April 15, 2023 · 12:02 pm

Response to Shi’i “You are to me as Aaron is to Moses”

(After rebuking his people) Moses turned to Aaron and said: “Aaron! What prevented you, when you saw them going astray, from following my way? Have you disobeyed my command? Aaron answered: “Son of my mother! Do not seize me with my beard, nor by (the hair of) my head. I feared that on returning you might say: ‘You sowed discord among the Children of Israel, and did not pay heed to my words.” (Qur’an 20:91-93)

﷽ 

This is in response to other hadith that the Shi’i often use. They try to justify their claims of Ali being the correct or rightful Imam of the Muslims after the Blessed Messenger (saw).

It is another example (of many) of them making a mountain out of a molehill.

The following hadith comes to mind:

Narrated Sa`d:

Allah’s Messenger (saw) set out for Tabuk, appointing Ali as his deputy (in Medina). Ali said, “Do you want to leave me with the children and women?” The Prophet (saw) said, “Will you not be pleased that you will be to me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4416

This hadith is about the honour of present trust and not future succession.

Alas, we also have the following:

Narrated ‘Uqbah bin ‘Amir:

That the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “If there was to have a Prophet after me, it would have been ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3686

The hadith about Umar (ra) neutralizes any attempt to single out Ali for a uniquely elevated status.

This hadith (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4416) shows clear as daylight that Ali was not pleased being left to take charge of the affairs of the people of Medina. So how much more the whole Ummah?!

Rather than seeing this as an honor bestowed upon him as one being the most trustworthy to take care of the most vulnerable, Ali saw it as a slight.

So not being content with trusting his station to his Imam, which is none other than the Blessed Messenger (see), Ali quipped, “Do you want to leave me with the children and women?”

Was Ali not aware of this verse of the Qur’an?

“Whoever obeys the Messenger has truly obeyed Allah. But whoever turns away, then ˹know that˺ We have not sent you ˹O Prophet˺ as a keeper over them.” (Qur’an 4:80)

Because the Shi’i cannot prove their case for the concept of the Imamate of Ahl Bayt from the Qur’an, they must quickly pivot the conversation to Hadith, which they feel justifies their position.

The Blessed Prophet (saw) is said to have replied to the recalcitrant Ali,

“Will you not be pleased that you will be unto me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.”

Somehow, the Shi’i seemed to close their eyes over the fact that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was trying to console his otherwise temperamental cousin.

Perhaps Ali sought glory or standing on the battlefield? Allah (swt) knows best. Yet, the Blessed Messenger (saw) gave Ali a more noble task than what Ali could have longed for.

The Shi’i run wild.

So, the Shi’i became laser focused on the part: “You will be unto me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.”

They start to surmise that this must be a strong indication that Ali, without a doubt, is the one who will lead the Muslims after the Blessed Messenger (saw) is gone.

So they start to imagine that the Blessed Messenger (saw) said things that he did not say. For example, the Hadith says, ‘no prophet after me’ but it does not say ‘no messenger after me’.

So perhaps Ali could be a Messenger after the Prophet Muhammed (saw) ?

The Shi’i who are known to be lovers of Qiyas (analogy) so well …maybe just this once.. 😉 🤫

So, with the above hadith in tow, we can quickly turn to the Qur’an and find:

“We made an appointment of thirty nights with Moses (On Mount Sinai), to which We added ten more; so the term set by the Lord was completed in forty nights. Moses said to Aaron, his brother: “Deputize for me ((ukh’luf’nī) among my people. Dispose rightly, and do not follow the way of the authors of evil.” (Qur’an 7:142)-Ahmed Ali

“And We treated with Musa thirty nights, and We completed them with ten; so the appointment of his Lord was completed by forty nights. And Musa said unto his brother Harun: act thou (ukh’luf’nī) in my place among my people, and rectify, and follow not the way of the corrupters.” (Qur’an 7:142)=Abdul Majid Daryabadi

As archaic and jumbled as Abdul Majid Daryabadi’s translation sounds to us, it best represents both the Arabic and the context. Although Ahmed Ali’s translation is good as well.

As always, because we are not here to tell you how to think or what to think, but for you to research and come to your own conclusions, please proceed to:

https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/7/142/

Even some of the more modern translations do a very horrible job of translating the verse:

For example, Sahih International has:

“And We made an appointment with Moses for thirty nights and perfected them by [the addition of] ten; so the term of his Lord was completed as forty nights. And Moses said to his brother Aaron, “Take my place among my people, do right [by them], and do not follow the way of the corrupters.” (Qur’an 7:142)


“Take my place.” No. Moses was not going anywhere permanently. Moses went somewhere briefly.

The following translators translate (ukh’luf’nī) in a Shi’i friendly manner.


Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar-Iranian Christian translator
Muhammed Mahmoud Ghali -Al Ahzar
Ali Quli Qara’i -Shi’i translator
Ali Bakhtiari Nejad -Shi’ia translator
The Monotheist Group [2013 Edition]-Quranist

The following translates the verse that we feel best expresses the meaning of ukh’luf’nī given the context.

Abdul Majid Daryabadi
Ahmed Ali
Hamid S Aziz
A.L Bilal Muhammed et al
Mushraff Hussain
Mohammed Shafi

So we know that it cannot mean to “take my place” permanently because Moses came back. We also know that it cannot mean taking my place in succession. How do we know this?

The historical data does not support this.

“Now Joshua son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him. So the Israelites listened to him and did what the Lord had commanded Moses.” (Deuteronomy 34:9)

The following, which is quite literally, is titled: Joshua to Succeed Moses.

Then Moses went out and spoke these words to all of Israel: “I am now a hundred and twenty years old, and I am no longer able to lead you. The Lord has said to me, ‘You shall not cross the Jordan.’ The Lord your God himself will cross over ahead of you. He will destroy these nations before you, and you will take possession of their land. Joshua also will cross over ahead of you, as the Lord said. And the Lord will do to them what he did to Sihon and Og, the kings of the Amorites, whom he destroyed along with their land. The Lord will deliver them to you, and you must do to them all that I have commanded you. Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the Lord your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you.”

 Then Moses summoned Joshua and said to him in the presence of all Israel, “Be strong and courageous, for you must go with this people into the land that the Lord swore to their ancestors to give them, and you must divide it among them as their inheritance.  The Lord himself goes before you and will be with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged.”

Source: (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2031%3A1-8&version=NIV)

SHI’I HAVE NO TIME FOR CONTEXT ??

Next time your overly excited Shi’a friend starts to tell you about the above Hadith and quotes the above verse of the (Qur’an 7:142), inform them what it says just 8 verses later.

“And when Moses returned to his people, angry and grieved, he said, “How wretched is that by which you have replaced me after [my departure]. Were you impatient over the matter of your Lord?” And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by his head, pulling him toward him. [Aaron] said, “O son of my mother, indeed the people oppressed me and were about to kill me, so let not the enemies rejoice over me and do not place me among the wrongdoing people.” (Qur’an 7:150)

“And recall when We summoned Moses for a term of forty nights, and then you set up the calf as your god in his absence. You indeed committed a grave wrong.” (Qur’an 2:51)

Moses scolded, “O Aaron! What prevented you, when you saw them going astray, from following after me? How could you disobey my orders? Aaron pleaded, “O son of my mother! Do not seize me by my beard or my head. I really feared that you would say, ‘You have caused division among the Children of Israel, and did not observe my word.’” (Qur’an 20:92-94)

So, if the Shi’i want to make Ali analogous to Harun (as) in a very literal way, we have some real problems.

Let us replace the words Moses (as) with the Prophet Muhammed (saw) and wewill replace Aaron (as) with Ali and let us see how this works.

“And when Muhammed returned to his people, angry and grieved, he said, “How wretched is that by which you have replaced me after [my departure]. Were you impatient over the matter of your Lord?” And he threw down the tablets and seized Ali by his head, pulling him toward him. [Ali] said, “O son of my mother, indeed the people oppressed me and were about to kill me, so let not the enemies rejoice over me and do not place me among the wrongdoing people.” (Qur’an 7:150)

Muhammed scolded, “O Ali! What prevented you, when you saw them going astray, from following after me? How could you disobey my orders? Ali pleaded, “O son of my mother! Do not seize me by my beard or my head. I really feared that you would say, ‘You have caused division among the Children of Israel, and did not observe my word.’” (Qur’an 20:92-94)

Are we to believe that it only takes the Prophet Muhammed (saw) to be gone for 40 days as Ali, fearing for his life, allows the people to fall into blatant shirk?

Are we to believe there could be a scenario where the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) is so furious with Ali that he snatches him up by his beard?!

Are we to believe there is a scenario where the Blessed Prophet (saw) scolded Ali for disobeying his orders? Even to the point where Ali feared that the Blessed Prophet (saw) would say that he (Ali) caused division among the Muslims?


Keep in mind that Moses (as), like the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) would have been given knowledge by Allah (swt) that Aaron (as) was not, in any way shape or form, in dereliction of his duties. Yet Musa (as) snatched Aaron (as) up!

We do not believe these are things the Shi’i are willing to entertain regarding Ali.

The Moses Aaron comparison is also devastating to Shi’i claims.

Why? Because they do not have equal authority.

“When there comes to them some matter touching (public) safety or fear, they divulge it. If they had only referred it to the Messenger, or to those charged with (ulī l-amri) authority among them, the proper investigators would have tested it for them (direct). Were it not for the Grace and Mercy of Allah unto you, all but a few of you would have fallen into the clutches of Satan.” (Qur’an 4:83)

Aaron did not have the knowledge of the divine will that Moses had.

“I really feared that you would say, ‘You have caused division among the Children of Israel, and did not observe my word.’

“And [recall] when Moses said to his people, “O my people, indeed you have wronged yourselves by your taking of the calf [for worship]. So repent to your Creator and kill yourselves [i.e., the guilty among you]. That is best for [all of] you in the sight of your Creator.” Then He accepted your repentance; indeed, He is the Accepting of Repentance, the Merciful.” (Qur’an 2:54)

This line: “I really feared that you would say, ‘You have caused division among the Children of Israel, and did not observe my word.” This absolutely does not refer to Ali ibn Abi Talib at all! This was a man who, instead of pursuing the killers of Uthman, wasted no time in collecting his army to go fight the people of Sham!


Translation of the above:

“This year of his caliphate, the Commander of the Faithful, Ali ibn Abi Talib, assumed leadership and appointed governors over the regions. He appointed Abdullah ibn Abbas over Yemen, Samurah ibn Jundab over Basra, Imarah ibn Shihab over Kufa, Qays ibn Sa’d ibn Ubadah over Egypt, and over Syria, Sahl ibn Hunayf in place of Muawiyah. Sahl marched until he reached Tabuk, when the close associates of Muawiyah met him and said, “We want to say…” It was said, “He knows.” They said, “We want to say…” It was said, “He knows.” They then said, “If Uthman sent you in his capacity [as the rightful caliph, then proceed], but if it was someone else, then go back.” They said, “Have you not heard what happened?” They replied, “Yes.” So he returned to Ali.”

“As for Qays ibn Sa’d, the people of Egypt differed concerning him. The majority pledged allegiance to him, but a group said, “We will not pledge allegiance until the killers of Uthman are brought to us.” The situation was similar in Basra. As for Imarah ibn Shihab, who was sent as governor to Kufa, Talhah ibn Khuwaylid prevented him from entering out of anger for Uthman. He returned to Ali and informed him. The strife intensified, the matter became grave, and opinions differed. Abu Musa wrote to Ali informing him of the obedience and pledge of allegiance of the people of Kufa, except for a few. Ali sent many letters to Muawiyah, but he did not receive any reply. This continued repeatedly until the third month after the murder of Uthman, in Safar.”

“Then Muawiyah sent a scroll with a man who came to Ali. Ali asked, “What news do you bring?” The man replied, “I come to you from people who desire nothing but revenge, deeply aggrieved. I left seventy thousand elderly men gathered under the shirt of Uthman, which is displayed on the pulpit of Damascus.” Ali said, “O Allah, I declare myself innocent before You of the blood of Uthman.” Then the messenger of Muawiyah left Ali’s presence, and those Kharijites who had killed Uthman intended to kill him, but he barely escaped after much effort.”

“Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, resolved to fight the people of Syria. He wrote to Qays ibn Sa’d in Egypt, urging the people to mobilize for fighting them, and to Abu Musa in Kufa. He also sent word to Uthman ibn Hunayf about this. He addressed the people, inciting them for that purpose. He was determined to prepare and depart from Medina, appointing Qutham ibn Abbas as his deputy over it. He was resolved to fight, with those who obeyed him, against those who disobeyed him, rebelled against his command, and did not pledge allegiance to him along with the people.”

“His son, Al-Hasan ibn Ali, came to him and said, “O my father, abandon this, for it involves the shedding of Muslim blood and the occurrence of division among them.” But he did not accept that from him; rather, he insisted on fighting and organized the army. He gave the standard to Muhammed ibn al-Hanafiyyah, appointed Ibn Abbas to be in charge of important matters, and Umar ibn Abi Salama over the vanguard. It is also said he appointed Umar ibn Sufyan ibn Abd al-Assad over the vanguard. He appointed as the commander of his advance guard Abu Layla ibn Amr ibn al-Jarrah, the nephew of Abu Ubaydah. He appointed Qutham ibn Abbas as his deputy over Medina. Nothing remained except for him to depart from Medina heading towards Syria, until there came to him what diverted him from all of that, which we will mention.”

Source: Al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah (البداية والنهاية) by Ibn Kathir Volume: around Vol. 7 or 8 (depending on the edition)

Prima Qur’an comments:

  1. Ali claimed that he is in Bara’ah with those who killed Uthman.
  2. He did not spend his time looking for these killers. Ali did not seem concerned at all about finding the killers of Uthman.
  3. Trying to find the killers of Uthman could have easily disuaded the tension or at the very least exposed Muawiyah as a hypocrite.
  4. Rather, Ali wasted no time in raising an army for the continued fighting, and killing and slaughter among the Muslims.
  5. Al Hasan ibn Ali was much wiser than his father (Ali), who was spoiling for a fight.

Look at the words of Al Hasan ibn Ali.

“O my father, abandon this, for it involves the shedding of Muslim blood and the occurrence of division among them.” But he (Ali) did not accept that from him.”

So try to apply the following statement of Aaron (as) to Ali : “I really feared that you would say, ‘You have caused division among the Children of Israel, and did not observe my word.” This absolutely does not apply to Ali.

In addition to that, we have the following:

Narrated by ‘Abdullah bin Abbas

“Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah’s Apostle during his fatal illness. The people asked, “O Abu Hasan (i.e. Ali)! How is the health of Allah’s Apostle this morning?” ‘Ali replied, “He has recovered with the Grace of Allah.” ‘Abbas bin ‘Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, “In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else), And by Allah, I feel that Allah’s Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of ‘Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah’s Apostle and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us.” ‘Ali said, “By Allah, if we asked Allah’s Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah’s Apostle for it.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4447

  1. It is quite clear that Ibn Abbas was not aware of any Shi’i interpretations that Ali should be the one to lead the Muslims after the death of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
  2. Ali himself was not of the understanding that it was something that was his to take simply by being related to the Blessed Prophet (saw).
  3. This is another reason why it is best to make the Qur’an the pillar of our theology and faith, as the hadith themselves have narrations that the Shi’i themselves wince at.

Then there is this straight from Nahjul balagha itself. Straight from a Shi’i website:

“By Allah, I had no liking for the caliphate nor any interest in government, but you yourselves invited me to it and prepared me for it. When the caliphate came to me, I kept the Book of Allah in my view and all that Allah had put therein for us, and all that according to which He has commanded us to take decisions; and I followed it, and also acted on whatever the Prophet – may Allah bless him and his descendants – had laid down as his sunnah. In this matter I did not need your advice or the advice of anyone else, nor has there been any order of which I was ignorant so that I ought to have consulted you or my Muslim brethren. If it were so I would not have turned away from you or from others.”

Source: https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-205-both-you-frown-over-small-matter

This sermon is said to have happened long after the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) died. This sermon itself proves that Ali never considered that he was already the appointed Khilafa of the Muslims.

He said, “When the Caliphate came to me.” This means he was not the Caliph at the time, he recognized it as such and nor did he want it. Someone who is divinely appointed by Allah (swt) to the Khilafa of the Muslims takes pride in it, claims it and upholds that as a great trust.

It shows Ali himself viewed the caliphate as something that came to him by people’s invitation after Uthman’s death, not as a pre-appointed right he was claiming.

Someone who recognizes they are not divinely appointed but that people have chosen who will lead them and then gets pushed into a position of leadership makes the kind of statements that Ali made above.

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

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 13, 2023 · 12:17 am

Shaykh Yusuf Estes in Oman for Ramadan.

“And brought together their hearts. If you had spent all that is in the earth, you could not have brought their hearts together; but Allah brought them together. Indeed, He is Exalted in Might and Wise. ” (Qur’an 8:63)

﷽ 

Part of the visit of the Islamic preacher Yusuf Estes to the headquarters of Al-Istiqama satellite channel this morning In it, the guest was introduced to the various sections of the channel and its facilities

Shaykh Yusuf Estes has spoke in Oman before:

https://timesofoman.com/article/95088/Oman/Education/American-Islamic-lecturer-Yusuf-Estes-captivates-audience-in-Oman

This was a very interesting discussion between Shaykh Yusuf Estes and brother Hatim AbdisSalam

May Allah (swt) bless you Shaykh Yusuf Estes and all your efforts for calling people to Al-Islam.

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

April 1, 2023 · 2:23 pm

The Ibadi school and the Niqab

“My Lord, increase me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)

﷽ 

Recently one of our respected sisters had commented with a question on this blog:

“Asalamu Alaikum, I read somewhere (Reddit) that Ibadis consider the Niqab/ Burqa to be a Zoroastrian innovation, therefore, making it haraam for Muslim women to wear the niqab. Is this true? what are the Ibadi opinions on the niqab? As in Tanzania Ibadi sisters tend to wear the niqab.”

So this is the response from our Shaykh Jumaa Mazruii (May Allah continue to benefit us by him).

Several points to be taken.

  1. None of the Ibadi scholars have ever said that Niqab is a bid’ah or that it came into Islam by way of the Zoroastrians.
  2. One of our biggest living scholars, and Mufti of Oman, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (hafidullah) says, that it is something preferable for women to wear. Men like to look at the face of the woman and it can become part of fitnah.
  3. Our school does not say it is wajib (obligatory) rather, it is something highly stressed.

Prima Qur’an comments: (To be taken with a pinch of salt).

Our thoughts on the Niqab as a Muslim convert from the West and given the fact that our school has little presence where Muslims are the minority, some things need to be taken on board.

  1. There are people in life that make bad decisions and bad choices. We all make bad choices /decisions from time to time. So imagine a situation where a woman went into a certain entertainment industry and there are, unfortunately, pictures of her all over the internet. That Niqab maybe an extra level of protection and/or anonymity for her.

Might we also add that current cultural dynamics in Western society offer absolutely no dignified approach for a woman who may have regretted such a course of action and wishes to move on with her life in a way that is dignified and anonymous. There is the possibility of changing one’s name. However, hiding the appearance is not part of the cultural norms of the west or most other societies at all.

The Niqab offers her both that dignity and anonymity.

2. We are now in the month of Ramadan. Once the Ramadan festivities have ended, many in  Malaysia, Indonesia will practice what we call ‘Jalan Raya’, the walking celebration, albeit taxi, train and driving these days.

We visit our parents, grandparents, aunties, uncles, asking for forgiveness and to reestablish and rekindle familiar ties. What happens now is that many take the opportunity to take pictures at this gathering (very often without even having the courtesy to ask others if they want their pictures to be taken).

In such a situation, a man may feel more comfortable with others taking pictures of his wife, daughter etc. while wearing the niqaab. There is a certain gheerah (protective jealousy) in not having other men sharing and circulating pictures of one’s wife/daughter etc.

Albeit in today’s culture and society, we have shed gheerah like a deciduous forest sheds its leaves during the winter.

3. Often times, Muslims who have proclaimed they have a very “progressive” or “liberal” view of Islam will rail against the Niqab. This is strange because a progressive philosophy should be inclusive, which would include the niqab as part of a woman’s right.

4. Women may be able to get around with more ease in a mixed-sex setting that we find ourselves in very often in places like Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia. Often, men and women can mistake facial ques for something that is not intended. A slight grin, a bright-eyed smile can many times be interpreted by men in ways that a woman never intended for it to mean at all. In this case, the Niqab is a protection for both.

Now, although we find the argument for the Niqaab to be compelling on those grounds, it may not be ideal for Muslims living in the West or places where such customs and understandings of Islam are prevalent.

An example:

Women who teach in kindergarten or schools should have their face visible to children. Children need to be able to form bonds with their teachers and the face conveys many words and feelings that are often conveyed stronger than words. So, whereas as in point 4 above, the Niqab can help facilitate appropriate interaction, in the case of small children it may serve the opposite effect. Again, this is in the context of children who are not used to the niqaab, or it is something alien to them. It may be a source of discomfort for children and Allah (swt) knows best.

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

You may also be interested in reading the following:

Ibadi view: Is the voice of the woman awrah?
Khimar (Head Covering) is an injunction with in the Qur’an.

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

March 24, 2023 · 1:35 pm

Harakat of the Qur’an & Al-Khalili ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi al-Ibadi

“And among those We created is a community which guides by truth and thereby establishes justice.” (Qur’an 7:181)

﷽ 

The next time someone says that we Ibadi are Khawarij and that we do not take our deen from them perhaps gently remind those people to stop using harakat when teaching your children how to read the Qur’an properly!

That system—you use to teach their children, which enables tajwīd, which facilitates tarāwīḥ prayers, and which is the very means of correctly reciting the Qur’an—was systematized by an Ibadi scholar.

There is scarcely a grammar book that talks about the essence of ilmu al-nahw except that the name: Al-Khalili ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi is mentioned.

The “Shining Star” of the Basran school of Arabic grammar, a polymath and scholar, he was a man of genuinely original thought. Al-Farahidi was the first scholar to subject the prosody of Classical Arabic poetry to a detailed phonological analysis.

He was born in Oman circa 718 and died in Basra, Iraq circa 791. He was an Arab philologist and the first to compile an Arabic dictionary. He was the teacher of Sībawayh, whom latter compiled al-Kitāb fī an-naḥw (“The Book on Grammar”).

The lie that Al-Khalili ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi al-Ibadi left the school of Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqamah to join Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah is a whopper of a lie!

“This is where history records the role of Khalil bin Ahmad al-Farahidy al-Ibadi. He then determined the form of fathah with the lowercase alif letter lying on top of the letter, kasrah with a small ya’ letter below it and dhammah with a small waw letter above it. Meanwhile, tanwin is formed by duplicating the writing of each of these signs, in addition there are several other signs.”

Source: https://www.muslimcreed.com/2022/03/the-history-of-giving-dots-and-harakat.html

“In Khalili’s time, the Qur’anic manuscripts were equipped with various points with various functions and purposes. In the disciplines of the Qur’an, it is known as naqthi’rab, or simply the point of harakat, and naqthi’jam which are nothing but dots on each other. The two types of dots are written differently by using red for vowel points and black for letter points.”


“The number of dots scattered on each page of the Qur’anic manuscripts which then gave birth to problems, both for readers and writers. For readers, reading errors are not impossible to avoid because sometimes they cannot distinguish one from another. As for writers, it is considered a hassle because they always have to change colours at one time in the writing process.”

Source: (https://www.muslimcreed.com/2022/03/history-of-harakat-in-mushaf-quran.html

Every time your children use the system of harakat to read the Qur’an, rather it is in reciting the Qur’an in Ramadan during tarweeh prayers, or in one’s private reading of the Qur’an during prayers, or in any type of gathering all of that hasanat, all that blessing is being accredited to Al-Khalili ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi al-Ibadi!! May Allah (swt) cover him in mercy!

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

March 23, 2023 · 7:33 pm

Dr. Zakir Naik in Oman

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

﷽ 

Al hamdulliah, our brother and esteemed orator Dr. Zakir Naik will be spending his opening days of Ramadan in the Sultanate of Oman.

He will be doing a series of two public talks.

Dr. Zakir Naik has had the good fortunate to have met the Mufti of Oman, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (hafidullah).

May Allah (swt) bless Dr. Zakir Naik and his tour in Oman. It is hoped that people will benefit by his talks and that Allah (swt) will open the hearts for many to come into Islam.

Probably one of the key differences between Ibadi and Sunni is that we truly do believe that Muhammed (saw) is the last and final prophet and the last and final messenger.

The Sunni say this but they have a belief in non sequential messengers. There is a sort of glib or tongue in cheek statement about the Prophet Muhammed (saw) being the last of the Prophets and Messengers and than there is the belief that his body is in Madinah and Jesus (as) is alive in heaven.

For the Ibadi school Jesus (as) is dead. He is not coming back. The Blessed Messenger (saw) is: The mercy to the worlds. It is not quite clear what Sunni’s believe that Jesus 2.0 is going to clear up that the Qur’an hasn’t already made clear.

The diagram above the first two circles represents the view of the Ibadi school. Jesus (as) has come and died. Muhammed (saw) is the last of the prophets, and he is the last of the messengers.

The diagram above the second set of three circles represents the Sunni view. (Though there are a few dissenting voices). So this is what we call non-sequential prophets. But even then, we are not quite sure how that works. How the Blessed Messenger (saw), the Prophet Muhammed (saw), is the last and final prophet and messenger (who has a body in Madinah) and Jesus (as) is alive in heaven, and he is coming back.(saw),

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/what-happened-to-jesus-and-how-did-he-die/

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/the-problems-with-believing-in-the-2nd-coming-of-jesus-and-mahdi/

Crucifixion or Impaled? How do we understand Qur’an 4:157?

Crucifixion or Impaled? Understanding Qur’an 4:157

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/examination-of-the-word-tawaffa-in-the-quran-as-it-relates-to-the-death-of-jesus/

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/sunni-misunderstanding-of-quran-4159-concerning-jesus/

https://primaquran.com/2023/07/19/the-definitive-proof-from-the-ibadi-school-that-jesus-is-dead-and-will-not-return/

https://primaquran.com/2024/03/30/the-question-of-the-historical-crucifixion-and-the-martyrdom-of-jesus/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

March 5, 2023 · 3:44 am

Hadith: Do not revile/curse my companions

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

Or do you say that Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants were Jews or Christians? Say, “Are you more knowing or is Allah ?” And who is more unjust than one who conceals a testimony he has from Allah? And Allah is not unaware of what you do That is a nation that has passed on. It will have what it earned, and you will have what you have earned. And you will not be asked about what they used to do. Those are people who have passed away; theirs is that which they earned and yours that which ye earn. And ye will not be asked of what they used to do. (Qur’an 2:140-141)

﷽ 

It has been said about the Ibadi school, that we revile, abuse and curse the companions!

It has been said that we are Khawarij who curse, revile and abuse the companions.

Nothing can be further from the truth! 

When you hear people say such things about us, ask them to bring their evidence! 

Please listen to what our teacher and Shaykh Dr. Khalid bin Mohammed Al Abdali (Hafidullah) shares with us what should be the stance of the Muslims in regard to the companions and those who have gone before us.

One group says about some of the companions of the Blessed Messenger (saw) that they “Are the dogs of hellfire!”

Another group says, “These are sinners and have disobeyed the order of Allah.”

Who is doing the cursing? Who is doing the reviling?

In our books, the Ibadi, we haven’t named someone a dog from the dogs of Jahannam. Al hamdulllah! That Allah (swt) has purified our tongues from it.  That being said, we do not say the Sahabah/companions were all angels and saints. We tell the history.

This should be very clear. If our books say that such and such a companion is a sinner or sinned, that is not reviling anyone. It is simply reporting the news. If our books say such and such a companion went against the amr, the command of Allah (swt), that is not reviling anyone. That is simply reporting the news.

You are welcome to dispute with us about whether such and such a companion sinned on this or that occasion, but stop saying that the Ibadi revile, curse or abuse the companions. Even worse one recent individual who claimed to be a teacher of the Ashari school claimed the Ibadi say that Uthman and Ali committed Shirk! Authubillah min dhalik! When pressed for a proof he deleted his post and made amends for it. This is the sign of sincerity.

It is the Ahl Khilaf (The People of the opposition). It is their books that are filled with statements companions reviling each other. 

It was our teachers (Ibadi scholars) who approached Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz (ra), who was a righteous Caliph and a just Imam. It was they who went to him and urged him to stop the cursing and reviling of the companions at the minbar. It is not the place for it.

In fact, if you want to see who really reviled who see this entry. Read it and weep!

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

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying:

“Do not revile my Companions, do not revile my Companions. By Him in Whose Hand is my life, if one amongst you would have spent as much gold as Uhud it would not amount to as much as one much on behalf of one of them or half of it.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:2540)

Narrated Anas:

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

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

It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet (saw) came to a graveyard and greeted (its occupants) with Salam, then he said:

“Peace be upon you, abode of believing people. We will join you soon, if Allah wills.” Then he said: “Would that we could see our brothers.” They said: “O Messenger of Allah, are we not your brothers?” He said: “You are my Companions. My brothers are those who will come after me. I will reach the Cistern ahead of you.” They said: “O Messenger of Allah, how will you recognize those of your nation who have not yet come?” He said: “If a man has a horse with a blaze on its forehead and white feet, don’t you think that he will recognize it among horses that are deep black in color?” They said: “Of course.” He said: “On the Day of Resurrection they will come with radiant faces, hands, and feet, because of the traces of ablution.” He said: “I will reach the Cistern ahead of you.” Then he said: “Men will be driven away from my Cistern just as stray camels are driven away. And I will call to them: ‘Come here!’ But it will be said: ‘They changed after you were gone, and they kept turning on their heels.’ So I will say: “Be off with you!”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:4306)

Narrated Jabir bin `Abdullah:

We were in a Ghazwa and a man from the emigrants kicked an Ansari (on the buttocks with his foot). The Ansari man said, “O the Ansari! (Help!)” The emigrant said, “O the emigrants! (Help).” When Allah’s Messenger (saw) heard that, he said, “What is that?” They said, “A man from the emigrants kicked a man from the Ansar (on the buttocks his foot). On that the Ansar said, ‘O the Ansar!’ and the emigrant said, ‘O the emigrants!” The Prophet (saw) said’ “Leave it (that call) for it Is a detestable thing.” The number of Ansar was larger (than that of the emigrants) at the time when the Prophet (saw) came to Medina, but later the number of emigrants increased. `Abdullah bin Ubai said, “Have they, (the emigrants) done so? By Allah, if we return to Medina, surely, the more honorable will expel therefrom the meaner,” `Umar bin Al-Khattab said, “O Allah’s Messenger (saw)! Let me chop off the head of this hypocrite!” The Prophet said, “Leave him, lest the people say Muhammad kills his companions:”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4907)

Narrated Ibn `Umar:

The Prophet (saw) sent (an army unit under the command of) Khalid bin Al-Walid to fight against the tribe of Bani Jadhima and those people could not express themselves by saying, “Aslamna,” but they said, “Saba’na! Saba’na! ” Khalid kept on killing some of them and taking some others as captives, and he gave a captive to everyone of us and ordered everyone of us to kill his captive. I said, “By Allah, I shall not kill my captive and none of my companions shall kill his captive!” Then we mentioned that to the Prophet (saw) and he said, “O Allah! I am free from what Khalid bin Al-Walid has done,” and repeated it twice.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7189)

Sunni and Shi’i narrators state that Ali ibn Abu Talib led the prayers either while intoxicated or in a major state of ritual impurity.

Sunni and Shia narrators state that Ali bin Abi Talib drank alcohol and offer prayers while intoxicated?

So are they reviling, rebuking and cursing Ali for simply reporting the facts?

Or what about the reviling and rebuking Ahl Sunnah has done of the noble companion Hurqus Ibn Zuhair (ra) ?

The noble companion Hurqus ibn Zuhair and the deception of Ahl Sunnah “Be Just!”

Or what about the tremendous and horrible statement put into the mouth of the Blessed Messenger (saw), calling some of his companions “the dogs of hellfire?” Many are those from among the Shi’i and Ah Sunnah quotes this with absolutely no shame.

Khawarij are the dogs of hellfire!!

What about the Salafi preacher who really did curse one of the companions, Amr b. al-Hamiq al-Khuza’i for stabbing Uthman in the chest 9 times!

Salafi preacher admits a companion killed Uthman not the so called Khawarij.

What about Ibn Taymiyyah’s damning admission that the majority of the companions hated Ali?

Ibn Taymiyya claims the majority of Sahabah (Companions) and Tabi’in (Followers) hated Ali Ibn Abi Talib

So we would implore those in dawah, and we would implore teachers and learned people from among the Sunni and Shi’i to be educated on this matter. You may not agree with us, and you are free to differ with us, but you do not have a license to lie about us or misrepresent us.

In fact, on matters of lying and not being truthful, one should have awareness and fear of Allah (swt) who sees and knows all that we do.

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

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

February 24, 2023 · 2:01 am

Do Sunni Muslims believe animals can go to hell?

“When they see it, the criminal will wish he can ransom himself from the chastisement of that day by sacrificing his children.” (Qur’an 70:11)

“Indeed, Allah does not do injustice, [even] as much as an atom’s weight; while if there is a good deed, He multiplies it and gives from Himself a great reward.” (Qur’an 4:40)

﷽ 

“And the request of forgiveness of Ibrahim for his father was only because of a promise he had made to him. But when it became apparent to Ibrahim that his father was an enemy to Allah, he disassociated himself from him. Indeed was Ibrahim compassionate and patient.” (Qur’an 9:114)

In this short entry we will be discussing a very curious hadith found in Bukhari.

We like to call this: The TO BE CONTINUED….hadith.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3350)

You can see how some Sunni scholars tried to deal with this hadith.

Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī in Fatḥ al-Bārī says Āzar was transformed from human form into an animal form for two reasons:

The first reason: As a mercy to Abraham — because if Āzar entered the Fire in the form that Abraham knew, Abraham would be pained every time he looked toward the Fire and saw his father. So Allah wished to show mercy to Abraham by transforming his father’s form.

The second reason: Āzar had seen the signs indicating Allah’s oneness, the proof had been established against him, yet he refused anything but polytheism. Therefore, the punishment is of the same kind as the deed. He was transformed into a stupid hyena because he was characterized by stupidity and rejected the call to monotheism, so he was transformed into this form.

Source: (https://shamela.ws/book/37774/737)

The Lord will answer him with the decisive word, that He has forbidden Paradise to the disbelievers. Then it will be said to Abraham: Look at what is under your feet. So Abraham, peace be upon him, will look and see a hyena covered in filth. The hyena is the male hyena with much hair. He will find it covered in excrement or blood. Then it will be seized by its limbs—that is, its hands and feet—and thrown into the Fire. It is said that it appeared to him in this repulsive form because So that he might disown him. The wisdom behind his transformation into a hyena, rather than any other animal, lies in the fact that the hyena is the most foolish of animals. Part of its foolishness is its heedlessness of what requires vigilance. When Azar rejected the advice of the most compassionate person towards him and instead accepted the deception of Satan, he resembled the hyena, known for its foolishness.
This hadith also illustrates God’s honoring of His friend Abraham.
Furthermore, it provides evidence that a child’s conversion to Islam will not benefit the parent on the Day of Judgment if the parent was not a Muslim

Source: (https://dorar.net/hadith/sharh/9790)

Prima Qur’an comments:

“This hadith also illustrates God’s honoring of His friend Abraham.” What?! This wild explanation does nothing to tell us how Abraham (as) was not disgraced on that day. What is the resolution? What did Abraham learn about Āzar?

If Ibrāhīm knows the animal is his father, he still sees his father punished. The transformation doesn’t remove the shame—it merely changes the visual. This explanation solves nothing theologically. It also introduces a special privilege for Ibrāhīm that no other believer gets, which contradicts Qur’ānic justice (Qur’an 4:40).

If the animal were a ransom, Āzar would be saved. But the ḥadīth explicitly says Paradise is forbidden to disbelievers. So the animal is not a ransom—it’s just an animal being punished. That’s the plain reading.

Also, if this whole elaborate and fanciful interpretation is needed so that Abraham is not disgraced and dishonored, what good is that those reading this very article know that indeed his father was disgraced?!

So now we will need another elaborate and fanciful interpretation (let us see if we can beat the Sufis to it). That someone would suggest that we all have our memories wiped concerning the fate of Azar on the day of judgment!

We call the above hadith: The TO BE CONTINUED hadith.

You know, sometimes you get wrapped up in watching a series on television, and suddenly they cancel season three just when it was getting really interesting!

That’s the case with the following hadith:

“Ibrahim will meet his father on the Day of Resurrection, and Azar’s face will be dark and covered with dust. Ibrahim will say to him, “Did I not tell you not to disobey me?’ His father will say, ‘Today I will not disobey you.” Ibrahim will say, ‘O Lord! You promised me not to disgrace me on the Day of Resurrection; and what will be more disgraceful to me than cursing and dishonoring my father?” Then Allah will say, ‘I have forbidden Paradise to the disbelievers.’ Then he will be addressed, ‘O Ibrahim, what is beneath your feet?’ He will look and there will be a sacrificial animal (Dhahb) WHICH WILL BE CAUGHT BY THE LEGS AND THROWN INTO THE FIRE!”

In ya go ya little booger!

“He will look and there will be a sacrificial animal (Dhahb) which will be caught by the legs and thrown into the fire!”

When you look at this text, it is sensible that it stops at this part: “Then Allah will say, ‘I have forbidden Paradise to the disbelievers.” This concludes the matter.

Now the messy part.

The following part is all too easily an accretion by a redactor:

“Then he will be addressed, ‘O Ibrahim, what is beneath your feet?’ He will look and there will be a sacrificial animal (Dhahb) which will be caught by the legs and thrown into the fire!”

So we saw that this particular Hadith had a sensible conclusion. Yet theology won’t have it that way….we need it to continue…. “THEN….”

From this part on, the redactor just lets the imagination run wild…..

This becomes more interesting when you consider that, in Islamic history, both the Shi’i Muslims and the Ash’ari Sunni Muslims have had a real problem with the idea of the parents of the Prophet (saw) being in hellfire or even the father of Ibrahim being in the hellfire.

The Shi’i have made some very wild attempts to assert that Azar is not the father of Ibrahim but his uncle instead. Not to be outdone by none no other than Jalal Al-Din Al-Suyuti, threw his weight behind the idea as well.

(insh’Allah, perhaps these are subjects for future articles) ..

So there are two things to be immediately said about the Hadith above.

First point.

If Prophet Ibrahim (as) gets to ask for privileges on behalf of his father, then this means that all the Prophets will get to ask privileges for their wives, sons, daughters, uncles. Noah (as) gets to ask for his sons. Lut (as) gets to ask for his wife.

Second point.


This will indicate double standards. The Prophets get special treatment from Allah (swt) — Astaghfirullah and the rest of us. If we go to the Jannah, can we ask the same for our family members:” Will Allah (swt) be just and give this same treatment to everyone or only to the Prophets?

“And certainly We know best those who are most worthy of being burned therein.” (Qur’an 19:70)

So what did the sacrificial animal do to be burned by the fire?

Was this (let’s say a goat) was he:

Among the Mujrimun-criminals?

Among the Fasiq-defiantly disobedient?

Among the Munafiq-hypocrites?

Among the Mushrik-those who associate partners with Allah (swt) ?

May Allah (swt) forgive us. May Allah (swt) deal justly with those who forge narrations and put words in the mouth of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

Our understanding in the Ibadi school is that the animals are the creations of Allah (swt). They are created according to their fitra, and they do not rebel against Allah (swt). They are not subject to any punishment, certainly not hellfire.

To believe that the Blessed Messenger (saw) would not overburden camels or that he would cut his robe so as not to disturb a sleeping cat and then turn around and think that he narrated something like this is certainly wanting.

All praise be to Allah. Al hamdulillah.

“And the request of forgiveness of Ibrahim for his father was only because of a promise he had made to him. But when it became apparent to Ibrahim that his father was an enemy to Allah, he disassociated himself from him. Indeed was Ibrahim compassionate and patient.” (Qur’an 9:114)

The idea of not accepting that the father of Prophet Ibrahim (as) goes to hell is the same train of thought that leads some Sunni Muslims to launch attacks upon the very Sahih hadith themselves!

You may read about that here:

Attacks upon Sahih hadith by Sufi Leaning Ashari Theologians
Are The Prophets Parents In Hell? – Dr Shaykh Abdullah al-Mu’ammari.

You may also be interested in reading the following:

The Ibadi school is attacked for saying it’s haram to eat Goat Penis.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

10 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 20, 2023 · 2:14 pm

On Seeing Allah

“The Originator of the heavens and the earth; He made mates for you from among yourselves, and mates of the cattle too, multiplying you thereby; there is nothing like unto Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

﷽ 

This verse is sufficient to refute the rational proofs that the Ashari may try and bring forth to assert that Allah (swt) is perceptible.

This article will give the position of the Ibadi School, The Muslims, also known as: (Ahl al Haqq wal Istiqamah) on seeing Allah (swt) on the day of judgement.

We will critique the position of our brothers from Ahl Sunnah. As Ahl Sunnah is divided on this issue we need to make sure that our arguments are addressed to both sides of the divide among Ahl Sunnah itself.

  1. The school of Ahl Sunnah that asserts that Muslims will see Allah (swt) in an apparent sense. (Athari, Salafiyya)

  2. The school of Ahl Sunnah that asserts that Muslims will see Allah (swt) as being perceptible in the heart or mind.

In our estimation, the Athari, Salafiyya among the Ahl Sunnah are more consistent in their principles on ‘seeing’ Allah (swt) than are the Ashari. We will leave that to you the reader to decide where lay the truth.

Whereas we regard the Ashari/Maturidi to be the most inconsistent in this regard, as there are a few positions of them on this matter. Insh’Allah that will be shown in this article. We will present two examples straight away to prove this point:

“The Day the shin will be uncovered and they are invited to prostration but the disbelievers will not be able.” (Qur’an 68:42)

Ask all the Ashari/Maturidi on the planet, do they take the outward meaning of this verse? Certainly, this would be a strong verse to support their position? That people will see Allah (swt) by seeing the ‘shin’ of Allah (swt).

“People asked the Prophet (saw): O’ Messenger of Allah will we see our Lord in the Day of Resurrection? Then the Messenger of Allah replied: Is there any dispute among you whether a full moon is visible? They answered: No. then The Prophet (saw) continued asking them: “ Is there any dispute among you whether the sun is visible in a cloudless sky? They replied in the negative. Then The Prophet stated (saw): “Then you will see your Lord JUST LIKE this”. Allah will get the people together in the Day of Resurrection then He says: those who were worshiping any deity shall follow it. Then the ones who were worshiping the sun will follow the sun and the ones who were worshiping the moon will follow the moon and those who were worshiping Rebels will follow Rebels …Then Allah will come to them in a FORM other than WHAT THEY KNEW and say: “I am your Lord”, they reply: “We seek refuge in Allah from you. This is our place until our Lord Comes to us, and when our Lord comes to us, we will recognize Him. THEN ALLAH WILL COME TO THEM IN A SHAPE THEY KNOW and will say, I am your Lord’ They will say, ‘(No doubt) You are our Lord,’ and they will follow Him.”

Source: (Al Bukhari hadith no.6573 Book Of Ar-Riqaq)

They (Ashari/Maturidi) leave their students absolutely gob smacked that on the one hand, they battle against fellow Sunni who takes the outward meaning and they(the Ashari/Maturidi) constantly deny corporeality, and space/time for Allah (swt) and yet at the same time assert that we will see (sorry Mohamed Ghilan) I mean look upon Allah (swt) !!

We will show the strength and consistency both textually and intellectually of those of us who say that we will not see Allah (swt) on the day of judgement.

We will also be interacting with material from two videos. In the first video, you will only need to watch the first half-hour. That is the only section relevant to this post. https://youtu.be/5_6zRI0eH44 When we quote from this we will reference this as video A.

The second video is quite long.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsFrP55SiM4&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3oWTMdhyYLY69QDXuiOdUw4FSccfLwWUPURapr0GTnTVwjw7k7gHbDVbg When we quote from this we will reference this as video B.

I personally was quite shocked and taken aback as I listened to our  respected brother Mohamed Ghilan. Yet, as I listened he showed such what has to be described as a simple understanding of basic tenets of creed and certainly did not understand the beliefs of others. May Allah guide him and us.

Mohamed Ghilan echoing Shaykh Hamza Yusuf calls seeing Allah (swt) in the hereafter as “beatific vision” borrowing terminology from Roman Catholics. He states this @ 54:14 seconds (Video B) into the discussion.

Like when he says about Moses and the burning bush…
“He really spoke.”

Oh, do tell us what do you mean when you say that, “He (swt) really spoke”??

What follows will be from video A above. The Ustaz ask:

First Question: Is it rationally conceivable that Allah (swt) can be seen?

The Ustaz says that we can conceive of images in our minds. So Allah (swt) is being compared to temporal objects and bodies with accidents!

Now, this is important you will notice some bait and switch tactics going on with Ahl Sunnah. They are all over the place on this point of creed. All of this about “seeing” Allah (swt) and yet the first point is to talk about “seeing” Allah (swt) in the mind! Not with the eyes, not with the faces nor with the hearts.

So the Ustaz ask” “Is it possible in the mind?” He responds: “Yes he can! Why? Because he is existent. He is an existent being!”

My response:

That is a very weak argument. Because what will soon to follow will be likening Allah (swt) to spatial objects with accidents and bodies.

And sure enough @14:51 The Ustaz does exactly that. “Now this pen is made of substance body (plastic) and it’s made up of accidents, colour, shape size, weight, occupying space, etc, moving not moving. These are all accidents. Now can you is it possible in the mind for you to see this body without the accidents. Now you don’t see it. You don’t see it separate from its accidents but that does not mean it’s not possible. There is nothing in your mind to say to you, hear me out. There is nothing in your mind to say that you cannot see substance without the accidents except that you are unable since bodies do not exist except with accidents. But there is nothing inconceivable in your mind. There is nothing that is blocking it in your mind.”

@21:19 the Ustaz continues… “Is it a contradiction in the mind that an accident can be seen. It’s not a contradiction. It actually can be seen because it exists. Anything that exists as an existent being can be seen.”

Notice the student @21:49 (whomever he is) he is brilliant. He tried to save the whole creed and its nonsense by saying what they should be saying, that is: “Because Allah exists it’s possible we can grasp his existence.” Then the teacher responds abruptly “That he is seen yes.” My response: “WOW!”

The student was on to something brilliant but the teacher wanted to quickly make sure that he affirms his (the teacher’s) position in the creed.

So the questions we really should be asking is:

“Is Allah an accident or a substance?”

“Is Allah’s wujud like or unlike his creation?”

The argument that Ustadh is making is that you can’t see accidents but that it is possible. However, he failed to give a single example of someone actually seeing an accident. So you can’t affirm something is possible when you haven’t given a single example of untold thousands of examples of this being a reality. That is even in relation to created things! How much more for that which is not contingent upon or dependent upon anything?

One of the students uses an argument about a man in a dark room. He is there but you cannot see him. So then the Ustaz replies that:

“The reason he can be seen is because he exists is not the means by which he is seen.”

This is fallacious. The reason he can be seen here is that he is a substance, a body. Which still does not make the argument the Ustaz is trying to establish at all. In fact, even in the case of the man in the darkroom, there are many things to be said:

  1. He can’t be seen but he could be perceived. He could be perceptible without even being seen.

  2. Even if you saw him would you say that you comprehend him?

  3. The man has that which you can see his outward and that which you cannot see his inward.

It is part of the fitra that Allah (swt) created us and actually, a proof of his wahdat al wujud is the fact we can’t see him. The Ustaz can’t give a single example because it goes against the fitra. Another example that Allah (swt) has put inside of human beings that is quite powerful is the following:

The concept of nothing. It is part of your fitra, that you cannot picture nothing in your mind. Your mind will either picture an all-black space or an all-white space. That is still something. The irony here is that you can comprehend nothingness but you cannot see nothingness. Certainly, Allah (swt) is more than nothingness! If you cannot see nothingness how much more do you think you can see Allah (swt) who is the wahdat al wujud! You cannot comprehend Allah (swt) let alone see Allah (swt).

“Or were they created by nothing, or were they the creators.” (Qur’an 52:35)

On the possibility of seeing Allah (swt) this claim is demolished by the fact that there are so many invisible existents The soul, the intellect, the sense, perception, sounds, ether, etc.

Their opening the door of comparison of the Creator and the creation will lead to describing Him with many of those that are impossible about Him, Exalted is He. The existence of creatures cannot be perceived except with the existence of space and time. Perishing existents do not have the capacity to see the Eternal.

The peak of perceptibility of Allah (swt) ends with: “There is nothing like Him, and He is All-Hearing, All-Seeing” (Qur’an 42:11)

Muslim narrated from Abu Dhar, he said: “I asked the Prophet Muhammad (Blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), Have you seen your Lord? He replied: ” A light. How can I see Him”.

Source: (Sahih Muslim hadith 341. Kitab Al Iman)

The aforementioned evidence is enough to demolish the rational proofs that the Ashari/Maturidi bring forth in trying to liken Allah (swt) to his creation. May Allah (swt) protect the believers from it!

BE CAREFUL OF THE BAIT AND SWITCH-RUHYA-IDRAAK-NAZAR

I want to caution you the student of knowledge the seeker of truth on something very important. Do yourself a favour and note down every time someone from Ahl Sunnah uses these words ‘Ruhya’ or ‘Idraak’ or ‘Nazar’. I have often found that one speaker will claim Ruhya means this and Idraak means that and then another speaker will actually turn around and say the exact opposite!

Also, take note of the proof text they use. When they use a proof text from the Qur’an which word is being used there and why? Are they using ‘Ruhya’ or are they using ‘Idraak’ or are they using ‘Nazar’?

When they use a proof text from the hadith which word is being used there and why? Are they using ‘Ruhya’ or are they using ‘Idraak’ or are they using ‘Nazar’?

What about Idraak?

Be familiar with these arguments because the advocates of seeing Allah (swt) will rush to this argument first. It is perhaps the strongest they feel that they have. Even in the comment section below you will see one of our brothers from Ahl Sunnah rush to it.

“And what will make you know (idraka) what the Reality is?” (Qur’an 69:3)

The meaning of idraka here means perception when it is connected to the senses.

It has the sense of seeing when connected to the eyes or sight. When Idraak is connected to sight (ba sad ra) it means to see.

In this text yud’rikkumu is to reach or overtake.

“Wherever you may be, death will (yud’rikkumu) reach you, though you should be in raised-up towers. And if a good thing visits them, they say, ‘This is from Allah’; but if an evil thing visits them, they say, ‘This is from you.’ Say: ‘Everything is from Allah.’ How is it with this people? They scarcely understand any tiding.” (Qur’an 4:78)

So will we totally comprehend Allah (swt) or not? To totally comprehend Allah (swt) undermines the Wahdat al Wujud of Allah (swt). Can it be said that the finite will comprehend the infinite?

If we only partially comprehend Allah (swt) this means Allah (swt) would be broken into parts. He would be a part that we can comprehend and a part that we cannot comprehend. If we do not comprehend Allah (swt) at all it strengthens the argument of those of us who say that we will not see Allah (swt) at all. This is because comprehension is of the eyes.

Now, one has to be careful when dealing with various translations of the Qur’an. No doubt the translators have to toe the line of the various theologies they are beholden to.

The faculties of seeing (tudriku) cannot grasp Him, and He grasp all–seeing (yudriku), He is the All-Subtle and All-Aware.” (Qur’an 6:103)

Now the Ustaz in (video A) gave to his students the impression that Idraak means to ‘behold something in its entirety’. ‘To encompass‘ ‘To see something in its entirety to comprehend it‘.

My response:

There is a difference between reaching (idrak) and encompassing (ihata)

There is no lexical reference work which interprets idrak as ‘encompassing’. That is sufficient proof as to the error of this interpretation by the respected Ustaz and anyone else who follows suit in this.

One’s saying (for example) lahiqtu al-jidara bi yad-i (I reached the wall with my hand) does not mean anything other than touching the wall. It is impossible that the hand should ‘encompass‘ the wall.

if someone says, “ahata bi-hi al-sahmu (the arrow reached him) it is sensible. If someone says “ahata bi-hi al-sahmu (the arrow encompassed him) then no reasonable person will regard his utterance as anything but senseless.

“Allah will say, “Enter among nations which had passed on before you of jinn and mankind into the Fire.” Every time a nation enters, it will curse its sister until, when they have caught up with one another (‘iddarku) therein, the last of them will say about the first of them “Our Lord, these had misled us, so give them a double punishment of the Fire. He will say, “For each is double, but you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:38)

“when they catch up with one another.” It does not mean that each group encompassed the other.

If I cannot make you see this and if the usage of the lexicons cannot make you see it than I pray that Allah (swt) will open your eyes and your heart to what the pure Arab, and mother of the believers had to say about this.

Narrated Masruq:

I said to ‘Aisha, “O Mother! Did Prophet Muhammad see his Lord?” Aisha said, “What you have said makes my hair stand on end! Know that if somebody tells you one of the following three things, HE IS A LIAR: Whoever tells you that Muhammad saw his Lord, IS A LIAR.” Then Aisha recited the Verses:

‘No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is overall vision. He is the Most Courteous Well-Acquainted with all things.’  (Qur’an 6:103)

‘It is not fitting for a human being that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration or from behind a veil.’ (Qur’an 42:51)

Source: (Al Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 378)

Notice our mother Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her). Notice the response? “What you have said makes my hair stand on end!”

Now a desperate response to the above text after realizing that the first argument did not work is they may well say:

“The negation is without any condition, and therefore not bound to any meaning of ‘for all time’.”

Response to that claim:

Obviously this is now how our mother Aisha (r.a) understood this verse. She did not reason that perhaps he did see that time whereas other times he did not. No. In fact, that argument also works in our favour as it is not conditioned upon a time (this life or the life to come).

Other textual evidence from the Qur’an.

“When Moses came to the place appointed by Us, and his Lord addressed him, He said: “O my Lord! show (Yourself) to me, that I may look upon you.” Allah said: “You shall never see me; But look upon the mount; if it abides in its place, then you will see me.”

When his Lord manifested His glory on the Mount, He made it as dust. And Moses fell down in a swoon. When he recovered his senses he said: “Glory be to Thee! to Thee I turn in repentance, and I am the first to believe.” (Qur’an 7:143)

This is a powerful text against the claims of the Ashari/Maturidi and all those who say that we can see Allah (swt)!

Moses was dealing with his stubborn and rebellious people and demonstrated them the futility of their request which was:

“The People of the Scripture ask you to bring down to them a book from heaven. But they had asked of Moses [even] greater than that and said, “Show us, Allah, outright,” so the thunderbolt struck them for their wrongdoing. Then they took the calf [for worship] after clear evidences had come to them, and We forgave them for that ˹after their repentance˺  And We gave Moses a clear authority.” (Qur’an 4:153)

“And [recall] when you said, “O Moses, we will never believe you until we see Allah outright”; so the thunderbolt took you while you were looking on.” (Qur’an 2:55)

“And Moses chose from his people seventy men for Our appointment. And when the earthquake seized them, he said, “My Lord, if You had willed, You could have destroyed them before and me [as well]. Would You destroy us for what the foolish among us have done? This is not but Your trial by which You send astray whom You will and guide whom You will. You are our Protector, so forgive us and have mercy upon us; and You are the best of forgivers.” (Qur’an 7:155)

Prima Qur’an Comments: There is so much to be said about the above-mentioned ayats. First of all Allah (swt) said, ‘you will never see me‘. However some of these people have no shame nor fear of their Lord and they will play with the English translations and perform all kinds of maneuvers to make you think that this verse should be understood as, “You will not see me now” meaning the possibility of being seen in the future is there.

In fact, the Ustaz in (video A) unfortunately, he did exactly that.

This is similar to the following verse:

Say: Shall I choose for a protecting friend other than Allah, the Originator of the heavens and the earth, Who feeds and is never fed? Say: I am ordered to be the first to surrender (unto Him). And be not you (O Muhammed) of the idolaters. (Qur’an 6:14) 

No one who reads the Arabic text understands this as Allah (swt) is not currently fed but has the possibility of being fed in the future! Authubillah min dhalik.

Not only that but if we do not understand the negative imperative to include all times what does it say about the laws of Islam? Does it ever occur to the mind that there will be a time in the future where shirk would be permissible? Authubillah! There will be a time in the future where adultery and taking the soul without the right will become permissible? Authubillah!

This argument is also negated by the fact that there is division among the Ahl Sunnah as regards Allah (swt) will be seen in this life or not.

Look at the hadith again.

“People asked the Prophet (saw): O’ Messenger of Allah will we see our Lord in the Day of Resurrection? Then the Messenger of Allah replied: Is there any dispute among you whether a full moon is visible? They answered: No. then The Prophet (saw) continued asking them: “ Is there any dispute among you whether the sun is visible in a cloudless sky? They replied in the negative. Then The Prophet stated (saw): “Then you will see your Lord JUST LIKE this”. Allah will get the people together in the Day of Resurrection then He says: those who were worshiping any deity shall follow it. Then the ones who were worshiping the sun will follow the sun and the ones who were worshiping the moon will follow the moon and those who were worshiping Rebels will follow Rebels …Then Allah will COME TO THEM in a FORM other than WHAT THEY KNEW and say: “I am your Lord”, they reply: “We seek refuge in Allah from you. This is our place until our Lord Comes to us, and when our Lord comes to us, we will recognize Him. THEN ALLAH WILL COME TO THEM IN A SHAPE THEY KNOW and will say, I am your Lord’ They will say, ‘(No doubt) You are our Lord,’ and they will follow Him.”

Source: (Al Bukhari hadith no.6573 Book Of Ar-Riqaq)

Can it really be imagined that Allah (swt) who knows all things, and is perfect in the expression of his language would say to Moses (a.s), ‘You shall never see me’ knowing that Moses (a.s) would see him in the afterlife?

Someone should ask the Ustaz (from video A) what form is it that the believers KNOW concerning Allah (swt)?

Not only that but if the negation in this verse is taken to mean for this world, not for the hereafter, then it must be allowed in similar verses, like His saying:

“Slumber does not overtake Him, nor sleep.” (Qur’an 2:255)

“He has neither a companion nor a son” (Qur’an 72:3)

“He is not brought forth from like-kind nor does like kind come forth from him.” (Qur’an 112:3-4)

Whatever is forbidden in this world like slumber, sleep, companion, peers must be permitted in the hear-after. Should we really reason like this?

It is obligatory for every Muslim to believe that this world and the next world have no effect on the essence of Allah!

It is impossible for Allah (swt) that time can affect him or space to accompany him. His essence never changes and his attributes never shift.

What are we to do about the challenge of Allah (swt) in the Qur’an?

“But if you do not – and you will never (walan) be able to – then fear the Fire, whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the disbelievers.” (Qur’an 2:24)

This negation is eternal and permanent. Is the Ustaz (in video A) or any other going to claim no this statement of Allah (swt) is only for a ‘period of time’. Which means it is possible people will create the like of the Qur’an!

Also, we know that the mountain did not abide. Allah (swt) didn’t set his being perceived on the condition of the mountain but on his knowledge that it is not possible and that was manifest clearly to the people of Moses.

Also, note the concept of blasphemous ideas and concepts being related to mountains being destroyed as with the following blasphemous concept.

“The heavens almost rupture therefrom and the earth splits open and the mountains collapse in devastation That they attribute to the Most Merciful a son.” (Qur’an 19:90-91)

These are the people of disbelief. It is obvious when they say that they will not attain to faith until they see Allah (swt) plainly at which it says in response that the thunderbolt overtook them! Think about it! They are the ones who wanted a golden calf a ‘sura’ a form. These are the same people who want to look upon Allah (swt). They are wanting something perceptible to the eyes.

The people who adhere to the Ashari/Maturidi doctrine need to think clearly on this matter.

Again we have the following text…

And those who do not expect the meeting with Us say, “Why were not angels sent down to us, or [why] do we [not] see our Lord?” They have certainly become arrogant within themselves and [become] insolent with great insolence.” (Qur’an 25:21)

So now let us look at the positive proof that the Ashari/Maturidi will bring forth from the Qur’an to try and establish their proofs. Let us see if it is consistent with

a) The Qur’an itself.

b) with their own theology concerning Allah (swt) not being in space/time

c) reason.

Positive proof for the Ashari/Maturidi position from the Qur’an.

“The heart did not lie [about] what it saw. So will you dispute with him over what he saw? And he certainly saw him in another descent. (Qur’an 53:11-13)

“And without doubt, he saw him in the clear horizon.” (Qur’an 81:23)

#1) If we are to believe that this is Allah (swt) then it clashes with the clear text of the Qur’an.

#2) If we are to believe that this is Allah (swt) then it clashes with Ashari/Maturidi Aqidah. For example:

Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace, and blessings be upon him, said, “Our Lord descends to the lowest heaven in the last third of every night, and he says: Who is calling upon me that I may answer him? Who is asking me that I may give him? Who is seeking my forgiveness that I may forgive him?”

Source: (al-Bukhārī 1094,Muslim 758) 

So do the Ashari/Maturidi believe that in the hadith above that Allah (swt) descends?

Do the Ashari/Maturidi believe that distance is a hindrance to Allah (swt)?

Do the Ashari/Maturidi believe that Allah (swt) does the ascending and descending depending on the time of day as (the last third of every night) is depending upon the relative timings of the globe?

So if the Ashari/Maturidi use the above verses to argue that the Blessed Messenger (saw) had seen Allah (swt) then they must believe the part where it says, “certainly saw him in another descent.”

#3) It goes against reason as already mentioned above. Allah (swt) is imperceptible.

#4) Lastly, it contradicts well-established hadith on the matter:

It is narrated that `Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, said: “I asked the Messenger of Allah about these two verses. He said, “That is Jibreel; I never saw him in the form in which Allah created him except on these two occasions. I saw him descending from the heavens, with his huge size filling the horizon between heaven and the earth.”

Source: (Muslim Book 1 Hadith Number 0337 Book of Faith)

`Aisha may Allah be pleased with her, was asked about the verse (which means): “Then he [Jibreel] approached and descended.” [Quran 53:8] She, may Allah be pleased with her, said, “That is Jibreel. He used to come to him (the Prophet ) in human form, but on this occasion, he came in his real form, and he filled the horizons of the sky.”

Source: (Muslim Book 1 Hadith Number 0340 Book of Faith)

Those counter proofs should be enough to ground to powder any Ashari/Maturidi pretension concerning those verses.

The big verse that the Ashari/Maturidi use to support their position from the Qur’an is the following:

“ Some faces, that Day, will be radiant, Looking toward their Lord. And some faces, that Day, will be contorted, Expecting that there will be done to them something backbreaking.” (Qur’an 75:22-25)

So here the Ashari/Maturidi interpret the word Nazar as looking, seeing. (Insh’Allah we will come back to this, especially in the context of brother Mohamed Ghilan above).

This word (Nazar) is more general than ru’yah.

Will they see with their faces?

Will they see with their eyes?

Will they see with some sixth sense?

This confusion is clear evidence that they do not have any ground for their opinion.

Remember the hadith:

“Soon you will see your Lord openly as you see the moon on the night of the full moon.”

We understand this verse as: “waiting for their Lord”.

We need to again ask if the Ashari/Maturidi position contradicts the following:

a)The Qur’an itself.

b) with their own theology that Allah (swt) is not in space/time.

c) reason.

We would translate or understand the text as: “Faces, that day looking forward to receiving mercy from their Lord.”

The first thing that should be pointed out, is that no one from the Ashari/Maturidi school can find fault with our interpretation of the text. Observe yourself and see the many forms, as a verb, noun, active participle, and passive participle.

http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=nZr#(75:23:3)

Second, the context of the verse itself shows the people of the station waiting to receive their just rewards:

‘Some faces will be radiant, looking forward to receiving mercy from their Lord. Some faces will be contorted, expecting something backbreaking.’ 

To give you (the truth seeker) a solid proof to show you that Nazir does not have to mean seeing ponder the following text.

“Indeed, those who exchange the covenant of Allah and their [own] oaths for a small price will have no share in the Hereafter, and Allah will not speak to them or look at them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them; and they will have a painful punishment.” (Qur’an 3:77)

If Nazar in this verse is interpreted as seeing, it will lead to the meaning that Allah will not see these people on the Day of Resurrection. This is not possible, and such a belief is in real error because it is a rejection of faith in Allah (swt)! There is no way but to interpret Nazar here as mercy and favour. Allah (swt) will not show his mercy or favour upon them.

Now going back to what our brother Mohamed Ghilan said in his talk @ 54:32 “But the Sunni position is that we will actually see Allah (swt), but you can but that does not negate that Allah is above everything and he’s above comprehension.”

The other thing that our brother Mohamed Ghilan does is bring in a straw man argument. This is clear evidence that he is not confident of his position.

Thus, he brings up the following verse:

“And if you invite them to guidance, they do not hear; and you see them looking at you while they do not see.” (Qur’an 7:198)

It is clear to me that our brother Mohamed Ghilan by bringing into the discussion a non-argument he is preaching to the choir.

Perhaps our brother Mohamed Ghilan can mention to his students who among the Ahl Al Haqq Wal Istiqimah (The Muslims), the Mu’tazilis, the Jahmis, the Zaydi’s , the Imamis-12er Shia and from among those who scholars from Ahl Sunnah who are independent of taqlid, who among them holds to the position or view that Allah (swt) is comprehensible?

Again a straw man.

As regards Qur’an 75: 22-25 The Ahl Sunnah differ who will see him in the next life.

They are of three views;

1) Only believers will see Him.

2) All people will see him at the Station, believers and unbelievers then the unbelievers will be veiled from him.

3) The third is that hypocrites will see Him but not the unbelievers.

This is enough to prove the weakness of the foundation on which they have established their belief.

By contrast, the truth cannot bear such conflict, because its arguments are clear and its path is straight.

Is this a special treat for the believers only? Is this a special treat just for the believers and people who have remained steadfast?

Apparently not. Ponder the following:

“Soon you will see your Lord.”-Hadith The context of this hadith requires the seeing to take place at the station where all are gathered. It will not be restricted to believers only, Hypocrites, “and this ummah will remain with its hypocrites. Then, Allah, Exalted is He, will come to them in a form other than what they knew, then he will say: “I am your Lord.” Then they will say: “We seek refuge in Allah from you. This is our place until our Lord comes.”

It also follows from it that Allah, will be seen by this ummah believers and hypocrites- This goes against the verse in the Qur’an from

Moses: “NEVER WILL YOU SEE HIM.”

Why the unbelievers and hypocrites from the time of Moses did not get to see Allah (swt) but the unbelievers and hypocrites will be able to see now?

As regards this hadith. Let me put the hadith again for you to read and reflect upon it.

“People asked the Prophet (saw): O’ Messenger of Allah will we see our Lord in the Day of Resurrection? Then the Messenger of Allah replied: Is there any dispute among you whether a full moon is visible? They answered: No. then The Prophet (saw) continued asking them: “ Is there any dispute among you whether the sun is visible in a cloudless sky? They replied in the negative. Then The Prophet stated (saw): “Then you will see your Lord JUST LIKE this”. Allah will get the people together in the Day of Resurrection then He says: those who were worshiping any deity shall follow it. Then the ones who were worshiping sun will follow the sun and the ones who were worshiping moon will follow the moon and those who were worshiping Rebels will follow Rebels …Then Allah will COME TO THEM in a FORM other than WHAT THEY KNEW and say: “I am your Lord”, they reply: “We seek refuge in Allah from you. This is our place until our Lord Comes to us, and when our Lord comes to us, we will recognize Him. THEN ALLAH WILL COME TO THEM IN A SHAPE THEY KNOW and will say, I am your Lord’ They will say, ‘(No doubt) You are our Lord,’ and they will follow Him.”

Source: (Al Bukhari hadith no.6573 Book Of Ar-Riqaq)

Response:

First point. It also follows from it that His Essence (dhat), Exalted is He, changes from one form to the other. Such change is a characteristic of contingent existents (huduth).

Second point.

Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (May Allah continue to benefit us through him) asked our brothers from the Ahl Sunnah, the following:

“Whoever has read the Book of Allah and has studied the Sunnah of His Messenger must know that real form in which He will see His Lord, Exalted is He, so that, when he sees Him in another form he does not recognize Him. Then please bring me the description of this form and definition of it from your knowledge through your reading of the Qur’an and your study of the hadiths of the Messenger (saw)? Then they were taken aback and their arguments became void.”

Third point.

Both wordings are clear that their knowledge of His form will be a result of previous seeing. There is no way for those who take the hadith literally but to say that He is seen in this world. Yet most of them have rejected that (the seeing of Him in this world).

Fourth point.

Most believers in the seeing hold that it will happen without kayf (without an understanding how it will happen). The comparison in the hadith with the seeing of the moon ‘like that you will see Him‘ contradicts this view. So too does the mention of the form in the hadith and their not recognizing it when it has changed from what they were familiar with.

Fifth point. How will an angel be commanded to lie? It is a shameful thing.

Abu Musa reported: The Prophet (saw) said, Verily, In Paradise are two gardens with silver vessels and two gardens with golden vessels. Nothing comes between the people and their looking at their Lord but the mantle of Majesty on His Face in the Garden of Eden.”

Source: (Sunan al-Tirmidhi 2527)

In other words, you won’t be seeing Allah (swt) in the afterlife after all!

Remember the Ashari/Maturidi understand face as Allah himself, his essence! That ‘mantle of majesty‘ will prevent you from looking at Allah (swt).

“It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration or from behind a veil.” (Qur’an 42:51)

“The Messenger of Allah stood among us with five words he said Verily Allah exalted is he does not sleep, and that is not appropriate for Him. He lowers the Balance and raises it. To him are carried aloft the actions done in the night before the actions done in the day and the actions of the day before the actions of the night. His veil is “light” (and on one narration “fire”). If He lifts the veil then the light of His Face will burn whatever it reaches of His creation.” The universe itself will be utterly annihilated! Allahu Akbar!

Source: (Sahih Muslim 179a, Book 1 Hadith 352 English reference Book 1 Hadith 343)

“And call not, besides Allah, on another god. There is no god but He. Everything that exists will perish except His Face. To Him belongs the Command, and to Him will you all be brought back.” (Qur’an 28:88)

So regarding this verse that those of our brothers from Ahl Sunnah believe that the Qur’an 75:22 to be strong proof. However, it is weak from all conceivable angles.

It also goes to show to anyone who has eyes and a heart after the truth that the Ahl Sunnah and their consensus down through the ages, has not been guided on this matter. Rather they are in error.

Is it reasonable to assume that the seeing of Allah (swt) is merely hinted at in the Qur’an whereas food and drink, accommodation, gardens, rivers are mentioned time after time with clear phrases with no scope for any other interpretation? Think about it. May Allah (swt) be with you.

So we can see that the Ashari/Maturidi position concerning thee verses in question contradicts other clear text of the Qur’an.

It also contradicts their own theological position.

It also contradicts reason.

The difference between us Ibadi (Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqama) and our brothers from the (Ahl Sunah) when it comes to Qur’an 75:22 is that we use an understanding that is consistent with the verb form itself, used throughout the Qur’an: in the way we translate and interpret it, and is consistent with the clear verses of the Qur’an,  that clearly negate seeing Allah (swt).

We do that in all verses that indicate corporeality, or time/space for Allah (swt). It is clear that some of our brothers from Ahl Sunnah do so only when it suits them. Allah (swt) knows best.

“Would you question your Messenger as Musa was questioned before? But whoever changes from faith to unbelief has strayed without doubt from the even way.” (Qur’an 2:108)

You may also wish to see the following articles:

Those who do good will have the finest reward and more.
Some faces that day will be radiant. Looking at their Lord. Will we see Allah?
Shaykh Juma commentary on Seeing the Lord as you see the moon
The Proper Understanding of Musa (as) Request of Seeing Allah.
Imam ash-Shafi’i Seeing Allah in The Hereafter
Is Distance Necessary to See Allah (swt)? Response to Dr. Hamza Bakri
Salafis debate Ibadis on the issue of seeing Allah in the hereafter.
Seeing Allah: What Every Christian Should Ask Every Salafi. The Form/Shape of Allah?
Irrefutable Proof that the Salafi God is one that can take human form.
Madhkali Salafi Faris Al Hammadi The 60 cubit tall Allah?
Dr. Muhammed Salah teacher of the Salafi Sect Lies about Moses Seeing Allah.
Salafi preacher: We will see Allah’s face in paradise!
Salafi Shaykh Muqbil Al Wadi’i Hadith in Sahih Muslim on Seeing Allah is actually weak!

May Allah (swt) guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah.

28 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

February 13, 2023 · 4:53 am

Questions every sincere Shi’i must ask concerning Siffin and Nahrawan

“And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when you know what it is.” (Qur’an 2:42)

﷽ 

These are questions that every Shi’i* must ask concerning Siffin and Nahrawan.

*Shi’a meaning: 12er, Zaydi, Ismail’i, Reformist etc.

Question 1. Amr bin al-As what is the Shi’i view on him?

Question 2. Amr bin al-As do the Shi’i view him as being just?

Question 3. Is there anyone from Muaviya’s army at Siffin that Shi’i consider to be just?

Question 4. In the Shi’a view, if anyone opposes the Imam in war, is that person considered just?

Question 5. Is there anyone from Muavyia’s army at Siffin that Shi’i have adoration and respect for?

Question 6. Do Shi’i believe that Ibn Abbas (ra)was sent to speak to the Muslims of Narhawan?

Question 6. What is the most accurate portrayal of Ibn Abbas (ra) in his discussion with them (Al Narhawan) from your accounts?

Question 7. Ibn Abbas (ra) was with Ali in his battle of the Camel, the Battle of Siffin. Why was he not with Ali during his battle at Narhawan?

LET THE BOOK OF ALLAH JUDGE BETWEEN US?

Question 8. If you are among those who believe that Ali was correct in arbitration. That he acquiesce to arbitration on the grounds that the decision would be based upon the book of Allah. Then what Qur’an-based verses did Ali believe supported his position?

What did Muaviyah feel was his evidence from the Qur’an that supported his position? Likewise, what did Ali feel was his evidence from the Qur’an that supported his position?

Interestingly enough, evidence was given for Muaviyah’s position. The law of Qisas. We can say that it is based upon the following evidence in the Qur’an.

“Oh You who believe, fair retribution is prescribed for you in cases of murder: the free man for the free man, the slave for the slave, the female for the female. But if the culprit is pardoned by his aggrieved brother, this shall be adhered to fairly, and the culprit shall pay what is due in a good way. This is an alleviation from your Lord and an act of mercy. If anyone then exceeds these limits, grievous suffering awaits him.” (Qur’an 2:178)

“We ordained for them in the Torah, “A life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth—and for wounds equal retaliation.” But whoever waives it charitably, it will be atonement for them. And those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed are ˹truly˺ the wrongdoers.” (Qur’an 5:45)

“Moreover, if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah. And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.” (Qur’an 49:9)

Once sincere truth seekers look into these questions and reflect upon them, there will be a lot more people identifying with the Ibadi position.

You may be interested in reading the following:

Pro Alid YouTube channel throws Ibn Abbas under the bus!

Allah (swt) knows best and the help of Allah (swt) is sought!

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 30, 2023 · 2:11 am

The Hadith of the 12 Caliphs.

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into (sects), you have no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will, in the end, tell them the truth of all that they did.” (Qur’an, 6:159)

﷽ 

This idea of the Muslims following 12 Imams is a total concoction.

First and foremost, it has absolutely no support from the Qur’an.

We have more than established that here:

Are we to follow Infallible Imams according to the Qur’an?

The Sunni Muslims the following hadith that the Shi’i will often use against them.

Narrated Jabir Ibn Samura:

I heard the Prophet (saw) saying, “There will be twelve commanders (Amir).” He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said the Prophet (saw) added, “All of them will be from Quraish.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7222)

It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir b. Samura, who said:

I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: Islam will continue to be triumphant until there have been twelve Caliphs. Then the Prophet (saw) said something which I could not understand. I asked my father: What did he say? He said: He has said that all of them (twelve Caliphs) will be from the Quraish.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1821d)

It is actually quite easy-peasy lemon squeezy from a Sunni Muslim perspective to shut down Shi’i intrigue over these hadiths.

  1. None of these hadith say anything at all about the family of the Blessed Prophet (saw). So the wide-eyed speculation stops there.
  2. None of these hadith say anything at all about them ruling in succession. That is to say, one after the other.
  3. Did Hussein ibn Abi Talib ever rule over the Muslim ummah? We all know the answer to this is a resounding No! He didn’t rule over jack squat!


The reason we mention Hussein ibn Abi Talib is that the Shi’i who are quite imaginative see the succession of the Blessed Prophet (saw) as:

Ali ibn Abi Talib
Hasan ibn Ali
Husayn ibn Ali (Hussein ibn Abi Talib)
Ali ibn Husayn

So, from the perspective of a Sunni Muslim or an Ibadi Muslim, that’s a wrap. That means there is nothing more to discuss. Because the points that the Shi’i want to desperately prove from these hadiths cannot be established at all.

We will come back with our critique of this hadith. However, let us first look at the history of this number 12 prior to the advent of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw).

THE NUMBER 12 HAS NO SIGNIFICANCE IN ISLAM.

The number 12 is not significant or important, in any shape or form, in Islam. It is the atomic number of atoms in Magnesium. 12 is the number of zodiac characters in both the Western and Chinese models. There are 12 months in a year of the Gregorian calendar. The 12th surah in the Qur’an is called ‘Yusuf’ or Joseph.

The 12th chapter and 12th verse of the Qur’an say the following:

“Send him with us tomorrow to enjoy himself and play, and we shall take every care of him.” (Qur’an 12:12)

“Surely, the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah’s ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred.” (Qur’an 9:36)

Nothing here is analogous to 12 Imams. The verse says of the 12 months, 4 of them are sacred.

Are the Shi’i going to tell us that of the 12 Imams only four of them are sacred?

This holds no significance to 12 tribes, 12 disciples or 12 imams, or 12 rulers at all.

12 relates to Israel, and the tribes. It has absolutely nothing to do with Islam.

THE NUMBER 12 AND THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL

Let us look at Israel (Jacob) and the 12 tribes in the Qur’an and in the Bible.

“Allah made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel and We raised among them twelve chieftains, and Allah said: Lo! I am with you. If ye establish worship and pay the poor-due, and believe in My messengers and support them, and lend unto Allah a kindly loan, surely I shall remit your sins, and surely I shall bring you into Gardens underneath which rivers flow. Whoso among you disbelieves after this will go astray from a plain road.” (Qur’an 5:12)

“Moreover, We divided them into twelve tribes And when his people asked Moses for water, We inspired him, “Strike the rock with your staff!” -after which twelve springs gushed forth from it so that all the people knew whence to drink., And We caused the clouds to comfort them with their shade, and We sent down unto them manna and quails, [saying:] “Partake of the good things which We have provided for you as sustenance.” And [by all their sinning] they did no harm unto Us-but [only] against their own selves did they sin.” (Qur’an 7:160)

“So We dispersed them as separate communities all over the earth; some of them were righteous, and some of them less than that: and the latter We tried with blessings as well as with afflictions so that they might mend their ways.” (Qur’an 7:168)

“Say (O Muslims): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him, we have surrendered.” (Qur’an 2:136)

“Nay! do you say that Abraham and Ismail and Jacob and the tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Are you better knowing or Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah? And Allah is not at all heedless of what you do.” (Qur’an 2:140)

“Truly We gave unto Moses nine tokens, clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty). Do but ask the Children of Israel how he came unto them, then Pharaoh said unto him: Lo! I deem you one bewitched, O Moses.” (Qur’an 7:101)

Why were 9 tokens given? Why weren’t 12 tokens given? Why weren’t 7 tokens given?

“Say: We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Abraham and Ismail and Ishaq and Jacob and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit. ” (Qur’an 3:84)

“Lo! Thus spoke Joseph unto his father: “O my father! Behold, I saw [in a dream] eleven stars, as well as the sun and the moon: I saw them prostrate themselves before me!” (Qur’an 12:6)


Here Joseph mentions 11 stars and, altogether, 13 celestial bodies. No mention of anything 12 here.

There is absolutely nothing in the entirety of the Qur’an that would assign or even remotely hint that the 12 sons of Israel (Jacob) played any role that the 12er Shi’i designates for their 12 Imams. Nothing analogous here at all.

Now, what does the Bible say about these 12 sons of Jacob/Israel?

While Israel was living in that region, Reuben went in and slept with his father’s concubine Bilhah, and Israel heard of it. Jacob had twelve sons:

The sons of Leah:

Reuben, the firstborn of Jacob,

Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun.

The sons of Rachel:

Joseph and Benjamin.

The sons of Rachel’s servant Bilhah:

Dan and Naphtali.

The sons of Leah’s servant Zilpah:

Gad and Asher.

These were the sons of Jacob, who were born to him in Paddan Aram.

Source: (Genesis 35:22-26)

“All these are the twelve tribes of Israel, and this is what their father said to them when he blessed them, giving each the blessing appropriate to him.” (Genesis 49:28)

There is absolutely nothing in the entirety of the Bible that would assign or even remotely hint that the 12 sons of Israel (Jacob) played any role that the 12er Shi’i designate for their 12 Imams.

Were the 12 Imams the names of 12 tribes? Did the descendants of these Imams fight each other in a bitter civil war as was the case with Judah and Benjamin against the other 10 tribes? We all know that the answer to all of this is a resounding No! Nothing analogous here at all.

The tribes descended from the twelve sons of Jacob. They all existed alive simultaneously as separate people. According to the Imami Shi’i, was there any point in history in which their 12 imams existed simultaneously as separate people? We all know that the answer to all of this is a resounding No! Nothing analogous here at all.

  1. Reuben
  2. Simeon
  3. Levi
  4. Judah
  5. Issachar
  6. Zebulun
  7. Dan
  8. Naphtali
  9. Gad
  10. Asher
  11. Joseph
  12. Benjamin

NUMBER 12 AND THE DISCIPLES OF JESUS.

Jesus had 12 disciples because they were to go to each of the 12 tribes of Israel as previously mentioned. That’s it.

Now let us turn our attention to the disciples of Christ Jesus (as), as they are mentioned in the Qur’an.

“When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah?” Said the disciples: “We are Allah’s helpers: We believe in Allah, and do bear witness that we are Muslims.” (Qur’an 3:50)

“And behold! I inspired the disciples to have faith in Me and Mine Messenger: they said, ‘We have faith, and do you bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims'”. (Quran 5:111)

“O you who believe! Be Allah’s helpers, even as Jesus son of Mary said unto the disciples: Who are my helpers for Allah? They said: We are Allah’s helpers. And a party of the Children of Israel believed while a party disbelieved. Then We strengthened those who believed against their foe, and they became the uppermost.” (Qur’an 61:14)

There is absolutely no mention of the number of disciples anywhere in the Qur’an, which is both telling and interesting.

Now let us turn our attention to the disciples of Jesus (a.s) as they are mentioned in the New Testament.

“The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus.” (Matthew 10: 2-4)

“Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Matthew 19:28)

“These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” (Matthew 10:6)

“It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Revelation 21:12)

The Twelve Disciples (Apostles)

  1. Peter the Apostle (Simon Peter)
  2. Andrew the Apostle (Peter’s brother)
  3. James the Great
  4. John the Apostle
  5. Philip the Apostle
  6. Bartholomew the Apostle
  7. Thomas the Apostle
  8. Matthew the Apostle
  9. James son of Alphaeus
  10. Thaddeus
  11. Simon the Zealot
  12. Judas Iscariot

Replacement after Judas

After the betrayal and death of Judas Iscariot, the remaining apostles selected:

  • Matthias the Apostle

We have no record anywhere of the 12 sons of Jacob or the 12 disciples of Jesus giving legal verdicts, and so forth to anyone.

Not only that but the analogy creates real problems for the 12er Shi’i concept because the 12 sons of Jacob and the 12 disciples of Jesus were concurrent (not in succession).

Not only that, but one of the 12 disciples of Jesus was a traitor.

So, if this is analogous to the 12er Shi’i do tell us which of the “12 imams” was a traitor to Rasul Allah (saw)?

In fact, the 12er Shi’i seem to catch the unsuspecting Sunni Muslims with something that they may be remotely familiar with or something that seems vague.

“You remember about the 12 tribes of Israel?” “Oh yeah,” says the Sunni layman. “You remember Jesus had 12 disciples?” “Hmm, sounds right”, says the unsure Sunni Muslim who has never bothered to look into these matters.

So, after they “establish” something murky about the number 12 being significant, then they come and put their spin on the ahadith from Bukhari and Muslim about 12 rulers, and so forth. Even then, as we saw, those hadiths did not even allow the Shi’i to put their spin on the aware Sunni Muslim.

Now, note that these 12 disciples of Jesus, according to the above text, were with him concurrently, not in succession. None of these disciples ever disappeared, waiting until the present. One of these disciples betrayed Jesus. Which of the “12 Imams” betrayed Rasul Allah (saw)?

Also, you will note that these 12 disciples were to go unto the 12 tribes of Israel (Jacob). The whole of the New Testament is about Jesus (The Messiah) coming for his people, not the whole wide world. That is why you have the names of the 12 tribes of Israel at the gates of heaven in the vision.

Are these 12 Shi’i Imams going to have their names on 12 gates for 12 tribes of Arabs (only) numbering 12,000 each?

The only thing analogous between the 12 Imams and the 12 disciples of Jesus, who were sent to the 12 descendant tribes of Jacob, is in fact the number 12. That is all.

We have clearly pulled the rug out of the 12er Shi’i idea of there being anything analogous here.


Unfortunately, our respected Imams of Hadith were not infallible in their collection of Hadith. They allowed a bizarre narration about 12 leaders to slip in their corpus.

The 12er Shi’i then use that hadith to persuade Sunni Muslims to their perspective.

Mohammed Hashim Kamali explains the situation best.

“Hadith critics have expressed reservations. Nevertheless, over the authenticity of various hadiths. Some politically tendentious hadith have come under criticism. One such hadith that al-Bukhari has recorded on the authority of Jabir b Samura is as follows:

“I heard the Prophet, peace be on him, saying that ‘there will be twelve rulers (amiran), ‘ and then the Prophet uttered words which I did not hear-but my father believed they were ‘…all of them will be from Quraysh’. “

“The Shi’i scholars have taken this hadith as “decisive evidence”, on the veracity of their belief in the twelve Imams. The Sunnis themselves have advanced different interpretations of this hadith. One interpreter thus understood this to mean that the twelve amirs will be simultaneous, all to whom will be laying claim to leadership, and the context is, therefore, one of tumult (al-fitna). “


“The various versions of probably this same hadith that Muslim and Abu Dawud have recorded say something different. Briefly, Muslim recorded a hadith to the effect that “this matter (i.e the Caliphate) will not go away until twelve Caliphs have come and gone.” Abu Dawud similarly recorded a hadith to the effect that “this religion shall remain until twelve Caliphs have ruled, all of them with the agreement and support of the umma.”

“The commentator of al-Bukhari, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, has quoted these views, and reading all of them together, he thought that the reference in that respect was to the Caliphate. But this only added to complication in view of the common knowledge that the approved Caliphs were only four, not twelve, According to Qadi ‘Iyad Al-Yahsubi the hadith “probably meant just leaders (‘a’immat al’adl) of whom four have lived and the rest may emerge any time before the day of resurrection.” This was “just the right sort of interpretation,” according to Jawad Yasin, for its Shi’i readers with which to vindicate their belief in occultation and the return of their twelfth Imam any time before the day of resurrection.”

“Ibn al -Jawzi surmised the meaning of the hadith at issue and commented that the Prophet had probably meant twelve rulers, excluding his companions. It was then suggested that the hadith had referred to the Umayyad Caliphs. The problem here was that the Umayyad Caliphs, starting from Mu’awiya (d. 41 H) to Marwan al-Thani (d. 127 H) numbered fourteen, not twelve. Ibn al-Jawzi’s response to this was that Mu’awiya may be excluded since he was a Companion. Then he added that Marwan Ibn al-Hakam (d. 65 H) should also be excluded as he was a usurper and took office after the people had elected ‘Abd Allah b al-Zubayr. This rather imaginative interpretation fitted in with the counting of the Umayyad Caliphs at twelve and the image that was consequently conveyed of them was that they were leaders who ruled with the support of the umma.”

“This interpretation was based on several questionable assumptions, one of which excluded the first four Caliphs from the counting altogether, then it was assumed that Mu’awiya as not a usurper of political power; that Marwan b. al-Hakam was not to be counted as a Caliph, and that ‘Abd Allah b al-Zubayr had been conclusively elected to be the Caliph.”


“All of these rather weak interpretations were attempted with the pious yet questionable motive of upholding the reliability of the leading hadith collections and also to lend support perhaps to the Umayyad rule. The episode sustained itself simply because the chain of transmitters of the hadith in question appeared sound. Al-Bukhari and Muslim evidently recorded it because of its isnad without paying much attention to its meaning. And then a series of apologetic commentaries followed suit to justify what they had done.”

“If the true purpose of all hadith is to clarify and interpret the Qur’an and those aspects of Islam that can properly be said to be a necessary part of its belief structure and its Shari’a, then the hadith we have just reviewed is so peripheral that it hardly merits all the speculative effort that is undertaken to justify it.”

Source: (A Textbook of Hadith Studies, pages 206-208 by Mohammed Hashim Kamali)

However, all this fuss is over nothing. As we have shown it is too easy to refute the Shi’i claims in regard to the above hadith.

Critique of the matn (text) of the hadith.

Narrated Jabir Ibn Samura:

“I heard the Prophet saying, “There will be twelve commanders (Amir).” He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said the Prophet added, “All of them will be from Quraish.”

Source😦https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7222)

It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir b. Samura, who said:

I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: Islam will continue to be triumphant until there have been twelve Caliphs. Then the Prophet (saw) said something which I could not understand. I asked my father: What did he say? He said: He has said that all of them (twelve Caliphs) will be from the Quraish.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1821d)

Prima Qur’an Comments:

Our critique of this hadith will not focus so much on the chain of narration as it will focus on the text itself, but rather using aql and mantiq.

Is it not odd that Jabir Ibn Samura is to have related something of purportedly such importance to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and yet, did not catch all of it so that his father (or the man standing next to him) had to be the one to inform him of the missing bits?

Why is Jabir Ibn Samura the only one narrating this? He was possibly only 10 years of age at the time.

Why is no clarification sought? The companions are known to ask the Blessed Messenger (saw) about the most minute details of his blessed life. Why is there no clarification sought on a matter of purportedly such weight?

If the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) narrated about the future, why not simply mention Abu Bakr, or Ali as his successor?

What if the missing bits were as follows:

“I heard the Prophet saying, “There will be twelve commanders (Amir).” He then said they would all be corrupt and vile. My father, said the Prophet added, “All of them will be from Quraish.”

It does seem odd that the Blessed Messenger (saw) would foretell about 12 rulers and yet not state plainly that Abu Bakr, or Ali, was to be the successor?

Look at this map of the umayyad dynasty. That is quite an accomplishment for an empire that did not put the familiy of Ali at the centre of thier doctrine!

The Shi’i have yet to produce a single hadith where the Blessed Messenger (saw) explicitly stated in no uncertain terms that Ali would be the Amir of the Muslims, after his death. Not one!

We know you might be thinking about the incident at Ghadir Khum. Don’t worry, we have you covered.

You may read about that here:

Hadith on Ghadir Khum ?

Lastly, among the Imami Shi’i they still cannot agree upon which list of 12 one is to follow.

You can read about that here:

How the Muslim Ummah approach the Shi’a in the wrong way.

You may also be interested to read the following:

A garden variety refutation of Shia’ism?

May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah.

21 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,