“When the Hellfire sees them from a distant place, they will hear its fury and roaring.” (Qur’an 25:12)
“Surely those for whom the decree of ultimate good has already gone forth from Us. These will be kept far away from not even hearing the slightest sound (of hell). While they abide eternally in whatever their souls desire.” (Qur’an 21:101-102)
“Every human being is bound to taste death: and you shall receive your rewards in full on the Day of Resurrection. He who is kept away from the Fire and is admitted to Paradise, will surely triumph; for the life of this world is nothing but an illusory enjoyment.” (Qur’an 3:185)
﷽
First let us be clear about one thing. There is not a single verse any where in the Qur’an that states that a believer or a Muslim will enter into the hellfire. None.
No evidence at all that people are coming to As Siraat (The Bridge) over hellfire None!
Those who do not have proper understanding of the Qur’an and are upon error will in their misguidance quote the following:
Yet ˹some˺ people ask ˹mockingly˺, “After I die, will I really be raised to life again?” Do ˹such˺ people not remember that We created them before, when they were nothing? By your Lord ˹O Prophet˺! We will surely gather them along with the devils, and then set them around Hell on their knees. Then We will certainly begin by drawling out of every group the ones most defiant to the Most Compassionate. And We truly know best who is most deserving of burning in it. There is none among you, (Those condemned to Hell), but he shall reach there (- the Hell). This is (a promise) binding on your Lord, an absolute decree. Moreover, saved are those who were righteous. Forsaken are the criminals therein on their knees.” (Qur’an 19:66-72)
This verse is speaking about those who mocked the resurrection (verse 66)
wa-in minukum (among you) in verse 71 who are they? They are the ones that are referenced in verse 66.
These verses are not addressing the Muslim at all. Why?
The Muslim is one who believes in the hereafter not denying it.
The Muslim is one who believes in the hellfire not denying it.
It makes no sense to say that Prophet Muhammed (saw), Prophet Jesus (as), all of the prophets, pious people would be put into hell.
There is absolutely no reference toa bridge over hell in these verses.
In fact, to fortify point number 7 look at how all these translations render the Arabic text.
Also rushed into oblivion are the machinations of Christian missionaries who in their ignorance used such verses against the Muslims.
There is No Falling Of A Bridge! – His Eminence Shayh Dr Khalid Al-Abdali (h)
They say that, no these people will pass over a bridge. A bridge named as-Siraat. And (as they pass) begin to fall down from this bridge.
Some will pass by quickly like the speed of lightning. Whilst some will crawl over it…and some will fall over (The Bridge).
Where are they falling to? Huh? “To Hell” (Says the Audience)
Allah the Exalted says: “It has seven gates; and each gate is assigned for a certain group of them.” (Qur’an 15:44)
This (Idea of a Bridge) -Is one of those propagated fables you will find no evidence for in the book of Allah. That-People will fall down.
This is because Allah -the Exalted has affirmed for us in the clearest of wordings that there are gates (to hell).
I believe that there are gates. Who believes otherwise? That there are no gates?
That, no no this is not correct. They will fall down into hell without passing a gate.
Tell me. If there is anyone here who dares to say that there are no gates (to hell).
Rather they fall into it instead! Focus! Some are misguiding people on this! Whilst considering themselves people of paradise and favour.
Wake up to reality! And stop deceiving yourself!
Pay attention! “Until, when They reach it(hell) And It’s gates are made opened.” (Qur’an 39:71)
It’s gates, Right? “And It’s guardians Say to them.” (Qur’an 39:71)
Are there gates found or not? I believe and I’m certain and convinced that there are gates there. Without a doubt! As for this issue of tukh(falling down) Then no!
“Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will exalt you in my presence and shall purify you of the ungrateful disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)
“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)
﷽
The Pseudo-Salafis are attacking Imam Imran Hossein because he basically doesn’t believe that the Qur’an says the following:
“And for their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.” And they did not kill himnor did they impalecrucify him but Allah made some random individual look exactly like Jesus and that person was crucified instead of Jesus. Those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge of it, but only follow conjecture. For certainly, they did not kill him.” (Qur’an 4:157)
“What did Allah do to make it appear…that he died? Let me warn you! And my language some time is very harsh. Because that is the only language some people can understand. Don’t come with this nonsense! Because it is not only pathetic nonsense it is absolutely sinful! To say that Allah (authubillah) caused someone else to take the appearance of Nabi Isa (a.s) and that innocent man, innocent because he never claimed to be the Messiah! He was crucified. Wait for judgement day with that nonsense! Pathetic nonsense! It’s not there in the Qur’an. It’s in your imagination. That’s where it is. Yet it took the world of Islam by storm. What a brain washed ummah we are today! Well than what happened? Well, then why don’t you go to the Qur’an and let the Qur’an explain rather than go on fancy flights of imagination. “-Shaykh Imran Hossein.
Now notice that @ 1:27 this “Nasir Al Hanbali” states:
“We will bring the Ayah in the Qur’an and the Tafsir from ibn Kathir narrated by Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, but notice how this creep (Shaykh Imran Hossein) says: “why don’t you go to the Qur’an and let the Qur’an explain…” but he brings no Ayah from the Qur’an, just his weird: “LET ME WARNN YOUUU!!!“
“You gonna tell Allah on judgement day you caused that man to assume the appearance of someone? And he who never claimed to be the Messiah he was crucified that is an act of injustice! You are attributing injustice to Allah what foolishness. Where are the scholars who will correct this foolishness? That’s why I have to be so forceful in my language. Allah took his soul. That he was dead. They took down the body. They put the body in a cave. They sealed the cave. Allah returned the soul. As simple as that. Nobody knew that the body, that the soul was returned and Allah raised him. But let me warn you one more time. If you stick with this theory of substitution you are going to be in a pathetic state on judgement day. Let me warn you one more time. This is a simple explanation from the Qur’an. “- Shaykh Imran Hossein.
So than “Nasir Al Hanbali” puts the following recitation up:
“Nasir Al Hanbali” than ask us: “Do you think Shaykh Ali Jaabir was wrong and the creep was right?”
My comment:
Where did Shaykh Ali Jabir recite “the resemblance of Isa was put over another man (and they killed that man” ? Shaykh Ali Jabir did not recite that at all! Yet the text put up there fools those who do not understand the Arabic text!
Then, ‘Nasir Al Hanbali’ gives us another reciter.
“Nasir Al Hanbali” than ask us: “Do you think Shaykh Abu Bakr ash-Shatiri was wrong and the creep was right? Let us listen to the next reciter, Shaykh Sa’ood ash-Shuraim.”
Prima Qur’an comment:
Where did Shaykh Abu Bakr ash-Shatiri recite “the resemblance of Isa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man)”? Shaykh Abu Bakr ash-Shatiri did not recite that at all! Yet the text put up there fools those who do not understand the Arabic text!
Prima Qur’an comment:
Where did Shaykh Sa’ood ash-Shuraim recite “the resemblance of Isa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man)” ? Shaykh Sa’ood ash-Shuraim did not recite that at all! Yet the text put up there fools those who do not understand the Arabic text!
This is simply pure deception on behalf of the one who put the video up.
“Allah said to Isa: Allah said: O Isa (Jesus)! I will take you and raise you to Myself [Qur’an 3:55] Allah said: “Ya Isa” referring to Isa ibn Maryam (a.s) when the Jews plotted against him, they wanted to kill him. They entered upon him wanting to kill him [because] their norm was to kill Prophets. When they entered upon [Isa ibn Maryam], Allah raised him from amongst them. He made another man resemble him. They grabbed that man, crucified him and killed him thinking that he was Isa. As for Isa, then Allah raised him from amongst and they did not perceive it. That is why Allah says: “but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but it appeared so to them [the resemblance of Isa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man)],” [Qur’an 4:157] -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an comment:
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan has invented an outright lie about Allah (swt)! Let the Shaykh be reminded the following:
“And who is more unjust than one who invents a lie about Allah or says, ‘It has been inspired to me,’ while nothing has been inspired to him, and one who says, ‘I will reveal something like what Allah revealed.’ And if you could but see when the wrongdoers are in the overwhelming pangs of death while the angels extend their hands, saying, ‘Discharge your souls! Today you will be awarded the punishment of [extreme] humiliation for what you used to say against Allah other than the truth and that you were, toward His verses, being arrogant.’” (Qur’an 6:93)
Prima Qur’an comment:
Where did Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan get the daleel from the Qur’an and Sunnah that ” He made another man resemble him.” This is Aqeedah! The Qur’an does not say this! This is not from the Sunnah!
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan continues:
“Allah made this man resemble the Messiah, Isa. He himself accepted it and ransomed himself; he ransomed himself and he accepted that he would be killed and crucified. Allah honored him and did not waste this person and what he did with the Messiah. It is said that the one who Allah made to resemble Isa was the one who practiced treason; the one who led [the Jews] to Isa. The one employed treachery or betrayed Isa and led the Jews to him. Allah made him resemble Isa, so they killed him. However, the first opinion is more famous, that the one who chose to resemble Isa was honored and he chose to take his place. This man sacrificed himself for the sake of Allah, he was crucified and killed, so the Messiah Isa ibn Maryam could be saved from them. And Allah knows best. Allah raised him alive with him soul and his body. Not how some of the ignorant individuals say: “he was only raised with his soul.” He was raised with his soul and body alive. They were not able to touch him with any harm.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an comment:
Where did Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan get the daleel from the Qur’an and Sunnah that “Allah made this man resemble the Messiah.” This is Aqeedah! The Qur’an does not say this! This is not from the Sunnah! How can we be so carefree in ascribing to Allah (swt) such things and in the next breath say, “he first opinion is more famous.” Of course the opinion that some random person volunteered to be killed sounds better than just some random guy being chosen! The point being Shaykh Salihi al-Fawzan we don’t attribute opinions and conjecture to Allah (swt) !! It would have been appropriate to say that this is an interpretation of the text that was taken from the People of the Book and it does not have a sound chain of narration.
Also, which text in the Qur’an says that Allah (swt) “He was raised with his soul and body alive.”
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan continues:
“As for His statement: I will take you.. [Qur’an 3:55] The word Wafaat can mean death and it can also mean to sleep. “It is He who takes your souls by night (when you are asleep), and has knowledge of all that you have done by day,. [Quran 6:60]” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
“Wafaat here means to sleep and Allah knows best or I will take you…[Qur’an 3:55], It can also mean to take you. Mutawaffi also means to take; Tawaffa haqqahu min fulaan [he took his rights from so and so]. The word Wafaat here does not mean death. Because the Messiah is still Alive and will descend at the end of times, he will kill the Dajjal and then he will die after that.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
“Because: “Every soul shall taste death.” [Qur’an 3:185] He [Isa a.s] will die after that. The point of evidence here is that [the Ayah]: “I will take you and raise you to Myself” [Qur’an 3:55] To raise him to him is not done except to a higher place. This is proof that Allah is [always] high and above [His creation]. -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an comment:
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan quotes the verses: “It is He who takes your souls by night (when you are asleep), and has knowledge of all that you have done by day,. [Quran 6:60]” Does he not realize that he further proves our point that Jesus is dead? If there is any confusion as to what happens when we “sleep” let the Blessed Messenger (saw) explain it to you.
When we sleep we die. Our soul travels. If Allah (swt) does not return to the soul to the body than we die in our sleep. As far as Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan statement: “To raise him to him is not done except to a higher place. This is proof that Allah is [always] high and above [His creation].”
To Allah (swt) shall all return [not just Jesus].
“Indeed, to Allah we belong and to Allah we shall return.” [Qur’an 2: 156]
It does not mean spatial location. Even though Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan who is fond of taking his creed from the people of the book Allah (swt) is not contained in a spatial location.
“And he said: Lo! I am going to my Lord Who will guide me.” [Qur’an 37:99]
Ibrahim a.s says I am going to my Lord did he mean from place to place? No.
It is unfortunate because the more you investigate the beliefs of ‘Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah‘ on this you can see they are in disarray over it.
Some say someone random was made to look like Jesus and he was put on a cross.
Other’s say Jesus was on a cross and died.
Other’s say that Jesus was on a cross but he passed out and latter was resuscitated.
“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)
“He will speak to the people in the cradle and in maturity and will be of the righteous.” (Qur’an 3:46)
﷽
Shaykh Imran Hosein has recently used the following as evidence for the return of Nabi ‘Isa — Christ Jesus the following:
“He will speak to the people in the cradle and in maturity and will be of the righteous.” (Qur’an 3:46)
So what is this all about? It is really about those who believe that Jesus (as) will return again before the end of times being so desperate that they will clutch at straws to try and exegetically extract such an idea from the Qur’an.
Listen to the lecture from the 22 minute mark.
Shaykh Imran Hosein
@ 23:18 Shaykh Imran says, “But the Qur’an went on to say something more. Remember that this is Surah Al Maidah, ‘ tukallimun Nasa fil mahdi wa kahlan.”
“Twice, twice, you will speak. The first time is as a baby in the cradle and the second time is as an adult.” -Shaykh Imran Hosein
“But uh, even in London adults speak. There’s nothing big, there’s nothing miraculous about that. That’s normal. If you are an adult, and you don’t speak you’re dumb.” — Shaykh Imran Hosein
“But if you are an adult, and you are not dumb, then it is normal for an adult to speak. So where is the need for the ‘ruh al qudus’?” “Answer: The Qur’an is saying that you will speak miraculously twice.” -Shaykh Imran Hosein
“You will speak miraculously as a baby in the cradle, and you will speak miraculously again as an adult.” — Shaykh Imran Hosein
“C’mon, put on your thinking caps.” -Shaykh Imran Hosein
Prima Qur’an comments: At this juncture let us stop and do exactly as the Shaykh asks us to do.
Now, this is important because Shaykh Imran Hosein is one of those people who have as his entire focus eschatology, the Mahdi, Dajjal, and the so-called 2nd coming of Christ Jesus.
Someone who holds such views should be able to provide evidence for them, and the fact that Shaykh Imran Hosein has to make such exegetical stretches of the Qur’an shows the patently false nature of such beliefs.
A few minutes into his lecture, Shaykh Imran Hosein has some words for the Ahmadiyyah movement as well as for Muhammed Asad. However, Shaykh Imran’s misinterpretation of the Qur’an is equally bad.
It is amazing how the crowd gathered around Shaykh Imran soaked up all these words he had to say, and we just hope that they did indeed: ‘put on their thinking caps.’
Notice the slyness of his approach here:
“But uh, even in London adults speak. There’s nothing big, there’s nothing miraculous about that. That’s normal. If you are an adult, and you don’t speak you are dumb.” — Shaykh Imran Hosein
This subtle point is where he slowly lures his audience. In almost a trance-like state fixated upon his words, they can’t help but agree. After all, there is nothing miraculous about adults speaking, is there?
This is where he slips in his suggestion and whispers to the subconscious.
First the agreement of the negative: adults speaking is nothing miraculous. [everyone is now on the same page].
Then comes the delivery: The mixture of truth with falsehood.
“Answer: The Qur’an is saying that you will speak miraculously twice.”
As the subconscious is now primed, the reader will understand that Jesus will speak while in the cradle and as an adult. So there is already a bias confirmation: Ah, so Jesus does speak twice. Then comes the falsehood attached: miraculously twice.
wayukallimu l-nāsa fī l-mahdi wakahlan wamina l-ṣāliḥīna -which of these Arabic words means miraculously?
The answer: None of them, of course.
“And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know [it].” (Qur’an 2:42)
Now it is a given that if a person speaks like a baby in the cradle that this is indeed miraculous, but even the Shaykh himself said: “Adults speak. There’s nothing big, there’s nothing miraculous about that.”
Thus, what Shaykh Imran has done is to mix the haqq that-Jesus will speak as a baby and in maturity with batil -that both events would be miraculous.
Then you will see how he needs to interpolate such falsehood in the Qur’an in order to get you to buy into his concept of some messianic figure coming later.
So now, after establishing his false premise that he has convinced his audience into accepting, he continues the rest of his speech.
Wake up dear Muslim brothers and sisters. You are being deceived.
What about kahl and kahlan in the Arabic text of the Qur’an.
If people want to say kahlan means 70 years old or even 800, let them roll with it, because no matter how old Nabi ‘Isa Christ Jesus was, we have the following text:
“[The Day] when Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, remember My favor upon you and upon your mother when I supported you with the Pure Spirit and you spoke to the people in the cradle[wakahlan]and in maturity; and [remember] when I taught you writing and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel; and when you designed from clay [what was] like the form of a bird with My permission, then you breathed into it, and it became a bird with My permission; and you healed the blind and the leper with My permission; and when you brought forth the dead with My permission; and when I restrained the Children of Israel from [killing] you when you came to them with clear proofs and those who disbelieved among them said, “This is not but obvious magic.” (Qur’an 5:110)
So, whatever these people want to say, the context of the above verse makes it abundantly clear that Jesus was wakhalan when he was being taught the Torah and the Gospel and dealing with the children of Israel.
Also, those who want to say that Jesus (as) did not reach maturity before he had the chance to speak, thus he must come back. This idea is based upon what? What verse in the Qur’an tells the age in which Jesus (as) died? Even those who say he did die but was taken bodily alive into heaven. Tell us his age? The New Testament is not a proof text for Muslims.
Are we really going to say that Allah [swt] is teaching Nabi ‘Isa—Christ Jesus the Torah and the Gospel upon his return? Why? What for?
So, even if you want to be extremely, and we do mean extremely charitable and go against references like:
Lisan Al Arab or Al Razi in Tafsir al Kabir, just remember to remind them that this 50+-year-old Jesus, this 80+year old Jesus was doing all the above as mentioned in Qur’an 5:110 before ANY SO-CALLED BODILY ASCENSION.
“This day those who disbelieve have despaired of [defeating] your religion; so fear them not, but fear Me. This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion.” (Qur’an 5:3)
“Our Lord, do not take us to task in case we forget or we make mistakes.” (Qur’an 2:286)
﷽
APOLOGY TO FELLOW MUSLIMS AND TRUTH SEEKERS.
May Allah (swt) forgive me. Praise be to Allah (swt) who guides us to a way that is best.
I used to rely upon a particular translation of the Qur’an 4:31 until upon closer examination I realized the game that was being played upon the unaware.
I’m thankful to Shaykh Hafidh Hamed Al Sawafi for pointing this out to me!
Most people are usually familiar with this translation:
“If you avoid major sins that you are prohibited, We will absolve YOU YOUR MINOR SINS and cause you to enter a generous gate.” (Qur’an 4:31)
Any translation that comes remotely close to that is a FALSE
Take a look at the different translations into English here:
Those people who are either translating this text as such are doing so according to their i’tiqad or without giving much thought about it -according to the i’tiqad of others.
The most correct translation is: the one from Yusuf Ali (1985) which states:
“IF (but) eschew the evilest of the things which you are forbidden to do, We shall expel out of (Saiyiatikum) YOU ALL THE EVIL IN YOU, and admit you to a gate of great honor.” -(Qur’an 4:31)
The reason that certain translators translate it the way that they do is because of their theology. Which is that the small sins get wiped out and the big sins get purified in the hell-which one latter is released from.
However, the correct understanding is that if a Muslim avoids the major big sins, or if they do them and rush to repent and reform, Allah (swt) will forgive our minor mistakes and faults.
Imposing their theological suppositions upon the Qur’an Al-Kareem!
As one Muslim brother pointed out: “Saiyiatikum” is “all evil in you”.
To interpret it as “minor sins” or the likes is but an interpretation.
The literal meaning takes precedence over an interpretation unless there’s a hujjah to support the interpretation.
Insh’Allah in time I will begin to replace the translation with the appropriate translation free from i’tiqad -may Allah (swt) help me.
Kindly take note. My humble and sincere apologies.
“And protect them from the evil consequences [of their deeds]. And he whom You protect from evil consequences that Day – You will have given him mercy. And that is the great attainment.” (Qur’an 40:9)
(We told you), “If you do good, it will be for your own benefit, but if you do bad, it will be against your souls. When the prophecy of your second transgression will come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the mosque as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction. (Qur’an 17:7)
﷽
Recently I was watching a video circulating the internet over our brother, a former IDF soldier who found the light of Islam. Al hamdulillah! May Allah (swt) increase him in faith and bring him to a state of felicity. May many more of them be guided to the light of Islam.
The brother who was interacting with the former IDF soldier was doing an excellent effort in flashing the verses on the screen. However, something jolted me when the brother quoted Qur’an 17:7 and gave a very strange understanding of this verse. It raised the alarm and this is why I felt the urgency to write this post in hopes that you will also warn those you know!
I have personally not come across people understand the verse this way. unless they were from the United Arab Emirates, or Saudi Arabia.
The verse in question is:
(We told you), “If you do good, it will be for your own benefit, but if you do bad, it will be against your souls. When the prophecy of your second transgression will come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction.” (Qur’an 17:7)
Please pay special attention to how the Arabic word ٱلۡمَسۡجِدَ is being translated into English.
Here is a complete list of known translations into English:
Notice the word ٱلۡمَسۡجِدَ has been translated as Temple in 32 translations. Why is this even important brothers and sisters?
This is the video I am referencing:
@22:50 minutes into the video The Muslim Lantern states: “In fact Allah azwajala said that the people children of Israel will take the Masjid,Masjid Al Aqsa from you.”
This is dead wrong. There is no such verse in the Qur’an at all. Surely brother Muslim Lantern will have his reward with Allah (swt). However, I think in this regard he is simply transmitting what he heard without investigating the verse.
Let us look at the context:
“And We gave (Clear) Warning to the Children of Israel in the Book, that twice would they do mischief on the earth and be elated with mighty arrogance.!” (Qur’an 17:4)
Allah (swt) is addressing the Children of Israel (Jacob).
“When the first of the warnings came to pass, We sent against you Our servants given to terrible warfare: They entered the very inmost parts of your homes; and it was a warning (completely) fulfilled.” (Qur’an 17:5)
Allah (swt) is mentioning that he sent against you (Meaning children of Israel) -They are the ones being attacked not the attackers!
“Then did We grant you the Return as against them: We gave you increase in resources and sons, and made you the more numerous in man-power.” (Qur’an 17:6)
Allah (swt) grant you (Children of Israel) a return against them (the attackers of the Children of Israel)
(We told you), “If youdo good, it will be for yourown benefit, but if youdo bad, it will be against yoursouls. When the prophecy of your second transgressionwill come to pass, sadness will cover your faces. They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did the first time to bring about utter destruction.” (Qur’an 17:7)
Allah (swt) is not saying that the children of Israel will be the one’s who will enter the places of prostration and bring utter destruction. It makes no sense! It makes no sense because the place that the destruction will come to is the place that the children of Israel themselves worship!
That is the temple of Solomon (as). Look at the text that are underlined in green. That is what people are getting confused. The Children of Israel will cause corruption in the earth twice and they will be punished by having their place of worship destroyed!
Allah (swt) will use someone else as a means of punishment for the disobedient Children of Israel.
They (your enemies) will enter the place of prostration (Masjid)as they did THE FIRST TIME to bring about utter destruction.”
The first time was the destruction of the place of prostration-by Nebuchadnezzar.
The second time that Allah (swt) is speaking about in the future in Qur’an 17:7 was by the Romans.
WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT AND WHAT HAS THIS HAVE TO DO WITH PALESTINE AND AL AQSA MASJID?
This is important because the false interpretation that was given to our brother The Muslim Lantern and not only him but to many Muslims will be used as a psychological weapon against the Palestinian and Muslim resistance when the Zionist eventually come to attack it!
How will it be used a psychological weapon? Because, the false interpretation makes it that the Zionist (Israel) will conqueror Masjid Al Aqsa.
@22:50 minutes into the video The Muslim Lantern states: “In fact Allah azwajala said that the people children of Israel will take the Masjid,Masjid Al Aqsa from you.”
How will you defend a place knowing that Allah (swt) himself said that your enemies would take it from you? Do you see the point brothers and sisters?
In fact, watch the expression of our new brother in Islam (former IDF) when our brother Muslim Lantern says this. The new brother looked quite surprised? Why? Because he knows how the resistance is fighting, even after being almost entirely abandoned by the whole Muslim Ummah. He looks surprised because he can’t imagine the IDF just taking Al Aqsa Masjid. Jordan is the custodian of Al Aqsa Masjid. Jordan would be forced to go beyond just sending ‘a memo of protest‘ if the Zionist wanted to full on take the Masjid.
Rather or not the Zionist attempt to do so is another matter. The point of this post is do not read these verses of the Qur’an incorrectly. Especially do not read them in such away that would give a moral boost to the enemies of the faith!
“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)
“We have neglected nothing in the Book, then unto their Lord they (all) shall be gathered.” (Qur’an 6:38)
﷽
We as Muslims believe in an All-Wise, All-Intelligent, All-Knowing, Creator. We do not describe the Creator as being frivolous or mercurial. We seek refuge in Allah.
Thus, while reading through the Qur’an, we come across this very interesting verse.
“And when you said, “O Moses, we can never endure one kind of food. So call upon your Lord to bring forth for us from the earth itsgreen herbs and its cucumbers and its garlic, and its lentils and its onions.” [Moses] said, “Would you exchange what is better for what is less? Go into any settlement and, indeed, you will have what you have asked for.” And they were covered with humiliation and poverty and returned with anger from Allah upon them. That was because they repeatedly disbelieved in the signs of Allah and killed the prophets without right. That was because they disobeyed and were habitually transgressing.” (Qur’an 2:61)
So here our colleague sat with their thoughts looking at this amazing verse. We thought about all the intra-Islamic debates over various points of doctrine and jurisprudence and the blood that has been shed over such. Cucumbers, garlic, lentils & onions, the words just jumped out at them.
“WoW!” they thought. We do not believe this verse has been the centre of any type of controversy among us as Muslims. Empires or dynasties built upon the verse that mentions cucumbers, garlic, lentils and onions.
So let us imagine that this verse came down to us in another form. Would any vital information be lost? Would we not know that the children of Israel complained about not being able to endure only one type of food and that Allah (swt) responded to them expressing disappointment?
So let us imagine that this verse came down to us in another form. Would any vital information be lost? Would we not know that the children of Israel complained about not being able to endure one type of food and that Allah (swt) responded to them expressing disappointment?
Imagine the verse said:
And when you said, “O Moses, we can never endure one kind of food. So call upon your Lord to bring forth for us from the earth its green herbs.” [Moses] said, “Would you exchange what is better for what is less? Go into any settlement and, indeed, you will have what you have asked for.” And they were covered with humiliation and poverty and returned with anger from Allah upon them. That was because they repeatedly disbelieved in the signs of Allah and killed the prophets without right. That was because they disobeyed and were habitually transgressing.” (Qur’an 2:61)
What is missing? What did we excise out?
The following: “and its cucumbers and its garlic and its lentils and its onions!”
Subhan’Allah! We as Muslims do not believe in redundant revelation.
Often, when the Shi’i engage other Muslims (usually Sunni), they will ask them: “Do you really believe that the Blessed Prophet (saw) would leave a matter like the leadership of the Muslims up in the air!?”
Often, questions like this evoke reflection and indeed they should!
But in this case, this is a loaded question. As it implies that such an issue is of vital importance to begin with. That begs the question of whether or not this is even a pillar of faith that is established in the Qur’an first and foremost.
In the Qur’an Allah (swt) establishes our most vitally important beliefs. Yet, nowhere in the entirety of the Qur’an from Al Fatiha to Al-Nas do we find mention of who should succeed the Blessed Prophet (saw)!
Rhetorical questions in the Qur’an like the following do not need to be asked if there is a clear line of succession.
“Muḥammed is not but a messenger. Messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.” (Qur’an 3:144)
We look through this astonishing beautiful revelation, this sublime source of guidance that leaves us enthralled for hours upon hours on end. Pondering its verses and yet there is no clear mention of statements like: “Ali should succeed the Prophet (saw) when he dies.” In fact, his name is not mentioned at all in the Qur’an! Statements like the following are simply not found: “The Ahl Bayt holds the leadership of the Muslims.” “The Muslims should be led by so-and-so when the Prophet (saw) dies. “
Yet…cucumbers and its garlic and its lentils and its onions! Here they are mentioned by name clear as day.
Which of the two matters does one believe is of more weight and magnitude?
Knowing by name and having spelled out to us clearly the four different food types the children of Israel were craving or knowing by name and having spelled out to us clearly that we are to obey infallible guides or guides from the family of the Blessed Messenger (saw)
Which of the two matters have the Muslims wrangled over, fought each other over, and spilled blood the most?
It has to be a point of embarrassment for those that uphold such doctrines:
A) Muslims must be ruled by the family of the Prophet (saw)
&
B) Muslims are to be ruled by infallible family members of the Prophet (saw)
It must be embarrassing for believers in such doctrines to see Our All-Wise, All-Intelligent, All-Knowing, Creator acknowledge cucumbers and its garlic and its lentilsand onionsby name in his glorious revelation and not once mention the name of Ali Ibn Abu Talib.
It should not surprise us that in any discussion in relation to topic A or B above the Shi’a are anxious to pivot the conversation away from the Qur’an and towards any (dear God, sweet Lord in heaven) and we do mean any data extraneous to the Qur’an that assist them in building their case.
We should also not be surprised that some Shi’a held to tahrif (corruption) of the Qur’an on these very topics!
Let us say that we were to gather a bunch of atheists and Agnostics in a room, and we were to pose them the following question.
Are you more likely to believe in a Creator that mentions in passing the name of a few random vegetables that people craved in the past, while not mentioning clearly a line of succession and leadership that leads to internecine conflicts among those devoted to him?
Or
A Creator that mentions clearly a line of succession & leadership that, if not mentioned clearly, would lead to internecine conflicts among those devoted to him?
There are many people on this planet that would argue fiercely, cogently and intelligently that mentioning by name a few random vegetables that the people of the past craved seems almost trivial compared to mentioning by name a clear line of succession and leadership that, if not mentioned, would lead to internecine conflicts and loss of life.
Yazeed is mentioned in the Qur’an and it is a miracle! (Qur’an 19:76)
Now this doesn’t necessitate an argument against the wisdom of the Creator. It just argues for a Creator that may want his creation to figure some things out like a puzzle, an enigma or a riddle.
After all, what would we know, this is simply a run-of-the-mill garden variety refutation.
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.
Prima Quran 