(We told you), “If you do good, it will be for your own benefit, but if you do bad, it will be against your souls. When the prophecy of your second transgression will come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the mosque as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction. (Qur’an 17:7)
﷽
Recently I was watching a video circulating the internet over our brother, a former IDF soldier who found the light of Islam. Al hamdulillah! May Allah (swt) increase him in faith and bring him to a state of felicity. May many more of them be guided to the light of Islam.
The brother who was interacting with the former IDF soldier was doing an excellent effort in flashing the verses on the screen. However, something jolted me when the brother quoted Qur’an 17:7 and gave a very strange understanding of this verse. It raised the alarm and this is why I felt the urgency to write this post in hopes that you will also warn those you know!
I have personally not come across people understand the verse this way. unless they were from the United Arab Emirates, or Saudi Arabia.
The verse in question is:
(We told you), “If you do good, it will be for your own benefit, but if you do bad, it will be against your souls. When the prophecy of your second transgression will come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction.” (Qur’an 17:7)
Please pay special attention to how the Arabic word ٱلۡمَسۡجِدَ is being translated into English.
Here is a complete list of known translations into English:
Notice the word ٱلۡمَسۡجِدَ has been translated as Temple in 32 translations. Why is this even important brothers and sisters?
This is the video I am referencing:
@22:50 minutes into the video The Muslim Lantern states: “In fact Allah azwajala said that the people children of Israel will take the Masjid,Masjid Al Aqsa from you.”
This is dead wrong. There is no such verse in the Qur’an at all. Surely brother Muslim Lantern will have his reward with Allah (swt). However, I think in this regard he is simply transmitting what he heard without investigating the verse.
Let us look at the context:
“And We gave (Clear) Warning to the Children of Israel in the Book, that twice would they do mischief on the earth and be elated with mighty arrogance.!” (Qur’an 17:4)
Allah (swt) is addressing the Children of Israel (Jacob).
“When the first of the warnings came to pass, We sent against you Our servants given to terrible warfare: They entered the very inmost parts of your homes; and it was a warning (completely) fulfilled.” (Qur’an 17:5)
Allah (swt) is mentioning that he sent against you (Meaning children of Israel) -They are the ones being attacked not the attackers!
“Then did We grant you the Return as against them: We gave you increase in resources and sons, and made you the more numerous in man-power.” (Qur’an 17:6)
Allah (swt) grant you (Children of Israel) a return against them (the attackers of the Children of Israel)
(We told you), “If youdo good, it will be for yourown benefit, but if youdo bad, it will be against yoursouls. When the prophecy of your second transgressionwill come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction.” (Qur’an 17:7)
Allah (swt) is not saying that the children of Israel will be the one’s who will enter the places of prostration and bring utter destruction. It makes no sense! It makes no sense because the place that the destruction will come to is the place that the children of Israel themselves worship!
That is the temple of Solomon (as). Look at the text that are underlined in green. That is what people are getting confused. The Children of Israel will cause corruption in the earth twice and they will be punished by having their place of worship destroyed!
Allah (swt) will use someone else as a means of punishment for the disobedient Children of Israel.
They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did THE FIRST TIME to bring about utter destruction.”
The first time was the destruction of the place of prostration-by Nebuchadnezzar.
The second time that Allah (swt) is speaking about in the future in Qur’an 17:7 was by the Romans.
WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT AND WHAT HAS THIS HAVE TO DO WITH PALESTINE AND AL AQSA MASJID?
This is important because the false interpretation that was given to our brother The Muslim Lantern and not only him but to many Muslims will be used as a psychological weapon against the Palestinian and Muslim resistance when the Zionist eventually come to attack it!
How will it be used a psychological weapon? Because, the false interpretation makes it that the Zionist (Israel) will conqueror Masjid Al Aqsa.
@22:50 minutes into the video The Muslim Lantern states: “In fact Allah azwajala said that the people children of Israel will take the Masjid,Masjid Al Aqsa from you.”
How will you defend a place knowing that Allah (swt) himself said that your enemies would take it from you? Do you see the point brothers and sisters?
In fact, watch the expression of our new brother in Islam (former IDF) when our brother Muslim Lantern says this. The new brother looked quite surprised? Why? Because he knows how the resistance is fighting, even after being almost entirely abandoned by the whole Muslim Ummah. He looks surprised because he can’t imagine the IDF just taking Al Aqsa Masjid. Jordan is the custodian of Al Aqsa Masjid. Jordan would be forced to go beyond just sending ‘a memo of protest‘ if the Zionist wanted to full on take the Masjid.
Rather or not the Zionist attempt to do so is another matter. The point of this post is do not read these verses of the Qur’an incorrectly. Especially do not read them in such away that would give a moral boost to the enemies of the faith!
“So We did not send any messenger except [speaking] in the language of his people to articulate for them, and Allah sends astray [thereby] whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.” (Qur’an 14:4)
﷽
Shaykh Juma Mazrui (h) began his topic about the use of Majaz in the sunnah by giving us a recap of the previous lesson.
He mentioned some more examples from the Qur’an which I will now proceed to quote here:
“So do not make your hand [as] chained to your neck or extend it completely and [thereby] become blamed and insolvent.” (Qur’an 17:29 Sahih international translation)
“And do not set up your hand shackled to your neck, (i.e., Do not be niggardly) nor outspread it widespread altogether, (Literally: outspread it all outspreading, i.e., do not be a spendthrift) for then you will sit blamed and regretfully rejected.” (Qur’an 17:29 Dr. Ghali translation)
This is another beautiful example of majaz, of metaphor in the Qur’an. In fact if one was to take the literal interpretation of this verse, where exactly would this half-way point between tying one’s hand to one’s neck and extending it fully? Would that look like?
So what the verse is saying, it using hand as a metaphor for that which gives, or distributes. That one should not be stingy, nor should one be a spendthrift. That we should be balanced in our approach to spending.
“Of them some seem to give heed to you; will you, then, make the deaf hear even though they understand nothing? And of them some look towards you; will you, then, guide the blind, even though they can see nothing?” (Qur’an 10:41-42)
Obviously it means those who are spiritually blind. The eyes are used as a metaphor for the ability to perceive, understand and be open to something.
“Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb who do not use reason.” (Qur’an 8:22)
Yet Allah (swt) who created people in such a condition and than blames them for this? So it cannot mean what the apparent text says.
“They will say, “Indeed, you used to come at us from the right hand.” (Qur’an 37:28)
Look at how various translators have tried to deal with the above text!
Here the right hand is used as a metaphor, majaz which means to approach, admonish strongly.
So than moving to the ahadith, contrary to what people today tell us that the Salaaf, the Blessed Messenger (saw) and his companions took everything from their outward meaning on the contrary they understood the use of majaz in their language.
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Allah (mighty and sublime be He) said: Pride is my cloak (upper garment) and greatness My robe (waist wrapper), and he who competes with Me in respect of either of them I shall cast into Hell-fire. It was related by Abu Dawud (also by Ibn Majah and Ahmad) with sound chains of authority. This Hadith also appears in Muslim in another version.”
Are we to believe that Allah (swt) has an upper garment and a waist wrapper?
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Allah (mighty and sublime be He) said: Whoever shows enmity to someone devoted to Me, I shall be at war with him. My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his ears with which he hears, his eyes with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes and his foot with which he walks. Were he to ask [something] of Me, I would surely give it to him, and were he to ask Me for refuge, I would surely grant him it. I do not hesitate about anything as much as I hesitate about [seizing] the soul of My faithful servant: he hates death and I hate hurting him.”
Are we to believe that Allah (swt) becomes the ear of the person? The eyes of the person? The hand and the foot of the person?
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
Allah (swt) will say on the Day of Resurrection: O son of Adam, I fell ill and you visited Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I visit You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so had fallen ill and you visited him not? Did you not know that had you visited him you would have found Me with him? O son of Adam, I asked you for food and you fed Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I feed You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so asked you for food and you fed him not? Did you not know that had you fed him you would surely have found that (the reward for doing so) with Me? O son of Adam, I asked you to give Me to drink and you gave Me not to drink. He will say: O Lord, how should I give You to drink when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: My servant So-and-so asked you to give him to drink and you gave him not to drink. Had you given him to drink you would have surely found that with Me.”
It is clear that Allah (swt) ascribes acts to himself which he does not actually do, such as falling ill, and asking for that which is apparent that he does not need such as food and drink.
On the authority of Abdullah ibn Umar reported:
The Messenger of Allah, (saw), said, “The upper hand is better than the lower hand. The upper hand is one that gives and the lower hand is one that takes.”
The hadith itself while using hand as a metaphor explains the meaning. Thus the word hand is not used as an apparent real attribute of a person.
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Prophet (saw) said:
“Allah the Almighty said: I am as My servant thinks I am. I am with him when he makes mention of Me. If he makes mention of Me to himself, I make mention of him to Myself; and if he makes mention of Me in an assembly, I make mention of him in an assembly better than it. And if he draws near to Me an arm’s length, I draw near to him a cubit, and if he draws near to Me a cubit, I draw near to him a fathom. And if he comes to Me walking, I go to him running.”
Our Shaykh Juma Mazrui reminded us that unfortunately there are among those who take such statements upon their literal important and thus their teacher, Shaykh Al Uthaymeen has advocated for the ‘jogging of Allah’ as a real action and quality that Allah (swt) does. ‘Jogging but unlike our jogging’.
This hadith also poses other problems if taken upon face value.
If a person draws to Allah (swt) be an arms length, than Allah (swt) draws to that person by a cubit.
If that person draws near by a cubit than Allah (swt) will draw near to them by a fathom.
It gives the impression that the opposite can be true in that a person can eventually go so far away from Allah (swt), that Allah (swt) would be out of reach, so to speak.
“When My slaves ask you ˹O Prophet˺ about Me: I am truly near. I respond to one’s prayer when they call upon Me. So let them respond ˹with obedience˺ to Me and believe in Me, perhaps they will be guided ˹to the Right Way˺. (Qur’an 2:186)
Insh’Allah, the third lesson will be this week. Hopefully what has passed from our respected teacher is more than sufficient to dispel the myth that the Blessed Messenger (saw), his companions, the Salaaf did not understand the Arabic language nor did they employ the use of majaz.
“And We have also sent down unto you (Muhammed) the Reminder and the Advice (the Qur’an), that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them.” (Qur’an 16:44)
﷽
In our first lesson Shaykh Juma Mazrui (h) went over some of the disputes the scholars have had in regards to majaz in the Qur’an. Among those who dispute majaz are those who liken Allah (swt) to his creation by stating that he has two right hands, two eyes, and so forth.
Some people are under the mistaken impression that the apparent meaning of certain verses in the Qur’an indicate anthropomorphism. However, most of those who assume as such are either reading translations of the Qur’an into English and/or even among the Arabs those who have forgotten how deep and powerful the language of the Qur’anic Arabic actually is. They have forgotten the use of Majaz.
Such that when a person sees the word ‘yadahu’ they use their mind to scan one of the most common meanings possible for the word. However, not everyone can be said to take that meaning. The context would certainly dictate how one may scan a word search for an understanding.
An example:
And the Jews say, ‘The (yadu l-lahi) is tied up.’ Chained are their (aydihim), and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, (yadahu mabsūṭatāni) , HE spends however He Wills.” (Qur’an 5:64)
So these are words and phrases and terminologies that an Arab in the 7th century would have knowledge of. So when an Arab of that time read this page did they imagine Allah (swt) as being bound (like a prisoner) unable to have use of His “hands”?
Or, did they immediately recognizes the metaphor? That these people are claiming that Allah (swt) does not bestow upon them anything of good and/or is misrely. Where Allah (swt) retorts back that he is boundless in his generosity?
What went through their minds when the yadu (a feminine singular noun in the nominative case switched to yadahu (a noun and a possessive pronoun-the noun being feminine dual in the nominative case with the attached possessive pronoun in third person masculine singular).
Can it be said that they imagine some type of gender swapping happening? Or it can it be said that these people knew the function and style of their language.
Now if one was to give a person the Qur’an without any understanding of who or what Allah (swt) is what is the perception that they would walk away with. (Reading a translation or reading the Arabic).
If for example in our dawah we tell the Christians that Allah is not a man or a woman and Allah (swt) does not have a gender. What would be the impression of that Christian (reading a translation of the Qur’an) or that Arab Christian reading the Arabic Qur’an have when reading the following verse:
“There is nothing likeunto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)
That apparent meaning or the meaning that comes when they use their mind to scan search for an understanding they may walk away with the impression that they were mislead.
Similarly, when reading the Qur’an when the are certain statements which are assumed to be attributes of Allah (swt) in which you will never find the following statement after such assumed attributes: Bila Kayfa meaning: ‘without how’ ‘without modality’
It is very clear that every language is rich in meaning , scope and depth. All languages to some degree or another deploy a range of literary devices. Chief among them is metaphor or as we would say in Arabic majaz.
Shaykh Juma Mazrui (h) has shown us clearly many examples of Majaz in the Qur’an.
“Allah is the Guardian of those who believe, He brings them out of every darkness into light. And those who disbelieve, their guardians are the evil ones; they bring them out of light into all kinds of darkness. These are destined for the Fire, and there shall they abide.” (Qur’an 2:257)
This is an example of metaphor or Majaz. There is no real darkness that we are being brought out of and into a real light. No one has been able to demonstrably prove this by the apparent meaning.
“Ignominy shall be their portion wherever they are found save (where they grasp) a rope from Allah and a rope from men. They have incurred anger from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them. That is because they used to disbelieve the revelations of Allah, and slew the prophets wrongfully. That is because they were rebellious and used to transgress.” (Qur’an 3:112)
This is another example of metaphor or Majaz. There is no real rope from Allah and a rope from men that people are grasping onto.
Again we find:
“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah and do not be divided. Remember Allah’s favour upon you when you were enemies, then He united your hearts, so you—by His grace—became brothers. And you were at the brink of a fiery pit and He saved you from it. This is how Allah makes His revelations clear to you, so that you may be ˹rightly˺ guided.” (Qur’an 3:103)
There no real, physical or apparent rope from Allah (swt) that any of us are grasping on to for every moment of our life. This is a clear example of metaphor or Majaz. The rope that is referred to that we are to grasp or adhere to is the religion of Islam.
“Moreover, will say to those who were oppressed to those who were arrogant, “Nay, (it was) a plot (by) night and a plot (by) day when you were ordering us that we disbelieve in Allah and we set up for Him equals.” But they will conceal the regret when they see the punishment. And We will put shackles on (the) necks (of) those who disbelieved. Will they be recompensed except (for) what they used to do?” (Qur’an 34:33)
This is the majaz of hadhfi or the metaphor of omission. Can it be said that the night plots and the day plots? This is a clear example of metaphor and the overwhelming majority of translators have not translated nor interpreted it by its apparent meaning.
“To Him belong the keys to the heavens and the earth. As for those who have rejected the verses of Allah, it is they who are the losers.” (Qur’an 39:3)
If you translate this literally, or take it apparently it is to mean that Allah (swt) has two material keys. This would be a case of tashbih to liken one thing to another. Like people have keys that they use to start their car or to unlock their homes.
That Allah (swt) would need two sets of keys to lock/unlock the heavens and the earth merits pensive reflection from those who beleive in the apparent meaning of the text.
17 times a day a Muslim says, “guide is to the right way.” That is from the opening chapter of the Qur’an.
Well, where is this ‘straight path, this straight way’? If you to take it from the apparent, from the literal meaning.
“Be patient over what they say, and remember Our servant, David, the possessor of many hands; he was one who repeatedly turned back [to Us].” (Qur’an 38:17)
Plural in Arabic begins with three and not two! So, at the very least David had three hands. However, notice something from the following site:
It is unanimous that they all translate ‘many hands’ as strength! Even the Salafi/Saudi translations do! Even the translation that gives us the most literal word for word meaning possible was too shy to translate David having many hands.
Be patient over what they say and remember Our servant, David, the possessor of strength; indeed, he was one who repeatedly turned back [to Allah ] (Sahih International)
Be patient (O Muhammad SAW) of what they say, and remember Our slave Dawood (David), endued with power. Verily, he was ever oft-returning in all matters and in repentance (toward Allah) (Muhsin Khan & Muhammed Al Hilal)
So we can say to those who believe in literal translations: Why don’t you take these verses on the apparent meaning? If Allah (swt) says that David has many hands then say that David had many hands!
You are shy to ascribe many hands to David but not to Allah (swt)?!
“He is the One who has made the earth subjugated for you, so walk on its shoulders, and eat out of His provision, and to Him is the Resurrection.” (Qur’an 67:15)
The earth has shoulders? As I have?
“And He (is) the One Who sends the winds (of glad news between the two hands of his Mercy, until, when they have carried clouds ” (Qur’an 7:57)
Allah sends winds like herald of glad news, between the two hands of his Mercy.
Now his Mercy has two hands?
So those who believe in literal translations tell us that Allah (swt) has two right hands, and he has an attribute of Mercy and this attribute has two hands. Are they also right hands?
Look how virtually everyone else translates the text!
“Moreover, it is He who sends the winds as good news before His mercy until, when they have carried heavy rain clouds, We drive them to a dead land and We send down rain in that respect and bring forth thereby [some] of all the fruits. Thus will We bring forth the dead; perhaps you will be reminded.” (Sahih International)
“And it is He Who sends the winds as heralds of glad tidings, going before His Mercy (rain). Till when they have carried a heavy-laden cloud, We drive it to a land that is dead, then We cause water (rain) to descend immediately. Then We produce every fruit besides that. Similarly, We shall raise the dead, so that you may remember or take heed.” (Muhsin Khan and Muhammed Al Hilali)
No one wants to take the literal, or apparent meaning of the text and ascribe to Allah’s mercy two hands! Why is that?
“Also, He (is) the One Who sends the winds (as) glad news (from) between (hands) His Mercy, and We send down from the sky water pure.” (Qur’an 25:48)
Even look at those at Corpus Qur’an. They are literally confused about how to translate the Arabic text:
“So, out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say: “My Lord! bestow on them your Mercy even as they cherished me in childhood.” (Qur’an 17:24)
Does humility have wings?
“And lower your wing to those who follow you of the believers.” (Qu’ran 26:215 -Sahih International)
For some reason in this case Sahih International decides to go with the literal, apparent text. But the question needs to be asked does the Blessed Messenger (saw) have a wing?
Allah (swt) said he did. So why can’t what Allah (swt) says be good enough for us?
“So when we accepted your covenant and lifted the mountain of Sinai over you, saying, receive the law which we have given you, with a resolution to perform it, and hear; they said, we have heard, and have rebelled: And they were made to drink down the calf into their hearts for their unbelief. Say, a grievous thing has your faith commanded you, if you indeed be true believers.” (Qur’an 2:93)
Does anyone think they were drinking calf? It means that their hearts were filled with worshipping the calf.
“And a faction of the People of the Scripture say [to each other], “Believe in that which was revealed to the believers at the face of the day and reject it at its end that perhaps they will abandon their religion.” (Qur’an 3:72)
wajha-face. Are we really to believe that the day has a face?
“Give good news, glad news, to the believers upon the foot of the truth.”(Qur’an 10:2)
“Have the people been amazed that We revealed [revelation] to a man from among them, [saying], “Warn mankind and give good news to those who believe that they will have a [firm] precedence of honor with their Lord”? [But] the disbelievers say, “Indeed, this is an obvious magician.” (Sahih International)
Muhsin Khan and Muhammed Al Hilali really went wild with this translation:
“Is it wonder for mankind that We have sent Our Inspiration to a man from among themselves (i.e. Prophet Muhammad SAW) (saying): “Warn mankind (of the coming torment in Hell), and give good news to those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah and in His Prophet Muhammad SAW) that they shall have with their Lord the rewards of their good deeds?” (But) the disbelievers say: “This is indeed an evident sorcerer (i.e. Prophet Muhammad SAW and the Quran)” (Muhsin Khan & Muhammed Al Hilali)
The principle of rejecting the Mujaaz usually comes from those who say that Allah (swt) has two limbs, and two right hands, two eyes etc. Shaykh Juma Mazrui had other examples that I did not have the chance to pin down but insh’Allah I will enquire about the missed examples and plug them into this article..
Shaykh Juma Mazrui will be going over with us in the coming weeks the following lessons: Insh’Allah.
In the traditions of the Prophet (saw) did he use Majaaz when he talks to the companions?
Majaz in the Arabic language.
Tawil in the Arabic language.
“See how Allah does make His revelations clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!” (Qur’an 5:75)
Those two PDF files are titled: Ibadhism a moderate sect of Islam & Ibadism in the studies of Ali Yahya Mu’ammar
I am sharing these files as I believe researchers of the Ibadi school may come across them online and while they are useful there are some points of information contained with in the books that need addressed as well as the presentation of the books themselves.
Ibadhism a moderate sect of Islam
Let me address this PDF book first.
This paper is written by Harun Yildiz it seems like a translation from Turkish into Arabic and what makes it more challenging is that it seems the writer is translating thoughts from Arabic to Turkish and than into English. Thus, it is not a smooth read. If you would like to clarify any points the Professor is still alive as of 10/5/2024 and maybe reached here:
A discussion about different aspects of Ibadi Jurisprudence. That the Ibadi’s are known for using: The Qur’an. The authentic Sunnah. Mutawattir Mashur, Ahad (all of which can be acted upon provided they meet the requisite conditions). ‘Ijma (consensus), Qiyas. (analogy), Istidlal & Masalih i Mursala (Istislah).
Not cursing the companions of the Blessed Prophet (saw) is not something we are known for. It is not a known way with our school.
He has a section discussing Ibadis accepting the Ottoman Rule while living in their own communities deciding things by the azzaba (the religious/political council)
He talks about Ibadi sub-sects which in reality are more concerned with political divisions than real theological divisions. Nukkariyya Naffasiyya Khalafiyya Husayniyya Umariyya Sakkakiyya (real innovative ideas) -the one that has real theological and bizarre claims Farsiyya
He mentions: “It is permitted to increase the number of Imamates in the Muslim community if the area is expanded and the distance therein becomes far, or if the enemy separates its sections and it becomes difficult to rule it with one system, or if that becomes a cause of its downfall and separation of its forces and destruction of the people’s interests.” pg. 21
So what is meant is imagine there is an an Imamate in North Africa and one in Bangladesh they would be cut off by a great distance. So this idea is practical and pragmatic and the hadith is interpreted to reflect this reality.
As correctly pointed out Ibadis are not known for fighting with other Muslims. on pg. 86 in the footnote: “The first actual movement that was put forward by Ibadis is the movement launched by Talibu’l Hakk(Haqq) Abdullah b. Yahya al-Kindi in Yemen with defensive reasons.”
The mistakes (errors) or clarifications that the book needs.
#1 The author states:
“If a deviation is seen in the president, he would be was overthrown in a hard way, not with a soft method.” pg. 82
But than this is contradicted by:
“The unjust ruler will first be requested to practice justice, if he does not respond, he will be told to leave the Muslim affairs; if he does not respond, it is permitted to fight him and remove him by force even if that will result in his death, if that will not lead to bigger riot.” pg.20
As well as:
“It is not right to revolt against a just president, according to Ibadites. It is not wajib(obligatory) to revolt against a cruel president, as Kharijites posited. In addition, this case isn’t forbidden, as Ash’aris and Salafis say. So, justice is primarily demanded from cruel rulers. If he does not answer, his dismissal is requested. If he still does not answer, revolt is no longer unlawful against him and he should be dismissed by force.” pg. 86
His statement here:
“‘However, Quraishness or Arabness is preferable in case of overlapping conditions here.” pg. 86.
This is incomplete information. These are factors that are not default but given consideration in circumstantial situations as was explained at the end of our article here
You do not need to read the whole article. The section that I deal with the point is at the end of the article.
However, I will also address the point here:
Maslaha (Arabic: مصلحة) is an Arabic word that means “benefit,” “welfare,” “interest,” or “public good.
So case in point where Quraishness is preferable. It is painfully obvious that Muslims would be in a better place if we were united under one Amir, Imam, Caliph.
You could unite the Ibadis, Malikis, Hanafis, Shafi’i and Hanbali under one Amir, Imam, Caliph if there was a person who met all the conditions according to the Ibadi School. The Sunni position is that the Amir, Imam, or Caliph needs to be from the Quraysh.
In this scenario, there is a coalition of Sunnis and Ibadi and the Zaydi are excluded.
Or
You could bring the Zaydi in under this Amir, Imam or Caliph if that person was a descendant of Hassan or Hussein.
So, in theory, if you had an Amir, Imam, Caliph who met the conditions of the Ibadi school, was a descendant of the Quraysh, and was a descendant of either Hassan or Hussein, you could theoretically have a coalition (Sunni, Ibadi, Zaydi) willing to give Bayah a single Imam, Amir, Caliph.
Note: The conditions of the Ibadi school are not objected to by any of the other schools. Thus, for us Ibadis there are practical and pragmatic considerations. As well as for the maslaha of the Ummah, we could unify under the above proposed scenario.
The Imami Shi’i are excluded for obvious reasons. They would still freely practice their school while under the power of such a scenario.
He states:
“He who commits adultery with a woman, she will be unlawful to him for ever.” pg. 34
What he means is fornication , if you are caught there are no conditions in which you can marry her/him. If it was adultery it would be stoning as per the Sunnah.
Ibadism in the studies of Ali Yahya Mu’ammar
Now this paper is said to be written by the noble and blessed Shaykh Ali Yahya Mu’ammar (r)
The translator is: Ahmed Hamoud Al-Maamiry. I do not know if it is the quality of the printing but the paper has many grammatical mistakes, some incomplete thoughts/sentences as well as words combined together. I believe this particular translation into English does not speak to the profundity of the Shaykhs eloquence or wisdom. Certainly the original Arabic would be in the best interest of the researcher. Perhaps even a French translation may have done a better job at conveying the thoughts and reflections of the esteemed Shaykh. May Allah have mercy on him.
The mistakes (errors) or clarifications that the book needs.
This is not an error per se in this book, however, it contradicts the point made on pg. 82 in the above PDF book.
“Even when they were able to change systems of rule, they did so through convocation and conviction, and they achieved what they needed without using the sword or killing souls. The system of government was changed three times in without any violence. The Imam whom they assign would call the former Imam and would give him the option between remaining in the country with all his rights and obligations like any other Muslim and choosing to leave to any place he likes peacefully with his property and with whom he likes among his family.” pg. 17
Which of course is totally contrary to everything you ever heard of us. You see the Amir or Imam of the Muslims is much like a CEO of a vast company. If he starts to run the company into the ground the shura council will advise him much like members of the board. If he is involved in scandal (big sins) will be asked to step down. So, just like the CEO that doesn’t do anything against the law but is simply horrible at management, he is asked to step down without punitive measures taken. However, if the CEO does not step down he can be (emphasis on can) be taken our forcibly.
“They affirm the torment of the grave and the questioning b the two angels according to many traditions confirming the issue.” pg.15
However, this is an error (if the respected Shaykh said this) as there is difference of opinion in our school in grading the hadith reports if they weigh in the balance of mutawatir or not.
This is where Sheikh Dr Scholar Abdullah bin Saeed Al Ma’mari clarifies on this matter.
“or the Arabs, but on merit. When merits are equal then the Quraish or the Arabs have the priority.” pg. 20
This is incomplete information. These are factors that are not default but given consideration in circumstantial situations as was explained at the end of our article here:
“Tidak ada paksaan dalam (menganut) agama (Islam), sesungguhnya telah jelas (perbedaan) antara jalan yang benar dengan jalan yang sesat. Barang siapa ingkar kepada Tagut dan beriman kepada Allah, maka sungguh, dia telah berpegang (teguh) pada tali yang sangat kuat yang tidak akan putus. Allah Maha Mendengar, Maha Mengetahui.” (AlQuran 2:256)
﷽
Ini website dalam bahasa Indonesia tentang segala hal terkait Ibadhiyyah. Website-nya baru mulai tapi insya Allah artikel-artikel baru akan terus ditambah agar saudara-saudari kami dari Indonesia dapat terus membaca dan mengambil faidahnya.
“Dinde zorlama yoktur. Hak yol, batıl yoldan apaçık ayrılmıştır. Kim tağuta küfredip, Allah’a iman ederse, muhakkak ki o (kimse) kopması mümkün olmayan en sağlam kulpa yapışmıştır. Allah, hakkıyla işitendir, hakkıyla bilendir.” ( Kur’an-ı Kerim 2:256)
﷽
Değerli Okuyucularımız,
Web sitemize hoş geldiniz. Burada İbadi mezhebi ve güncel konular hakkında geniş kapsamlı bilgi edinebilirsiniz. İbadi mezhebi, İslam’ın önemli mezheplerinden biri olan ve özellikle Umman, Cezayir, Tunus ve Libya gibi ülkelerde yaygın olarak takip edilen bir mezheptir. Bu web sitesi, İbadi mezhebinin temel prensiplerini, tarihini ve uygulamalarını ayrıntılı bir şekilde ele almaktadır.
İbadi mezhebi hakkında daha fazla bilgi edinmek veya bu konudaki sorularınızı yanıtlamak için bizimle iletişime geçmekten çekinmeyin. İbadi mezhebi ile ilgili hocalarımız, size yardımcı olmaktan memnuniyet duyacaklardır.
Ayrıca, İbadi mezhebi ile ilgilenenler için özel olarak oluşturduğumuz bir WhatsApp grubumuz bulunmaktadır. Bu gruba katılmak isterseniz, bize bildirin ve size gerekli bilgileri sağlayalım.
İbadi mezhebini sizlere tanıtmaktan ve sorularınıza cevap vermekten memnuniyet duyarız.
“And when it is said to them, “Do not cause corruption on the earth,” they say, “We are but reformers.” Of a surety, they are the ones who make mischief, but they realise (it) not.” (Qur’an 2:11-12)
“And whoever kills a believer intentionally, their reward will be Hell—where they will stay indefinitely. Allah will be displeased with them, condemn them, and will prepare for them a tremendous punishment.” (Qur’an 4:93)
﷽
Ibn Taymiyya and his sect are ready to slaughter all Muslims in the world.
Ibn Taymiyya and his Salafiyyah sect are the one’s who espouse ideas to cut off the heads of all Muslims who are against them and their ideology.
All you need to do is spend a little time on social media, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and you will not fail to who those who are extremist in their ideology, whom they support in reality.
Read it and weep! If people want to ascribe to the early Khawarij the doctrine of take no prisoners and slaughter them all than what do we have here?!
These so called callers of Salafiyyah tell people: “The Khawarij are the dogs of hellfire!” “They Kill Muslims Who Disagree With Them And They’re Views And Give Bloodshedding Fatwas And They’re Blood Is Halal For Them, They’re Extreme Takfiris!”
But let us look at the following text and be reminded of the saying: If the shoe fits wear it!
Interesting…Interesting…
That sounds awfully familiar (ask them the ruling for one who says the Qur’an is Created)
The following text are from Ibn Taymiyya al Harrani as well as his sect!
“We bear witness-and we are the scholars of Makkah-the Authors of these statements and the conclusions found here. That this religion/sect was established by Shaykh Muhammed B. Abdulwahab and was called too by the Imam of the Muslims. Shaykh Saud B AbdulAziz, To the Oneness of Allah and Negating Polytheism. -That is mentioned in the book is the truth of which there is no doubt or uncertainty of. And of that which occurred prior in Makkah and Madinah. -In Egypt and Syria -and all other countries-up until now is from the forms of polytheism (Shirk). That is mentioned in this book as being disbelief (kufr) that makes the committers of such wealth and blood permissible. And they will be damned to hell forever, residing there and whoever does not enter this religion/sect and acts upon it and supports its people and hates its enemies is a disbeliever (kafir) of Allah and the Last Day. And it is obligatory for the Imam of the Muslims and the Muslims themselves to wage war against them (Jihad) and to Kill them until they repent to Allah from that which they were upon. And he must uphold this religion/sect.”
Source: (Al Duraru Sunniyah Fi Al Jawabat Al Najdiyyah, Vol 1, Pg 314.)
“And the caller too innovation what is deserving of them-is the recompense-by agreement of all Muslims. And that recompense is given by killing them or other than that. As the Salaf killed Jahm B. Safwaan, al-Ja’d b. Dirham (teacher of Jahm bin Safwan) and Gilaan Al Qadari and others..”
He goes on to say if you cannot kill them-that being the first and best option-you should at least warn of them. As he says it is from: “Enjoying Good and Forbidding the Evil”, that “Allah has ordered.”
Source: (Majmoo Al Fatawa: Ibn Taymiyya, Page 242.)
“And whoever amongst them is a caller to misguidance, his deviance cannot be removed except by death! Either he shows open repentance and if he does not he is given judgement for his disbelief (kufr). Like the Imams of the Rafidhis (Shias); they are among those who have misguided people. As the Muslims, Gilan Al Qadari, al-Ja’d b. Dirham (teacher of Jahm bin Safwan) and their likes form the deviant callers. Therefore this dajjal is killed absolutely. -And Allah knows best. And for the killing the caller to innovation then he can be killed as well, to stop his misguidance from affecting the people. Just as one at war is killed. Even if the the situation is not the same as the infidels.”
Source: (Majmoo Al Fatawa: Ibn Taymiyya Page 303 And Page 197)
According to the above Fatwa they are ready to kill all Muslims in the world that accept these views!
“And from the book: Taarikh Al Naysapuri – I heard from Muhammed B. Saleh B. Haani, who heard the Imam of the Scholars: Abu Bakr B. Khuzaymah say: “Whoever does not affirm that Allah is over the throne, and has settled on the throne, above the seven heavens and that he is separate from his creation, then he is a kafir-he is obligated to repent or to be struck (killed). Otherwise he will harm the people of the qiblah and the non-Muslims with his presence.”
Source: (Kitab Ijtima Al Juyush Vol 2: Ibn Qayyim.)
“And he was in the 7th Heaven, Because the Prophet (saw) – Saw his Lord. While he was in this world, and did you know that the scholars did no differ that the entirety of the believers will see they’re lord in the hereafter, and not in this world. Whoever denies the seeing of they’re Lord on the day of gathering is not a believer in the eyes of the believers. And He is worse to the scholars than the Jews and Christians and the Magians. As Ibn Mubarak said: “We can bare the sayings of the Christians and Jews but we cannot bare the saying of the Jahmiyyah.” [end of blue section]
Source: (Page 587 Kitab Al Tawheed By Ibn Khuzaymah)
“And from the book: Taarikh Al Naysapuri – I heard from Muhammed B. Saleh B. Haani, who heard the Imam of the Scholars: Abu Bakr B. Khuzaymah say: “Whoever does not affirm that Allah is over the throne, and has settled on the throne, above the seven heavens and that he is separate from his creation, then is a kafir-he is obligated to repent or to be struck (killed). Otherwise he will harm the people of the qiblah and the non-Muslims with his presence.”
The Imam, Ibn Khuzaymah Died In The Year 312 a.h And he says in his book also, “Whoever denies the seeing of Allah in the hereafter, then he is in the sight of the believers, more worse than a Jew or a Christian or a Magian-and they are not believers in the view of the believers.”
Sources: (Kitab ijtima al Juyush Vol 2 Page 194: Ibn Qayyim Kitab Ijtima Al Juyush Vol 2: Ibn Qayyim.)
“This Is The Saved Group, Those who have gathered upon the truth brought by the The Messenger (saw) and that which he was steadfast upon and those who steer upon the path of the Messenger (saw) and his companions. These are the Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamaah, The people of the noble hadith-the Salafis those that follow the righteous Salaaf-and strive upon their path in upholding the Qur’an and Sunnah and any other sect opposing them-for them is the promise of Hell.”
“Therefore you-oh seeker-are too look at every sect that proclaims they are the saved sect and look into their actions. If their actions actions is in compliance with the Shari’ah then they are the saved sect and if not, then no. And what is the scale that is meant of judging is the Qur’an and Purified Sunnah in (validating) the truth all of it.”
Source: (Fatawaa Noor Alaa Al Darb, Vol 2, Pg 12: Ibn Baz.)
OPEN YOUR EYES DEAR READERS AND SEE FOR YOURSELF! THE SALAFI MANJAH IS UPON THE MANHAJ OF SLAUGHTER AND KILLING.
Ibn Taymiyya al Harrani what is he is talking about!?
If this guy was a transformer his name would be TAKFIRA-TRON.
This Salafiyyah dawah is effective ONLY in that the people they talk to on the streets they only show the people what they want them to see. Those people (who they invite to Islam) are not researchers and they don’t have access to the Arabic language.
If people really know about them they will know that what they present is not Islam at all.
“We do not abrogate an ayat or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?” (Qur’an 2:106)
“And when We substitute an ayat in place of an ayat – and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down – they say, “You, [O Muhammed], are but an inventor [of lies].” But most of them do not know.” (Qur’an 16:101)
﷽
One of the major differences in aqidah (creed) between the Ibadi school and those from ‘Ahl Sunnah’ is on the issue of the preservation of the Qur’an.
The Ibadi position is this:
We have the entire Qur’an. (Chart A)
We have the Qur’an that Allah (swt) intended for us to have which is Chart A
The Sunni position is this:
We have the Qur’an that Allah (swt) intended for us to have. Chart B
We do not have the entire Qur’an.* Chart B
*Note. This is not an outlier or strange position. This is the major position with in what is called ‘Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah‘. You may be surprised at those who call themselves Sunni who are simply ignorant of this. However; as with any school of theology, jurisprudence or approach taken it is always possible to have minority voices and or those that dissent from the mashur (majority view).
This entry will discuss some observations by a Sunni apologist whom is replying to what is commonly referenced on internet culture as team: “Atheist-Christ*” . In this particular response to 1/2 of team Atheist-Christ an enterprising Sunni apologist gives what he feels is a robust response.
*Note: For those not familiar, an Atheist-Christ is a Christian unbothered by an unsaved Atheist among them. He (the Christian) teams up with the Atheist and they jointly attack Islam.
Thus, 1/2 of team Atheist-Christ is an apologist whom has taken issue with the idea of the Qur’an having lost and/or forgotten chapters/verses/words and so forth.
When it comes to the idea or concept of abrogation the only consensus that the Sunni Muslims seem to have is that such a concept exist. What actually abrogates what is anyone’s guess.
Some of them even believe in scenarios such as that the Qur’an used to have verses that explicitly mention stoning adulterers to death and that the verses were abrogated/lost/forgotten/eaten by a goat. However, the ruling remains! In our school this concept is one in which refuge in Allah (swt) is sought.
You get into issues such as the Qur’an abrogating the Qur’an. The Sunnah abrogating the Sunnah. Or even the Sunnah abrogating the Qur’an. The last one being the most dangerous of all, as the sunnah is primarily preserved and transmitted via lone narrator reports. It is an excellent opportunity for something that is dhan (uncertain) to overrule or overwrite something that is qati (decisive) such as the Qur’an.
The basis for this belief is the following text from the Qur’an.
“We do not abrogate an ayat or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?” (Qur’an 2:106)
The assumption here is that the word ayat is referencing a verse in the Qur’an. It is not assumed for example that is a reference to miracles, that are no longer witnessed or tangible. or that it a reference to even the previous revelations. Now there are so many things to be said about this in and of itself. Notice that it does not say the word surah (chapter). For example in the following verse:
“And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Slave, then produce a Surah (chapter) the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah , if you should be truthful.” (Qur’an 2:23)
This part also deserves pensive reflection on the part of those who believe the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated.
“We bring forth better than it or similar to it“
Abrogation is omission, removal and it is impossible for that which is eternal. The idea that some part of Allah’s sifat of attribute of ‘speech‘ would be ‘better‘ or “improved upon” over other parts merits pensive reflection.
“We bring forth better than it or similar to it”
If a person believes that this statement is a reference to the Qur’an than it creates a circular reasoning. If you no longer have the original source to compare it with than you have no way of knowing in what way that which was brought was improved upon.
An example:
As mentioned there is the view among a great many Sunni scholars that there used to be verses of stoning the adulterers in the Qur’an and that was abrogated/lost/forgotten/eaten by a goat. Recall the verse they base their belief on states: “We bring forth better than it or similar to it.” So which verse in the Qur’an now is now similar to it or better than it?
Why are Christians scolded for forgetting the revelation where as for Muslims it becomes a proof and a miracle for Islam? So much so that for the Christians hate and enmity was stirred up between them?!
“And with those who say ‘We are Christians’ We took compact; and they have forgotten (fanasu)a portion of that they were reminded of. So We have stirred up among them enmity and hatred, till the Day of Resurrection; and Allah will assuredly tell them of the things they wrought.” (Qur’an 5: 14)
In fact because I can anticipate how these people think. I can almost guarantee you the immediate response will be something akin to the following: “The difference here is that Allah made the companions forget where as the Christians forgot from negligence.”
Which also baffles me. The Creator causes you to forget his revelation = something meritorious.
The Arabic word Insan is derived from the Arabic nasiya meaning to forget. In fact you can see that in the very text of Q 5:14 above.
So allow me to share with you the video from a Sunni apologist who goes by the name of Farid. I think he means well and over all he some good material.
So after listening to 1/2 of team Atheist-Christ put up his objections against the Qur’an Farid had the following to say:
“”Alright. So Firstly the common answer to this which is the answer I adopt is that this this chapter was abrogated. That’s what that’s the classical position. So the argument for that is really simple. Uh basically this specific verse. This specific verse that speaks of the son of Adam having valleys of gold or valleys of wealth, this specific uh verse was memorized and documented by um according to Sayuti 15 companions. That’s quite a high number. and yet it never got into the Qur’an.” -Farid
Prima Qur’an comments:
Actually, it is very surprising that Farid says this. Perhaps to give him the benefit of the doubt what he means is the Uthmanic codex; because to say that it was never part of the Qur’an is to totally misread what was plainly stated.
Look again:
“We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this…..”
It is clear that was considered part of the Qur’an. We do not call du’a and invocations surah. So the more correct perspective here (if it were true at all) is that it was part of the Qur’an. It just doesn’t become part of the Uthmanic codex.
Farid continues:
“Now there is nothing controversial about the verse. There’s no reason for someone to hide the verse away or anything like that. So yes the traditional Islamic answer is this verse EXCUSE ME THIS CHAPTER was abrogated. And that itself will be convincing to any Muslim.”-Farid
Prima Qur’an comments:
Well, I am a Muslim and I am not the only one that doesn’t buy this at all. The Mufti of Oman, learned scholar and Shaykh, has this to say:
“Abrogation is never permitted in the reports of the Law-Maker because His Knowledge is not refreshed and He is not ignorant of anything that happens, and He does not reveal but the truth.”-Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h)
Notice that Farid does a kind of bait and switch. In the above paragraph he uses the word ‘verse’ twice and the third time finally says, “Excuse me This CHAPTER.” Because that is what is being discussed. Recall “We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this…..”
So since the entirety of the chapter(surah) was lost or forgotten Farid is in no position to say that nothing controversial was in its contents. The reason he cannot say that is accordingly the chapter (surah) as a whole was lost/forgotten. However, the portion the chapter that was remembered was: “If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust.”
Also, recall the verse in the Qur’an that is the basis for this belief.
“We bring forth better than it or similar to it”
So what verse did Allah (swt) bring that was better than or equivalent to the one of the two valleys full of riches?
Farid continues.
“Now before getting to my arguments I want you to be aware that the concept of abrogation is not something that is specific to Islam. It’s something that existed in Christianity previously you have the laws of Christianity abrogating the laws of Judaism. Right? Umm You even have specific examples of works that were abrogated because they were not important um in Judaism. So this is again this is not something that’s exclusive to Islam.”-Farid
Prima Qur’an comments:
It would have been great if Farid would have given an example of a law in Christianity abrogating a law of Judaism. If he done that perhaps we could see even how problematic such a concept was in their traditions as well. For example:
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:8-9)
“If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. Do not bring sin upon the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 24:1-4)
So initially Jesus (whom is God the Son) according to the Athanasian Trinity gave Moses this command that it was o.k to divorce a woman if he found something displeasing or indecent about her. After she marries another man and he too divorces her or dies she cannot go back to the first husband as that would be ‘detestable’ in the eyes of the Lord. Yet, this same Jesus (whom is God the Son) than tries to say it was Moses who gave such a law because “your hearts’ were hard”
Christian damage control
“Jesus now answers that Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of the Israelites’ hearts. This means that God created a set of rules limiting the damage which divorce might cause. Jesus adds that it was not so from the beginning. In other words, God’s intention in creation was that all human marriage between man and woman should be lifelong. To separate what God had joined was a violation of God’s design. Under Moses, however, Israel was allowed to break the design because of the sin-hardened hearts of the people—providing limits and restraints on the practice.”
God (Jesus as God the Son) first allowed this type of divorce even though it was a violation of his (Jesus) design. Mostly because of the recognition that people’s hearts were hard. However, he suddenly changes that. Umm why? Aren’t the hearts still hard? You mean to say that human hearts are not hard anymore?
Do you know the irony of all this dear readers?
Religious Jews will see this a proof against Christianity and the capricious nature of how they perceive God.
Religious Christians will see this a proof for Jesus divinity because: Who else can give laws that they personally dislike, and violate the very intended pattern hey have planned for human beings (but not yet cause their hearts are hard) but some time 2000 years ago (possibly their hearts were not as hard) and yes you know what that was not adultery than but it is now: who can do that but God?
Religious Muslims who are involved in polemic with Christians (people like brother Farid) would possibly use arguments like this against the Christian faith and yet see things like this as a case for Islam.
This doesn’t become about being consistent and defending the haqq (truth). It’s about the football jersey that I wear and yours doesn’t’ match mine!
Farid continues.
“Now in regards to this specific matter what I find really interesting here this is referring to Abu Musa Al Ashari; who taught the Qur’an in Basra who taught the Qur’an in Yemen he was seen as one of the main reciters of the Qur’an. We rely upon Abu Musa for our Qir’aat today however, however, interestingly Abu Musa forgot a complete chapter of the Qur’an And what’s really interesting about that specific chapter is like we have no information about it.”-Farid
Prima-Qur’an comments:
These statements by Farid prove my previous points. Namely,
A) We can’t say that the chapter contained anything controversial because as he stated, “We have no information about it.”
B) Farid stated earlier that “and yet it never got into the Qur’an.” Than he says, “Abu Musa forgot a complete chapter of the Qur’an” This is why I give him the benefit of the doubt that what he means is the Uthmanic codex. Not that it was never part of the Qur’an ever.
Farid continues.
“Now in this specific hadith we find Abu Musa not saying not saying I forgot this chapter. He says, I was made to forget this chapter. Where do we find this concept? Well we find it in the Qur’an in verse 106 in Surat al Baqarah mā nansakh min āyatin aw nunsihā nati bikhayrin min’hā aw mith’lihā (We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it.”-Farid
Prima Qur’an comments:
Actually, Abu Musa does not say, “I was made to forget this chapter.” He says, “I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this.” Thus, he did not forget the whole chapter. He forgot all of it with the exception of a certain portion. A portion which Farid admits was recited as the Qur’an and it is still there (as it is in the hadith) but it not recited as part of the Qur’an today.
Is this really what Qur’an 2:106 is saying?
Does it say, “We do not abrogate an entire chapter, with the exception of some verses that will remain but will not be in the final version of this Qur’an, or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it, except for the two valleys verse which will remain and not be included in the final compilation.”
This is absolutely bizarre.
Farid continues.
“Now I want you to focus on the words cause it to be forgotten. That is what Abu Musa is saying I was made to forget this. That’s what Abu Musa is saying. Now, how can that even be proven right? I mean that’s the concept is very strange in itself, but is there any precedence for this? Now what really blew my mind was this specific narration That is narrated by Abu Umamah ibn Sahl in which he says, One night a man tried to read a chapter of the Qur’an that he had but he could not. Another man tried to read it but he also could not. Another man also tried to read it but failed. In the morning they went to the Messenger of Allah and gathered there. One of them said: “O Messenger of Allah! Yesterday night I tried to read chapter so-and-so but I could not.” The other said: “I have come for this very reason.” The third man said: “Me too.” The Messenger (saw) said: “It was abrogated yesterday.” Uh this specific hadith is narrated in nasikh wal mansukh by Abi Obaid; it was also narrated in other works like (I did not catch this part) Um it was also narrated by Tabarani in his Mu’jam al-Kabir in which he says that the Ansar that actually go to recite this verse only managed to recite the words bismillah ir rahman ir raheem, in the name of Allah, The Most Gracious, Most Merciful, and than they just freeze. Not knowing forgetting the rest of the chapter. Which is just it’s really interesting.Basically, what happened was you have this collective amnesia that occurred. Now, now I don’t have the answers in regards to why this occurred. I have no idea what was in that chapter. I have no idea what was in the chapter that abu musa narrated. Um it may even be the same chapter; but for some reason God in his infinite wisdom decided to abrogate that chapter in the same way he decided to abrogate the laws of the old testament and the..(pause) and other books in the old testament as well.”
Prima Qur’an comments:
Al hamdulillah. At least Farid realizes that this whole thing does seem “very strange'”
Farid proposes that there was some how this “collective amnesia” that occurred.
Now neither Farid or myself (to my knowledge) are medical doctors. However, what I can see is that there are considered to be three types of amnesia.
Types of Amnesia
Retrograde amnesia. Having retrograde amnesia means you’ve lost your ability to recall events that happened just before the event that caused your amnesia. …
Anterograde amnesia. …
Transient global amnesia (TGA).
You may read more the distinction between Anterograde Amnesia VS. Retrograde Amnesia here:
I was not satisfied that what Farid describes really fits into any of these categories. At first I thought that maybe Transient global amnesia (TGA) would fit the description. Yet this seems temporary with the memories coming back. So than I thought I would search selective amnesia. This seems to fall under a type of dissociative psychiatric disorder. I do not believe that Farid attributes that to the companions at all.
Farid quotes an example of a few people not being able to remember a particular surah (chapter) and than the Blessed Messenger (saw) is attributed with saying that it was abrogated the night before.
Farid than quotes two other sources but does not bring the references.
“ it was also narrated in other works like (I did not catch this part) Um it was also narrated by Tabarani in his Mu’jam al-Kabir.”
So for example we do not know the type of “amnesia” they had. Was it temporary?
There seems to be temporary memory loss. Where did I place those car keys? There seem to be permanent memory loss, associated above with one of the types of amnesia.
There seems to be forgetfulness of something tangible and non tangible. There seems to be a situation where you were forgetful of what you are forgetful of. Another is something tangible.
So again this creates a type of circular reasoning where if you do not really recall a particular chapter or verse it is possible that you did not forget it at all but just think that you did. You could misplace or forget where you put your car keys. Yet, you know the item in question is tangible, they are car keys. But where did you place them? However, if you think about something obscure like a passage from a book and you think you forgot how to recollect it, it is very possible that actually didn’t commit it to memory to begin with. A type of paradox.
Farid continues.
“Now the Non-Muslim that’s watching this video naturally will be skeptical. Um will probably say, but you see this hadith of Abu Musa it’s speaking about a miracle why should I believe this narration that’s speaking about a miracle there’s no reason for me to believe this. Now I understand where you’re coming from. But that’s why the hadith of Abu Musa that David{1/2 of Atheist-Christ} is quoting is really interesting; and the reason is because again it’s narrated by around 15 people um at least of course at least that’s what we have received. Right? Now none of those 15 actually provide um any context to this. They simply say stuff like oh I heard Rasulullah (saw) recite this verse that speaks of the son of Adam having two valleys of wealth right? Um and you have them narrating this and it’s preserved arbitrarily. It’s narrated at different times at different places. So, yes you have Abu Musa narrating this in Basra. Uh Ibn Abbas, Ibn Zubair narrating this in Mecca. You have Zaid bin Arqam narrating this in Kufa; and of course you have the rest of the sahaba um narrating this in Medina. That’s really interesting. Their narrating this without a context. No one, none of them are arguing that there is a um collective amnesia going on. However, there is absolutely no trace of this chapter. We don’t know anything about this chapter; except for this one verse. Subhan’Allah. Now, there’s one last thing that comes to mind, which is why does this verse exist. Why do they all remember this verse? And why have they all forgotten the rest of the chapter? Now it seems to me like wallahu’alim that Allah (swt) has left this as a trace to point to there being something there once, and now it’s all gone. Subhan’Allah. And Subhan’Allah I mean I wouldn’t have even come across this if it weren’t for our good friend David Wood {1/2 of Atheist-Christ} Um so thank you David {1/2 of Atheist-Christ} I really appreciate this one. Um trust me I wouldn’t have come across this if not for your video. So please keep it up I’m enjoying, I’m learning I’m hoping that everyone else is enjoying the show as well.” -Farid
Prima-Qur’an comments:
Notice that Farid says, “it’s narrated by around 15 people” latter on he states: “Why do they all remember this verse? And why have they all forgotten the rest of the chapter?“
Now I know that English may not be brother Farid’s native language. May Allah (swt) bless him for doing his level best to combat the false narratives about Islam. However, for an English speaker following along the way Farid words things it gives the impression that these 15 narrators all made comments similar to Abu Musa Al Ashari above; namely, “We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this.” However, that is simply not the case at all. This is why it is important to double check sources and to have those sources available for everyone to scrutinize. Source “Trust me bro” is not helpful. For example:
Anas reported Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying: قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ
If the son of Adam were to possess two valleys of riches. he would long for the third one. And the stomach of the son of Adam is not filled but with dust. And Allah returns to him who repents.
Ibn Abbas reported Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying:
If there were for the son of Adam a valley full of riches, he would long to possess another one like it. and Ibn Adam does not feel satiated but with dust. And Allah returns to him who returns (to Him). Ibn Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur’an or not; and in the narration transmitted by Zuhair it was said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur’an, and he made no mention of Ibn Abbas.
Now it is not possible for the companions to not know the difference between a saying or statement of the Blessed Messenger (saw) and the Qur’an.
Narrated Sahl bin Sa`d:
I heard Ibn Az-Zubair who was on the pulpit at Mecca, delivering a sermon, saying, “O men! The Prophet (saw) used to say, “If the son of Adam were given a valley full of gold, he would love to have a second one; and if he were given the second one, he would love to have a third, for nothing fills the belly of Adam’s son except dust. And Allah forgives he who repents to Him.” Ubai said, “We considered this as a saying from the Qur’an till the Sura (beginning with) ‘The mutual rivalry for piling up of worldly things diverts you..’ (102.1) was revealed.”
If anything is correct about this it is most likely of a similar nature to the Qudsi hadith. That is the content being attributed to Allah (swt) but actually the words of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
Now there is something that Farid said above that sounds sensible when it comes to his point about a trace of something. However, trying to make a connection between 15 narrators and the exact statements of Abu Musa Al Ashari is not something he established. Nonetheless when he says, “Now it seems to me like wallahu’alim that Allah (swt) has left this as a trace to point to there being something there once, and now it’s all gone.“
That is how you avoid the paradox I mentioned earlier. You have to be able to recall that you forgot something and having a trace of that can help to establish something was forgotten(temporarily, forever) that is not established. The point that I made above:
“So again this creates a type of circular reasoning where if you do not really recall a particular chapter or verse it is possible that you did not forget it at all but just think that you did.”
Prima-Qur’an Conclusion:
I do not think that anything presented by Farid presents any type of proof or miracle for Islam and/or the preservation of the Qur’an. Not being able to know if a particular thing forgotten was temporary or permanent is important.
The very hadith cited that kicked off the conversation could very well fall into the genre of Qudsi hadith. There is evidence that the companions felt this was a saying of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
The statement from At Tabarani was not given the source or actual quote. You would think something this phenomena would be more wide spread as well. The concept of abrogation as mentioned in my other entry here: https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/why-abrogation-in-the-quran-is-a-false-doctrine/ is an absolute train wreck of a doctrine!
Sunni Muslims (with dissenting voices) believe things like there used to be verses about stoning in the Qur’an and it was removed (abrogated) and yet the ruling remains! Why?
Than as Farid states apparently one companion is made to forget an entire chapter of the Qur’an (with the exception of one verse) and even that verse does not end up in the Qur’an we have today.
The idea that Allah’s verses (his eternal speech) and sifat is superseded by (other eternal speech) better than before merits pensive reflection.
When it comes to our school, Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqama we believe the following:
A) We have the whole of the Qur’an with us.
B) We have the Qur’an that Allah (swt) intended for us to have.
Sunni Muslims (with dissenting voices) for the most part hold to position B. They do not hold position A, as they believe whole chapters, verses etc. were lost/forgotten/ etc.
I am motivated to write articles like this because I imagine there is someone persuaded by the depth, comfort, beauty and cohesiveness of Islam. That person than becomes deterred by others telling them, have you seen this video by Atheist-Christ? Than that well intentioned person watches that video and in fairness watches Farid’s video. That person maybe driven further into doubt because Farid’s video could come across as massive copium. In fact that video response could be what drives that person away from embracing the faith!
I want individuals to find responses like this so that they may know that yes Islam is cogent, beautiful, comforting and has depth. If you find certain presentations of Islam disheartening that is not an aspersion on Islam, it is an aspersion on that particular presentation of Islam.
May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) grant victory to our brothers in Palestine amin!
For those interested I also have some entries on abrogation here:
This was in response to statements by Dr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Ali of Lamppost productions and affiliate of Zaytuna Institute in the United States. He is a Sunni Maliki Ashari’i Islamic scholar.
“Hikmetle ve güzel öğütle Rabbinin yoluna çağır ve onlarla en güzel biçimde mücadele et. Kuşkusuz Rabbin, işte yolundan sapanları en iyi bilen O’dur ve O, yola gelenleri de en iyi bilendir.” (Qur’an 16:125)
﷽
İslam Mezhepleri Tarihi – İbadilik – DPÜ İslami İlimler Fakültesi
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Abdullah İbn Said AL-MAMARİ “İbadilik ve Günümüzdeki Durumu”
Bunlar kardeşimiz tarafından Türkçe’ye çevrilmiş bazı videolar. Allah onu korusun
“Kabirlerde Kuran okunur mu? – Şeyh Kahlan el-Kharousi cevaplıyor”
Ölmüş olan bir kimse için kesin olarak cennetliktir veya cehennemliktir diyebilir miyiz?
“Tağut kimdir ve nedir? – Şeyh Raşid bin Seyf el-Rabi açıklıyor”
“Cennet sadece Ibadiler için mi? – Şeyh Salim bin Khalfan açıklıyor”
“Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is guided” (Qur’an 16:125)
﷽
There are so many people on social media these days saying this person refuted so and so. This Shaykh said this. However, upon a closer look you see that nothing of the kind too place.
Let me say this the books of Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness) they are banned in Saudi Arabia. While there are Shaykhs giving fatwa about drinking beer, and more and more concerts are planned. Keeping quite about what is happening to our brothers and sisters in Palestine. Ever ready to draw their tongue and sword against the Muslims. Let this Ummah realize who the real khawarij are!
The truth is many Muslims think that these people are their dawah is dominant. You see them all over social media. They are on YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, you name it. So for an English speaking audience it looks quite impressive. Rarely does anyone counter them. However, if they only had access to the Arabic language and you see these people try and attack our school they get absolutely pummeled. Dare I say you would even pity them!
Some Muslims have a deep resentment towards Saudi Arabia. I, however, do not. They have kept the sacred trust of Mecca and ensuring the safety of the pilgrims as well as maintaining the city of Madinah. Saudi Arabia is also one of the safest countries in the world. I hope for them peace and prosperity; I just hope that it does not come at the expense of the moral compass of the society.
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan didn’t refute the Ibadi! He didn’t refute anything!!
Jahmi say that heaven and hell will disappear soon or later. They say Allah (swt ) is every where, and we do not say this.
“The knowledgeable ones in Oman are predominantly Ibadi’s. And the Ibadiyyah are a sect from the Khawarij. And Ahmed Ibn Hamad al-Khalili (Grand Mufti of Oman) is their Imam. And his writings entail the Madhab of the Khawarij and the Madhab of the Jahmiyyah. He has very evil writings! Do not take knowledge from him! Rather take knowledge from Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
What can we say? Ahmed Ibn Hamad al-Khalili (hafidhullah) has written numerous works and none of that is a secret. So which books or writings of books of Shaykh al-Khalili (hafidhullah) did Shaykh Salih al Fawzan refute? None! Which shows that these people who made this video are even willing to lie about their own Shaykh! They even made a lie upon Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan because he didn’t refute absolute jack!
@0:56 Then the producers claim that Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan “refutes the creed of the Ibadiyyah!”
Questioner: “Esteemed Shaykh, who are the Ibadiyyah sect? And is it obligatory to warn against them?”
“The Ibadiyyah are a subsect from the Khawarij (renegades) and are followers of a man named Abdullah Ibn Ibad. They are a sect from the Khawarij. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
The students of Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan should ask him what books and writings of ‘Abdullah Ibn Ibad‘ (rahemullah) is he familiar with? In what way do we follow him? What are the proofs and evidences?
Questioner: “Esteemed Shaykh, are the Ibadiyyah sect from the followers of Sufism?”
“The Ibadiyyah are from the Khawarij (renegades) & they have extremism upon the Madhab of the Khawarij, The Ibadiyyah make Takfeer upon those who commit major sins other than Shirk, and they believe that the sinful (Muslims) will reside in the hellfire forever. This is from the beliefs of the Khawarij. They are followers of a man named Abdullah Ibn Ibad. They are a sect from the Khawarij.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
“And they (the Ibadiyyah) say that the Qur’an is created, upon the Madhab of the Jahmiyyah. They combine between the beliefs of the Jahmiyyah and the Khawarij. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
“And they believe that the sinful (Muslims) will reside in the hellfire forever.”
Actually, we do not believe that the believers go to hell at all! Does Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan have a single verse from the Qur’an that says the believers got to hell or leave the hell?
“Theysay that the Qur’an is created.” That is because the Qur’an is created!
In fact, on this subject a golden opportunity was presented to Shaykh Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz to expose Shaykh Ahmed ibn Hamad Al Khalili (hafidullah) and by extension the belief that the Qur’an is created as false. However, ibn Baz backed down!
It is attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw) “Whoever guides someone to goodness will have a reward like the one who did it.”
Questioner: “Does the creed of the Ibadiyyah entail disbelief? And if someone prays Salah behind the Ibadi’s, should he repeat his Salah?”
“It is well known that the Ibadiyyah say that the Qur’an is created. They utter the speech the Jahmiyyah. The Salah is not valid behind anyone who says that the Qur’an is created. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
Does having similar beliefs to a particular group of Muslims make one from among them? What kind of logic is that?! This must mean that Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan utters the speech of the Jahmiyyah because they believe that the Blessed Messenger (saw) is a Prophet of Allah (swt). Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan also believes this. So does this mean that Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan =a Jahmi?
The Jahmi believe that heaven and hell will disappear sooner or later. This is not our belief. The Jahmi believe that Allah (swt) is omnipresent and this is also not our belief. There are many more examples.
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan is known to speak falsehood and attribute speculation about Allah (swt) and since his aqeedah errors are published and well known he should publicly repent!
For example: Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan when speaking about the Qur’an 4:157 says, “Allah made this man resemble the Messiah.”
Meaning that Allah (swt) made some random person to look like Jesus. However, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, nor his students can produce any proof for this speculative assumption from the Qur’an or the Sunnah!
In summary Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan only warned his denomination about Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness) . He gave absolutely no refutations. Do not get it twisted!
Let us demonstrate how a refutation is done,
We will do this by refuting Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan’s speculation concerning Allah (swt) having two eyes.
Step 1)
Make your intention for the sake of Allah (swt) the purpose is not to glorify your ego but to establish the truth so that the people maybe guided.
Step 2)
You give the position of the other side. You do not edit, cut out or censor them. Lay out their evidence from their own sources. This is done like this…observe….
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan’s speculation concerning Allah (swt) having two eyes is based upon the following pieces of evidence:
Questioner ask: “Sheikh may Allah grant you success. In the hadith of the Prophet (saw) “And indeed your Lord is not one eyed.” Is this evidence for the attribute of the two eyes of Allah?”
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan replies “Yes, Ahlus-Sunnah-Wa-Al-Jamaa’ah derive from it the affirmation of the two eyes of Allah. If God is not one-eyed, so then the meaning of it is that He has two eyes, yes.”
Questioner ask: “And is there another evidence (that is) more sufficient than this?”
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan replies: “In the Qur’an “Which sailed on before Our eyes, as a reward for someone who has been rejected.” [Qur’an 54:14]
“Cast him into the chest, and toss it into the river. The current will throw him up on the shore where an enemy of Mine as well as an enemy of him will pick him up. I have lavished love of My own on you so that you are brought up under my two eyes.” [Qur’an 20:39]
Step 3)
Refutation. Show how the opposing sides conclusions are flawed. We will do this now.
“And they have thereof no knowledge. They follow not except assumption, and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all.” (Qur’an 53:28)
For the first evidence:
What they do is rely upon the following hadith:
The Prophet (saw) said, “Allah did not send any prophet but that he warned his nation of the one-eyed liar (Ad-Dajjal). He is one-eyed while your Lord is not one-eyed, The word ‘Kafir’ (unbeliever) is written between his two eyes.”
From they deduce that Allah (swt) must have two eyes. In the above hadith, they rely upon reason and speculation!! The very thing they accuse others of doing. No where does that hadith say that Allah (swt) has two eyes.
The second evidence:
“In the Qur’an “Which sailed on before Our eyes, as a reward for someone who has been rejected.” [Qur’an 20:39]
Prima Qur’an response:
From they deduce that Allah (swt) must have two eyes. In the above passage of the Qur’an they rely upon reason and speculation!! The very thing they accuse others of doing. No where does that text of the Qur’an does it say that Allah (swt) has two eyes. Even if they don’t want to allow for the fact that the Arabs in the time of the Blessed Messenger (saw) were masters of their language and understood fully idiom and expression and even if you want to take the literal meaning “Our eyes” is an unspecified number!
The third evidence used:
“Cast him into the chest, and toss it into the river. The current will throw him up on the shore where an enemy of Mine as well as an enemy of him will pick him up. I have lavished love of My own on you so that you are brought up under my two eyes.” [Qur’an 20:39]
Prima Qur’an response:
First of all these people lie upon their own Shaykh! Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan did not say ‘two‘ eyes. Even if he did in another speech or book then he has attributed to Allah (swt) speculative theology. Look at the two Saudi backed translations of the Qur’an into English.
Even if they don’t want to allow for the fact that the Arabs in the time of the Blessed Messenger (saw) were masters of their language and understood fully idiom and expression and even if you want to take the literal meaning the translation “Two eyes” is a flat lie! There is no word ‘two‘ in the Arabic text. Not only that but they are in a real pickle now! Because the text says, ‘eye‘ and other text says ‘our eyes‘. This is what happens when you do not understand language, idiom and expression.
You see this is a very different situation then the following text of the Qur’an:
“And the Jews say, ‘The hand of Allah is tied up.’ Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His Hands are extended, He spends however He wills…” (Qur’an 5:64)
Even if they don’t want to allow for the fact that the Arabs in the time of the Blessed Messenger (saw) were masters of their language and understood fully idiom and expression and even if you want to take the literal meaning the translation as ‘both‘ they have scope to say that Allah (swt) has two hands. Yet they have absolutely no proof that Allah (swt) has ‘two‘ eyes. Their position would have been more consistent if they simply stated: “We believe that Allah has eyes.” They could have done that without specifying a number.
That my friends is how a refutation is done.
I have done my level best to defend the honour of Shaykh Ahmed ibn Hamad Al Khalili (hafidullah). In reality he does not need my defense. His defense is the Qur’an and the Sunnah! I have also done my level best in defending again the slander against our brothers, the Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness)
Prima Quran 