith.  

This humble article is one of many that refute these overly simplistic and unfounded allegations. The source for the original article in Arabic is: https://salahsafa.blogspot.com/2013/02/blog-post_27.html?fbclid=IwAR0rRA_ODrbLmqTsJ4-ObzBNbTwWcuw7hjbi_KWnDruTvkKNLsEzt_PuTnw

Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn Ibn Aḥmad al-’idlibī was born in 1948 in the Syrian city of Idlib. He is Shāfi‘ī in lineage and got a PhD in Islamic sciences with a specialty in Ḥadīth from the Dār al-Ḥadīth al-Ḥassīniyah in Morocco in 1980. He has taught Ḥadīth sciences at several Arab universities, including the Kulliyah al-Darāssāt al-’islāmiyah wa al-‘Arabiyah in Abu Dhabi and the Kulliyah al-Sharī‘ah in the United Arab Emirates.

21 He has a website where his publications and media appearances are posted.

He is famous for writing a 22 detailed response 23 to a Salafī critique against the ’Āsh‘arī theological school.24 His first publication (probably a rework of his PhD thesis) is a detailed research that tries to prove that textual (matn) criticism of prophetic Aḥadīth has been part of Islam since its beginnings.25 The Aisha-age-traditions are not discussed in it, but he provides many examples of famous Aḥadīth that are found in the Ṣaḥīḥ collections, which has been criticized by many foundational scholars, including ‘Ā’īsha who was famous for criticizing traditions that spoke in a denigrating manner about women or traditions with anthropomorphic contents.26

This book in my eyes shows the key element in al-‘idlibī’s approach to the Ḥadīth corpus whereby traditions are determined firstly by contents, and not just by isnād. Although scholars of Fiqh have always applied textual criticism, over the centuries the authenticity level of the isnād became more and more decisive in accepting a tradition and increased the reluctance to reject it.27 Al-’idlibī on the other hand points out that to declare an isnād authentic (ṣaḥīḥ) it needs to comply to five conditions, while there are numerous reasons for a text (matn) to contain a mistake (’asbāb al-Wahm kathīrah).

Only a tradition which is deemed both ṣaḥīḥ in isnād and matn can overcome its probable truth factor (ghalab ‘alā al-Ẓann), but it still isn’t multiple transmitted (lā yatawātar) and thus doesn’t gain the certain truth factor (maquṭū‘a) of a multiple transmitted tradition (al-Mutawātir). When a tradition has 28 an authentic isnād but deviant contents (’isnād ṣaḥīḥ wa matnahu shādh) it is classified as weak and deficient (ḍa‘īf) and can be rejected.29 Al-’idlibī thus clearly presents an ’usūlī methodology in judging and classifying traditions .30, although he never references his methodology to any ’usūlī scholar.

Jonathan Brown calls this approach ‘Late Sunni Traditionalism’, which is a revival of the ’Ahl al-Rā’y juristic methodology whereby ”jurists, not hadith scholars, with the ultimate authority in determining the authenticity and implication of a hadith“, making jurists ”responsible for content criticism“.31 Al-’idlibī is clearly influenced by, or follows a similar vision as, the late ’Aẓharī scholar Muḥammad al-Ghazālī (d. 1996 CE) who saw a Ḥadīth only as truly ṣaḥīḥ if it didn’t contain a hidden flaw (‘illā) or contradict more reliable evidence.32 It is this methodology which we will also find in his discussion on the Aisha-age-traditions.

Al-’idlibī’s analysis on the age of marriage of ‘Ā’īsha

Although I was acquainted with English works on the age of ‘Ā’īsha, and knew there were already Arabic discussions on this matter from the 1950s 33, I hadn’t come across any work in Arabic until I saw a blog post by professor Mohammed Fadel (University of Toronto) where he recounted his meeting with al-’idlibī and had posted a link to al-’idlibī’s essay.34 While reading I noticed he used many similar sources and arguments as the English works, but because he used classical terminology it didn’t feel apologetic. That he wrote a specific essay on it shows that the age presented in the traditions were probably disconcerting to him, but by applying his methodology and terminology this apologetic element isn’t present.

In the essay, he points out that because the Aisha-age-traditions are of ṣaḥīḥ status, there is no avoiding in studying it. If we take his ’usūlī methodology in mind, it means that the ṣaḥīḥ status of the isnād demands that the matn must also be checked for an error (wahm), so that its probability status (ẓann) can be judged.

Secondly, he says he came across some articles on this subject by some scholars, and he wanted to write about it to “sharpen some scientific thoughts in the condoning indifference on the positions of weakness”. 

Meaning, he wants to point out to people that they remain too much indifferent to possible weaknesses in historical sources. Thus according to him, his objective is not to simply discredit the Aisha-age traditions because he rejects the possibility of the Prophet marrying an underaged girl, but to use it as an example of how people easily overlook mistakes in generally accepted sources. Just as his book on matn criticism tries to prove the classical practice of it, and thus its authenticity level as an Islamic methodology, this essay tries to show the necessity and usefulness of such criticism.

In his analysis he tries to determine ‘Ā’īsha’s age by determining:

  1. The age difference and the birth-year of her older sister ’Asmā’
  2. The possibility she experienced and narrated events at a certain age
  3. The words used to describe her
  4. When she converted to Islam
  5. When her father married her mother
  6. The way she was proposed as a possible spouse for the Prophet

He does this by using both graded and ungraded narrations, thus collecting as much evidence to prove there is a conflict between the gathered evidence and the original narration under question.

Part of his argument is also based on the idea that it is unreasonable that she was four or younger at certain events (2.) and when she was proposed to the Prophet (6.), which uses assumptions about a child’s capability and the way seventh-century culture discussed possible spouses. It thus not simply an argument based on the clear textual and linguistic comparison, but also involves the idea of what is reasonable. All this taken together is enough proof for al-’idlibī to declare the Aisha-age-traditions as containing an error (wahm), and thus being defective (ma‘lūl).

Translation of al-’idlibī’s essay

The transmitted Ḥadīth in the estimated age of the honorable ‘Ā’īsha on the day of marriage contract and marriage

In the name of Allah Most Merciful ever Merciful.

Praise to Allah numerous good blessed praising such as loving and pleasing our Lord, and praise to Allah whom by His blessings completes the righteous, the Lord completes through the good, and seals for us through the good, through Your beneficence and grace and honor, O Honored of the honored.

A Ḥadīth is transmitted about the Prophet, salutations of Allah upon him and peace 36, that the marriage-contracted (‘aqada)37 honorable ‘Ā’īsha, Allah’s pleasure upon her 38, and her years were six years and he married her [when she was] nine years. And is this Ḥadīth authentic in transmission chain (isnād) and textual contents (matn)?? [There] is no avoiding from its study.

I came across an article about this important subject written by some researcher in weakening (taḍa‘īf) that Ḥadīth regarding transmission chain and textual contents, and I found that one [can get] possible gain (al-Mumkin al-Istifādah) from it in the sharpening.

(al-Taqāṭ) of some scientific thoughts in the condoning (al-Taghāḍī) on the positions of

weakness (nuqaṭ al-Ḍu‘f), for the leaving [of this condoning] (al-Khurūj) through constituent result (bi natījah mu’assisah) on evidence (al-’Adilah) and conductive indications (al-Qarā’īn al-Muwaṣṣilah) towards the rational correct expression, by Allah’s authority.

And for necessary clarification (li ḍarūrah tajliyah) of the aspect of the rational correct (wajh al-Ṣawāb) in this important issue from the issues of the noble Prophetic biography and the reported tradition so this research supported through evidence in the history of the birth of honorable ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘), and estimation of her age (miqdār ‘umrahā) at the time the marriage-contract [was placed] upon her from the Messenger of God (ṣA‘ws) and her age at the time of her wedding. And in this [there are] two said issues:

The first saying is well known (al-Mashūr): Is that he marriage-contracted her and she was a girl of six years and he married her and she was a girl of nine. They take through what is established on it from her saying in ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and others, which means that she’s born after the Prophetic mission (ba‘ada al-Ba‘thah al-Nabawiyah)39 by four years.

The second saying: Is that he marriage-contracted her and she was a girl of fourteen years and he married her and she was a girl of eighteen years, which means that she was born before (qabla) the mission by four years.

The evidence of the first saying: 

Al-Bukhārī, Muslim, and others reported from Ṭariq on Hishām bin ‘Arwah on his father on ‘Ā’īsha that the Prophet (ṣA‘ws) married her and she was a girl of six years, and he consummated with her and she was a girl of nine years. And Muslim’s transmission is from Ṭarīq Mu‘ammar on al-Zuhrī on ‘Arwah on ‘Ā’īsha

And Ibn Ḥanbal and Muslim’s transmission is from Ṭarīq al-’Aswad bin Yazīd al-Nakha‘ī on ‘Ā’īsha. And the wording “he married her (tazawwajahā)” 40 is intended with the meaning of marriage-contract (al-‘Aqd), and this is the objective (al-Maqṣūd) here.

And the Ḥadīth it’s transmission chain (sanad) is ṣaḥīḥ. And it’s certainly incorrect (’akhṭā’) as an opinion (ẓann) that Hishām bin ‘Arwah is isolated (tafarrada) in its transmission and that it is from his imagination (’awhāmahu).41

The evidence of the second saying: 

1 – ‘Ā’īsha is younger than her sister ’Asmā’ (rA‘) with 10 years, and ‘Asmā’ was born before the Hijrah by twenty-seven years, meaning before the Prophet mission by fourteen years, and this means that ‘Ā’īsha was born before the Hijrah by four years.

Ibn ‘Asākir reported in the “Tārīkh Damashqi” through its sanad on ibn ’Abī al-Zanād that he said: ”’Asmā’ the daughter of ’Abū Bakr was older than ‘Ā’īsha by ten years.“42

And ’Abū Na‘īm said in the “Ma‘rifah al-Ṣaḥābah” in the biography (tarjamah) of ’Asmā’:” She was born before the history 43 by twenty-seven years, and she died seventy-three years later in Makkah after her son killed ‘Abd Allah bin al-Zubayr in [those] days, and she was a hundred years.“44 And [that] which confirms this report in the knowing the year of birth of ’Asmā’ is what ’Abū Na‘īm reported such about her that she said: ”I saw Zayd bin ‘Amrū bin Nafīl and supporting himself on the wall of the Ka‘abah, he said: Oh community of Quraysh, none of you today is on the religion of Abraham other than I.“ 45 Zayd had passed away and the Quraysh was building the Ka‘abah before He [God] send down a revelation on the Messenger of God by five years. Such was reported by Ibn Sa‘ad in the “al-Ṭabaqāt” on Sa‘yd bin al-Musayb 46, meaning [this] was before the Hijrah by eighteen years, thus her age was nine years [when] she heard this as that time.

And this is logical (ma‘aqūl), because anyone recollecting what was heard from him (yaḍbuṭ mithl hadhā al-Samā‘ minhu) cannot be anything other than predominantly nine (tisa‘a fī al-Ghālib). And ibn al-’Athīr in the “’Asad al-Ghābah”: ’Abū Na‘īm said: ”She was born before history by twenty-seven years.“47 And ibn ‘Abd al-Birr said in “al-istī‘āb”: ”And ’Asmā’ passed away in Makkah in Jumādī al-’Awwalā year seventy-three [after Hijrah], and at her death, she had reached a hundred years.“48

2 – Al-Bukhārī reported on ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) that she said: ”Indeed He sent in Makkah on Muḥammad (ṣA‘ws), while I proceeded to play (li-jāriyah ’ala‘abu), {But surely the Hour is their appointed time, and the Hour is calamitous and bitter} 49, and what was sent down of chapter al-Baqarah and al-Nisā’ except what was already with him.“ 50

Al-Qurṭubī says in his commentary (tafsīr): Ibn ‘Abbās said: ”Between the sending down of this verse and between [the battle of] Badr were 7 years“51. And when it is as such, this means that it was sent down before the Hijrah by five years and after the [Prophetic] mission by eight.

And ibn Sayd said in the “al-Muḥkām” and ibn Manẓūr in ” 52 Lisān al-‘Arab”53: ”al-Jāriyah: The youthful from the women (al-Fatiyyah min al-Nisā’).“ And al-Fatiyyah is the juvenile woman (al-Shābbah). And they applied (yuṭaliqūn….‘alā) the word “al-Jāriyah” for the girl in her adolescence (fatā’īhā) and juvenileness (shabābahā) until the appearance of coming and  going [of her menstrual period].54

So how much is the age of ‘Ā’īsha with the sending down of the Exalted His saying {But surely the Hour is their appointed time, and the Hour is calamitous and bitter} which was sent down after the [Prophetic] mission by eight years?!

Concerning the first saying her age is four years and a girl of four isn’t called jāriyah as the first saying outlines. As for the second saying, her age is placed with the sending down of the verse estimating (thantī) ten years and thus is harmonious (al-Mansajim) with the meaning of al-Jāriyah.

3 – al-Bukhārī transmitted on ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) that she said: ”I didn’t understand my parents except that they professed the religion [of Islam], and no day would pass except with the visit of the messenger of God (ṣA‘ws) at the morning daylight and night. So when the Muslims were tested [by being persecuted] Abū Bakr went out-migrating towards Ethiopia, and when he reached al-Ghimād early he was met by Ibn al-Daghnah…” [till the end of the] tradition.

The aspect of interference from this narration are two issues:

First of the two is that a child cannot know the custom (al-‘Āddah) professed by the majority of the people from its religious conversion and its religiosity (tadayyun) and its condition (aldīhu) by the religion of others at four years, and if ‘Ā’īsha was born four years after the [Prophetic] mission, and her first awareness (‘ayahā) of her surroundings in the 8th year [of the Prophetic mission] then her statement “I didn’t understand my parents except that they professed the religion [of Islam]” is a result without use; because Abū Bakr was known to have been one of the earliest converts to Islam, and [his wife] ’Umm Rūmān became Muslim in Mecca in early times, as Ibn Sa‘ad said.

However if she was born before the mission by four years, and her first awareness of her surroundings in the first year of the mission, that statement is useful. And is that – it explains she begins to become aware of her surroundings – she sees the condition of both of them professing the religion of Islam, and not only one condition.

And this proves that she was born before the mission with approximately four years, and this is proven in other evidence.

Second, of the two is that her statement ”So when the Muslims were tested [by being persecuted] Abū Bakr went out-migrating towards Ethiopia“ is a turning point (Ma‘ṭūfā) on her realization of her parents and they two professed the religion is so candid in that when she was was aware to this event (al-Ḥuduth) and the departure of the companions from Mecca for the migration to Ethiopia was in the middle of the fifth year from the mission and their migration second for her in the last of the fifth or beginning of the sixth.

And if ‘Ā’īsha was born four years after the mission it was possible for her to be aware of that event in the beginning of the sixth year, and because she was born before the mission with four years, thus this means the possibility of her awareness for that with clarity (bi-wuḍūḥ).

4 – Muḥammad bin ’isḥāq said in the Prophetic biography in mentioning ’Asmā’ as one of the first who became Muslim: ”Then people from the Arab tribes submitted, from them Sa‘īd bin Zayd bin ‘Amr bin Nafīl and his wife Faṭimah bint al-Khaṭāb, and ’Asmā’ bint Abū Bakr, and ‘Ā’īsha bint Abū Bakr and she was young (ṣaghīrah)….then Allah the Exalted commanded His Messenger (ṣA‘ws) that he proclaim (yaṣda‘) with what came with him. And that he announces through His command to mankind, and call towards Allah the Exalted, and maybe he concealed something and hide through it that command with its appearance, so it was broadcasted years after the mission, then God the Exalted said {So proclaim what you have been commanded, and turn away from the idolaters}.55

And Ibn Kathīr transmitted some of this text with the meaning as said: ”Ibn ’isḥāq said: Then Allah commanded His Messenger (ṣA‘ws) after three years after the mission through that he proclaimed with what he was commanded, and that he endured on whom are idolaters.“56 And Ibn ’isḥāq’s statement means here that ‘Ā’īsha became Muslim during the time of the secret call [to Islam] (fitrah al-Da‘wah al-Siriyah) after the mission, and that she was young, and if that fitrah time period was 3 years, ‘Ā’īsha may have been brought in to some of the gatherings of the Muslims at the end of the fitrah.

And on the statement that she was born after the mission by four years, this cannot be right in principle because she wasn’t born after.

In regards to the second statement, her age would be six years or seven. Perhaps ibn ’isḥāq mentioned her as being amongst the first Muslims in spite of her young years as a respect for her father Abū Bakr (RA‘) and consisted the turning point (Ma‘ṭūfah)57 of her sister ’Asmā’ who was older than her by ten years.

5 – al-Ṭabarī says in his “Tārīkh”: ”Abū Bakr married in the pre-Islamic times (al-Jāhiliyah) Qutīlah ibnah ‘Abd al-‘Uzzā and she fathered for him ‘Abd Allah and ’Asmā’, and he also married in the pre-Islamic times ’Umm Rūmān bint ‘Amir and she fathered for him ‘Abd al-Raḥman and ‘Ā’īsha, so all these four children were born from his two wives whom their [marriage] oaths were taken in the pre-Islamic times.“58 So these historical texts are candidly obvious in that ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) was born before the Prophetic mission.

6 – Ibn Abī ‘Āṣam transmitted in the first and second, and al-Ṭabarānī in the “al-Mu‘jam al-Kabīr” and al-Ḥākim in the “al-Mustadarak” on ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) that Khawlah bint Ḥākim, the wive of ‘Uthmān bin Muẓa‘ūn (rA‘), said in Mecca to the messenger of God (ṣA‘ws): ”In other words, the messenger of God desists from marrying? He said: And who [do you suggest]? She said: Do you want a young woman (bakrā) or an old woman (thayibā)? He said: So who is the young woman? She said: The daughter of the most beloved of Allah’s creation to you, ‘Ā’īsha bint Abī Bakr. And he said: Who is the older woman? She said: Sawdah bint Zama‘ah. He said: So go and mention me to both of them.“59

The context (al-Siyāq) proves that Khawlah (rA‘) wanted to speak to the messenger of Allah (ṣA‘ws) after the passing of the honorable Khadijah, because from that moment he had no wife, and in the purpose (Ghāyah) is improbable that she speaks to him in this case about her who is of the age of six years!! However when she is a girl of fourteen years then this is reasonable (ma‘qūl), and seems that this is correct (al-Ṣaḥīḥ).

– And there is no doubt that together these proofs and external indications on the statement in that the Prophet (ṣA‘ws) married ‘Ā’īsha and her age being eighteen years is proven by strong proof that this is correct.

And in regards to what is established about ‘Ā’īsha from that the messenger of God married her and she was of nine years, and it is unavoidable that this is an error (wahmā). And she (rA‘) lived – [based] on the deciding statement here – seventy-five years. So perhaps she was afflicted (’aṣābahā) by forgetfulness (al-Nisayān) in this matter, thus its narration is erroneous (al- awahhum).60 And the error of the narrated statement (tawahhīm al-Qawl al-Murawī) about ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) doesn’t escape it, and that from the gathered evidence and indications which presents its conflict (khilāfahi).

The summary of the research:

Based on the gathering of evidence and indications that the honorable ‘Ā’īsha (rA‘) was born before the mission by four years, and she was marriage-contracted (‘aqada ‘alayhā) by the messenger of Allah (ṣA‘ws) in the tenth year of the mission and her age was fourteen years, before the Hijrah by three years. And married her at the end of the first year after the Hijrah and her age were eighteen years.

The mentioned tradition in specifying the age of ‘Ā’īsha by six years on the day of the marriage-contracting and nine years on the day of marriage are authentic in the chain of transmission (ṣaḥīḥ al-’isnād), however, it conflicts with the researched texts and historical indications. Thus it is defective (ma‘lūl) because it is from those that are erroneous (al-’Awhām).

The imams (rA) stated that the narration when its contents (matn) conflicts with what is stronger evidence from reliable history, it is thus rejected (yuradd), because it is proven that it is in some way unsound (al-Khalal) through an occurring cause of the error (al-Wahm) in the single narration.

And Allah knows best.

And praise is to Allah, Lord of the worlds.


19 See a discussion on this in Jonathan A.C. Brown, Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy (London: Oneworld, 2014), 145-148. Early 20th century Orientalist writing caused some discussions on this among higher classes and some intellectuals in Egypt, but it is the post-1990 era when this discussion seemed to have returned in Arabic, in far more Arab countries among the larger population, and by scholars trained in Islamic sciences.

20 See for example a lecture by the well-known preacher Dr. Adnan Ibrahim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8Nz2LpiYVs (accessed on 26-01-2015).

21 Personal communication from his students at these universities.

22 http://www.salahsafa.blogspot.com

23 Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-’idlibī, ‘Aqā’īd al-’Āshā‘irah fī Ḥiwār hādī ma‘ Shubhāt al-Munāwi’īn (Cairo: Dār al-Salām, 2010).

24 Safar ibn ‘Abd Raḥmān al-Ḥawālī, Minhaj al-’Āshā‘irah fī al-‘Aqīdah (Riyadh: Dār al-Taybāt al-Kudharā, n.dt.).

25 Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-‘idlibī, Minhaj Naqd al-Matn ‘inda ‘ulamā’ al-Ḥadīth al-Nabuwī (Beirut: Dār al-’Afaq al-Jadīdah, 1983).

26 For example, a famous tradition transmitted by Abū Hurayrah claims that the prayer is nullified when a donkey, dog or woman passes in front of the praying men, ‘Ā’īsha scolded Abū Hurayrah for this. Another famous saying by her is that “anyone claiming Muḥammad saw Allah is lying, as God cannot be seen by human eyes”, whereby she refuted the still dominant belief that Muḥammad’s night journey to heaven was in a bodily form.

27 Wael B. Hallaq, “The Authenticity of Prophetic Ḥadîth: A Pseudo-Problem”, Studia Islamica, No. 89 (1999), 75-90.

28 A Mutawātir is a Ḥadīth or saying (khabar) which is transmitted in every stage of the stages of the sanad by multiple transmitters (general agreed-upon requirement is 10 transmitters), whereby it can be rationally be concluded that these transmitters could not have agreed upon a fabrication (’ikhtilāq). A Mutawātir provides necessary knowledge (al-‘ilm al-Ḍarūriyya). Any ṣaḥīḥ tradition that doesn’t confirm to these criteria, but has an authentic isnād, is of the status of Aḥād (singular transmission) only provides conditional knowledge (al-‘ilm al-Mutawaqqif), which needs further investigation. Maḥmūd al-Ṭaḥḥān,Taysīr Muṣṭalaḥ al-Ḥadīth (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Ma‘ārif li-lNushr wa al-Tawzī‘a, 1425 AH), 23-25, 27.

29 al-’idlibī, ibid, 33.

30 For the difference between’usūlī and ’athārī methodology, see Hallaq, ibid, 79-85. For a classical ’usūlī exposition, see Abū Ishāq al-Shāṭibī, al-Muwāfiqāt fī ’usūl al-Sharī‘ah (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, n.dt.), 4:3-21.

31 Jonathan A.C. Brown, Hadith: Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World (Oxford: Oneworld, 2009), 262.

32 Brown, ibid, 263. See the first two chapters in al-Ghazālī’s The Sunna of the Prophet between the People of the Fiqh and the People of the Ḥadīth (al-Sunnah al-Nubuwiyyahbayna ʾAhl al-Fiqh wa ʾAhl al-Ḥadīth) (translated by Aisha Bewley, Istanbul: Dar al-Taqwa,2009).

33 See footnote 19 above. Brown also points out that other known ‘Late Sunni Traditionalist’ scholars as ‘Alī Goma‘a also have written arguments against the Aisha-age-traditions, I hope to compare these in later writing.

34 http://shanfaraa.com/2013/07/salah-al-din-al-idlibi-on-the-age-of-aisha-r-when-shemarried-the-prophet-s/ (accessed on 10-09-2014). I thank prof. Fadel for his kind encouragement to translate and analyze al-’idlibī’s essay. The Arabic essay is added as Appendix I.

35 I have transliterated important words between brackets (), my additions to the text to amplify readability between [], and I stay as close to the Arabic sentence structures as possible by retaining the long sentences as much as possible. al-’idlibī refers to several sources without precise references (he doesn’t use footnotes in this essay), when I could trace the exact citations in the mentioned works I have added them in footnotes. I have added dates of death of the mentioned historians to show the period they were working in (which was mostly centuries after the compilers of Ḥadīth).

36 Translation of ṣalā Allah ‘alayhi wa salam, in the rest of the translation abbreviated as: (ṣA‘ws)

37 The contracting of marriage refers to the agreement between the guardians and/or prospected spouses on the wish to get married and on the amount of dowry. The root-word ‘aqada literally means making a knot (thus the English expression on marriage as “tying the knot” comes very close) and is used for contracts, agreements etc. It can be used to refer to the contracting of the marriage and the existing marriage itself as a form of contract. In classical Sharī‘ah constructs, betrothal (khiṭbah), contracting the marriage (‘aqd), and consummating it are separate acts whereby the first is an unofficial agreement between parties, the second an officializing agreement between parties with a dowry, while the latter is generally when the female is deemed physically ready. [al-Zuḥaylī, ibid, 7:23-26, 43-65. Brown, Misquoting Muhammad, 143]

38 Translation of raḍī Allah ‘anhā, in the rest of the translation abbreviated as: (rA‘)

39 Throughout most of the essay, al-’idlibī uses only al-Ba‘ath, the mission, to refer to the advent of the Prophetic mission. Although I will sometimes add ‘prophetic’ between brackets, I mostly just translate it literally with ‘the mission’, but it is best read as ‘advent to the Prophetic mission’. It is generally accepted that the Prophet received his first revelation in 610 CE, thirteen years before the Hijrah.

40 See footnote 3 above.

41 Here al-’idlibī dismisses the attempts by some apologists to try to find a weakness in the transmission chains of the Aisha-age-traditions to discredit them. See footnote 18 above.

42 Abū al-Qāsim ibn al-‘Asākir (d. 571 AH), Tārīkh Damashqi (Dār al-Fikr al-Ṭabā‘h wa al-Nushr wa al-Tawziya‘, 1995), 69:8. The isnād is not graded, thus its authenticity compared to the Aisha-age-traditions is unknown.

43 The history here means the Hijrah in 623 CE, when the Meccan Muslims migrated to Medina, which soon after was turned into the starting point of the Islamic calendar, and thus, history.

44 Abū Na‘īm al-’Aṣbihānī (d. 430 AH), Ma‘rifah al-Ṣaḥābah (Riyadh: Dār al-Waṭan li-lNushr, 1998), 6:3253. See also ibn al-‘Asākir, ibid, 69:9. Again the isnād is not graded, thus its authenticity compared to the Aisha-age-traditions is unknown.

45 al-Aṣbihānī, ibid, tradition 2843, 3:1134. Ungraded isnād.

46 ibn Sa‘ad (d. 230 AH), al-Ṭabaqāt al-Kubrā (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 1990), 3:291. Ungraded isnād.

47 ‘Azz al-Dīn ibn al-’Athīr (d. 630 AH), ’Asad al-Ghābah fī Ma‘rifah al-Ṣaḥābah (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 1994), tradition 6705, 7:7. Ungraded isnād.

48 ibn ‘Abd al-Birr (d. 463 AH), al-istī‘āb fī Ma‘rifah al-Ṣaḥābah (Beirut: Dār al-Jīl, 1992), tradition 6705, 7:7. Ungraded isnād. See also in al-‘Asākir, ibid, 69:8.

49 Qur’ān 54:46.

50 al-‘Asqalānī, ibid, 7:290. Isnād graded ṣaḥīḥ.

51 Shams al-Dīn al-Qurṭubī, Jāma‘a al-Aḥkām al-Qur’ān (Cairo: Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyah, 1964), 17:146. Ungraded isnād. The battle of Badr occurred in 2 AH (624 CE).

52 Bin Sayd al-Mursī, al-Muḥkām wa al-Muḥīṭ al-‘Aẓim (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyyah, 2000), 7:625-626 (under the heading al-Shīn wa al-Bā’, the root of al-Jāriyah is jarā).

53 ibn Manẓūr al-’Anṣārī, Lisān al-‘Arab (Beirut: Dār Ṣādr, 1414 AH), 7:81.

54 I interfere that it refers to the coming and going of her menstrual period, although by my knowledge it is unusual to use it for such.

55 Qur’ān 15:94

56 Ibn Kathīr al-Damashqī (d. 774 AH), al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyah (min al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah li-ibn Kathīr) (Beirut: Dār al-Ma‘rifah li-lṬabā‘h wa al-Nushr wa al-Tawzī‘, 1976), 1:454. Ungraded isnād.

57 Meaning here the conversion of ’Asmā’.

58 Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī (d. 310 AH), Tārīkh al-Rusul wa al-Mulūk (Beirut: Dār al-Turāth, 1387

AH), 3:425-426. Ungraded isnād.

59 Abū al-Qāsim al-Ṭabarānī, al-Mu‘jam al-Kabīr (Cairo: Maktabah ibn Taymiyah, 1994),

23:23. Nu‘īm bin al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī, al-Mustadarak ‘alā al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘ilmiyah, 1999), tradition 2704, 2:181. Isnād graded ṣaḥīḥ.

60 Wahm is a technical indication within the classical Ḥadith sciences: ”When an error (wahm) is discovered through external indications (al-Qarā’īn) and the gathered the paths [of transmission], then it is defective (al-Mu‘allal)“, al-‘Asqalānī, Nukhbah al-Fikr fī Muṣṭalaḥ Ahl al-Athār (Cairo: Dār al-Ḥadīth, 1997), 8.

Dr. Shaykh al-Din al-idilibi (May Allah continue to benefit many by him)


Filed under Uncategorized

Mohamed Hijab’s excellent argument against the Qur’an being uncreated.

“Indeed, We have made it an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

Mohamed Hijab who is a known U.K based Muslim has recently put forward some excellent arguments against the idea of the Qur’an being eternal and uncreated.

Now to be fair I want to say from the outset that Mohamed Hijab (as far as I know) believes that the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated.

However, it doesn’t seem that he has pondered the implications of his kalaam argument on the subject of the Qur’an being makhluq (created).

Listen carefully to the exchange between Marwan and Mohamed Hijab

The contingency argument.

@1:28:36 listen to Marwan’s question about pantheism and contingency argument.

@1:30:18 Mohamed Hijab gives his reply listen carefully.

“This is a book and it’s made out of parts and the parts are the pages of the book right. Correct? So these are the pages of the book. I dunno what book. ‘Jewish historical society of England’ …..This is a book right and this is the whole of the book correct? and it’s made out of parts correct? Now if I pick a part out. Now if I take all parts out of this book does it remain as a book? It the parts are taken out than the whole thing is taken out. If that’s conceivable that parts taken out the whole thing is taken out than there is no way that this thing that I’m talking about is necessary and independent. Because necessary and independent means it’s always there and it can never be any other way. It’s a simple as that. You said, well if it’s inter-dependent anything which is inter-dependent by definition is dependent because what does the word inter-dependent mean? Interdependent means things which rely upon each other. So, if in order for this book to exist, there’s an inter-dependence or each page relies upon the existence of other pages in this book in order to exist. Then what we’re saying is this thing is dependent because everything interdependent is by definition dependent. What is dependence? Something which relies upon something else for its existence. What is inter-dependence? Something which relies upon something else in order to exist. So in many ways what your saying is if we admit that its dependent than khalas (finished) it cannot be dependent and necessary at the same time.”

@1:33:16 “How do we describe the kul here. How do we describe the whole of this book? How do we describe the whole of this book? We describe it through it’s parts right? Now if I say I just dissembled all it’s parts and it’s maybe what 3-400 pages and I’ve scattered them around they still exist but they exist in a different form. Now what I’m saying is the fact that I can re-arrange them like this I can you see this hundred, I dunno let me see 208 pages of this book yeah. If I take the 232 pages and make page 1 and page 232 and make it like munaqis (opposite) so instead of 1,2,3,4,5 it’s 232, 231, etc., etc. I’ve re-arranged it. The fact that now I can rearrange this book means there is nothing necessary about the arrangement and the form of this book. There is nothing necessary about it at all.”

@1:34:27 “The book as it is the way in which the book is now from 1 to 232, the way in which the book is like that the form the sura the shaqil the hakel -what ever word you want to use, the form of the book as it is now can be re-arranged. Now let me give you an example because I feel, I feel like the issue here is we don’t know the difference between contingency in this necessity. Necessity: 2 +2=4. 2+2=4. Is there any way 2+2=4 can be arranged any other way. Can it re-arrange in any other way? Can 2+2=anything other than 4? Which means its necessary. So its impossible to re-arrange 2+2 to equal anything other than 4. It’s eternally that way, it’s necessarily that way and it will continue being that way. It cannot be any other way. Now this is not the same with the arrangement of the parts of this book. The arrangement of the parts of this book can be other ways. This book itself can be another way. Instead of this colour; which I will describe as beige I dunno maybe I’m colour blind. It could have been blue. I can actually paint it right now. I can make it blue. I can , you want me to do? It looks like a historic book I dun want to ruin it. But I can change this book. There is nothing necessary about this book. Now you might say well, if we define necessity as something susceptibility, destructibility and generation. Yeah? And then in the closed system of the universe energy cannot be destroyed. Cannot be destroyed and therefore the atoms will take another form. I’m saying. I am not defining. I’m not defining contingency in only that way. I’m defining contingency in three ways. Number 1. Something that can be any other way. Number one yeah? Number 2. Something susceptibility to destruction and generation destruction yeah? And number 3. Something which relies upon something else for its existence. Now even if you argued that well this cannot be really destroyed because it’s atoms will take other form. I’m saying its still not necessary because it can be arranged in another way. The parts of this whole can be arranged in a way which is currently not arranged. It can be a way which is currently not/is. So which means that it, it meets the criterion of contingency; because it can be another way.”

@1:37:24 “You are confusing eternality and necessity. O.K? It’s conceivable that something can be eternal and not necessary. It’s conceivable how so? Because something can be eternal but rely upon something necessary. And that’s why the ‘ulemah of Islam they differentiated between what is referred to as wajibun an nafsi and wajibun al ghayri which is necessary for its own sake and necessary or in and of itself and necessary because of something else. So for example if I were to say. You have a sun. Let’s say the sun is necessary. The sun yani. Shams yeah? And it’s rays are contingent based-dependent upon the sun. The fact that the rays exist and they are contingent on the sun doesn’t’ mean that just because they are both eternal. The fact that the rays exist and are contingent on the sun doesn’t’ mean that the rays are necessary just because their eternal because they are dependent upon something which is necessary in this case, the sun or the eternal. You get it?

@1:38:37 “Yeah that’s his Ibn Cena beliefs. Yeah well Islamic refutation of the universe being eternal is clearly against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Al Ghazali had this kind of refutation if you wanna.”

Marwan ask about the attributes of Allah (swt).

@1:39:00 “We affirm all the attributes of God through these kind of argumentations. That is why, there is a point where you need like the Rahma of Allah. The fact that he is ghafu and afuw and raheem and all that stuff. That needs to be affirmed through revelation.”

Marwan ask are these attributes necessary or contingent?

@1:39:19 ‘Yeah all attributes of Allah are necessary.” @1:40:25 “We don’t use the word dependent it’s being controlled by the irada (intention) of Allah. By the will of God. So the verb all the attributes of God are controlled by the will of God. If Allah wants to speak yeah? If Allah wants to speak he wills that and he does that.”

Marwan so they are contingent upon his will?

Listen to how uncomfortable is the response of Mohamed Hijab. The sudden shift. Also notice that Mohamed Hijab does not affirm that Allah is speaking, or is speaking eternally. He attributes the speaking to his will! Al hamdulillah! Thank you!

@1:40:44 “We don’t need to use the word contingent. They are controlled by his will.

I believe at this point Marwan doesn’t really seem to buy it. A quick glance of the ideas upward and simply responds . ‘O.K’

The arguments brought by Mohamed Hijab absolutely decimate the idea that the Qur’an is uncreated.

It’s message is dependent upon asbaab an nuzul (occasion of revelation) which conceivably could have been different. According to our brothers from the Sunni denomination it has text that have been abrogated and that is dependent upon what abrogates and what is abrogated. It is composed of letters and words and sentences that are dependent upon structure to have coherent meaning. It’s conceivable that the Ahruf /Qir’aat of the Qur’an could be more or less than what they are. It is conceivable that the Qur’an could have been revealed in a language other than Arabic. It is conceivable that the Qur’an itself cannot be necessary because it is conceivable that Allah (swt) could have had the Torah or any other revelation completely intact and reach us until this very day.

In the words of Fakhr al-Din Al-Razi:

“The impossibility of a word which is composed of letters and sounds being eternal is self-evident to the mind for two reasons:

The first that a word cannot be a word unless its letters are sequential. The letter uttered before the last that is uttered is originated, and if something’s being originated is affirmed, its eternity is then impossible. So for the letter following the end of the first, there is no doubt that is originated.

The second is that, if those letters from which the word is composed occurred in one go, the word cannot be. A word composed of three letters can occur in any one of six combinations. If the letters occurred altogether, the words occurring in some of those combinations will not be better than it’s occurring in any of the rest. Alternatively if the letters occurred in succession then the word is originated.”  Source: (Al-Tafsir al-kabir (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Illmiyyah, 2nd edition, 1:P20.)

Fakhr al-Din took fellow Sunni Muslims of the Hanbali school to task when he says,

“These people are so low as to not deserve mention among the group of the learned. It happened one day that I said to one of them: “If Allah spoke these, then either He spoke them in one go, or in succession. The first is void because the speaking of all these letters in one go will not convey orderly composition which is a combination in sequence. It necessarily follows that this composition combined with these successive letters cannot by themselves be Allah’s speech. The second is void, because if Allah spoke them in succession then it will be originated.’ When the man heard this statement |of mine|, he said: ‘It is obligatory for us to affirm and pass on’, i.e., we affirm that the Qur’an is eternal and pass by this statement that we have heard. At that point, I wonder greatly at the safety of this speaker. Source: (Al-Tafsir al-kabir (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Illmiyyah, 2nd edition, 27, 187-88)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Ibadi’s disavow Uthman, Muaviya and Ali….about that.

“That was a nation which has passed on. It will have what it earned, and you will have what you have earned. And you will not be asked about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 2:133-134)

“And those who came after them say: “Our Lord! Forgive us, and our brethren who came before us into the Faith, and leave not, in our hearts, rancor (or sense of injury) against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful.” (Quran 59:10)

So some of our brothers from among the Salafiyah go rampaging through the books and works of our scholars. They will find among them those who disavow Uthman or those who disavow Muaviya or those who disavow Ali. We will bring evidence from the books of the scholars from our brothers from among the Ahl Sunnah to show you the double standards of their claims.

“Look you see these Ibadites! They disavow the companions! They were all loved by each other and we love them all too! We would never say such things about the companions!”

About that…

remember you cannot unsee what you are about to see and you will be held accountable.

Salih Al-Sheikh, in his explanation of the Tahawi creed, said that the fighting companions fell into minor disbelief, and they entered into the characteristics of disbelief!

Al-Albani says that the fighting companions after the Messenger of Allah have no refuge from calling them infidels!

In the book of Al-Sharuh Al-Wafiah on Al-Tahawiyyah it states that the Companions fight each other. It may be lesser kufr, or it may be greater kufr (i.e. polytheism) and that depends on the level of hatred!

Shaykh Ubaid bin Abdullah Al-Jabri says in his book Imdad Al-Qari that the fighting Companions are falling into blasphemy!

Shaykh Ibn Al-Qayyim Yusri Al-Sayyid Muhammad in his work Jami’ al-Fiqh, by Lisri al-Sayyid, stated that the fighting companions had fallen into disbelief by their actions!

Shaykh Abu Abdullah Mustafa bin al-Adawi mentioned that the fighting companions are falling into kufr al-Amal!

It was stated in the book Fath Al-Bara’i om in his explanation of Sahih Al-Bukhari that the fighting the Companions are considered to be upon blasphemy And that the misfortune of disobedience may lead to greater sins, and it is feared that he will not be sealed with the seal of Islam!

Shaykh Ibn al-Uthaymeen says that the Companions fighting each other is considered blasphemy, but it does not expel one out of the religion!

Ibn Taymiyyah says that the companions who fought each other are called infidels, and it is a restricted designation!

It was stated in the book, The Masa’il of Imam Ahmad that Ali bin Al-Jaad says that Muawiyah died upon other than Islam!!!

The Salafiyah will end up declaring all the Companions to be unbelievers altogether, according to their claim that whoever rejects the Hadith of Ahad is an infidel! Sheikh Al-Ghazali says that none of the companions except this!

Salafiyah have declared one of the companions who rebelled against Caliph Uthman to be an infidel!

Shaykh Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab describes a group of the Companions as ignorant, evil and rebellious!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, in his book The Throne of the Most Merciful, says that the Companions did takfir upon one another and this is well known!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, in his book Iqtidaa al-sirat al-mustaqeem, criticizes the honorable companion Abdullah bin Umar (May Allah be pleased with him), who is the strongest person in following the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah!

Shaykh Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab had strong criticism for a number of the companions!

Shaykh Ibn Al-Uthaymeen (famous for his beer drinking fatwa) said in his book Explanation of Al-Aqeedah Al-Wasitiyyah says that there is no doubt that the companions committed theft, they committed fornication some times with horses and sometimes without horses, and they even drank alcohol!

What about this? It was mentioned in the book Akhbar Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah that the blood of Uthman is divided into three. A third on the mother of the believers Aisha, and a third on Talha, and a third on Ali bin Abi Talib! That darkness was over each of them!

Shaykh Ibn Baz responds to Ibn Hajar and claims that the act of the companion Abdullah bin Umar in seeking blessing from the relics of the saints (tabarruk) leads to polytheism. And here Ibn Baz declared himself more knowledgeable than the great companion Abdullah bin Umar!

Shaykh Ibn Al-Uthaymeen once again says that the Companions are not all just, so whoever is known for an insult is not just! Some of them committed theft, drank wine, committed fornication with a horse, and fornication with other than a horse!

An explicit accusation and takfir without hinting that Ali did not kill Uthman except that he considered him an infidel!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmoo’ al-Fatawa mentioned that the Companions fought and cursed each other and declared each other infidels, and their statements concerning this is well known!

Accusing The Mother of the Believers Aisha (r.a) of killing Caliph Uthman and she was responsible for inciting people to kill him! Saying kill Nathla, for he has disbelieved! (Nathla was a Jew). Accused of likening Uthman to a Jew named Nathla.

In a commentary explaining the aqidah of Tahawi. Muawiyah bin Abi Sufyan is blamed for approving the insult of Imam Ali, and by approving it he insulted Ali in Iraq and the Levant!

Muawiyah used to curse Ali and ordered him to be cursed on the pulpits and continued to curse him even after the death of Ali!

They would not give anything except after disavowing Imam Ali and testifying against him with hypocrisy!

It is proven that Muawiyah was ordering Saad to insult Imam Ali and he explained that in detail and you will find among the Salafiyyah those who defend Muawiyah and those trying to abuse the text!

It was stated in the book Sunan Ibn Majah that Muawiyah used to insult and curse Imam Ali, and the reason was due to worldly matters between them!

It was stated in the book on the explanation of Sahih Muslim that Muawiyah ordered Saad to insult Imam Ali! And with all this, you find the Salafiyyah defending and fighting for Muawiya, and it was safer for them to desist from that period in its entirety. But no, not them! One standard for them and one standard for others. They use double standards in sedition and make the common people think that they are the lovers of the Companions!

Banu Umayyah used to insult and curse Imam Ali on their platforms! And the Salafiyyah defend the injustice of the Umayyads and cursing of Imam Ali!

According to Imam Al-Qurtubi’s testimony Muawiyah insults Imam Ali and commands people to insult him! And guess who is defending those who curse and insult the Companions?

The great Companions used to curse the other great Companions, and many are the Salafi who conceal this and pretend to love the Companions, while in reality Companions are innocent of them.

Imam Ali is cursed, yet the one who curses him he is considered trustworthy and honest! Yet look how they assault the Ibadi school. Where is the balance? The equal weights?

Raja bin Haydah bin Jarwal, considered a man of trust with those who attack us. He denounced the just caliph Umar bin Abdul Aziz for leaving cursing and cursing of Imam Ali on the pulpits. Which by the way this was at the urging of the Ibadi delegation. (Thank you Muslim majority for conveniently leaving that tid bit out)

This man was cursing and cursing Imam Ali, and despite all this, he is proven trustworthy and has the trust of Ibn Mu’in and Ahmad bin Hanbal!

Al-Hajjaj beats people who do not curse Imam Ali and punishes them with flogging!

Hariz bin Othman, it was known about him that he insulted Imam Ali, and he was famous for that. However, when Ahmed bin Hanbal was asked about him, he said about him: trustworthy, trustworthy, trustworthy!

A question to the Salafiyyah, On what consistent basis do you attack the Ibadi when some of our scholars and some among us disavow Ali and yet you keep defending the Umayyads whose Sunnah was to curse Imam Ali in the streets and on the pulpits?!

Now imagine dear readers that we take a time machine back to the Ummayad period. We have those among the Ibadi who disavow Ali for arbitration and killing the believers at Nahrawan. Meanwhile what will be going on in the Ummayad territories? Cursing Imam Ali on the pulpits as a necessary Sunnah. Who is reviling who? Who is disavowing who?

Ibn al-Qayyim criticizes the Companions for masturbating during their battles, and criticizes their women! Certainly these are the ethics of the downward road!

Marwan bin Al-Hakam used to insult and curse Imam Ali as well as his two sons Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein on the pulpits!

Caliph Uthman begged Ali bin Abi Talib and Talha to defend him when his house was besieged. However, he was not as supported as it should have been. And Marwan was cursing the people and antagonizing them more! Why didn’t the companions support Uthman?!

The Salafiyyah spread lies among the people that Muawiyah loves Ali and takes care of him, to the extent that if the two groups fight, it is because of the excessive longing between the brothers, so if the night comes, they congregate until the morning, then they shed crocodile tears to deceive the common people! Here, their lies are exposed!

The Salaafiyah are deceiving the common people by saying that Muawiyah did not order Sa`d to insult Mu`awiyah, and that his purpose was not to insult, but rather he wanted to test Sa‘d, Yet the deception is clear!

Muawiya used to send his agents to interrogate people and disavow Imam Ali and curse him, and if they did not respond to his request, they would be sentenced to death!

Muawiyah orders Hajr and his companions to disavow Ali and curse him, but they refuse to do so and are killed! This is Muawiyah the one we are supposed to say (May Allah be pleased with his deeds) after his name!

A torrent of insults and cursing of Imam Ali, and this insult remained the Sunna of the Umayyads, and Muawiyah swore that their young ones would grow old and their old ones would grow older (they would be granted prolonged life) because of cursing Imam Ali!

And the Salafiyyah want it to be remained concealing from the common people and defend the Umayyads of the Nawasib! The truth has appeared and revealed the hidden!

 Here is is mentioned the killing of Hujr bin Adi al-Kindi and his companions by Muawiyah Al-Baghy and his army of miscreants!


Al-Hajjaj orders the muezzin of Imam Ali to disavow Imam Ali, but he refuses and thus is killed!

Abdullah Al-Jabreen admits that the Umayyads insulted and cursed Imam Ali on the pulpits until the era of Umar bin Abdul Aziz. Then he said that people began to mention the virtues of Imam Ali, but even than he was upset that they alienated the people from the Umayyads

Muawiya’s first act after the death of Al-Hassan bin Ali was to perform Hajj and ascend to the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah in Medina to curse Imam Ali! Imagine the minbar of light and barakah being used to pour out vomit and hate!

The Banu Umayyah, they had the vile practice that if they heard that someone had named his son Ali, they killed him!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah al-Harrani states about Ali that many of the companions and followers hated him, insulted him and fpught him!

Ahl al-Sunnah excused some of those who killed Ali. And them themselves openly insulted and cursed him!

Ibn Al-Qayyim recounts the story of Al-Hajjaj in cursing Imam Ali and ordering people to curse him in the markets in front of the shops!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah proves the infighting and killing among the companions, and each group despising the other!

The Salafiyah tell us that the mother of the believers Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her) swears by Allah that Abu Huraira lied! Is this the amount of respect for the Companions have for each other according to the Salafiyah.

In the books of Ahl Sunnah a sahabah is accused of adultery!

A Companion eats the head of another Companion!

Salafiyah claim that what Ahmed bin Hanbal did for Islam was not done by anyone other than him not even Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq! (May Allah be pleased with him!) Are these words said in truth about the best companion of the Blessed Messenger (saw)?!

The sahaba used to drink wine! (After becoming Muslims)

A Companion Drinks Alcohol!(After embracing Islam)

A companion leads the people in the morning prayer, four units while in a state of sloppy drunkenness, and says to the crowd of worshipers, “Shall I add more for you?”

Umar bin Al-Khattab appoints a companion who drinks alcohol in Bahrain and asks the companions to testify to his drunkenness'. This is how the Salafiyah convey to us about the companions challenging and calling each other out like this!

They say the companions were cheaters and that Abu Hurarira was the chief of them in cheating! Imagine! And there are among the Ahl Sunnah who have the audacity to call the People of Truth and Straightness as Non Muslims?!

What does it mean by calling a noble companion a thief?

See what is said about the companions here:

Who were those who persisted in their ignorance and evil, then Muawiyah banished them from the Levant? ! Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab answers you!

Shaykh Ibn Baz accuses the companions of polytheism!

Shaykh Ibn Baz’s ruling on cursing some of the companions! Surprise Surprise!

Ahl Sunnah say that Abu Hurairah was known for taking bribes! Who attacks the companions?

Shaykh Ibn Al-Uthaymeen, states that not all the Companions are not all just! In them there is rank debauchery!

Ibn Al-Atheer describes the companion Abu Musa as a fool! Who respects the companions?

Yahya Ibn Mu’een insults the companion Ammar bin Yasir and follows up his insults with curses! Who respects the companions?

Umar ibn al-Khattab, May Allah be pleased with him, called the People of the Book al-Faruq. Is this true, ya Salafiyah?

Ahl Sunnah defaming Umar Ibn Al-Khattab! (May Allah be pleased with him), by saying that he was distracted by clapping in the markets!! Who respects the companions? Only the people who have no haya insult Umar (r.a)

They imagine that the companions of the Messenger of Allah are flirting with a beautiful woman while they are praying! Is this the state of the companions of the Messenger of Allah with you?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah accuses Imam Ali that his war was not for Allah and His Messenger, and if it was for Allah and His Messenger, victory would have been for him! The Ibadi position is that Ali came short for going against the hukm of Allah (swt) and later slaughtered the Muslims of Nahrawan. Allah knows best his ending.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that Ali deems the blood of Muslims lawful, and thus he is out and out a Kafir.

Al-Waleed bin Juma’ is from the narrators of Sahih Muslim and Ibn Hazm says his hadeeth is defective and Al-Waleed is a doomed man!

Here they are defaming the Prophet of Allah (saw), his honorable companions, and his pure wives!

Another wretched statement!

If Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave girl, where would he place his hand?! Who honors the companions?

Defaming the great companion Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him).

They claim the Companion Abdullah bin Umar called Abu Hurairah a flat liar!

Among the terms of the reconciliation between Muawiyah and Al-Hassan, after he was betrayed and almost killed, is that Muawiya stop cursing Imam Ali in Al-Hassan’s presence!

Shi’a tend to think Al Hassan’s reconciliation with Muawiya was wrong but that Ali’s reconciliation with Muawiya was fine and dandy!

One of Ahl Sunnah says that the faith of Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq and the faith of Iblees are one! No one says this except for someone who has left the fold of Islam. And the Sunnis excused those who killed Imam Ali and openly insulted and cursed him!

The claim that Fatima Al-Zahraa was a lying woman and lied to Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq, and his narration was received, then she deserted him until she died!

None other than Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah criticizes the “Rightly Guided Caliphs”!

According to the testimony of Ibn Katheer!

More from Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that Ali fought and killed many Muslims who perform the prayers and pay the zakat, and the matter of blood is more severe! Why is if it an Ibadi scholar says it it is an offense but if Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says it is fine?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that in Ali’s caliphate there was no mercy, rather people were killed and they curse each other, and they did not have a sword against the infidels, but rather the infidels coveted them and took a country from them and their money.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that the time of Ali is a time of sedition, and there was no general imam!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that the Companions who fought Ali, vilified him and cursed him were more knowledgeable than those who supported Ali and cursed Uthman. Who is disavowing who here?

The predecessors of the Salafiyah are those who did not consider Imam Ali to be the caliph of the Muslims until the time of Ahmed bin Hanbal! Think about that! Do not get it twisted. The Imami Shi’i never accepted the first three Caliphs. The Ahl Sunnah the fourth until Imam Ahmed rehabilitated the image of Ali among them. Where as the Ibadi are the one’s who recognized all four from the beginning! Learn the truth!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah defines the Sunnis as the ones who established the succession of the three caliphs! Where is Ali?

The jurists of the Hejaz and Iraq from the two groups of theologians and the people of opinion, including Malik, Al-Shafi’i, Al-Awzai, and the majority of Muslims and theologians, agreed that Ali was right in his war in Siffin and in the Battle of the Camel, and that those who fought him were unjust oppressors ! (i.e. Muawiyah and his army, Our Mother Aisha, Talha and Al-Zubayr)

Muawiyah tempts the child killer Ibn Arta’ah to kill Ali bin Abi Talib and promises him the best of this world and the Hereafter! But remember Ahl Sunnah will tell you they loved each other as brothers! Of course they did!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that Umar is less mistaken than Ali, and they found the weakness in Ali’s sayings more, and they found contradiction in Ali’s sayings more than the contradictory sayings of Umar!

Ibn Asakir The Syrian Sunni Islamic scholar says that Marwan Ibn Al-Hakam used to curse Imam Ali on the pulpit every Friday for six years, then he was dismissed and reinstated again, and he did not stop insulting him!

Muawiyah mobilizes the people of Basra to fight Imam Ali.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that many of the Companions were known to have slandered Ali!

Ibn Hajar Al Asqalni openly quotes the things Ibn Taymiyyah has said about the companions that Ibn Taymiyyah and his supporters want to hide from people.

Look what the Hanbali Imam Ibn Qudama said about Ibn Muljim killing Imam Ali!

Al-Dhahabi: The Messenger of Muawiyah offers Hajr and his companions the innocence of a man! And the man is Imam Ali However, why amputate and hide the texts?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah is skeptical whether Imam Ali memorized the Qur’an or not?

Al-Tabari: The Messenger of Muawiyah asks Hujr and his companions to disavow Ali and curse him, and tells them that we have been commanded to do so!

Imam Ali stayed in the caliphate for five years or more, so people ate and drank the blood of the innocent, lived off the sweat of the weak, and the tears of the bereaved, as well as the suffering of the orphans and the miserable!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah’s opinion laid bare regarding the leadership of Imam Ali and those who fought Imam Ali and those who did not fight with him!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, the three caliphs agreed upon by the Muslims, and the sword was unsheathed against the infidels and kept from the people of Islam. Ali, the Muslims did not agree to pledge allegiance to him, but rather sedition occurred during his reign, and the sword was kept from the infidels and unleashed on the people of Islam! In fact I (Prima-Qur’an) being non-partisan am inclined to agree with Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah here. It is a point against the Shi’i as the reign of Ali was not one of barakah, but of blood shed of believers and deep divisions that have lasted until this very day. If I say it as an Ibadi I will be called Kharijite where as Ibn Taymiyyah makes a good observation and gets a free pass.

Al-Abbas describes Ali as a treacherous sinner and a traitor; and ask Umar to judge between them? ! Hey Ahl Sunnah what is the ruling on the treacherous, the sinner, the traitor? Where is the love of the Companions?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah: Hating Ali does not harm faith one bit!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah: The preachers of Morocco mention Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, and they mention Muawiyah, but they do not mention Ali. It is clear that they hated him and cursed him!

The whole of Banu Umayyah, are a clan of Ali haters, all except for Umar bin Abdul Aziz, the just!

Al-Awza’i: We did not accept the giving until we witnessed Ali’s hypocrisy and disavowed him! Is this the love of the Companions?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah: Imam Ali did not show the religion of Islam during his caliphate, and their enemies among the infidels and Christians coveted them! If the religion of Islam did not appear during Ali’s caliphate, then what religion did appear during his caliphate?

The Salafi Shaykh Abdel Moneim Al-Shahat states: “The reason for Ali’s defeat was caused by his greed for the caliphate and his love for leadership!”

How does he know what is in Ali ibn Abu Talib’s heart? Rather the reason for Ali’s defeat was going against the Amr of Allah (swt) in the Qur’an and in all my encounters with the Shi’i they Shi’i flee from this point!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah expresses what is in his heart towards Imam Ali here:

Ibn Hajar in Al-Durar Al-Kamina transmits from Ibn Taymiyyah his visciousness towards Imam Ali!

Here they are – slandering the Mothers of the Believers, the Messenger of Allah, and Umar ibn al-Khattab!!!

The book of Musnad Imam Ahmad: Caliph Uthman directs his words to his companions while he is besieged and says to them: “Why are you killing me?!” A question for the Sunnis, why do you spread rumors among the people that the one who killed Uthman were rabble and bandits who came from Egypt?!

And why are you basically exposing the sedition of the Companions?! These books expose your lies!

They have admitted to fabricating false hadiths about Uthman!

Marwan killed Talha, one of the so called ten promised paradise, and because of him, events unfolded to lead to what what happened to Uthman, and he was severely cursing and abusing Imam Ali. Despite all that the Ahl Sunnah praise him.

Amr Ibn Al-Aas once stabbed the caliph Uthman and once demanded the blood of Uthman. The books of Ahl Sunnah expose their lies!

In The Book of The Comprehensive Explanations on the Tahawi Creed: They Criticize Uthman and Deplore His Killers!

Imam Al-Shafi’i says Imam Ali that he did not take revenge on blood or money! That is, those who participated in the killing of the caliph Uthman, Imam Ali did not take revenge on them because they were not in the wrong! Is this correct?

Ibn Qutayba criticizes Caliph Uthman so is he a kharijite?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah at it again! This time he slanders both Uthman and Ali!!

The companions in Kufa slander Uthman, some of whom witnessed Badr! Obviously they did not believe the Qur’an teaches that all companions go to paradise.

The companion Abd al-Rahman bin Udays was among those who pledged allegiance under the tree. He was the commander of those coming from Egypt to besiege Uthman! And many are those among the Sunni who enjoy sedition and lie to the people that those coming from Egypt are nothing but rabble and deviants!

Remember the Salafi preacher who went on air and cursed the companion  Amr b. al-Hamiq al-Khuzāʿī  for stabbing Uthman in the chest 9 times! Even after he found out the man really was a companion he did a 180 but still maintained all the companions are just. Then the conclusion can only be that Uthman was killed with justice. Or the companion killed Uthman without justice with is a major major sin. It is a difficulty no doubt about it.

The Ahl Sunnah scholar says about the companion Al-Walid bin Uqba, Uthman’s brother to his mother, that his beard drips with wine!

Al-Kamil fi at-Tarikh edited to hide the truth from people!!

A complete chapter titled: “Why people denounced Uthman!” Imagine if Ibadi’s wrote a book like that with a title like this!

In the Sunni books the mother of the believers, Aisha (r.a) is stated to have said: “Kill Nathla, for he has committed blasphemy,” Nathla meaning Uthman!

Uthman spoiled the innermost secret of the divorced (freed-slaves)!

With in the book of Ibn Qutayba we find more censures against Caliph Uthman by a number of companions!

Aisha (r.a) the mother of the believers orders the killing of the companion Uthman bin Hanif!

Accusations of the murder of Caliph Uthman distributed among three: Aisha, Talha and Imam Ali!

The honorable companion Abd al-Rahman bin Udays al-Balawi who was among those who witnessed the conquest and was among those who pledged allegiance under the tree, and we see clearly his role in relation to Caliph Uthman!

The Sahabah themselves participated in the revolt against Caliph Uthman, as well as the sons of the Companions! Enough of your one sided views of history and delving into sedition and saying that that the Muslims were so stupid, so unaware, so aloof that Caliph Uthman was taken by surprise by unknown revolutionaries and unknown people!! All the while laughing at the common people and praising Muawiya and the Umayyads and telling the events to fit your lies to serve your agenda!

Al-Dhahabi, himself one of the predecessors of Al-Wahalia, mentions how Muslims resented Uthman! Where is the respect for the Companions and the shedding of crocodile tears to serve your malicious agenda?

A companion of the people of the allegiance of Al-Radwan and the leader of the revolutionaries was against Uthman!

In the Kitab al-Futuh: Aisha calls for the death of Uthman!

Umm Habiba appeals to Ali bin Abi Talib to protect Uthman and respond to her, unless he is dishonorable and miserable, meaning Uthman! And what is the greatest and most grievous attack against the Companions, other than that?

It was asked of the mother of the believers Aisha, “Do you not like a man from among the divorced men who disputes with Muhammed’s companions regarding the caliphate?” So what did Aisha say? !

Musannaf bin Abi Shaybah: Their are kings from the evil of kings, and the first of these kings is Muawiyah!

“Jaafar died in the midst of the caliphate of Muawiyah, may Allah curse him!”

“Yazid bin Muawiyah, may Allah curse them both!” More cursing and curses! Why all this cursing? Wasn’t Mu’awiyah one of the Companions?!

These books expose your hypocrisy!

The books of Ahl Sunnah are filled with it. May Allah (swt) curse so and so.

The Sunnis praise Muawiya and that he is the best of kings, then they add to this by saying that he approves of insulting Imam Ali! Have you gone mad?! Imam Ali is cursed and the one who curses him is said to be the best of kings!? WoW!

Let Imam Al-Suyuti quotes the words of Aisha (r.a) telling us what she really thinks about Muawiyah!

Imam Al-Shafi’i: list four sahabah whose testimony is not accepted! Testimony is taken from the truthful so what is the state of those four sahabah? These books expose their lies.

Marwan bin Al-Hakam, the first man with the caliph Uthman, hits the companion Talha bin Obaidullah with an arrow, and he kills him!

Shocker! Muawiyah bin Abi Sufyan and wine! Your books expose your hypocrisy.

Two companions insulted Muawiyah, and Imam Ali declared Muawiyah is upon misguidance!

The cause of the death of Imam al-Nisa’i, May Allah have mercy on him, at the hands of the fanatical Banu Umayyah!

How did Imam Al-Nisa’i die!? The word of truth may cost you your life, but Allah’s promise is true! The curse of hatred, hypocrisy and criminality!

The position of Sunni scholars towards Muawiya!!

The books of the Salafiyah declare Muawiya to be an infidel.

The Insulting and cursing of Muawiya and Uthman in Sunni books.,The Muhajireen and the Ansar did not support Uthman.

Ali bin Al-Jaad swears that Muawiyah died in a state other than Islam! Ali bin Al Ja’ad is a narrator in Bukhari and Imam Bukhari has taken some 13 narrations from him in his Sahih.

A fatal statement that afflicts Muawiya and which breaks those who glorify him!

The ignorant who fabricate hadiths in favour of Muawiya!!

The Companion Hajr bin Uday who witnessed such battles such as the pivotal conflict of Al-Qadisiyah, Al-Jamal, and Siffin, and he was a Shiite of Ali, who was killed by Muawiyah’s order in Damascus!

If Ali Ibn Abu Talib had his hands drenched with the blood of the Muslims there is no doubt that Muawiyah bathed in it!

Muhammad bin Abi Bakr Al-Siddiq was killed on the orders of Muawiya. He was inserted into the stomach of a donkey and then burned! Shall we say “May Allah be pleased with such a man” and expect people to enter into Islam?!

Muawiyah was kind to some of the servants of Al-Hassan, and thus, Al-Hassan died of poisoned! Your books expose your hypocrisy!

The killing of the companion Hajar bin Uday and his companions was mentioned with glee by Muawiya and his army!

Muawiya was the uncle of the believers!? With family like that who needs family!

Question for your Sunni friends: Lil game of trivia. Was Muawiya truthful in accusing Imam Ali?! If so Ali is a brigand that usurps rule without right. If not Muawiya is a bold face liar.

Al-Hassan Al-Basri states: Four qualities were in Muawiyah, if he had only one of them, he would have been disastrous!

Muawiyah drank what? “Then my father handed it to him and he said, “I have not drunk it since the Messenger of Allah (saw) prohibited it!” Drink what? Do not deceive people and say that he used to drink milk, because milk was not prohibited by the Messenger of Allah (saw), so what is the forbidden drink that Muawiyah indulged in according to your books?

Ibn Abbas (r.a) replies to Muawiya after an exchange that your cousin, i.e. Uthman bin Affan, was rebuked by the Muslims, so they killed him! Notice that Ibn Abbas (r.a) doesn’t say rebels or some unknowns killed Uthman but that he was killed by the Muslims!

Who killed Ammar bin Yassir? What did the Blessed Messenger (saw) say about those who would kill Ammar (r.a)?

Muawiyah and the novels of wine! In Sunni books.

Muawiyah was a scribe between the Prophet and the Arabs, not as Sunni’s claim that he was a scribe of the revelation!!

And it came in the book Musnad of Imam Ahmad that he was ordering them to consume money between them unjustly and to kill themselves, confirming the verses “do not consume one another’s wealth unjustly”

When Al-Hassan died, Muawiya said the Takbir and everyone in his council said Takbir! These are your books, so see how you are? Look what your books say!

Muawiya was busy waiting for Al-Hassan’s death, so when the news reached him, he said “Allahu Akbar” and “Allah is the Greatest” for the people of Sham!

Abd al-Razzaq, who has nearly 300 hadiths in al-Sahihayn, says that mentioning Muawiya in gatherings is filthy! Why all this great hatred?

When Al-Hassan bin Ali died, Muawiya went on pilgrimage and wanted to insult Imam Ali on the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah (saw), and wrote to his workers to curse Ali on the pulpits! Imagine! On the Blessed minbar of the Blessed Messenger (saw) cursing the companions!

Ahmed bin Hanbal narrates that Shaykh Al-Bukhari swears that Muawiyah died in a state other than Islam, and he did not narrate from him, and he forbade his son Abdullah to mention him or write about him!

None other than the mountain of knowledge Ishaq bin Rahawayh states: “Nothing narrated from the Prophet (saw) regarding the merits of Muawiyah is authentic!”

Muawiyah removes Saeed bin Al-Aas from the mandate of Medina and appoints Marwan bin Al-Hakam in his place, so what is the reason?

According to the testimony of al-Dhahabi, Muawiyah curses Ali; and al-Hasan stipulated that he should not curse him while he was listening.

The hadith that states Muawiyah is one of the people of Hell, and al-Tabarani hides the name of Muawiyah and puts the word man! These books show your hypocrisy and deceit!

Muawiyah commands batil (falsehood and consumes it). Sunni books.

Muawiya and the novels of wine!

Abdullah bin Umar deeply regretted not fighting the oppressive faction Muawiya and his companions!

Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr’s neck was cut off by order of Mu’awiya, and he was the first head to be cut off in Islam!

The mother of the believers, Aisha (r.a) threatens Muawiya with death for killing her brother. The companions were one big happy family? So we are told.

Amr bin Al-Aas, a well-known companion, was one of the instigators against Uthman!

Insulting the great Companions and defaming an honorable person in the books of the Sunnis.

Defaming the great companion Umar Ibn Al-Khattab! with words that are never befitting of a man like Umar (r.a). Is there no fear of Allah’s wrath in your hearts?!

The noble and honourable Khadija(r.a) made her father drink wine to marry her to the Messenger of Allah (saw), and when her father got drunk, he accepted her marriage!

May Allah suffice you! May Allah guide this ummah!

May Allah guide us! What disaster!

Mujaddid Al-Salafiyah Muhammad bin Abd Al-Wahhab lied and claimed that the Companions unanimously agreed that the Companion Qudama bin Madhu’un had been declared an unbeliever!

Accusing the companion Anas bin Malik of drinking paint, i.e. alcohol! The impression they give of the companions is of people who huff paint and absue whippets!

A companion accused of adultery!

We can lead the horse to the troph but you cannot make it drink.

So what will it be dear Muslim Ummah?

Will your Imam be hiding in occultation waiting to come out…. one day?

Will your Imam be a playboy who goes boating with scantly clad women and tells us the obligation of prayer and fasting has been lifted?

Will you be a Crypto-Sunni that holds disdain for Yazid, a little bit for Muaviya when your feeling edgy and none for Uthman because it’s a step too far?

Or do we go with the majority simply because it is convenient and we embrace the Islam of the Imperium and say (May Allah be pleased with the tyrants)? To rebel against the ruler is to be a kharijite?

Or do you just go your own way do it yourself Islam?

May Allah (swt) guide us all to what is beloved to Allah (swt)!


Filed under Uncategorized

The companions were promised paradise in the Qur’an ?

Do not follow what you have no ˹sure˺ knowledge of. Indeed, all will be called to account for ˹their˺ hearing, sight, and intellect.” (Qur’an 17:36)

The issue of the companions is a sensitive one among the Muslim ummah.

Often one dives right into the subject without taking some time to define terms. For example:

Who actually is a companion (sahaba)? What is the criteria that is used? Is there a universally agreed upon definition?

All of these preliminary questions would be very helpful in establishing the truth of the matter.

In actuality an in depth discussion about this has already happened here:

“And why do you not spend in the cause of Allah while to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens and the earth? Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterward and fought. But to all Allah has promised reward (l-husna). And Allah, with what you do, is Acquainted.” (Qur’an 57:10)

You may see the various translations here: https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/57/10/#:~:text=Those%20among%20you%20who%20have,spent%20and%20fought%20later%20on.

“Not equal are those believers remaining [at home] – other than the disabled – and the mujahideen, [who strive and fight] in the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred the mujahideen through their wealth and their lives over those who remain [behind], by degrees. And to both Allah has promised reward (l-husna). But Allah has preferred the mujahideen over those who remain [behind] with a greater reward (ajran aziman).” (Qur’an 49:5)

First neither of these verses are speaking about paradise or promising anyone paradise. Someone will need to show where in the Arabic text it says this.

This is the issue of comparison. Not the issue that all of them will go to paradise.

Those who came after benefited from those who proceeded them. Put it like this. A scholar alive whom starts teaching in 2023 versus a scholar from the 1800s. That scholar from the 1800s has proceeded the scholar in 2023 because that scholar from the 1800s his knowledge continues to benefit people until today, including the scholar who started teaching in 2023.

Allah (swt) differentiates those who do jihad and those who remain at home. Allah (swt) differentiates between those who spend and fought before and those who came latter.

Also if you juxtapose the two verses together look at it closely.

The statement: “with a greater reward (ajran aziman)” cannot mean paradise/heaven. Firstly because the Arabic text does not say so. and secondly because it would exclude from paradise those from the statement: “But to all Allah has promised reward (l-husna)” Because the verse in 49:5 indicates that ajran aziman is distinct from l-husna.

The only way for Sunni’s to solve this is for them to now use strained interpretative devices to suggest that husna means heaven and ajran aziman means seeing Allah, or that husna means heaven and ajran aziman means greater heaven.

The Qur’an speaks in generality. It speaks in terms of generality. When it speaks of the companions as we seen above it speaks in terms of generality.

Contrast those verses above where no mention of paradise is in the Arabic text with a text that has explicit mention.

“And their Lord responded to them, “Never will I allow to be lost the work of [any] worker among you, whether male or female; you are of one another. So those who emigrated and were evicted from their homes and were harmed in My cause and fought and were killed – I will surely remove from them their misdeeds, and I will surely admit them to gardens (jannatin) beneath which rivers flow as reward from Allah , and Allah has with Him the best reward.” (Qur’an 3:195)

Also keep in mind based upon the verses in the Qur’an we know that people who die as a shaheed in the path of Allah (swt) will be in paradise. This is also our good opinion and outward perception. However, only Allah (swt) really knows what is in the heart of people.

“It has been narrated on the authority of Sulaiman b. Yasar who said:

People dispersed from around Abu Huraira, and Natil, who was from the Syrians. said to him: O Shaykh, relate (to us) a tradition you have heard from the Messenger of Allah (saw). He said: Yes. I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: The first of men (whose case) will be decided on the Day of Judgment will be a man who died as a martyr. He shall be brought (before the Judgment Seat). Allah will make him recount His blessings (i. e. the blessings which He had bestowed upon him) and he will recount them (and admit having enjoyed them in his life). (Then) will Allah say: What did you do (to requite these blessings)? He will say: I fought for Thee until I died as a martyr. Allah will say: You have told a lie. You fought that you might be called a” brave warrior”. And you were called so. (Then) orders will be passed against him and he will be dragged with his face downward and cast into Hell.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1905a)

In principles of interpreting the Qur’an are two fold.

  1. When a text is general and another is specific the specific is regarded as stronger as evidence.
  2. . A clear text is preferable to an interpretation of the text.

An example:

Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an:

” In it are Signs Manifest; (for example), the Station of brahim; whoever enters it attains security; Pilgrimage therefore it is a duty mankind (nas) owe to Allah,- those who are able to perform the journey; but if any deny faith, Allah stands not in need of any of His creatures.” (Qur’an 3:97)

men(nas) includes children, women, slaves, the mentally challenged and all included. It is general. Yet is through the sacred prophetic tradition that we know that children must not go to hajj alone. Women unless they have a mahrim. The mentally challenged are not obligated. All of them are not obligated even though they are nas(people, mankind).

Nass includes children, women, slaves, insane all are included in the word nass (people). When it comes to hadith some are lifted from the obligation. children must not go to hajj. Children unless they have mahrim.

For example the companion/sabaha that Allah (swt) called a fasiq.

“O you who believe! If a Fasiq (liar- evil person) comes to you with any news, verify it, lest you should harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful for what you have done” (Qur’an 49:6)

“And as for those who are Fasiqun (disbelievers and disobedient to Allah), their abode will be the Fire, every time they wish to get away therefrom, they will be put back thereto, and it will be said to them: “Taste you the torment of the Fire which you used to deny.” (Qur’an 32:20)

I said to ‘Ammar: What is your opinion about that which you have done in case (of your siding with Hadrat ‘Ali)? Is it your personal opinion or something you got from Allah’s Messenger (saw)? ‘Ammar said: We have got nothing from Allah’s Messenger (saw) which people at large did not get, but Hudhaifa told me that Allah’s Apostle (saw) had especially told him amongst his Companion, that there would be twelve hypocrites out of whom eight would not get into Paradise, until a camel would be able to pass through the needle hole. The ulcer would be itself sufficient (to kill) eight. So far as four are concerned, I do not remember what Shu’ba said about them.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:2779a)

Narrated Anas:

The Prophet (saw) said, “Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, ‘My companions!’ Then it will be said, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6582)

Allah does not cause the loss of anyone who does good.

“Be patient in hard times.(Oh Muhammed) Allah does not fail to repay those who do good.” (Qur’an 11:115)

“So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it, And whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it.” (Qur’an 99:7-8)

If Umar Ibn Al Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him) understood the verses of 57:10 and 49:5 in the way contemporary Sunni Muslims strenuously interpret them then Umar(r.a) would not go to  Hudhayfah ibn Yaman (r.a) and ask if he was a hypocrite.

Now someone will reply: “This is a sign of his sincerity.”

Yes that is true, but it is a sign of nifaq to doubt a promise of Allah (swt)!

Rather Umar Ibn Al Khattab (r.a) did this because he was not certain of his place in paradise and he had sincerity and true fear of Allah (swt).

As the following verse reminds us:

“Did they feel secure against Allah’s planning? None would feel secure from Allah’s planning except the losers.” (Qur’an 7:99)

This is an issue of creed (aqidah) for Sunni Muslims but it is not for our school, Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqamah.

The Sunni Muslims state in Al-Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah.

“We love the companions of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him. We do not exaggerate in our love for any of them, nor do we disown any of themWe hate those who hate them or who mention them without good, for we do not mention them except with good. Love for them is a part of religion, faith, and spiritual excellence, and hatred for them is unbelief, hypocrisy, and transgression.”

This is the Sunni statement of creed in regards to the companions.

We respond to this with the angels du’a in the Qur’an:

“Those (angels) who bear the Throne and those around it glorify the praises of their Lord, and believe in Him, and ask
forgiveness for those who believe (saying): ‘Our Lord! You comprehend all things in mercy and knowledge, so forgive those who repent and follow Your Way, and save them from the torment of the blazing Fire! Our Lord! And make them enter the Paradise which you have promised them, and to the righteous among their fathers, their wives, and their offspring! Verily, You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise. And save them from the sins, and whomsoever You save from the sins that Day, him verily, You have taken into mercy.” And that is the supreme success.’” (Qur’an 40: 7-9)

The beauty of this du’a is that it says: ‘for those who believe’ and ‘those who repent and follow Your Way’. So than if Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Muaviya, Yazid or anyone else are among those people than the du’a lands on them. And if Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Muaviya, Yazid or anyone else are not among them than the du’a misses them.

The point being that is the purview of Allah (swt).

May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Are Iran and Afghanistan: Water Wars about to pop off?

“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)

“And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his punishment is hell; he shall abide in it, and Allah will send His wrath on him and curse him and prepare for him a painful chastisement.” (Qur’an 4:93)

So let us be very clear from the very beginning.

Should the Taliban/Afghanistan and Iran start to have a major war and kill each other their armies should heed what Allah (swt) says:

“And whoever kills a believer intentionallyhis punishment is hell; he shall abide in it, and Allah will send His wrath on him and curse him and prepare for him a painful chastisement.” (Qur’an 4:93)

“Oh Mash’Allah! The Taliban are killing those Shi’a Kafirs and our soldiers who die are martyrs!”

No, it is likely that they will be in hell burning without end.

“Oh Mash’Allah! The Iranian Artesh are killing those Bakri Dogs, and Sunni scum our soldiers who die they are martyr!” No, it is likely that they will be in hell burning without end.

You think my statements are harsh?

It is a verse from the Qur’an. It is not me stating this. Taking the life of believing Muslim without right is a very severe matter.

Also read on…

There is nothing heroic on either end. Just a very sad and dismal end for both.

Just making more mothers widows, more children fatherless, taking more eligible marriageable men from the population that women can marry and have children who worship Allah (swt), follow the Sunnah and strive to make Islam supreme on the Earth.

Maybe now it all makes sense why the U.S government left 7 billion worth of military equipment behind in Afghanistan on “accident”


“And whoever kills a believer intentionallyhis punishment is hell; he shall abide in it, and Allah will send His wrath on him and curse him and prepare for him a painful chastisement.” (Qur’an 4:93)

All the Iranian soldier or Afghani soldiers has to do is to refuse to comply with orders.

However, unfortunately they both have a very easy way of dealing with the above verse Qur’an 4:93 each views the other as kafir to begin with so they have no qualms about killing the other.

So keep that in mind when you think my statements are harsh. Remember it is what Allah (swt) said and not what I said. The only way around it is to make takfir upon the other party. Many misguided scholars both sides certainly wouldn’t have a problem with that.

“Indeed, there is no light at all for the person whom Allâh gives no light.” (Qur’an 24:40)

Disputes over water between Iran and Afghanistan date to the 1870s when Afghanistan was under the British Imperium. A British Imperial Officer drew the Iran-Afghan border along the main branch of the Helmand River. In 1939, the Iranian government of Reza Shah Pahlavi and Muhammed Zahir Shah’s Afghanistan government signed a treaty on sharing the river’s waters, but the Afghans failed to ratify it.

The 44.2-meter (145 feet) Arghandab Dam, 18 miles northeast of Kandahar, was completed in 1952 with a storage capacity of 388,000 acre-feet of water. A few months later, in April 1953, the Kajaki Dam, seventy two miles upstream from Lashkar Gah, was also finished. It created the most important water reservoir in Afghanistan and was built with the objective of providing electricity, water for irrigation, and flood control.

The Helmand is the longest river in Afghanistan, constituting over 40 percent of Afghanistan’s surface

Iran made a huge scientific blunder by introduction of a foreign species of fish into the lakes by Iranian fishery companies. That particular fish ravished the reeds of the wetlands. Reeds are very crucial to the habitat of wetlands.

The situation was further aggravated when the Taliban government of Afghanistan blocked the Kajaki Dam and choked off water to Iran from 1998-2001, a period that also included one of the region’s worst droughts.

Dust storms from the dried Hamoun lakes are considered among the worst in Southwest Asia and have caused a serious public health crisis in Iran. The region’s economy has also been gravely impacted, as thousands of villagers left their homes and moved to cities to have a better chance of survival. The deteriorating economic situation, unemployment, and the loss of income from agriculture in both countries has led to more drug trafficking in the Hamoun region, with all the attendant ill effects on Afghan and Iranian societies.

A total of eight million hectares of Afghanistan’s land is fertile, but only two million are cultivated.

Additionally, due to chronic droughts, land fertility has dropped by 30 percent compared to the 1970s

It seems that former president and U.S Viceroy President Muhammed Ashraf Ghani quickened the pace to build dams throughout Afghanistan knowing that this may well quicken the pace to conflict with Iran.

Rather this was to ensure that the U.S would come to Afghanistan’s aid against Iran under his viceregency or set up future conflict between the Taliban and Iran it seems like a win-win situation for Western policy makers.

Drought is increasingly driving farmers in Afghanistan to switch to poppy cultivation, which requires much less water than other crops and is also more lucrative. For many years, Afghanistan has been the world’s largest opium producer, and Iran has been the main transit route for Afghan opium to Central Asia and Europe. This problem has aggravated Iran’s number one social problem, opiate addiction

Unfortunately there are those on both sides (Iran and Afghanistan) that may press for conflict for various reasons.

As mentioned in a previous article Iran is in a bad way. You can read that here:

Iran may want a war in order to divert away from it’s own internal problems. However, what would that mean? A war with Afghanistan? Do they capture territory?

Capturing territory and holding it can be difficult as Ukraine, Russia, and the United States have all recently learned. Are there think tanks in Iran who think that the best thing they could do is expand eastward and become neighbors with India and China?

What about from the Taliban’s perspective? What would war with Iran mean? Do they capture territories, cities? Is this something that gets ugly?

Keep in mind that Afghanistan really does not have an Airforce. It did repel the Russian Airforce and stinger missiles played a huge roll in this. Alas, it is likely that Iran would practice strafing against Afghan heavy units on the ground.

We are looking at possibly more refugees from Afghanistan pouring into Pakistan, or Afghan unrest in Iran.

Than, just as the honourable Sultan of Oman was reconciling Iran to Bahrain and Iran to Egypt we see strife development between Iran and Afghanistan. Hmm


An open conflict between Afghanistan and Iran would bring more Sunni vs Shi’a strife. Already I have seen the children posing as adults (and yes some actually children) starting in with the insults and digs on social media. It goes something like this.

Pakistanis attacking Afghanis for being ungrateful. Shi’as saying it’s time to bring an end to these Bakri dogs, the Taliban. Deobandis and Salafi’s and other Sunnis saying its time Iran became Sunni and the Taliban will see to it. End the Shi’a kafir etc. You know the same old tired drivel.

Of course these short sighted individuals (both sides) will cheer on the bloodshed from the comfort of their living rooms. If they really cared about the sanctity of human life and coming to real resolution.

. The fact that Afghanistan is landlocked country, with no access to ocean ports. Afghanistan is a nation that has experienced now over 40 plus years of war. Iran has crushing economic sanctions against it.

If there are so called Muslims (involved in kufr niama) who are willing to sell opium to fellow Muslims (involved in kufr naima) what does that tell you about the depraved state of some people in the region? Or how desperate they have become?

Instead of using this time to inflame and incite Sunni-Shi’a strife why not spend even an hour a day online researching various means and ways to solve the issue? What we could do instead is looking into issues of irrigation, crops that survive in arid regions. How to better manage water. Why not create water reservoirs? Sure it is not a frugal project. Yet, you have to wonder how much does war cost? Not just in terms of money but the impact it has on the human psyche and on the soul?

In times of flooding and excess water this can be channeled to the water reservoirs. In times of little water, the caches can be used.

Islam teaches us to use our minds that Allah (swt) gave us. There is allot more to this ummah than lobbing hateful remarks at each other online. None of that is appealing to people who are considering Islam as their way of life.

Insh’Allah perhaps Iran and Afghanistan want to look into cloud seeding:


If a solution comes up and there is a counter proposal due to environmental impact etc. let us not lose heart.

Why not start a petition online urging the Afghan and Iran governments to stay their hands and not shed the blood of Muslims and use their combined talents and expertise to solve the matter.

If both sides truly fear Allah (swt) He will make a way out for them as he has promised.

“And whosoever fears Allah and keeps his duty to Him, He will make a way for him to get out (from every difficulty). And He will provide for him from sources he never could imagine. And whosoever puts his trust in Allah, then He will suffice him. Verily, Allah will accomplish His purpose. Indeed Allah has set a measure for all things.” (Qur’an 65:2-3)

Do not endanger your eternal after life by needlessly taking the life of a believer!

“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)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Responses to Navigating Differences

“So set thy face to the way of life that is upright and in harmony with nature, the pattern which He originated mankind. There is no changing Allah’s creation. That is the upright way of life; but most men know it not.” (Qur’an 30:30)

So the responses started to pour in from all over social media to the document: Navigating Differences: Clarifying Sexual and Gender Ethics in Islam

The attacks ranged from a former disgruntled employee of Yaqeen institute to leftist who have capitulated to the Satanic mantra of “Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” The latter is a quote straight from the Satanic Bible.

As regards the people who do not feel the document went far enough they are not entirely clear on what they want. So what are Muslims who live in a secular democracy supposed to do with persons who identify under the LGBTQI+ banner? Are they supposed to imprison them? Are they suppose to physically assault them?

I mean signatories of that document have constantly pushed back against the LGBTQI+ agenda. They have also made it clear that Islam is ‘The’ path to salvation. Not ‘one’ path to salvation. One of the signatories, Dr. Shadee El Masry had a debate recently defending the fact that Islam is ‘The’ path to salvation.

Many of the signatories have made it clear that Islam, a loving and responsive surrender to Allah (swt) and obeying his commands and prohibitions is the only way forward for any of us that sin. Anyone of us.

As far as Daniel Haqiqatjou you can see a brother on Twitter post what Daniel has said about the LGBTQI+ and if you want to condemn the signatories what Daniel wrote seems like a love letter to their community. You can read it here: https://twitter.com/elerrantenomad/status/1661720757603561472

Daniel has made zero attempt any time someone has posted that screen shot under his timeline.

On top of this Paul Williams from Blogging Theology (whom I otherwise find highly recommended) encouraged his viewers to watch Daniel going on a tirade of slander. https://twitter.com/freemonotheist/status/1661707732544634880

Not good brother Paul. Yes, I do love that you allow different view points. That is certainly a highlight. Yet the differences need to be done in decorum. Daniel has made a recent screed against smiling of all things! Hopefully Paul you will advise him against in the near future insh’Allah.

So back to the point. What do those who think the document “did not go far enough” want those scholars and teachers to do?

On the other side were those who endorse the Satanic ethos of “Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.”

However, they get upset when others follow these exact same Satanic ethos. If you want to do what ever you want to do why can’t others do what ever they want to do? What ever happened to ‘You do you’?

These so called progressive “Muslims” who are nominal “Muslims” if they even attempted to engage in a formatted debate on rather or not LGBTQI+ relationships or marriages between the same sex is permissible in the Qur’an and Sunnah have about as much chance as a snake in a typewriter contest. They stand about as much chance as a moth in a candle stick factory. It is over before it even begins.

Some of them were upset that the signatories have not addressed climate issues, universal healthcare, BLM among other issues. Well, they have.

I am upset that the side that sees themselves as progressive liberals have not come together and condemned the DNC (Democrat National Convention) for their treatment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr and Marianne Williamson.

Btw Marianne Williamson has a platform of giving 500 billion dollars to the African American community. That is more than the GDP of anyone single African nation with the exception of perhaps Egypt! You think that might get the attention of Black Lives Matter and the progressive types?


Where is there joint statement from these progressive left “Muslim” leaders calling on the DNC to allow debates with Joe Biden?

These people are upset that these signatories to the document don’t talk about the rising ocean waters on the daily. Yet, we haven’t heard them say anything about Al Gore’s very plush very comfortable Ocean Front Property.


“In a move that critics may cite as his own inconvenient truth, former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a house in secluded Montecito, Calif., to their real estate holdings.

The couple spent $8,875,000 on a gated ocean-view villa on 1 1/2 acres with a swimming pool, spa and fountains, according to real estate sources familiar with the deal. The Italian-style house has high ceilings with beams in the public rooms, a family room, a wine cellar, terraces, six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms in more than 6,500 square feet of living space.”

It’s as if those waters may not be rising any time soon after all.

Not only this but there is real differences among the LGBTQI+ community concerning the targeted sexualization of children.

There are the “Gays Against Groomers’ which are a group of adults whose platform is basically: “Look in the push to get LGBT acceptance we are sexualizing’s children!” These gays have been targeted and canceled as well by other gays!


I mean all of these transsexuals whom dress and dance in front of small children proactively seem to be doing their own community a huge disservice. Why do self identified trans people like to be type cast? Where are the Trans Astronauts? Trans Math professors? Trans It Technicians? Why is it always the heavy make up, scantly clad types that get access to the children? These are questions that need to be answered.

There is real debate and conversations that needs to be had. How does one transition? Transition in English has the following meaning:

“The process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another.”

How does one go from A to B when neither A or B is something that can be defined by the same group. (leftist) It’s fluid. Transition is the wrong terminology and they have bad PR representatives. The terminology should be ‘Self Identity’ Surgery etc.

If gender is fluid what about race? Ethnicity? If that is the case than allow me to present to you one of the greatest African American actors of all time, Martin Sheen.

After all doesn’t Martin Sheen tell us that one can be conditioned to believe certain things?

Children are very impressionable. Bombarded enough via TikTok, movies, cartoons, and other forms of multi-media, looking for belonging and identity in the world they can be convinced if not outright pressured to make rash decisions.

What do when we are at an impasse?

If you are a biological man but you feel that you are truly a woman and I insist on calling you sir, and refer to you as ‘He’ I will be seen as hateful, a bigot, transphobic etc.

However, for me if I call you a woman I feel I am portraying logic, empirical data, and most importantly my faith. I feel that a worldview is being forced upon me and that I am being gas lighted if I do not capitulate to that worldview.

My compromise in this situation is to just do what is very natural when I meet any other human being on this planet. What is your name?

I do not need to know your sexual orientation, your gender, your ethnicity, or even your religion or lack there of to simply greet you and say, ‘Hello Linda’ ‘Hello David’.

Let’s be honest. How many of us when we meet a person say, “Hi I’m David and I’ m White” or “Hi I’m White David?” “Hello everyone I’m Lesbian Linda.” It is really just bizarre.

Think bout when you go for a job interview and the HR ask you: “So tell us a little about yourself.”

Do you respond with: “Yeah, Hi, I am David, I’m White and I prefer the missionary position. I think people who eat animals are heartless and cruel.”


May Allah (swt) continue to guide us on the straight path and continue to guide us on a course that is just.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Good Friday Lessons in English

Bismillah ir rahman ir raheem, With the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, The Most Merciful.

“Oh my Lord advance me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)

As salamu ‘alikum warahmutallahi wabarakuth (May the Peace, Mercy of Allah and Blessings descend upon you in tranquility).

Going forward we will be posting this every Friday. These classes are on various topics by various authors. I will make it easy for you to find as I will be posting this at the top of Prima Qur’an for ease of navigation.

Good Word – Friday Lessons in English 

(Free Online Islamic Lessons for Everyone

The Topic:  Reminders from Surat Yusuf Part-1

Speaker: Humaid Al-Shuaili

 6th Thilqe’dah 1444       26/05/2023                  

 Friday 9:30am-10:30am Oman Time

To join the session click the link below just before 09.30am and use the provided meeting password. If you don’t have the application installed, the link will guide you to download it first. You’ll be put in a waiting room before the host grants you access.


Password: 077234

Invitation open to ALL, MEN & WOMEN of ALL FAITHS.

For more information:

WhatsApp: 96004006

Website: https://www.iicoman.om/

For previous sessions:


Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Navigating Differences: Clarifying Sexual and Gender Ethics in Islam

“We have created you from a male and a female.” (Qur’an 49:13)

The Muslim social media is abuzz over a recent public statement put forward by Muslim scholars , academics and other notables in the U.S, North American community.

The original article can be found here:

The article is nothing less than a very principled defense of the Islamic position on the matter. It is very clear they are defending Islamic values. Those people who are upset with this document (among believing practicing Muslims) did not read it clearly.

“By a decree from God, sexual relations are permitted within the bounds of marriage, and marriage can only occur between a man and a woman. In the Quran, God explicitly condemns sexual relations with the same sex (see, e.g., Quran, al-Nisā’: 16, al-A‘rāf: 80–83, and al-Naml: 55–58).”

“In Islam, the sinful actions of an individual do not and should not dictate his or her identity. As such, it is impermissible for Muslims to take pride in identifying with labels that categorize them by their sins.”

Very well said. In other words there is no Gay Pride for a believer. Just as there is no ‘Liar Pride’, ‘Cheater Pride’, ‘Deceiver Pride’ ‘Adulterer Pride’ ‘Fornicator Pride’ ‘Hypocrite Pride’ for a believer.

There are those in the Muslim community who have condemned the article without even reading it. Such people are a curse for this Muslim ummah. Such people are a curse for this Muslim ummah. Such people are a curse for this ummah!

It takes 5 minutes to read. Some have said it was not harsh enough? It doesn’t need to be harsh at all! It is principled and unwavering and opens the door for forgiveness and repentance and transformation.

Rather I agree with everything they say or believe, Dr. Jonathan AC Brown, Dr. Shaykh Yasir Qadhi, and Dr.Shaykh Shadee Elmasry among others, will come under tremendous scrutiny and attack. Indeed it is happening right now. May Allah (swt) grant them taufik.

The signatories were very careful and intelligent in the writing of the document. They are all protected under the U.S constitution.

Amendment I

(ratified December 15, 1791)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The only thing that any practicing Muslim could find fault with and that is if you went over the document with a magnifying glass could possibly be the following paragraph:

“As such, as a general rule, Islam strictly prohibits medical procedures intended to change the sex of healthy individuals, regardless of whether such procedures are termed gender “affirming” or “confirming.” For individuals born with biological ambiguities, such as disorders of sexual development, Islam permits them to seek medical care for corrective reasons.”

However, anyone who wants to attack this clause would have to than give the legal verdict based upon the Qur’an, and Sunnah to give the concrete solution for those born under such circumstances.

Also you will note that I say practicing Muslims as in all fairness and truthfulness those are the only Muslims there are. Muslim means one who submits/surrenders. So this is a recognition that there are cultural Muslims or we may say ‘nominal Muslims’. That is to say those who do not submit or surrender.

Allah (swt) in the Qur’an called Iblis (who was a Muslim) a kafir the moment Iblis disobeyed his amr (command).

So what ever grievance anyone may have with the signatories or their organizations this ain’t it boss.

As regards those Muslims who are suggesting that all Muslims just leave the United States and other such countries.

#1) You lead the way. I hope that anyone who suggest this is not someone who current lives in a country where Muslims are the minority. That would be pure nifaq (hypocrisy).

#2) Those scholars, teachers and other Muslims who live in Muslim minority countries are often natives of that country. To move to another location is not as easy as one would think.

#3) Those scholars, teachers and other Muslims who live in Muslim minority countries are also people who are fulfilling the commands of Allah (swt) in the Qur’an:

Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.” (Qur’an 16:125)

Anyone who has lived in the United States for example knows it is a deeply deeply troubled society. There are beautiful human beings in that nation with huge hearts. Very sincere and noble people, may Allah guide them.

Yet the sickness, chaos, utter contempt for the elderly, the young being filmed fist fighting each other and spread all over the internet for clicks and likes. The social injustice. The economic injustice. The promiscuity, the hedonistic society and drug and alcohol dependencies. The narcissism.

Could write an entire blog…an entire website dedicated to all the evils that best that nation from all sides. I believe anyone striving to deliver the haqq (truth) to the people are to be deeply respected.

This takes back bone to do what they did. They took a stand and I stand with them!

If any of our brothers from our school (Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqama) read this , than do support them. Make du’a for them at the very least.

With Allah (swt) is success.

May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).

Articles I have written on the subject are as follows:


Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Mono Cultural vs Multi Cultural vs Omni Cultural

 “Oh mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the one who who has the most fear of Allah and by it attains righteousness. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.” (Qur’an 49:13)

Something I have come to the conclusion to after taking off my rose coloured glasses.

That is that multi-culturalism is successful only in that the dominant culture of that particular multi-cultural society does not come under threat.

I remember reading the book: “Reflections of an American Muslim” by Dr. Shahid Athar. In the book he likened the United States to a salad bowl rather than a melting pot. In a salad bowl all the ingredients are encouraged to preserve their original states and flavour.

Often in the melting pot, the process is controlled. Who or want is being added to the pot and what is the shape the smelter is molding?

Often the very people who push for multi-culturalism are the same people who will use terminology like “cultural appropriation”. In a society where there are multi-cultures co-existing someone some where is bound to dress in accordance with a different culture. Alas, this term “cultural appropriation” is often used by cancel culture advocates to create more strife in multi-cultural societies. Ironic!

I began to research and reflect about various scenarios in human history in which one dominant culture was supplanted by another. I have not come across a single scenario in which this happens naturally, or peacefully.

I think about the Aboriginal people of Australia, the multifarious native and indigenous peoples of North America. Many of whom were violently subjugated, expelled, and exterminated altogether.

So multi-culturalism works in as long as the dominant culture (either religious, tribal, ethnic) can co-exist and accommodate other cultural expressions as long as the dominant culture does not come under threat.

Now it is also important in any multi-cultural society that the less dominant cultural expressions be given some form of expression in the society.

Multi-cultural societies often take work because the task is to allow all the various expressions of the different cultures to maximize their expressions in away that does not jeopardies, offend or threaten the other co-existing cultures. This could be even the subjugation of various language expressions.

For example the Welsh Not in the United Kingdom. There are several books in English on the subject of the Welsh Not and how it undermined the Welsh language.

In the example of Singapore I have many Chinese Singaporean friends who lament the fact they cannot communicate with dying grandparents. Other Chinese languages such as Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, Teochew and Hainanese were suppressed in order to solidify Mandarin as one of the lingua franca of Singapore. Truth be told though, Singapore today is for the most part an English speaking nation through and through.

We also have the example of High German being favoured in public schools in Germany over Low German, Fresian etc.

Certainly I feel the loss of a language is a great loss to humanity. Although I can understand why the dominant culture in “multi-cultural” societies want to impose lingua-franca. Hindu for India, Urdu for Pakistan, Bahasa for Indonesia and Tagalog for the Philippines. Speaking the same language can bring cohesion and uniformity.

Yet, now many western societies are struggle with identifying who or what actually is a man or a woman. Struggling with gender pronouns where there need not be such a struggle. The same societies that often demanded uniformity in language now want the very words male and female to be open for debate.

Strange times we live in dear truth seekers.


This is very important to keep in mind. When Muslims debate with liberals, or people who seeming endorse multi dimensional, multi cultural societies gently remind them that there is not a single place on this planet or has there ever been a place which was omni-cultural.

An Omni-Cultural society is theoretical because it cannot exist in reality. That is all expressions are equally valued and equally expressed.

Living in a world with no down syndrome?

For example imagine Lady Gaga or America’s vicegerent Lady Queen Rania on a podium at the United Nations proudly announcing that we will eliminate down syndrome once and for all.

How? Iceland has the solution.


Telling the disabled to hurry up and die. Laws that assist people to hurry up and just kill themselves.

Preservation of race/tribe.

The Qur’an promotes many tribal/racial, phenotypes living together, or in peace distinctively.

“Oh mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another.” (Qur’an 49:13)

Although the Qur’an does not prevent people from one phenotype or the other to marry each other. Likewise the Qur’an does not prevent people from one phenotype wanting to actively preserve their distinct tribal, cultural, racial distinctiveness.

So if there is a segment of white people or black people or hutu or tutsi or wolof or pashtuns that only want their people to marry those of a similar racial, cultural or phenotype that is their prerogative.

I remember a shocking discussion I had with a native of Bahrain when I visited that amazing country. He objected to the idea of Caucasian/White converts marrying Asians and/or others. He said than the whites would die out. They(the Arabs) would not have a pool of Caucasian women to choose from in the future. How bizarre!

A country of conscientious objectors in a time of war?

So what do multi-cultural societies do with a culture of conscientious objectors in times of war?

Well in some cases like the Quakers (A Protestant Christian sect in the United States) they are exempted from fighting altogether. When most people think about the Vietnam war they think about the United States. They do not think about the more than 60,000 Australians that served in the Vietnam war. The following link shares the story of the first Vietnam War conscientious objector to be jailed.


What were to happen if a society was facing extinction and the a good portion of that multi cultural society (let’s say 40%) were conscientious objectors?

The Singapore government gave a very excellent reply to the United Nations on the matter here:


Singapore does not recognise the universal applicability of the right to conscientious objection to military service. In our view, HRC resolution 20/2 goes beyond what is prescribed in international law and applicable human rights instruments.”

“The resolution refers to the conscientious objection to military service as a legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. But Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises that the exercise of such rights and freedom is subject to limitations to meet the requirements of public order and the general welfare of society.”

“National defence is a fundamental sovereign right under international law. As a small city-state with limited manpower and resources, Singapore has no choice but to base our defence on citizen armed forces.”

“National Service is the bedrock of our defence and internal security. It underpins the peace and prosperity we enjoy, and safeguards our independence and sovereignty.”

Mash’Allah what an articulate and intelligent response!

What happens when the native population or the dominant culture is replaced by non native cultures?

We are probably seeing this on a very rapid scale in the GCC countries of the Middle East.

Nationals & Non-Nationals

UAE 11% 89%
Saudi Arabia 63% and 37%
Qatar 14% and 86%
Oman 54% and 46%
Kuwait 30% and 70%
Bahrain 47% and 53%

You can get more statistics and insights here: https://gulfmigration.grc.net/

What does this ultimately do for the native population? Of course having foreigners come and do jobs that natives are not willing to do is of course helpful. Yet, what does this do for the national identity of a population or people? This is an ongoing debate around the world, for the most part.

I remember once hearing about how Christianity was growing in the gulf countries and at first thought
I was wondering if this was not more missionary propaganda. However, on second thought in a sense they are correct.
But not just Christianity, Hinduism as well for that matter. Because those people who are brought to work there from the Philippines, India, and other places are people who are often Christian or Hindu.

Clothing uniformity vs non uniformity.

In Singapore in the school system all the children wear the same uniform. This is for public and private schools. In the United States in the public school system children wear their own clothes, purchased by themselves and most often their parents. Of course ironically in the United States private schools have uniforms.

I often thought that if the United States was to move to have school uniforms the first to come “to the aid” of the “oppressed children” would be the shoe brands, Nike, Adidas, Converse, Reebok etc. There would be simultaneous out crying from the retail clothing outlets. Walmart, Abercrombie & Fitch, Levi Jeans. A loss of revenue is after all a loss of revenue.

On the positive side in Singapore there is less distinction between economic class by using this model. Those whose parents can afford branded clothing for their kids and those who cannot. Often in many inner city schools the clothes you wear mark you as a member of a gang and can land you in violent confrontation. British Knights (Blood Killer) or Calvin Klein (Crypt Killer), wearing red or blue shoe laces on the right or left shoe etc.

Though Singapore can do more to engage with bullying; as we have a very distraught youth population often beset by a pressure cooker society, is not helped by going to school and dealing with bullies.

I would say Singapore in terms of having uniformity in clothing is probably a safe bet.

Yet, very often in these “multi-cultural” societies a certain look is the smart look when it comes to business attire. Surprise, surprise if that attire , the “you look smart look” is not western dominated. I guess if the Chinese wear a Cheongsam to a business meeting they lose IQ? I am not quite sure.

Kuddos to the GRCC Arabs for wearing traditional attire and not succumbing to mono-culture.

The Qur’an is not on a mission to promote religious pluralism. Who ever thinks this has lost the plot completely.

The Qur’an is only a mission that Islam will be the dominant world view. Not only religion but the supreme worldview. This does not mean that there cannot be different religious expressions under a Muslim dominated government but just as with all multi-cultural societies the dominant culture will maintain its status.

“It is He Who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the world view of Truth, to proclaim it over all world views: and enough is Allah for a Witness!” (Qur’an 48:28)

“They wish to extinguish Allah’s light with their mouths, but Allah will only allow His light to be perfected, even if the ungrateful disbelievers are compelled to be dismayed by it.” (Qur’an 9:32)

In closing the discussions and the debates are not really about being pluralistic, and inclusive, and multi-cultural.

The debates and the discussions are on how pluralistic, how inclusive, and how multi cultural can any given society afford to be?

Muslims wake up!

Do not allow those who claim they want diversity but suppress expression, that they are tolerant but shadow ban, that everyone else should mix and but the same preserve their tight knit culture to be the decision makers for the Muslims.

May Allah (swt) continue to guide us to a course that is just.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized