Surely those who say, “Our Lord is Allah,” and then remain steadfast, the angels descend upon them, “Do not fear, nor grieve. Rather, rejoice in the good news of Paradise, which you have been promised.” (Qur’an 41:30)
﷽
The Prophet (saw) said to Ali: Lā yadkhulu al-jannah illā nafs muʾminah” (لَا يَدْخُلُ الْجَنَّةَ إِلَّا نَفْسٌ مُؤْمِنَةٌ)
Zaid bin Yathi’ said: We asked Sayyiduna Ali: With what message did the Messenger of Allah (saw) send you? He replied: I was sent with four things. First, that only a believing soul will enter Paradise.
Belief in Islam is composed of three major elements.
To proclaim with the tongue there is no God except Allah and Muhammed (saw) is his Messenger.
Sincerity with Allah.
Actions. To do righteous deeds and to avoid evil deeds.
Surely those who say, “Our Lord is Allah,” and then remain steadfast, the angels descend upon them, “Do not fear, nor grieve. Rather, rejoice in the good news of Paradise, which you have been promised.” (Qur’an 41:30)
Does anyone understand from the above verse that a person can enter paradise simply by believing in Allah and Muhammed is his Messenger without the need to perform any actions?
Have you ever pondered on the message delivered in one of the shortest chapters in the Qur’an?
Surah Al-‘Asr.
By the time! Surely humanity is in loss, except those who have faith, do good, and enjoin on each other the truth, and enjoin on each other patience. (Qur’an 103:1-3)
Can you imagine, based upon your own understanding of this previously quoted chapter, that people are entitled to receive that great reward of paradise, of Al Jannah, without doing good deeds?
This chapter of the Qur’an delivers a clear message. The salvation of mankind is linked to both faith and actions. Good deeds are inseparable from true faith. True faith is necessarily linked to good deeds. The two are interlocked.
If we want to know the correct Islamic creed, the correct Islamic aqidah as taught by the Blessed Prophet (saw), make sure first and foremost you base your creed on the verses of the Qur’an that are clear with clear meanings. If you do so, you will be able to differentiate between the authentic traditons of the Blessed Prophet (saw) from the fabricated ones.
Muslims the world over, in all their denominations, believe that on the day of judgement no one will enter paradise without the intercession of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
The debate comes down to the following:
Is this intercession for all those who testify that there is no god except Allah and Muhammed (saw) is his Messenger ?
A special honour and privilege for the Muslims who fear Allah.
“He knows what is before them, and what is behind them, and they cannot intercede except for him, with whom He is pleased. And they stand in awe for fear of Him.” (Qur’an 21:28)
Imagine an individual who, their whole life they miss the prayers, they commit fornication and adultery, and they die unrepentant.
Is Allah content or pleased with this person? The answer is no!
The above verse provides clear-cut evidence that whatever Shafa’at that there will be, it will be for those with whom Allah (swt) is pleased.
In Christianity, they have a theological position that Christ Jesus is their intercessor on the day of judgement.
“My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.” (1 John 2:1)
“Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.” (Romans 8:34)
“For, There is one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity—the man Christ Jesus.” (1 Timothy 2:5)
In Christianity, Faith in Jesus is enough. It is sufficient to enter into paradise.
In Islam, true faith is accompanied by righteous living, righteous action, and righteous deeds.
“He knows what is before them, and what is behind them, and they cannot intercede except for him, with whom He is pleased. And they stand in awe for fear of Him.” (Qur’an 21:28)
“Those who carry the Throne and those around it glorify the praises of their Lord, have faith in Him, and seek forgiveness for the believers, Our Lord! You encompass everything in mercy and knowledge. So forgive those who repent and follow Your Way, and protect them from the torment of Hellfire.” (Qur’an 40:7)
From this verse we can understand that there are three major pre-conditions for Allah (swt) to forgive your sins.
To believe in Islam.
To actually want to be forgiven. This happens via repentance.
Follow the way Allah (swt) has set out for us.
One of the most important methods of interpreting the Qur’an is to apply to it the rules and the principles of the Arabic language. As the Qur’an itself was sent down in Arabic.
Consider, for example, the following verse:
“And warn them, [O Muhammed], of the Approaching Day, when hearts are at the throats, filled [with distress]. For the wrongdoers there will be no devoted friend and no intercessor [who is] obeyed.” (Qur’an 40:18)
When you look at this verse you will see the مَا (mā) which is used in the Arabic language to negate. And then come two nouns. The first is ḥamīmin and the other is shafīʿin. Both are indefinite nouns. This means that this verse implies a general sense. Meaning that all intercessors and all friends will not be acceptable on the day of judgement to intercede for the wrong doers.
So there is a principle in the Arabic language and fundamentals of Islamic jurisprudence known as uṣūl al-fiqh saying that if an indefinite noun is found in a negative context or prohibitive context or conditional context, it will produce a general sense.
So what we get from this is that no one will intercede for a person who did not repent in this temporal world.
We have seen that one of the most damnable articles of faith held by some Muslims is the belief that the sinners who died unrepentant will be admitted into paradise on the day of judgement.
Now contrast this belief with the following authentic tradition of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Narrated Abu Huraira:
When Allah revealed the verse: “Warn your nearest kinsmen,” Allah’s Messenger (saw) got up and said, “O people of Quraish (or said similar words)! Buy (i.e. save) yourselves (from the Hellfire) as I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment; O Bani `Abd Manaf! I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment, O Safiya, the Aunt of Allah’s Messenger (saw)! I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment; O Fatima bint Muhammed! Ask me anything from my wealth, but I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment.”
“Believe then in Allah and His Messenger, and in the light which We have sent down. Allah is fully aware of all that you do.”(Qur’an 64:8)
﷽
There is no denying the light that cascades across the floor. Indeed, many cathedrals are beautiful and breathtaking. Yet, no Muslim would deny that the teachings that take place in such buildings are teachings that mix light with darkness. It mixes haqq with batil. It mixes truth with falsehood.
“Do not mix truth with falsehood or hide the truth knowingly.” (Qur’an 2:42)
“They say, The Most Compassionate has offspring. You have certainly made an atrociousclaim, by which the heavens are about to burst, the earth to split apart, and the mountains to crumble to pieces. in protest of attributing children to the Most Compassionate.” (Qur’an 19:88-91)
There is a shared conceptual structure between Christian Logos theology, Neo-Platonic emanationism and the Sufi/Shi’i doctrines of Nūr i Muḥammed.
This is something alien to Islam.
Nūr i Muḥammed is a concept primarily within Sufi and some Shi’i traditions, designating Prophet Muhammed (saw) as the first creation and the primordial light from which the universe was created. It represents his inner, transcendent reality and spiritual essence rather than his physical humanity.
We see in the sacred text of the Christians the following beliefs.
Part of the Nicene Creed reads as follows:
“God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten not made, one in being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven.”
“For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.” (Colossians 2:16-17)
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. (John 1:1-8)
Contrary to what people think that the Qur’an being created is from Greek philsophy far from it. It is quite the opposite.
The position of the Sunni/Neo-Platonists. The Monad & the Logos
An uncreated ‘Kun’ by which everything else is created. The ‘kun’ acts as the intermediary between Allah, the transcendant and the material world.
However, the Sunnis believe that this uncreated ‘kun’ is not identical to the essence of Allah nor other than Allah’s essence. In our view, this is a step away from monotheism and a bridge towards Christology and logos theology.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)
“Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.” (John 1:3)
In our article here, we have shown that Jesus is not the eternal word of Allah. Jesus is the created word of Allah. Created from nothing “dust” and that which is created from dust or nothingness is not an attribute of Allah at all.
It is historically accurate to say that Christian theology has been heavily influenced by Platonic philosophy. We know this was the downward road in regard to their creed. So we now want to look at how such beliefs influenced certain strands of Islam.
As a reminder, our aqidah needs to be built upon the verses of the Qur’an. Those that are clear. Or it needs to be built upon the tawatur from the hadith.
And it dazzles the mind how those Muslims get accosted who say that Muhammed (saw) is only a man. They get accosted by those who hold fast to batini and esoteric doctrines. Well, if Muhammed (saw) is not only a man, then what is he? An angel? A demigod? A deity?
The same people do not seem to mind when we say about Jesus (as) that he is only a man. Even though Jesus (as) was born without a father.
“Say, “I am only a (basharun) man (mith’lukum)like you, to whom has been revealed that your god is one God. So whoever would hope for the meeting with his Lord – let him do righteous work and not associate in the worship of his Lord anyone.” (Qur’an 18:110)
“But now you seek to kill me, a man (anthropos) who has told you the truth which I heard from.” (John 8:40)
Question: What does the word Anthropos mean?
Answer: It means a mortal human being, full man. It distinguishes man from the animal kingdom on one hand and distinguishes man from a deity and divine essence on the other.
Anthropos is where we get the word anthropology, which means the study of man.
So this has not deterred those who wanted to bring Platonic Philosophy into Islam. In fact, it emboldens them. They reason well, Jesus (as) is anthropos, but he pre-existed as the word. So they reason that even if Muhammed (saw) is bashar, they can make him pre-exist as some eternal light.
What is interesting to note here is that nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus (as) say: “I am a man like you.” However, the text of the Qur’an is explicit. Muhammed (saw) is a man like us.
“And We sent not before you except (rijalan) men to whom We revealed [Our message]. So ask the people of the message if you do not know.” (Qur’an 16:43)
And We sent not before you, except men(rijalan) to whom We revealed [the message], so ask the people of the message if you do not know. We gave them not bodies that would not eat food, nor were they (khālidīna)immortals. (Qur’an 21:7-8)
khālidīna -this also means eternal. Jesus (as) is not the eternal word. Muhammed (saw) is not eternal light. Neither of them is eternal.
“The Messiah, son of Mary, was no more than a messenger. messengers had gone before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They both ate food. See how We make the signs clear to them, yet see how they are deluded!” (Qur’an 5:75)
“And they say, “What is this messenger that eats food and walks in the markets? Why was there not sent down to him an angel so he would be with him a warner?” (Qur’an 25:7)
In fact, if we do not accept the fact that Muhammed (saw) is a man like us, then we are accepting the belief of the Mushriks, who are surprised that Allah (swt) sends a man that eats food and walks among them.
“They say, “Why has no angel come with him?” Had We sent down an angel, the matter would have certainly been settled, and they would have never been given more time. And if We had sent an angel, We would have certainly made it a man—leaving them more confused than they already are.” (Qur’an 6:8-9)
The verse above has the Mushrik asking why no angel was sent with Muhammed (saw). So they are making a contrast between the two.
If Allah (swt) sent an angel, there would be no more room to debate about anything. This clearly tells us that Muhammed (saw) is not an angel. Angels are those beings which are created from light.
And nothing has prevented people from believing when guidance comes to them except their protest: “Has Allah sent a (basharan) human as a messenger?” (Qur’an 17:94)
“They challenge, “We will never believe in you until you cause a spring to gush forth from the earth for us, or until you have a garden of palm trees and vineyards, and cause rivers to flow abundantly in it. Or you should cause the heaven to come down upon us in pieces as you think, or bring Allah and the angels face to face (with us). Or you have a house of gold or you ascend into the sky. And [even then], we will not believe in your ascension until you bring down to us a book we may read.” Say, “Exalted is my Lord! Was I ever but a human messenger?” (Qur’an 17:90-93)
They asked Muhammed (saw) the following:
Bring a spring to gush forth from the earth.
Bring forth gardens, palm trees and vineyards.
Cause rivers to flow.
Bring the heavens down.
Bring Allah and the angels face to face.
Have a house made of guild.
Ascend into the sky. -it is clear that Jesus did not do this either.
Bring us down a book.
Muhammed (saw) replied to this by saying: He was only a human (basharan) messenger.
“Say: I am no (bid’an)new thing among the messengers (of Allah), nor know I what will be done with me or with you. I do but follow that which is inspired in me, and I am but a plain warner.”(Qur’an 46:9)
If Muhammed (saw) is the first creation and primordial light, then he certainly is a new thing among the messengers, as this cannot be said about any of the messengers who have come before him.
Verses from the Qur’an that are used to try and prove Nūr Muḥammed.
“O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger making clear to you much of what you used to conceal of the Scripture and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book.” (Qur’an 5:15)
mina l-lahi nurun wakitabun mubinun yahydi bihi from Allah a light and a book clear guides with it
The Qur’an is the light and a clear book. Allah guides with it, not with them(plural)
You may see how disparate translations render the Arabic into English.
“O mankind, there has come to you a conclusive proof from your Lord, and We have sent down to you a clear light.” (Qur’an 4:174)
bur’hanum min rabbikum wa-anzalna ilaykum nuran mubinan convincing proof from your Lord sent down to you a light clear
The Qur’an never references nazzala (sending down) to a human being ever! For example:
“Indeed, We have anzalna sent down to you the Book, in truth. So worship Allah , [being] sincere to Him in religion.” (Qur’an 39:2)
Rather, when speaking about prophets as messengers, Allah (swt) uses the word arsala (sent).
See: Qur’an 21:07Qur’an 33:45 and Qur’an 47:2
Allah (swt) tells us that the Qur’an is that light from Allah.
“And thus We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command. You did not know what is the Book or [what is] faith, but We have made it a light by which We guide whom We will of Our servants. And indeed, you guide to a (siratin mus’taqimin) straight path.”(Qur’an 42:52)
“Believe then in Allah and His Messenger, and in the light which We have sent down. Allah is fully aware of all that you do.”(Qur’an 64:8)
Notice the text says believe in Allah and his Messenger and in the light. The text does not say believe in Allah and his Messenger, who is the light! Just as the wa distinguishes the Messenger from Allah, the wa also distinguishes the nur from the Messenger!
First it should be said that the Qur’an is sufficient in this regard. Anything that one would bring from the hadith would come to clash with the overwhelming flood of evidence that the Qur’an has established.
Secondly, it should also be stated that none of the evidence brought from the hadith amounts to tawatur and, therefore, it cannot be established as an aqidah point.
Nonetheless, we will look at the evidence one tries to establish from the hadith for Nur-Muhammed. The idea of Muhammed (saw) as the first creation and/or the primordial light from which the universe was created.
It would also clash with other lone narrator reports.
Umm Salamah narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Indeed you come to me with your disputes, and I am only a human being, perhaps one of you is more eloquent at presenting his argument than the other. If I judge for one of you, giving him something from the rights of his brother, then it is only a piece of the Fire that I am giving him, so do not take anything from it.”
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said prayer and he omitted or committed (something). Ibrahim (one of the narrators of this hadith) said: It is my doubt, and it was said: Messenger of Allah, has there been any addition to the prayer? He (the Holy Prophet) said: Verily I am a human being like you. I forget just as you forget so when any one of you forgets, he must perform two prostrations, and he (the Holy Prophet) was sitting and then the Messenger of Allah (saw) turned (his face towards the Qibla) and performed two prostrations.
It also contradicts other information from the Blessed Prophet (saw) about what was the first created thing.
Abdul-Wahid bin Sulaim narrated:
“I arrived in Makkah and met ‘Ata bin Abi Rabah. I said to him: ‘O Abu Muhammed! The people of Al-Basrah speak about Al-Qadar.’ He said: ‘O my son! Do you recite the Quran?’ I said: ‘Yes.’ He said: ‘Then recite Az-Zukhruf to me.’” He said: ‘So I recited: Ha Mim. By the manifest Book. Verily, We have made it a Qur’an in Arabic that you may be able to understand. And verily, it is in the Mother of Book with Us, indeed exalted, full of wisdom. Then he said: ‘Do you know what Mother of Books is?’ I said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said:’It is a book that Allah wrote before He created the Heavens, and before He created the earth. In it, it is (written): Fir’awn is among the inhabitants of the Fire, and in it is: Perish the two hands of Abu Lahab, and perish he!’Ata said: ‘I met Al-Walid the son of ‘Ubadah bin As-Samit the Companion of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and asked him:’What was your father’s admonition when he died?” He said:”He called me and said: ‘O my son ! Have Taqwa of Allah, and know that you will never have Taqwa of Allah until you believe in Allah, and you believe in Al-Qadar- all of it-its good and its bad. If you die upon other than this you shall enter the Fire. Indeed I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) saying: “Verily the first of what Allah created was the Pen. So He said: ‘Write.’ It said : ‘What shall I write?’ He said : ‘Write Al-Qadar, what it is , and what shall be, until the end.’”
The Pen is presented as a created instrument for recording destiny. That is all.
The very first of what Allah created was the Pen.
None of the information that has been supplied mentions anything about spatiality.
So this leaves us with some points of discussion.
If spatiality is not a creation but something that co-exists with Allah. Then who or what creates spatiality? How do we square this with the belief that Allah creates all things?
If spatiality is a creation and the first thing that was created before spatiality was either the Pen or the Throne. This means that the Pen or the Throne existed prior to spatiality. Since we do not posit a place for Allah (swt), then one could conclude the Pen is like Allah (swt) in existing without a place.
The unresolvable tension in Neo-Platonic emanationism.
Neo-Platonic emanationism: The One is absolutely transcendent, beyond being, beyond space, beyond time. The first emanation (the Nous/Intellect) is the first thing that has being, but it exists in a framework of emanation that presupposes the One’s transcendence.
The Islamic doctrine of tawhid: “There is nothing like unto Him” (Qur’an42:11). Allah alone is eternal, uncreated, without beginning. Everything else is created, contingent, and shares no attributes of divinity.
If the Muhammedan Light or the Pen was created before space and time, then:
It exists in a state of non-spatial, non-temporal existence.
This is precisely the definition of divine transcendence. Existing without being located in space or time.
Something now shares this attribute with Allah.
“There is nothing like unto Him” is compromised.
When the Nūr Muḥammed doctrine claims:
“The first thing Allah created was the light of Muhammed”
It must then answer: Where did this light exist before space and time?
There are three possible responses, all of them problematic.
It existed in Allah. Something created existed within the divine.
It existed in a place. Which mean space is either uncreated (co-eternal with Allah) or the light created its own container (nonsensical).
It existed in no place and no time. The light shares with Allah the attribute of existing without spatial or temporal location. There is nothing like unto him now has an exception. The light is, in this crucial respect, like Allah.
There is no escape.
The Neo-Platonic Framework Collapses Under Islamic Premises
Neo-Platonism works because:
The One is beyond being, beyond even the category of “existence”
The Nous is the first being However, being is already a category that the One transcends.
The Nous is divine, and the system is not radically monotheistic.
But Islam does not allow:
Degrees of divinity.
A hierarchy of being where the first emanation shares in transcendence with that which is beyond being.
When Sufi metaphysicians attempted to import the Neo-Platonic structure while claiming to preserve tawhid, they created an unstable hybrid.
Evidences from the hadith that are used to try and prove Nūr Muḥammed.
The first hadith evidence that is used.
Narrated Abu Hurairah:
“They said: ‘O Messenger of Allah (saw)! When was the Prophethood established for you?’ He said: ‘While Adam was between (being) soul and body.'”
This above hadith mentions nothing about when the Prophet (saw) was created or what he was created from. It simply establishes that the office of Prophethood was ordained for him. This the more straightforward and textually responsible reading. The plain sense of the text is about foreknowledge and divine decree, not ontological pre-existence.
The second hadith that is used.
He relates from Jabir ibn Abdullah who stated:“I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah (saw)! May my mother and father be sacrificed for you, tell us of the first creation which Allah created before everything?’ The Prophet saw answered, ‘O Jabir! Indeed Allah created before everything the light of your Prophet from His light.”
Source: (Al-Musannaf Abdur Razzaq, pp. 63, Hadith 18)
This hadith is fabricated (mawḍū’)
The consensus is that it has no sound chain of transmission (sanad) and was falsely attributed to the Prophet (saw).
Bring us an authentic chain for this hadith.
The most dangerous aspect of the above hadith is the wording, “from His light” (min nūrihī). This can be dangerously understood to imply that the Prophet (saw) is a part of Allah or that Allah’s essence is divisible. A concept fundamentally opposed to Islamic monotheism (tawhid).
It is challenging to take seriously the claims of anyone who says they defend (tawhid) and expresses the above view.
Such groups who advocate this are like the mysterion cults. They hold that such sacred truths are revealed but cannot be fully understood by reason. They need esoteric (obscure) explanations or can only be explained via esoteric rituals that are not within the grasp of the uninitiated. The contradictory nature is laid bare for all to see. If that is the case, then you do need recourse to proof text. You simply need aprior convictions.
One of our team members was introduced to a Sufi Tariqa in which one of its members approached them asking about how they understood Nur i Muhammed. The follower of this Tariqa said: “The light of Allah is Allah!”
So how does this Nur of Muhammed (saw) actually work?
If you are involved in Sufism or Sufi Metaphysics, it is usually taught that this light enters into Adam.
Then it is passed from Adam to his son Seth. It goes all the way to Nuh. Then, at this point, something crucial happens. The light is passed onto Nuh’s son Sam (Shem). The Semetic people and his other son, Ham (Hamitic) people, receive a curse. Physically portrayed by being black-skinned.
It continues until it reaches Abrahams son (Isma’il). Now we get into a conundrum here. It cannot go through the son Ishaq because this line stops at Jesus (as) who had no children.
So it now passes through (Isma’il). But now we face another problem.
Historically speaking, there is a span of approximately 2,500 to 2,700 years between Isma’il, peace be upon him (born c. 2000s B.C.E.) and Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him(born 570 C.E.). While Islamic tradition holds that Muhammed is a direct descendant of Isma’il, historians and early genealogists note that there is no continuous, verified, or documented written record for this connection.
Also, on top of that, it must be affirmed that for that span of 2,500 years, that entire line maintained a belief in perfect monotheism.
Critique of Esoteric Cults and Genealogy
Where this becomes a source for cults and manipulation. If you continue to hold that this nur i muhammed travels through his descendants, then not only are the descendants superior to you via bloodline, but they are metaphysically superior to you based upon this esoteric reality.
This has become a source of manipulation and abuse in many circles. A person who is claimed to possess such attributes becomes a deity in their circle. Unchallenged and unquestioned. The least infraction can bring wrath and damnation down upon one. If the Imam, Qutb (or Ghawth) is caught up in sexual impropriety, molestation, physical abuse and or squandering of funds, any whistleblowers would be shamed into silence.
The Ibadi school shuts the doors to these esoteric beliefs which have no firm basis in the Qur’an and Sunnah. Exploitation of people cannot come about through presumed superior metaphysical personages.
Put yourself for a moment in the position of a 7th century Bedouin hearer, the idea that Muhammed (saw) pre-existed as a cosmic light, or that there exists a “Muhammedan Reality” that is the first emanation and the instrument of creation, would have sounded unfamiliar. Perhaps dangerously close to what they had just been taught to reject about Arab polytheism (where lesser deities mediated between the high God and the world) and Christianity (where the Logos became flesh).
In the end, what is needed for the Muslims is a return to purity in creed. A creed based upon the firm and clear text of the Qur’an and the mass transmitted testimony of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
You may also be interested in reading the following:
“We sent thee not, but as a Mercy for all creatures.” (Quran 21:107)
﷽
The Mufti of Oman, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (H) has informed us:
“Celebrating the birth of the Prophet ﷺ was not practiced during the time of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), nor during the time of the Successors (tābi‘īn), nor during the time of the successors of the Successors (atbā‘ al-tābi‘īn). Most likely, this celebration began during the era of the Fatimids. It is said that their intention behind this celebration was to deflect accusations that they were not truly Muslims. There is much discussion about the Fatimids. Some even refer to them as the “ʿUbaydīs”. Though they attributed themselves to Fāṭimah (may Allah be pleased with her) and thus were called “Fāṭimids.” Yet, many exaggerations surrounding them go so far as to take them outside the fold of Islam. For example, some said about al-Muʿizz al-Fāṭimī: “Whatever you will happens, not what fate decrees; you rule, for you are the One, the Subduer.” This is evidence that those people were far from Islam and from the oneness of Allah, as this is deification of human beings.”
“They were the first to introduce the celebration, and Muslims later adopted it from them. Perhaps the desire to celebrate the Prophet’s birthday was in order to remind people of this great blessing. The blessing of Allah sending His Messenger ﷺ to us. However, we must consider several important factors. Among these is that people, in commemorating the Prophet’s birth, have attributed sanctity to human-authored texts recounting the story of the noble birth. They came to revere such writings as if they were the Qur’an itself, and this is impermissible. Nothing is sacred except the words of Allah. As for the words of the Prophet ﷺ, when we read them, it is for the sake of deriving benefit and guidance; reading them in itself is not an act of worship. If someone who does not understand the Prophet’s words were to recite them thinking it was an act of devotion, it would not count as worship. Unlike the Qur’an, whose recitation is worship whether one understands it or not.”
“Therefore, attributing sacredness to anything other than the words of Allah is problematic. If the celebration is meant to remind people of this great blessing, then one should not be bound to a single text authored by a person centuries ago as though it were a chapter of the Qur’an. Rather, the occasion can be connected to present-day circumstances. What the community needs to draw from this remembrance, such as reviving the call to Islam and renewing the message. This can be done by giving lectures, enlightening people about this blessing, and renewing the spirit of the message according to the needs of the time.”
“At the same time, all that contradicts the Sharīʿah in such celebrations must be avoided. Gatherings involving drums, dancing by men and women, and similar practices are contrary to Islamic teachings. These must be avoided. Likewise, the extravagant spending of large amounts of money on such occasions does not please the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. These funds would be better spent on things that benefit the Muslim community. Excessive decoration and lavish displays are also not a proper way of honoring the Prophet. These are matters that must be carefully avoided.” -The Mufti of Oman, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (H)
Prima Qur’an comments:
So there is no need for people to try and justify this practice to the people on the basis of what the early generation did or what the Blessed Prophet (saw) ordered us to do.
If people celebrate to remember the blessings of the Blessed Prophet (saw), by giving lectures etc then this is not something in our estimation that is totally forbidden.
Celebrating the birth of the Blessed Prophet (saw) with speech, and poems has become ‘urf (culture/custom). -It does not violate Islamic Principles.
Do we become the beloved of Allah (swt) by following the beloved of Allah (swt).
Celebrating the birth of our noble Prophet (saw) Say, “If you ˹sincerely˺ love Allah, then follow me; Allah will love you and forgive your sins. For Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 3:31)
We do not believe such celebrations should be done with haram music, dancing or free mixing. This time is used to send abundant blessings down upon the Blessed Prophet (saw) and used as a time to reflect on rather or not we become the beloved of Allah (swt) by following the beloved of Allah (swt).
#متابعات أحيت منارة الاستقامة لتعليم القرآن الكريم وعلومه بمدينةنالوت بالأمس ذكرى #المولد_النبوي_الشريف ضمن البرنامج الذي أعلن عنه مكتب أوقاف #نالوت حيث ألقيت بعض الكلمات بمناسبة هذه الذكرى الجميلة كما تخلل هذه الأمسية بعض القصائد والأناشيد والمدائح النبوية. @Taha_Asker12 pic.twitter.com/kMeVcCZDvp
Often in Oman, Sunni and Ibadi come together to celebrate the Maulid
“Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example for whoever has hope in Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah often.” (Qur’an 33:21)
و كان نبينا صلى الله عليه وسلم يتسابق في طاعته القرشي والحبشي و الفارسي و الرومي يذكر اسمه فتفيض العيون بالدمع، وتورد أحاديثه فتجيش الارواح بالشوق، له في كل مكان أتباع، وفي كل بلد أنصار، وفي كل قطر محبون، يدوي اسمه في الأذان وفي المنائر، ويذكر على المنابر، ويدرس في الدفاتر،… pic.twitter.com/3HQWoiCazd
Some of the justifications that we use to allow the practice are as follows:
“And as for the blessings of your Lord, speak of them” (Qur’an 93:11)
Is not the birth of the Blessed Prophet (saw) a blessing to humanity?
It heralds the arrival of Allah’s beloved.
It is a way to convey the message of Muhammed (saw).
It is a way to send blessings and peace upon him.
A way to adhere to his love and follow what he (saw) brought.
This entry is quite short because it is not a hair splitting issue for us. Our scholars are very clear that we do not have records of the early generations celebrating this. This is something from ‘urf that the people love to do out of their burning love for Allah’s beloved.
Those who do not participate are not looked down upon. Those who wish to participate are received warmly.
They say, “Be Jews or Christians [so] you will be guided.” Say, “Rather, the (millata)religion of Ibrahim, inclining toward truth, and he was not of the (l-mush’rikina) polytheists.” (Qur’an 2:135)
“Knower of the unseen, disclosing none of it to anyone, except messengers of His choice. Then He appoints angel-guards before and behind them.” (Qur’an 72:26-27)
﷽
It was recently brought to our attention that when discussing the reliablity and transmission of the hadith that Profressor Fred Donner made the following comment:
@1:45
“But even in those collections of sound hadiths, there are many that we know MUST be fabricated, wherein the Prophet is seen as predicting things that happened two hundred years after his death.”
Ah yes, Fred. Prophets could never predict the future!
At least, here he has revealed himself. This is the problem and it shows his bias and his presupposition.
Donner’s argument is epistemologically circular: he assumes prophecy is impossible, and then uses that assumption to dismiss any hadith that contains a prophecy. To a believing Muslim, this is not historical criticism; it is secular dogmatism masquerading as neutrality. Far from academic.
Donner’s methodological reductionism rests on an epistemologically circular assumption that disqualifies it from serious historical consideration.
If Profressor Fred Donner is interested in engaging with Islamic scholarship on the following:
Epistemology: How do we know what we know? Or if we would like to debate Islamic scholarship on Metaphysics.
Then insh’Allah Islamic scholarship would welcome such an inquiry.
Profressor Donner’s book: ‘Muhammed and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam’ is a brilliant book of fiction. It is perfectly digestible for his liberal and left leaning audience.
One wonders how he would have written to an audience in India or Japan.
Reminder that a comprehsive and holistic reading of the Qur’an leads one to conclude that…
“But My mercy encompasses everything. I will ordain mercy for those who shun evil, pay alms-tax, and believe in Our revelations.” (Qur’an 7:156)
“And He is the All-Forgiving, All-Loving.” (Qur’an 85:14)
“Do you not love to be forgiven by Allah? And Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 24:22)
﷽
I will begin this article by sharing a perspective that may seem counter intuitive to the very article that I am writing.
For me one of the biggest signs of Allah’s Love and Mercy is the Creation of Hellfire and the Creation of the Worst Possible Planets for any life to exist.
I was reading this article on the worst possible planet and it certainly made me very thankful to be on Earth!
“Leah Crane: The planet I think is the worst also happens to be my least favourite planet, which is Mercury. It’s really close to the sun, and when we think about a planet being bad for life, a lot of the time we think about it either being very hot or very cold. Mercury is both. It is tidally locked, so one side always faces the sun, and that side, which we call the day side, is about 800° Fahrenheit, which is 430° Celsius, all the time – absolutely awful.”
Leah Crane: A little too hot. Also, you’d get a lot of cancers from all of the radiation. And then there’s the other side which always faces away from the sun, which is -290° Fahrenheit or -180° Celsius, equally unpleasant.
From the diversity and beauty of the animal kingdom to the various landscapes on Earth the first thought that certainly does not come to my mind is: “This Creator wants the absolute worst for us.”
From left to right: Kirkjufell Mountain located in Iceland. Credit to David Stanfield. Moraine Lake Banff National Park Canada. Credit to Nicole Seidl. Maya Bay Phi Phi Leh Thailand. Credit to Silent Sightseer. All photos taken from pexels.com
One of the means of knowing something is through contrast.
We know when something is unpleasant and thus we know what is pleasant. We know what it is to not to love and not to receive love. We know what it is not to be merciful or to receive mercy. We know what it is not to forgive or to be forgiven.
So in order to truly know Allah’s love, mercy and forgiveness we are shown its opposite.
“If Allah should take men to task for their injustice, He would not leave on the earth one single living creature; but He is deferring them to a term stated; and when their term is come they shall not put it back by a single hour nor put it forward.” (Qur’an 16:61)
This is to be contrasted with the Biblical characterization of the Creator.
“And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.” (Exodus 32:14)
“The Lord regretted making human beings on the earth, and his heart was grieved. So the Lord said: I will wipe out from the earth the human beings I have created, and not only the human beings, but also the animals and the crawling things and the birds of the air, for I regret that I made them.” (Genesis 6:6-7)
The clear distinction here is that in the Qur’an where Allah (swt) is simply telling us that if he were to give us our just desserts (what we really deserve) the extent of his wrath would essentially be scorched earth.
Where as in the Bible we are presented with a being who thinks to do evil to his creation, and even regrets making them.
Another huge difference between the portrayal of the divine in the two faiths is that in Christianity God is never sated or satiated unless there is pain or suffering. The running of a blade across the throat of an animal satiates God’s wrath.
“And without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” (Hebrews 9:22)
Where as in Islam a contrite human heart is what is needed before a Loving and Merciful Creator.
“The Day when neither wealth will be of any use nor sons, except to one who will come to Allah with a sound heart.” (Qur’an 26:88-89)
The blueprint for forgiveness was initiated by our Creator let us not forget this!
In Islam Allah forgives the first human being who erred and it was Allah who initiated the reproach between Creator and created!
Allah did not wait for Adam to approach him, in fact Allah inspired and taught him the words to seek forgiveness.
“Then Adam received from his Lord [some] words, and He accepted his repentance. Indeed, it is He who is the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful.” (Qur’an 2: 37)
a) Allah taught Adam the very words to seek reconciliation with him.
b) He accepted those words; because they are from him to begin with.
c) Allah accepts repentance.
Allah loves those who repent and purify themselves.
“Surely Allah loves those who always turn to Him in repentance and those who purify themselves.” (Qur’an 2:222)
Seeking forgiveness for our sins is an act of obedience and worship itself!
“Turn to Allah in repentance all together, O believers, so that you may be successful.” (Qur’an 24:31)
“O you who believe! Turn unto Allah in sincere repentance! It may be that your Lord will remit from you your evil deeds and bring you into Gardens underneath which rivers flow, on the day when Allah will not abase the Prophet and those who believe with him. Their light will run before them and on their right hands; they will say: Our Lord! Perfect our light for us, and forgive us! Lo! You have power over all things.” (Qur’an 66:8)
Allah (swt) has promised that he will forgive your sins.
“And whoever does evil or acts unjustly to his soul, then asks forgiveness of Allah, will find Allah Forgiving, Merciful.” (Qur’an 4:110)
“The Forgiver of sin and Accepter of repentance, the Severe in punishment, and Infinite in bounty. There is no god except Him. To Him is the final return.” (Qur’an 40:3)
Your sins are not greater than Allah’s mercy.
Disbelieving in Allah’s mercy and/or willingness to forgive sins is a major sin. A trap of Shaitan.
“He said, “And who despairs of the mercy of his Lord except for those astray?” (Qur’an 15:56)
“”O my sons! go and enquire about Joseph and his brother, and never give up hope of Allah’s Soothing Mercy: truly no one despairs of Allah’s Soothing Mercy, except those who ungrateful disbelievers.” (Qur’an 12:87)
“Say, ˹O Prophet, that Allah says,˺ “O My servants who have exceeded the limits against their souls! Do not lose hope in Allah’s mercy, for Allah certainly forgives all sins. He is indeed the All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 39:53)
“O believers! Do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Whoever follows Satan’s footsteps, then he surely bids immorality and wickedness. Had it not been for Allah’s grace and mercy upon you, none of you would have ever been purified. But Allah purifies whoever He wills. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.” (Qur’an 24:21)
Allah (swt) forgives all sins via repentance. This includes shirk as shirk is a sin.
Please see our article here that explains this. Al hamduillah our school is upon the haqq concerning this matter. May Allah (swt) guide the ummah to the truth.
We have no one else to turn to or efface our sins except Allah. Only Allah forgives Sins.
“Those who, upon committing an evil deed or wronging themselves, remember Allah and seek forgiveness for their sins—and who forgives sins except Allah?—and they do not knowingly persist in wrongdoing?” (Qur’an 3:135)
“Once you make a decision, put your trust in Allah. Surely Allah loves those who trust in Him.” (Qur’an 3:159)
Allah (swt) loves those who trust and rely upon him. Are we not trusting and relying upon Allah -alone when we ask him and him alone to forgive us? The answer is yes. Therefore in that condition we are among those who Allah (swt) loves!
How do I know that my repentance is sincere?
“O you who have believed, repent to Allah with sincere repentance.” (Qur’an 66:8)
“And whoever repents and does good has truly turned to Allah properly.” (Qur’an 25:71)
The fact that you desired to repent in and of itself is an act of sincerity. Second that you follow up your incorrect conduct with correct conduct.
Remorse is repentance.
Leaving the sin
Having remorse after committing the sin, which can only happen if our nature is not sinful to begin with.
Resolve to not return to the sin
If you sinned against Allah ask Allah to forgive you.
If you sinned against another person return their rights or seek reconciliation.
If you sinned against yourself, forgive yourself.
How do we know that our repentance is accepted?
“But whoever repents after his wrongdoing and reforms, indeed, Allah will turn to him in forgiveness. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 5:39)
“As for those who repent, mend their ways, and let the truth be known, they are the ones to whom I will turn tofor I am the Accepter of Repentance, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 2:160)
“But I am truly Most Forgiving to whoever repents, believes, and does good, then persists on guidance.” (Qur’an 20:82)
“As for those who repent, believe, and do good, it is they who will be admitted into Paradise, never being denied any reward.” (Qur’an 19:60)
“Only for those who do wrong. But if they later mend evil with good, then I am certainly All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 27:11)
The act of repentance in and of itself is a good. Than you follow up your repentance by continuing to do good deeds and trusting in Allah (Qur’an 3:159) by doing such is a sign that you have truly repented. It is also a sign that Allah has forgiven you.
Allah actually wants to accept our repentance!
“Allah wants to make clear to you [the lawful from the unlawful] and guide you to the [good] practices of those before you and to accept your repentance. And Allah is Knowing and Wise.” (Qur’an 4:26)
“Allah wants to accept your repentance, but those who follow their passions want you to digress into a great deviation.” (Qur’an 4:27)
“And it is He who accepts repentance from his servants and pardons misdeeds, and He knows what you do.” (Qur’an 42:25)
When we do a sin repent and start on the course of good we can know that Allah (swt) loves us.
“And do good, for Allah certainly loves the good-doers.” (Qur’an 2:195)
“And Allah loves the good-doers.” (Qur’an 3:134)
Allah loves those who are a doers of good.
Repentance is an act of worship and obedience.
Repentance is an act of good.
Therefore Allah loves us.
The angels keep a record of all our actions. For those who die upon faith and die upon Islam all the good is kept. The minor sins they are turned into good.
“This, Our record, speaks about you in truth. Indeed, We were having transcribed whatever you used to do.” (Qur’an 45:29)
A HUGE MISUNDERSTANDING. ALLAH’S FORGIVENESS IS NOT ARBITRARY.
To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. He forgives whoever (liman) He wills, and punishes whoever He wills. And Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Qur’an 3:129)
First of all. If you take this verse in isolation of other verses it means that those people who sincerely repent Allah (swt) may not forgive them. Then those people whom Allah (swt) says he would not forgive it means Allah (swt) would might them. Far above Allah (swt) to ascribe to him a capricious nature.
Second of all. There is no such thing as Allah can forgive your sins but not 100% otherwise it would be vain. Allah is far above this!
What is the benefit of Allah forgiving a servant of some of his sins and then leaving them alone? We accuse Allah (swt) of fooling around, while Allah Almighty is far above this.
You will often note that those verses that have the phrase: “He forgives whoever (liman) He wills, and punishes whoever He wills.” are in connection to asserting Allah’s authority over the claim of Jews or Christians who claim salvation is solely for them. Or, even in the context of Allah (swt) asserting authority over that of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Some examples:
“The Jews and the Christians each say, “We are the children of Allah and His most beloved!” Say, “Why then does He punish you for your sins? No! You are only humans like others of His Own making. He forgives whoever He wills and punishes whoever He wills. To Allah belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and everything in between. And to Him is the final return.” (Qur’an 5:18)
“You ˹O Prophet˺ have no say in the matter. It is up to Allah to turn to them in mercy or punish them, for indeed they are wrongdoers. To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. He forgives whoever He wills, and punishes whoever He wills. And Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 3:128-129)
Allah (swt) put conditions on receiving forgiveness.
“But indeed, I am the Perpetual Forgiver of whoever (liman) repents and believes and does righteousness and then continues in guidance.” (Qur’an 20:82)
Whoever dies without repenting from shirk, unlawful sexual intercourse, killing a soul without right. Allah will not forgive them.
“And those who do not invoke with Allah another deity or kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed], except by right, and do not commit unlawful sexual intercourse. And whoever should do that will meet a penalty. Multiplied for him is the punishment on the Day of Resurrection, and he will abide therein humiliated -Except for those who repent, believe and do righteous work. For them Allah will replace their evil deeds with good. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 25:68-70)
Anyone who sincerely repents will be like one who did not do any sins. This is correct. However, will that person recover and repent before the Angel of Death surprises him? This is a huge risk!
“Say, “What would my Lord care for you if not for your supplication?” For you have denied, so your denial is going to be adherent.” (Qur’an 25:77)
SINS CAN BE FORGIVEN FOR YOUR AFTERLIFE YET HAVE EFFECTS FELT IN THIS LIFE.
Another point is that there are effects of the sins and transgressions that we have done. For example if we sincerely repent this means that Allah (swt) has forgiven us in the afterlife. However, you will suffer from the effects of your sins in this world. May Allah (swt) forgive us in this life and the afterlife. So let us not take risk!
In other words Allah (swt) may hasten your punishment in this life and forgive you in the afterlife if you are sincere in your repentance.
This does not necessarily apply to every time you sin or every type of sin and Allah knows best. Some of the scholars mention that Allah (swt) says he is Forgiving and Forgiving. Why did he simply not say Forgiving? They say that forgiveness means pardoning you for the effects of this sin in this world and forgiveness means erasing the sin itself!
This is seen in Allah’s name: Al-Afuww -The one who not only forgives sins but also eliminates their negative impact, as if they never occurred.
Two examples:
Example A: Person is forgiven but the effects of sin are felt.
A person commits illicit sexual intercourse. This person is very remorseful and turns in sincere repentance to Allah. Allah (swt) forgives them. No punishment awaits them in the next life. However, the person finds out they have contracted HIV. This will impact the person for the rest of his/her life. Even knowingly being intimate with a person whom is unaware of your HIV status can lead to criminal charges, such as attempted murder.
Example B: Person is forgiven but the effects of sin are not felt.
A person was in a rush and was negligent in their wudhu. Not having a proper wudhu nullifies and invalidates the prayer. The person then realizes this. They do their wudhu with care and consideration and pray with devotion and sincerity. They ask Allah (swt) to forgive them. They are forgiven. No punishment awaits them in the next life nor are there any negative effects felt from the sin.
“As for those who repent, believe, and do good deeds, they are the ones whose evil deeds Allah will change into good deeds. For Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 25:70)
“Surely good deeds wipe out evil deeds. That is a reminder for the mindful.” (Qur’an 11:114) -how you know your sins are forgiven.
“IF (but) eschew the evilest of the things which you are forbidden to do, We shall expel out of (Saiyiatikum) YOU ALL THE EVIL IN YOU, and admit you to a gate of great honor.” (Qur’an 4:31)
Allah loves those who purify themselves.
“Surely Allah loves those who always turn to Him in repentance and those who purify themselves.” (Qur’an 2:222)
Repentance itself is an act of purification. It is the initial process to cleanse the heart and soul of the sin committed and therefore Allah loves those who initiate this process.
Allah loves those who are just.
“And whoever does evil or acts unjustly to his soul, then asks forgiveness of Allah, will find Allah Forgiving, Merciful.” (Qur’an 4:110)
“Surely Allah loves those who uphold justice.” (Qur’an 49:9)
When you sin you act unjustly to your soul -you are condemning yourself to possible damnation. Therefore when you seek forgiveness to Allah (swt) you are doing justice to yourself, to your own soul and as you are upholding justice via your repentance your among those beloved to Allah (swt).
The Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) is to seek forgiveness as instructed by Allah (swt).
“And seek Allah’s forgiveness. Surely Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 73:20)
“So be patient ˹O Prophet˺, ˹for˺ Allah’s promise is certainly true. Seek forgiveness for your sin. And glorify the praises of your Lord morning and evening.” (Qur’an 40:55)
“We sent no messenger save that he should be obeyed by Allah’s leave. And if, when they had wronged themselves, they had but come to you and asked forgiveness of Allah, and asked forgiveness of the messenger, they would find Allah Forgiving, Merciful.” (Qur’an 4:64)
“If you should love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 3:31)
The Blessed Messenger (saw) used to ask Allah (swt) to forgive him. That is part of his Sunnah. It is a major part of his Sunnah to ask Allah (swt) to forgive him, have mercy and compassion upon him.
By doing this we to follow and emulate the Blessed Messenger (saw) thus becoming the people mentioned in (Qur’an 3:31). Allah will love us and forgive us -1) for following the sunnah in general. 2) especially for following the sunnah of asking for forgiveness.
Allah responds to our prayers!
This simple fact is above all else. It in and of itself is the cause for the elation of the soul and the hope for the penitent.
When My servants ask you ˹O Prophet˺ about Me: I am truly near. I respond to one’s prayer when they call upon Me. So let them respond ˹with obedience˺ to Me and believe in Me, perhaps they will be guided ˹to the Right Way˺ (Qur’an 2:186)
“Your Lord has proclaimed, “Call upon Me, I will respond to you. Surely those who are too proud to worship Me will enter Hell, fully humbled.” (Qur’an 40:60)
“To the tribe of Thamud We sent their brother Salih. He said, “My people, worship God. You have no God other than Him. He created you out of the earth and made you inhabit it. Ask Him to forgive your sins, and turn towards Him in repentance. My Lord is near, and ready to answer.” (Qur’an 11:61)
Holy Angels That Are Beings of Pure Light Pray Constantly and Continuously for your Forgiveness and Guidance!
“Those (angels) who carry the Throne and those around it glorify the praises of their Lord, have faith in Him, and seek forgiveness for the believers, (praying) “Our Lord! You encompass everything in (your) mercy and knowledge. So forgive those who repent and follow Your Way, and protect them from the torment of Hellfire. Our Lord! Admit them into the Gardens of Eternity which You have promised them, along with the righteous among their parents, spouses, and descendants. You (alone) are truly the Almighty, All-Wise. And protect them from (the consequences of their) evil deeds. For whoever You protect from the evil of their deeds on that Day will have been shown Your mercy. That is the ultimate triumph.” (Qur’an 40:7-9)
Prima Qur’an comments:
Imagine that Allah (swt) created a group of angels that specifically are tasked with praying for the forgiveness and protection of the believers. Those who follow the way of Allah. Not only are they praying for you specifically, they are praying for your parents , and the wife or husband that you have not even met or married yet! The one who is currently your parent and for the children you have not even had born yet! As well as those who currently are your children!
There is tremendous amount of love and mercy that is directed towards the believers! That is why those who reject all this love and mercy are kafir (ingrates) -(ungrateful) such a people are without question and without doubt deserving of the hellfire because it is the path they pro actively choose.
NOT TO MENTION THE MONTH OF RAMADAN.
This can be a whole entry in and of itself. However, in particular this is to the Muslim reader. You know the amount of mercy and forgiveness and spiritual upliftment that is contained with in the month of Ramadan! It is an entire month that comes every year that is a means of spiritual training and gaining proximity and closeness to Allah (swt).
Imagine if in Ramadan you were to continuously pray to Allah (swt) for forgiveness and protection from the hellfire. Imagine even if you prayed that du’a with sincerity even once and it was granted!
A WARNING TO THE BELIEVERS.
Dear brothers and sisters, respected ummah of Muhammed (saw). All that has gone before is to show you that the deck has not been stacked against us. Quite the opposite. The fact that we are have been commanded to pray five times a day. That those five daily prayers are a continuous means for us to draw night and ask forgiveness from the Supreme Sovereign of this Universe. The gift of the month of Ramadan. Angelic beings of light praying for us and our spouses and children that we ourselves potentially haven’t even met! This is supreme love, supreme grace, supreme care and supreme mercy.
That being said we have to want this mercy and this love and this grace. In light of all that has been said those who end up going to hellfire are those among us who are actively participating in our own self destruction. You actually have to want to go to hellfire. How does one want this? By disobeying Allah (swt), by avoiding the commands of a Sovereign Creator and indulging in that which The Creator has prohibited. Most of all by shunning repentance
Ask Allah to forgive you quickly.
“Allah only accepts the repentance of those who commit evil ignorantly ˹or recklessly˺ then repent soon after Allah will pardon them. And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 4:17)
“And hasten towards forgiveness from your Lord and a Paradise as vast as the heavens and the earth, prepared for those mindful ˹of Allah˺” (Qur’an 3:133)
Delaying repentance is a sign of arrogance and ingratitude. Here you have a Lord that wants to forgive you and you shun this forgiveness. It is an act of disobedience. It is a sign that you are not recalcitrant and that you deem your action or style of living as something of light consequence.
Very sobering verse from the Qur’an.
Why should we not delay repentance?
“However, repentance is not accepted from those who knowingly persist in sin until they start dying, and then cry, “Now I repent!” nor those who die as disbelievers. For them We have prepared a painful punishment.” (Qur’an 4:18)
Are you guaranteed to live after reading this very sentence? Are you guaranteed to live the next few minutes or even the next hour? So considering that repentance is not accepted by the one who waits to be besieged by the angel of death when is the best time to repent?
Now!
“Indeed, whoever commits misdeeds, and becomes besieged by his iniquities—these are the inmates of the Fire, wherein they will dwell forever.” (Qur’an 2:81)
Any Muslim who sins it is the duty of the believing Muslim to admonish his brother/sister in a good way. Help them to save face. Do not humiliate them. Advise them in a good manner.
However, if a Muslim continues to persist in sin that person is to be shunned. To continue to walk in fellowship with them is walking in fellowship to the one who insults Allah (swt) , shuns his mercy and forgiveness and guidance.
“Cooperate with one another in goodness and righteousness, and do not cooperate in sin and transgression. And be mindful of Allah. Surely Allah is severe in punishment.” (Qur’an 5:2)
Remember that Allah (swt) only accepts from those of us who do our level best to live a righteous a life.
“Indeed, Allah only accepts from the righteous [who fear Him]” (Qur’an 5:27)
If any person Muslim or not dies as a fasiq (a person committing major sins), does not repent, is unjust Allah will refuse his/her all his deeds and that one will be in hell.
“That is because they followed what angered Allah and disliked [what earns] His pleasure, so He rendered worthless their deeds.” (Qur’an 47:28)
“Those who disbelieved, and prevented (others) from Allah’s way, He (Allah) has rendered their deeds vain.” (Qur’an 47:1)
“And those who do not invoke with Allah another deity or kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed], except by right, and do not commit unlawful sexual intercourse. And whoever should do that will meet a penalty. Multiplied for him is the punishment on the Day of Resurrection, and he will abide therein humiliated –Except for those who repent, believe and do righteous work. For them Allah will replace their evil deeds with good. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 25:70)
The question has been put forward to you dear brothers and sisters and sincere truth seekers.
“Will, they not turn with repentance to Allah and ask His forgiveness? For Allah is Oft Forgiving, Most Merciful” (Qur’an 5:74)
“And He is the All-Forgiving, All-Loving (Qur’an 85:14)
“Invite to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and kind advice, and only debate with them in the best manner. Surely your Lord knows best who has strayed from His Way and who is guided.” (Qur’an 16:125)
“And it is not for the believers to go forth [to battle] all at once. For there should separate from every division of them a group [remaining] to obtain understanding in the religion and warn their people when they return to them that they might be cautious.” (Qur’an 9:122)
“And who is better in speech than one who invites to Allah and does righteousness and says, “Indeed, I am of the Muslims.” (Qur’an 41:33)
﷽
Let us tell you what Da’wah is not. Da’wah is not posting pictures of the wives of Christian apologist in bikini and other inappropriate clothing. This is an act of kufr. Those who are pleased with it are pleased with acts of kufr. If The person who post this dies without repenting from it they upon something other than Islam. Yes! It is that serious.
Da’wah is not saying that you will start telling people that a self proclaimed ex-Muslim girl took ‘backshots’ in the desert simply becuase she spreads lies about the Blessed Prophet (saw). Her lies do not justify your lies. This too is an act of kufr. Those who are pleased with it are pleased with acts of kufr. If the person dies without repenting from this they die upon something other than Islam.
Da’wah is not ‘dunking’ on others. No one’s goal should be to ‘destroy’ someone. We don’t ‘own’ others. Allah is the one who owns us all! We are all of us broken and needy before Allah.
Can you imagine the atheist, the agnostic, the undecided seeker? They see this very nasty discourse between Muslims and Christians. Why would they choose to become either? They may reason to themselves, that if religion causes me to be an angry hateful and vicious individual what is the point of religion?!
Da’wah is not argument or claims of superiority. It’s an authentic, genuine and sincere invitation to Allah with dignity. What da’wah really is, what’s it’s obligation, who should speak (and within what knowledge), and the Qur’anic method of wisdom, gentle counsel and best manner. It closes with the core truth: you invite, but Allah ultimately is the guide.
We strongly encourage everyone to listen to this wonderful and beneficial talk on the Call to Islam (Da’wah) by Shaykh Hatim Al Abdisalam and Shaykh Muhanna Al Harthy. It offers valuable insights, practical guidance, and inspiration for anyone interested in conveying the message of Islam with wisdom and compassion.
So by mercy from Allah, [O Muhammed], you were lenient with them. And if you had been rude and harsh in heart, they would have fled from about you. So pardon them and ask forgiveness for them and consult them in the matter. And when you have decided, then rely upon Allah. Indeed, Allah loves those who rely upon Him. (Qur’an 3:159)
The example of da’wah to Pharaoh.
“O eminent ones, I have not known you to have a god other than me.” (Qur’an 28:38)
“Go to Pharaoh. Indeed, he has transgressed.” (Qur’an 20:24)
So we can see that Pharaoh has committed the highest form of sin against Allah (swt) namely the claim of divinity! Allah (swt) also says that he was a transgressor!
Nonetheless look at the way in which Allah (swt) ask Moses and Aaron (peace be upon them both) to conduct themselves while speaking with him.
“And speak to him with gentle speech that perhaps he may be reminded or fear Allah.” (Qur’an 20:44)
Christians and Atheist can say some very dispicable and vile things about our faith. This does not mean that we respond to them in kind. It can be frustraing. Especially for us as Muslims. When engaging with Christians, especially the low hanging fruiti among them, they insult the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) but we cannot turn around and insult Jesus (as).
“Do not insult what they invoke besides Allah or they will insult Allah spitefully out of ignorance. This is how We have made each people’s deeds appealing to them. Then to their Lord is their return, and He will inform them of what they used to do.” (Qur’an 6:108)
The majority of the companions and indeed the majority of people you will meet in your life who become Muslims did so because of the good conduct and charachter of Muslims.
“Virtue and evil are not equal. If you replace evil habits with virtuous ones, you will certainly find that your enemies will become your intimate friends.” (Qur’an 41:34)
We are human and at times we may slip. Allah (swt) reminds us in such occasions.
“But if you forget, then remember your Lord, and say, “I trust my Lord will guide me to what is more right than this.” (Qur’an 18:24)
We should ask ourselves if we embody the following verse:
“And who is better in speech than one who invites to Allah and does righteousness and says, “Indeed, I am of the Muslims.” (Qur’an 41:33)
1. What is Da’wah?
Da’wah literally means “invitation” or “calling.” It is inviting people to know Allah and understand Islam. It is not about winning debates or pressuring people to accept Islam.
2. The Purpose of Da’wah
The goal is to:
Help people know the truth about Islam.
Remove misconceptions.
Guide people to worship Allah alone.
Earn Allah’s pleasure by conveying His message.
A Muslim is responsible for conveying the message, not for making someone accept it.
3. Qualities of a Good Da’ee (Caller to Islam)
The discussion emphasizes that a da’ee should have:
Knowledge: Speaking based on authentic Islamic teachings.
Wisdom: Choosing the right words and the right time.
Patience: Accepting rejection without anger.
Good manners: Being humble, truthful, gentle, and respectful.
4. The Best Method of Da’wah
The most effective invitation is often through:
Good character.
Helping others.
Being honest in business and daily life.
Showing kindness and mercy.
Listening before speaking.
People are often attracted to Islam by the behavior of Muslims before they are convinced by arguments.
5. Common Mistakes in Da’wah
The discussion warns against:
Arguing aggressively.
Speaking without knowledge.
Insulting other religions.
Trying to force people to accept Islam.
Becoming impatient when someone does not accept the message.
6. The Prophet Muhammed’s Example
The Prophet ﷺ is presented as the greatest example of da’wah because he:
Treated everyone with mercy.
Forgave those who harmed him.
Answered questions calmly.
Never forced anyone to become Muslim.
Continued inviting people despite years of hardship.
7. Responsibility of Every Muslim
Da’wah is not limited to scholars. Every Muslim can participate by:
Being a good example.
Sharing authentic Islamic knowledge.
Helping neighbors and colleagues.
Answering questions honestly.
Referring difficult questions to knowledgeable scholars.
8. Guidance Belongs to Allah
One of the main lessons is that success in da’wah is not measured by the number of converts. Success is delivering the message sincerely and correctly. Guidance is in Allah’s hands.
Key Takeaway
The discussion presents da’wah as a lifelong act of worship built on sincerity, knowledge, wisdom, patience, and excellent character. It reminds Muslims that their conduct is often the strongest invitation to Islam, and that their duty is simply to convey the message faithfully while leaving the outcome to Allah.
A remeinder to us at PrimaQur’an and our team.
We, the Ibāḍīs, are distinguished from other sects and schools by our noble character and refined conduct. We rise above those who slander us and we are not people of insults, and this has been the way of our forefathers, whose footsteps we follow. That is why everyone who visits Ibadi communities in Oman, Zanzibar, Algeria, Libya etc does not hear foul or offensive words.
Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “The Prophet ﷺ was never insulting, nor obscene, nor one who cursed.”
Therefore, regardless of what has been said about us or what will be said, we remain committed to the manners of the Prophet, the manners of true believers.
“And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah” (Qur’an 6:93)
﷽
“The hadith reported by Al-Bukhari that Adam’s height was sixty yards, has been criticized by Ibn Hajar on the basis of the measurement of the homes and dwellings of some of the ancient nations, which do not show that their inhabitants were enormously tall.”
Source: (A Textbook of Hadith Studies, Authenticity, Compilation, Classification, and Criticism of Hadith pg. 204)
“The hadith, reported by al-Bukhari, that Adam’s height was sixty yards, has been criticized by Ibn Hajar on the basis of the measurement of the homesteads of some of the ancient nations which do not show that their inhabitants were of an enormous height.” (SB, Kitab al-Anbiya, bab khalq Adam; Fb (Egypt, 1320 A.H), vi,230)
Source: (Hadith Literature Its Origin, Development, Special Features, and Criticism pg 202.)
The following hadiths in Bukhari are thought to be taken into account here:
“Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “Allah created Adam, making him 60 cubits tall. When He created him, He said to him, “Go and greet that group of angels, and listen to their reply, for it will be your greeting (salutation) and the greeting (salutations of your offspring.” So, Adam said (to the angels), As-Salamu Alaikum (i.e. Peace be upon you). The angels said, “As-salamu Alaika wa Rahmatu-l-lahi” (i.e. Peace and Allah’s Mercy be upon you). Thus the angels added to Adam’s salutation the expression, ‘Wa Rahmatu-l-lahi,’ Any person who will enter Paradise will resemble Adam (in appearance and figure). People have been decreasing in stature since Adam’s creation. “
“Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “The first group of people who will enter Paradise, will be glittering like the full moon and those who will follow them, will glitter like the most brilliant star in the sky. They will not urinate, relieve nature, spit, or have any nasal secretions. Their combs will be of gold, and their sweat will smell like musk. The aloes-wood will be used in their centers. Their wives will be houris. All of them will look alike and will resemble their father Adam (in statute), sixty cubits tall.“
Someone has claimed that Ibn Hajar (rh) rejected the hadith that stated that Adam (as) was 60 cubits tall in his book Fath ul Bari and that the reasoning was archaeological evidence which didn’t conform to the hadith?
Shaykh Haddad’s response:
“Ibn Hajar did not reject the hadith but said that there was an apparent contradiction between its wording of sixty cubits and the archaeological findings of the people of Thamud whose distance from the time of Adam (as), he said, “is less than the time elapsed between them and the beginning of this Umma.” This is phrased as just a thought that causes the explanation of the hadith to be problematic, not a rejection of the basis of the hadith. Further, one might see a problem in the objection itself.”
In sum, (1) the assumption that Ibn Hajar “rejected” the hadith of the sixty cubits is inaccurate even if thus forwarded by M. Zubair Siddiqi in his ‘Hadith Literature’ and (2) the problem raised by Ibn Hajar is open to question.
Question 2) Surely the archaeological information would be subservient to the knowledge of hadith?
Shaykh Haddad’s response
“The knowledge imparted by hadith is assumptive (zanni) and becomes categorically binding only with the mutawatir.”
“Further, is there true conflicting information here, i.e. correctly interpreted and dated findings?”
What Shaykh Gibril mentions here is that Ibn Hajar questions the ‘matn’-text of the hadith because it contradicts known archaeological evidence.
He also makes an interesting plea that the hadith is (zanni) which he translates as ‘assumptive’. The word (zanni) can also be translated as ‘speculative’. This means it has the probability of being true and the probability of not being true.
However, the point here is that if these hadith are sound and then many people would take that to mean that the Messenger of Allah (saw) definitely said it.
The creation of Adam (as) was miraculous creation.
Indeed all of creation is a miracle.
A possible challenge some would have with accepting Adam (as) being 90 feet tall is that the hadith seems to be silent on the height of Eve (as). In Arabic the companion of Adam (as) is known as Hawwāʾ(as).
One would also have to point to a time in the archaeological/historic records in which the offspring of Adam (as) and Eve (as), including subsequent generations, ceased being so tall.
Lastly, many of these hadith have as their source Abu Huraira -a problematic transmitter when it comes to Israʼiliyyat hadith. As they would mix up his reports from the Blessed Messenger (saw) with those of his reports from the Israʼiliyyat.
عن بسر بن سعيد ، قال : اتقوا الله ، وتحفظوا من الحديث ; فوالله لقد رأيتنا نجالس أبا هريرة ; فيحدث عن رسول الله – صلى الله عليه وسلم- ويحدثنا عن كعب ثم يقوم ، فأسمع بعض من كان معنا يجعل حديث رسول الله عن كعب ، ويجعل حديث كعب عن رسول الله ،
صلى الله عليه وسلم .
“On the authority of Busr ibn Sa’id , said: Fear God, and be careful with hadith; for by God, I saw us sitting with Abu Hurayrah ; and he would narrate on the authority of the Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him) and he would narrate to us on the authority of Ka’b , then he would get up, and I would hear some of those who were with us attributing the hadith of the Messenger of God to Ka’b , and attributing the hadith of Ka’b to the Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him).”
In other words people were mixing up what was being narrated from Ka’b (ra) and what was being narrated from the Blessed Messenger (saw)!
This is from Imam al-Dhahabi in his ‘Siyar A’lam al-Nubala’ under the section talking about Abu Huraira.
This is one of many reasons why we in the Ibadi school are very careful when it comes to narrations from Abu Huraira concerning the Israʼiliyyat. However we take from him in matters of jurisprudence.
Lastly, even though there are among our Muslim brothers who will cling fast to these hadith we would like to make the following plea to them.
Please stop circulating e-mails and pictures like the following:
We remember receiving such an e-mail of the ‘giant human’ found in the deserts of Saudi Arabia. Even then we kept wondering why the government would want to keep such a tight lid on something that would support a cherished hadith.
It is things like this that canbe a source of embarrassment, and truly tarnishes the image of Islam in the eyes of others. In the end, Ibn Hajar Al Asqlani did not reject this hadith. Ibn Hajar Al Asqlani also did not reject Bukhari. However, it is very obvious that he did not think that Bukhari was not above being critiqued.
“And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah” (Qur’an 6:93)
The second group are the Sunni Muslims (in general). There have always been dissenting voices. In fact, in our article above. Ibn Hazm mentions that there has been no consensus among the Muslims in regard to this issue.
First and foremost try and understand something if you can. When we have established from the Qur’an that there is no text that mentions the coming of Jesus (as). That the consistent exegesis and interpretation of the term Tawaffā which appears in twenty-five passages in the Qur’an, and twice in relation to Christ Jesus (Q 5:117 and Q 3.55) means to die.
Secondly any reading of the Qur’an that even remotely suggest that Jesus (as) went up into heaven body and soul would flatly contradict the following verse.
“or until you have a house of gold, or you ascend into heaven and even then we will not believe in your ascension until you bring down to us a book that we can read.” Say, “Glory be to my Lord! Am I not only a human messenger?” (Qur’an 17:93)
When this is established the obligation is not upon us to deal with the hadith. The obligation is upon those who assert these hadith and how they make sense of them in light of the above information.
Qur’an 5:116–117 decisively closes the case
“And when Allah will say: O Jesus, son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah, he will say: Glory be to You, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, You would indeed have known it; You know what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in your mind, surely you are the great Knower of the unseen things. I did not say anything to them except what you commanded me with: That worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness over them as long as I was among them, but when you caused me to die (Arabic: Tawafaytani), you were the watcher to them, and you are witness of all things.”(Qur’an 5:116-117)
There are several things to take from the above passage:
1) This dialogue takes place on the Day of Judgment, where Prophet Jesus (as) suggests that he has no knowledge of what has happened since his demise on Earth and after his ministry ended. “I was a witness to them as long as I was among them.”
2) From the discussion, it is clear that Prophet Jesus only came to Earth once, acting as a witness to his people. If indeed there was a ‘second coming’ before the Day of Judgment, he would have full knowledge of what had happened since his first departure. After all, he abolished the Jizya and forced the Christians and Jews to convert to Islam. This conversation with Allah (swt) would make little to no sense.
3) For the sake of the argument, let us imagine that those hadith that are claimed to have been spoken by the Blessed Prophet (saw) were true for a moment. So now Jesus (as) comes back and everyone becomes a Muslim. The Dajjal is defeated. Jesus (as) gets married. Then Allah (swt) causes Jesus (as) to die.
Then we have Jesus (as) saying after he dies to Allah (swt) “I was a witness to them as long as I was among them, but when you caused me to die, you were the watcher over them, and you are witness of all things.”
A rather bizarre understanding, it seems.
Especially, if we take the following text into consideration: “And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in Jesus before his death.” (Qur’an 4:159)
A rather bizarre situation the ‘traditional‘ and ‘dominant‘ position leaves us in.”
Jesus says on the Day of Judgment:
“I was a witness to them as long as I was among them, but when You caused me to die (tawaffaytanī), You were the Watcher over them.”
This statement is incompatible with:
A second earthly mission
A global enforcement of Islam
A forty-year reign
If such events occurred, Jesus could not truthfully say this.
The verse only works if:
Jesus lived once
Died once
And never returned
Here are the facts.
The idea of the Messiah coming a second time has produced for the Jews and the fundamentalist Christians the state of Israel for them, while our belief in the return of the Messiah has produced backwardness, injustice, and poverty for us.
This leads to the nullification of action. It means that we cannot change evil, rebel against injustice, or advance unless Messiah or the awaited Mahdi (according to the Sunni & Shi’i) comes to save us from that.
Imagine the rhetoric in the United Kingdom and the United States they fear that Islam will be implemented in those lands! What?! Even when Islam has not been implemented in the lands where Muslims are an overwhelming majority? How will we implement Islam in lands where we are 2 or 3% of the population?!
Now we come to the hadiths, upon which they rely heavily. All these hadiths are ahad (solitary) reports, and we know that ahad hadiths are not used in matters of creed.
Volumes have been written on the hadiths about the return of the Messiah and the awaited Mahdi. By Allah, can a hadith like this occupy Muslims so much that volumes are written about it, while not a single verse, explicitly or implicitly, mentions it? Unfortunately, Muslims busied themselves with this and became passive, abandoning action and every attempt at reform and advancement, waiting for the Messiah to come.
As mentioned these hadith about the return of Jesus (as) are ahad. For us they do not come under the category of mutawatir.
Abu Huraira reported
Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying, “In the last days there will be lying dajjals who will bring you traditions of which neither you nor your fathers have heard, so beware of them. They will neither lead you astray nor seduce you.” Muslim transmitted it.
This above is an interesting hadith from Abu Huraira.
Many of these hadith have as their source Abu Huraira (ra). The hadith from him in regard to the Israʼiliyyat are problematic. Those who transmitted from him would mix up his reports from the Blessed Messenger (saw) with those of his reports from the Israʼiliyyat.
عن بسر بن سعيد ، قال : اتقوا الله ، وتحفظوا من الحديث ; فوالله لقد رأيتنا نجالس أبا هريرة ; فيحدث عن رسول الله – صلى الله عليه وسلم- ويحدثنا عن كعب ثم يقوم ، فأسمع بعض من كان معنا يجعل حديث رسول الله عن كعب ، ويجعل حديث كعب عن رسول الله ،
صلى الله عليه وسلم .
“On the authority of Busr ibn Sa’id , said: Fear God, and be careful with hadith; for by God, I saw us sitting with Abu Hurayrah ; and he would narrate on the authority of the Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him) and he would narrate to us on the authority of Ka’b , then he would get up, and I would hear some of those who were with us attributing the hadith of the Messenger of God to Ka’b , and attributing the hadith of Ka’b to the Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him).”
In other words people were mixing up what was being narrated from Ka’b (ra) and what was being narrated from the Blessed Messenger (saw)!
This is from Imam al-Dhahabi in his ‘Siyar A’lam al-Nubala’ under the section talking about Abu Huraira.
This is one of many reasons why we in the Ibadi school are very careful when it comes to narrations from Abu Huraira concerning the Israʼiliyyat.
However we take from him in matters of jurisprudence.
What you the reader need to know and understand from the very beginning is that these lone narrator reports are distributed throughout hadith collections. When you often hear from your Shaykh and/or teacher is a narrative about Jesus (as) coming back and the rise of this figure known as the Mahdi. They will than give you a narrative that seems like a sequence of events. They will inform you that this happens and than this will happen followed by this.
The truth is for much of what they say they are piecing together a narrative because the information is scattered and often contradictory.
The other issue that is problematic and causes people to stop thinking about what is being reported is that once the label ‘sahih’ is given to a report people are mistaken to think that the Blessed Messenger (saw) definitely said this. The word ‘sahih’ has been translated into English as ‘authentic’. However, a better translation would be ‘sound’. This means that it has met the rigorous scrutiny of hadith masters; however, there is still the possibility of an error.
Think for a moment about assembly line production in a factory. Have you ever received a product or an item and found that it was faulty or had a defect in it? This is even after rigorous criteria are applied to ensure that the item reach you without defects.
Often times elaborate interpretations are offered to save what apparently looks like conflicting data. So this is up to you the truth seeker to weigh the information and see if the explanations given to you are sensible and rather or not the data adds up.
“When would the Last Hour come? Thereupon Allah’s Messenger (saw) kept quiet for a while. Then looked at a young boy in his presence belonging to the tribe of Azd Shanu’a and he said: If this boy lives he would not grow very old till the Last Hour would come to you. Anas said that this young boy was of our age during those days.”
Interpretations of this hadith say that “the Hour” here means the hour of these people, but the hadith is clear. The question is about the Hour, and the Prophet (saw) does not know it, while Allah Almighty says the Hour will come suddenly and says to the Prophet: “You have no knowledge of it.” This hadith contradicts these verses, telling them that the age of this young boy will not reach senility before the Hour comes. This boy lived and Allah knows best when he died but the Hour did not come.
“People ask you about the Hour. Say, “That knowledge is only with Allah. You never know, perhaps the Hour is near.” (Qur’an 33:64)
“They ask you regarding the Hour, “When will it be?” But it is not for you to tell its time. That knowledge rest with your Lord.” (Qur’an 79:42-44)
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely (Jesus,) the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly (as a Just Ruler); he will break the Cross and kill the pigs and there will be no Jizya (i.e. taxation taken from non Muslims). Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it, and a single prostration to Allah (in prayer) will be better than the whole world and whatever is in it.” Abu Huraira added “If you wish, you can recite (this verse of the Holy Book): — ‘And there is none Of the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (i.e Jesus as an Apostle of Allah and a human being) Before his death. And on the Day of Judgment He will be a witness Against them.” (4.159)
The most famous hadith about breaking the cross killing the swine and abolishing the jizya.
“I swear by Allah that the son of Mary will certainly descend as a just judge and he would definitely break the cross, and kill swine and abolish Jizya and would leave the young she-camel and no one would endeavor to (collect Zakat on it). Spite, mutual hatred and jealousy against one another will certainly disappear and when he summons people to accept wealth, not even one would do so.”
Even though this hadith has been given a grading of ‘sahih’ it is problematic for many reasons.
A) The first type of issue is that this hadith has is that the riwayat-the narration comes down to us through different wordings and some of it has additional or missing information that others do not have.
B) The second issue and more serious issue is that this particular hadith has information that contradicts what Allah (swt) revealed in the Qur’an.
“Spite, mutual hatred and jealousy against one another will certainly disappear.”
“And the Jews say, “The hand of Allah is chained.” Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His hands are extended; He spends however He wills. And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. And We have cast among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. ” (Qur’an 5:64)
“And from those who say, “We are Christians” We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 5:14)
C) The phrase: “Break the Cross” is problematic as it is indefinite. It is not specific. Christians do not have ‘A’ Cross, rather they have crosses. And some Christians -like the Jehovah’s Witness do even hold it to be sacred at all.
D) The phrase: “Kill swine” is problematic as it too is indefinite. It is not specific. Most of the Muslims we speak to on this matter understand that Jesus (as) will kill all the species of Sus scrofa, family Suidae (pigs, swine, hogs, wild boars).
These animals are creations of Allah (swt) and Allah (swt) has simply ordered us not to eat them (unless dire need). What is the reason to kill them?
They cover a wide geographical range and they play a beneficial role in the spreading of seeds in nature. Jesus (as) if it is to be believed that he will literally kill the pigs such adventures would take him to Guam, Samoa Islands, the Caribbean, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, and various diverse geographical regions.
Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said that Isa ibn Maryam encountered a pig on the road. He said to it, “Go in peace.” Somebody asked, “Do you say this to a pig?” Isa said, “I fear lest I accustom my tongue to evil speech.”
*note* that this chain above does not go beyond Malik and thus it is not sure how he obtained this information.
E) The phrase: “abolish Jizya” is problematic as discussed in other articles. This is not a problematic issue for most Sunni Muslims as they do believe in concepts of abrogation.
Narrated Abu Hurayrah:
The Prophet (saw) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (as). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him.
Look at this part of the hadith: Here is the specific clause from the hadith that addresses this:
“وَيُهْلِكُ اللَّهُ فِي زَمَانِهِ الْمِلَلَ كُلَّهَا إِلاَّ الإِسْلاَمَ” “And Allah will cause all other religions to perish during his time except Islam.”
The Arabic word used here is “الْمِلَلَ” (al-milal), which means “all creeds, faiths, or religious communities.” This is a sweeping, all-encompassing term that explicitly includes Christianity and Judaism alongside every other religion.
Yet what did Allah (swt) says?
“And the Jews say, “The hand of Allah is chained.” Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His hands are extended; He spends however He wills. And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. And We have cast among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. ” (Qur’an 5:64)
“And from those who say, “We are Christians” We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 5:14)
The above hadith says: and abolish jizyah
This goes against the Qur’an.
“There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in exceeding the limits and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.” (Qur’an 2:256)
There are three interpretations of ”abolish Jizya”
The first is more believable and less of an interpretation. It is the view that outright people will be asked to become a Muslim and if they refuse they will be killed.
The second one is that it actually means he will enforce the Jizya. Yet that interpretation seems strange considering the very same hadith claims that Judaism and Christianity will cease to exist as faiths.
The last interpretation is that their is such an abundance of wealth that the Jizya need to be enforced. Yet, the amount of wealth has nothing to do with rather or not a Jizya is enforced as per the Qur’an.
In fact, many Muslims have tried a half and half approach to this hadith. What do we mean by this? They offer interpretations of parts of it but others are to be taken literal. You can see that in the video we are posting here:
Listen to the brief exegesis of the hadith about Jesus returning breaking the cross, killing pigs and abolishing the Jizya with Dr. Abdullah bin Hamid Ali in his discussion with Paul Williams of Blogging Theology.
Now you listen to this and come up with your own conclusions.
Prima-Qur’an comments: *Note* the above hadith states: ”He summons people to accept wealth, not even one would do so.”
Please compare this with another hadith:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “The Hour will not be established until the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you as a just ruler, he will break the cross, kill the pigs, and abolish the Jizya tax. Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it (as charitable gifts).
There is another religion that broke away from Sunni Muslims they too believe in a Prophet after Muhammed (saw). Also, like the Sunni they use often bizarre and fanciful interpretations of the hadith to get themselves out of embarrassing situations. So because this particular religion claims that Jesus (as) has already came back how on earth do we understand “Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it.”
So, sincere apologies for the hundreds of millions of people living in abject poverty in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Ghana, the United States, and other places you will have to settle for: “and he will spread insightful pearls through his teachings and writings, so much so that no one will accept them.”
What slippery evasion! What an absolute abandonment of the text!
Well, one of the things the so called “Khilafa” of this religion does is that he himself pays property taxes to the British government for a house he has there! Can any Muslim imagine Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman or Ali paying property taxes to a Non Muslim polity?
So back to the point. They interpret or abandon the text in the same way that many Sunni Muslims do as well.
“abolish Jizya” itself goes against the idea of Jesus (as) coming back. The very idea of Jesus (as) abolishing the Jizya and giving people the choice of the sword or Islam in and of itself refutes the idea of him coming back and uniting the Jews and Christians upon haqq (truth).
Why? The very presence of Jesus (as) should be enough to convince the Jews and Christians that Jesus (as) is who the Muslims say he is. The fact he abolishes the jizya and gives them the choice of Islam or the sword belies that point.
Think about it like this. Your mother is put in a room with four other women and you are told you need to recognize your mother from a group of women as they come out of a room. Your mother is the 4th woman out of the room and you immediately recognize her. However, would it not be strange that your mother comes to you with a sword and presses the issue? “Accept that I am your mother or die.”
If this is some attempt to fulfil some misguided understanding of the verse: “Every one of the People of the Book will definitely believe in him before his death.” (Qur’an 4:159) it is not necessary for Jesus (as) to come back.
In fact, imposing such an ultimatum (Islam or death) could be done by the so called “Mahdi” or even the Amir of the Muslims. That is if they wanted to go against the Qur’an 2:256 as quoted above.
Everyone will all believe in Islam?
Another Sahih hadith about the end of times that contradict flatly contradict the Qur’an.
Narrated Abu Huraira:
“Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “The Hour will not be established (1) till two big groups fight each other whereupon there will be a great number of casualties on both sides and they will be following one and the same religious doctrine, (2) till about thirty Dajjals (liars) appear, and each one of them will claim that he is Allah’s Messenger (saw), (3) till the religious knowledge is taken away (by the death of Religious scholars) (4) earthquakes will increase in number (5) time will pass quickly, (6) afflictions will appear, (7) Al-Harj, (i.e., killing) will increase, (8) till wealth will be in abundance —- so abundant that a wealthy person will worry lest nobody should accept his Zakat, and whenever he will present it to someone, that person (to whom it will be offered) will say, ‘I am not in need of it, (9) till the people compete with one another in constructing high buildings, (10) till a man when passing by a grave of someone will say, ‘Would that I were in his place (11) and till the sun rises from the West. So when the sun will rise and the people will see it (rising from the West) they will all believe (embrace Islam)but that will be the time when: (As Allah said,) ‘No good will it do to a soul to believe then, if it believed not before, nor earned good (by deeds of righteousness) through its Faith.’ (Qur’an 6.158) And the Hour will be established while two men spreading a garment in front of them but they will not be able to sell it, nor fold it up; and the Hour will be established when a man has milked his she-camel and has taken away the milk but he will not be able to drink it; and the Hour will be established before a man repairing a tank (for his livestock) is able to water (his animals) in it; and the Hour will be established when a person has raised a morsel (of food) to his mouth but will not be able to eat it.”
There will never come a time in the future when the Jews as a whole will enter Islam in mass.
“We have stirred among them hostility and hatred until the Day of Judgment.” (Qur’an 5:64)
” So We caused among them (Christians) animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” (Qur’an 5:14)
The Jews and Christians remain divided until the day of judgement/resurrection.
What is the point of Jews and Christians embracing Islam if it doesn’t benefit them?
Read the above hadith again.
“but that will be the time when: (As Allah said,) ‘No good will it do to a soul to believe then, if it believed not before, nor earned good (by deeds of righteousness) through its Faith.” (Qur’an 6.158)
“On the Day your Lord’s signs arrive, belief will not benefit those who did not believe earlier or those who did no good through their faith.1 Say, “Keep waiting! We too are waiting.” (Qur’an 6:158)
If everyone embraces Islam where do all the evil wicked people come from after realizing the haqq (truth)?
Also, even if all the people from the Earth did embrace Islam after very obvious signs and a continuation of very obvious signs the return of Jesus narrative leaves us with something very anticlimactic; namely, that huge swaths of Muslims totally apostate from Islam and become the worst of people and the last on the face of the Earth!
“and at that time Allah would send a pleasant wind which would soothe (people) even under their armpits, and would take the life of every Muslim and only the wicked would survive who would commit adultery like donkeys and the Last Hour would come to them.”
The return of Jesus (as) doesn’t even benefit the Ahl Kitab!
As we have already mentioned.
Narrated Abu Hurairah:
That the Prophet (saw) said: “There are three, for which when they appear, a soul will not benefit by its faith, if it did not believe before the Signs: Ad-Dajjal, the Beast, and the rising of the sun from its setting place” – or “from the west.”
So those converts (forced or not) get nada, zip, zilch, nothing. They get absolutely jack!
Imagine, if someone had access to a tome that they possessed that said rather or not you accept what they propose you still perish.
Couldn’t that person who had access to that information reject your proposal on the grounds that they didn’t want to be disingenuous?
Remember that according to the hadith that Jesus (as) comes after the Dajjal has appeared.
Al-nawwas b. Sim’an al-Kilabi said:
The Messenger of Allah (saw) mentioned the Dajjal (Antichrist) saying: If he comes forth while I am among you I shall be the one who will dispute with him on your behalf, but if he comes forth when I am not among you, a man must dispute on his own behalf, and Allah will take my place in looking after every Muslim. Those of you who live up to his time should recite over him the opening verses of Surat al – Kahf, for they are your protection from his trial. We asked: How long will he remain on the earth ? He replied : Forty days, one like a year, one like a month, one like a week, and rest of his days like yours. We asked : Messenger of Allah, will one day’s prayer suffice us in this day which will be like a year ? He replied : No, you must make an estimate of its extent. Then Jesus son of Marry will descend at the white minaret to the east of Damascus. He will then catch him up at the date of Ludd and kill him.
“Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “The Hour will not be established (1) till two big groups fight each other whereupon there will be a great number of casualties on both sides and they will be following one and the same religious doctrine, (2) till about thirty Dajjals (liars) appear, and each one of them will claim that he is Allah’s Messenger (saw), (3) till the religious knowledge is taken away (by the death of Religious scholars) (4) earthquakes will increase in number (5) time will pass quickly, (6) afflictions will appear, (7) Al-Harj, (i.e., killing) will increase, (8) till wealth will be in abundance —- so abundant that a wealthy person will worry lest nobody should accept his Zakat, and whenever he will present it to someone, that person (to whom it will be offered) will say, ‘I am not in need of it, (9) till the people compete with one another in constructing high buildings, (10) till a man when passing by a grave of someone will say, ‘Would that I were in his place (11) and till the sun rises from the West. So when the sun will rise and the people will see it (rising from the West) they will all believe (embrace Islam) but that will be the time when: (As Allah said,) ‘No good will it do to a soul to believe then, if it believed not before, nor earned good (by deeds of righteousness) through its Faith.’ (Qur’an 6.158) And the Hour will be established while two men spreading a garment in front of them but they will not be able to sell it, nor fold it up; and the Hour will be established when a man has milked his she-camel and has taken away the milk but he will not be able to drink it; and the Hour will be established before a man repairing a tank (for his livestock) is able to water (his animals) in it; and the Hour will be established when a person has raised a morsel (of food) to his mouth but will not be able to eat it.”
Who actually leads the people in prayer when Jesus (as) descends? Is it Jesus (as) or someone else?
Jabir b. ‘Abdullah reported:
I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: A section of my people will not cease fighting for the Truth and will prevail till the Day of Resurrection. He said: Jesus son of Mary would then descend and their (Muslims’) commander would invite him to come and lead them in prayer, but he would say: No, some amongst you are commanders over some (amongst you). This is the honour from Allah for this Ummah.
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying:
The Last Hour would not come until the Romans would land at al-A’maq or in Dabiq. An army consisting of the best (soldiers) of the people of the earth at that time will come from Medina (to counteract them). When they will arrange themselves in ranks, the Romans would say: Do not stand between us and those (Muslims) who took prisoners from amongst us. Let us fight with them; and the Muslims would say: Nay, by Allah, we would never get aside from you and from our brethren that you may fight them. They will then fight and a third (part) of the army would run away, whom Allah will never forgive. A third (part of the army) which would be constituted of excellent martyrs in Allah’s eye, would be killed and the third who would never be put to trial would win and they would be conquerors of Constantinople. And as they would be busy in distributing the spoils of war (amongst themselves) after hanging their swords by the olive trees, the Satan would cry: The Dajjal has taken your place among your family. They would then come out, but it would be of no avail. And when they would come to Syria, he would come out while they would be still preparing themselves for battle drawing up the ranks. Certainly, the time of prayer shall come and then Jesus (peace be upon him) son of Mary would descend and would lead them. When the enemy of Allah would see him, it would (disappear) just as the salt dissolves itself in water and if he (Jesus) were not to confront them at all, even then it would dissolve completely, but Allah would kill them by his hand and he would show them their blood on his lance (the lance of Jesus Christ).
Jesus (as) from the children of Israel totally eclipses the Mahdi -the descendant of the Prophet (saw).
Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu’minin:
The Prophet (saw) said: The Mahdi will be of my family, of the descendants of Fatimah. Abdullah ibn Ja’far said: I heard AbulMalih praising Ali ibn Nufayl and describing his good qualities.
When one compares what Jesus (as) is going to accomplish as compared/contrasted to what a Syed, a descendant of the Prophet (saw) is supposed to accomplish the Mahdi’s resume is a bit thin. Jesus (as) a descendant of Isaac (as) absolutely outshines, outclasses, and outperforms the Mahdi a descendant of Ishmael (as).
Seriously do yourself a favour. Go and read those two handfuls of hadith that mention the Mahdi. Look at those that specifically mention “Mahdi” not allusions, or interpretations but the very word “Mahdi”. Go and look at them. That is right go and take a look. Don’t go and read some lengthy commentaries about things he is suppose to do that are not explicitly stated in the hadith but read the hadith themselves. It is certainly underwhelming.
According Jesus (as). Whom has been alive for 2000+ years descends upon the Earth and kills the Dajjal, he informs people of their ranks in paradise, he rules as a just ruler, he fights the Gog and Magog and performs supplication that sends plagues upon them (gog and magog) and vanquishes them. He converts all the Jews and Christians to Islam, He lives among the Muslims for 40 years and gets married. Mahdi is basically background noise at this point.
Are Jesus (Isa) and this “Mahdi” one and the same or are they two different individuals?
It was narrated from Anas bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Adhering to religion will only become harder and worldly affairs will only become more difficult, and people will only become more stingy, and the Hour will only come upon the worst of people, and the only Mahdi (after Muhammed (saw)) is Isa bin Maryam.”
“Even if this hadeeth were saheeh – but it is not saheeh – the meaning would be that there is no one who is perfectly guided (mahdi) or protected from sin and error except Isa ibn Maryam (peace be upon him). This was stated by al-Qurtubi, Ibn al-Qayyim and Ibn Katheer. ”
Now earlier we mentioned this other religion that broke away from Islam and believes that Jesus (as) has already come and he was born in India. They want their cake and eat it to. Thus, they take a rather straight forward hadith speaking highly of the faith among future Muslims, from among the Persians ,they blatantly ignore the text of the Qur’an, as well as the hadith itself.
Narrated Abu Hurairah:
“We were with the Messenger of Allah (saw) when Surat Al-Jumu’ah was revealed, so he recited it until he reached: ‘And others among them who have not yet joined them (62:3).’ A man said to him: ‘O Messenger of Allah! Who are these people who have not yet joined us?’ But he did not say anything to him.” He said: “Salman Al-Farisi was among us.” He said: “So the Messenger of Allah (saw) placed his hand upon Salman and said: ‘By the One Whose Hand is my soul! If faith were on Pleiades then men among these people would reach it.'”
Even though in that particular text of the Qur’an 62:3 nor in the above hadith do we have the word “Mahdi” or “Messiah” or “Jesus” at all. Yet some people will be desperate to try to prove the unprovable.
Even if the idea of a coming Mahdi was true (which it is not) the hadith declare that the Mahdi will be a descendant of the Blessed Messenger (saw). This is proven through well kept and documented lineages and not through private dreams. Some are absolutely desperate.
Dajjal the biggest fitna? Hardly!
‘Imran bin Hussain reported:
“I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) saying, “Between time of the creation of Adam and the Resurrection Day, there is nothing greater than the mischief of Dajjal (the Antichrist).”
“No one asked the Messenger of Allah (saw) more about Dajjal than I asked him. He said to me, “He will not harm you.” I said: “O Messenger of Allah, it is reported that he will have with him a mountain of bread and a river full of water.” Thereupon he said, “He (Dajjal) is far too worthless and insignificant near Allah (to let him deceive the believers).“
“The Messenger of Allah (saw) came out to us when we were discussing Dajjal (False Christ) and said: ‘Shall I not tell you of that which I fear more for you than Dajjal?’ We said: ‘Yes.’ He said: ‘Hidden polytheism, when a man stands to pray and makes it look good because he sees a man looking at him.’”
“The Messenger of Allah (saw) mentioned Dajjal, one morning, as something despised but also alarming, until we thought that he was in the stand of date-palm trees. When we came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) in the evening, he saw that (fear) in us, and said: ‘What is the matter with you?’ We said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, you mentioned Dajjal this morning, and you spoke of him as something despised but also alarming, until we thought that he was in the stand of date-palm trees.’ He said: ‘There are things that I fear more for you than the Dajjal. If he appears while I am among you, I will contend with him on your behalf, and if he appears when I am not among you, then each man must fend for himself, and Allah will take care of every Muslim on my behalf.”
“The Messenger of Allah (saw) mentioned the Dajjal (Antichrist) saying: If he comes forth while I am among you I shall be the one who will dispute with him on your behalf, but if he comes forth when I am not among you, a man must dispute on his own behalf, and Allah will take my place in looking after every Muslim. Those of you who live up to his time should recite over him the opening verses of Surat al – Kahf, for they are your protection from his trial. We asked: How long will he remain on the earth ? He replied : Forty days, one like a year, one like a month, one like a week, and rest of his days like yours. We asked : Messenger of Allah, will one day’s prayer suffice us in this day which will be like a year ? He replied : No, you must make an estimate of its extent. Then Jesus son of Marry will descend at the white minaret to the east of Damascus. He will then catch him up at the date of Ludd and kill him.”
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying:
“And as they would be busy in distributing the spoils of war (amongst themselves) after hanging their swords by the olive trees, the Satan would cry: The Messiah has taken your place among your family. They would then come out, but it would be of no avail. And when they would come to Syria, he would come out while they would be still preparing themselves for battle drawing up the ranks. Certainly, the time of prayer shall come and then Jesus (peace be upon him) son of Mary would descend and would lead them. When the enemy of Allah would see him, it would (disappear) just as the salt dissolves itself in water and if he (Jesus) were not to confront them at all, even then it would dissolve completely, but Allah would kill them by his hand and he would show them their blood on his lance (the lance of Jesus Christ).”
Prima-Qur’an comments: This hadith is both interesting and strange. It mentions that even if Jesus (as) did not kill the false Messiah even then he would dissolve like salt in water. That Allah (swt) would kill this Dajjal by his lance. Though in brackets above it says (the lance of Jesus Christ)
Jesus (as) confronts the Dajjal and how is Gog and Magog dispatched?
It was narrated that ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud said:
“On the night on which the Messenger of Allah (saw) was taken on the Night Journey (Isra’), he met Ibrahim, Musa and ‘Eisa, and they discussed the Hour. They started with Ibrahim, and asked him about it, but he did not have any knowledge of it. Then they asked Musa, and he did not have any knowledge of it. Then they asked ‘Eisa bin Maryam, and he said: ‘I have been assigned to some tasks before it happens.’ As for as when it will take place, no one knows that except Allah. Then he mentioned Dajjal and said: ‘I will descend and kill him, then the people will return to their own lands and will be confronted with Gog and Magog people, who will: “swoop down from every mound.”[21:96] They will not pass by any water but they will drink it, (and they will not pass) by anything but they will spoil it. They (the people) will beseech Allah, and I will pray to Allah to kill them. The earth will be filled with their stench and (the people) will beseech Allah and I will pray to Allah, then the sky will send down rain that will carry them and throw them in the sea. Then the mountains will turn to dust and the earth will be stretched out like a hide. I have been promised that when that happens, the Hour will come upon the people, like a pregnant woman whose family does not know when she will suddenly give birth.'” (One of the narrators) ‘Awwam said: “Confirmation of that is found in the Book of Allah, where Allah says: “Until, when Gog and Magog people are let loose (from their barrier), and they swoop down from every mound (21:96).”
So while he is doing that, ‘Eisa bin Mariam, peace be upon him, will descend in eastern Damascus at the white minaret, between two Mahrud, with his hands on the wings of two angels. When he lowers his head, drops fall, and when raises it, gems like pearls drop from him.’ He said: ‘His (the Dajjal’s) breath does not reach anyone but he dies, and his breath reaches as far as his sight.‘ He said: ‘So he pursues him(the Dajjal) and he catches up with him at the gate of Ludd where he kills him.’ He said: ‘So he remains there as long as Allah wills.’ He said: ‘Then Allah reveals to him: “Take my slaves to At-Tur, for I have sent down some creatures of Mine which no one shall be able to kill.'” He said: ‘Allah dispatches Ya’juj and Ma’juj, and they are as Allah said: They swoop down from every mount.’ “He said: ‘The first of them pass by the lake of Tiberias, drinking what is in it. Then the last of them pass by it saying: “There was water here at one time.” They travel until they reach a mountain at Bait Al-Maqdis. They will say: “We have killed whoever was in the earth. Come! Let us kill whoever is in the skies.” They will shoot their arrows into the Heavens, so Allah will return their arrows to them red with blood. Eisa bin Mariam and his Companions be surrounded, until the head of a bull on that day would be better to them than a hundred Dinar to one of you today.’ “He (s.a.w) said: “Eisa will beseech Allah, as will his companions.’ He said: ‘So Allah will send An-Naghaf down upon their necks. In the morning they will find that they have all died like the death of a single soul.’ He said: ” ‘Eisa and his companions will come down, and no spot nor hand-span can be found, except that it is filled with their stench, decay and blood. So ‘Eisa will beseech Allah, as will his companions.’ So Allah will send upon them birds like the necks of Bukht(milch)camels.’ They will carry them off and cast them into an abyss.
While they are like that, Allah will send ‘Eisa bin Maryam, who will come down at the white minaret in the east of Damascus, wearing two Mahrud[garment dyed with Wars and then Saffron], resting his hands on the wings of two angels. When he lowers his head, beads of perspiration will fall from it. Every disbeliever who smells the fragrance of his breath will die, and his breath will reach as far as his eye can see. Then he will set out and catch up with him (the Dajjal) at the gate of Ludd, and will kill him. Then the Prophet of Allah ‘Eisa will come to some people whom Allah has protected, and he will wipe their faces and tell them of their status in Paradise. While they are like that, Allah will reveal to him: “O ‘Eisa, I have brought forth some of My slaves whom no one will be able to kill, so take My slaves to Tur in safety.” Then Gog and Magog will emerge and they will, as Allah describes, “swoop down from every mound.”[21:96] The first of them will pass by lake Tiberias and drink from it, then the last of them will pass by it and will say: “There was water here once.” The Prophet of Allah, ‘Eisa and his companions will be besieged there until the head of an ox would be dearer to any one of them than one hundred Dinar are to any one of you today. Then, the Prophet of Allah, ‘Eisa and his companions will supplicate Allah. Then Allah will send a worm in their necks and the next morning they will all die as one. The Prophet of Allah ‘Eisa and his companions will come down and they will not find even the space of a hand span that is free of their stink, stench and blood. They will pray to Allah, and He will send birds with necks like the necks of Bactrian camels, which will pick them up and throw them wherever Allah wills.
Prima-Qur’an comments: It is very clear that this great fitna or trial of this so called “Dajjal” is treated by Jesus (as) as nothing more than an after thought. Sure there are other hadith that have vague mention of him having fire and water and doing this or that. Yet, when all is said and done Jesus (as) just kills him, the end.
The hadith transmitters are confused as to who has the ability to kill people with their breath
“Every disbeliever who smells the fragrance of his breath will die, and his breath will reach as far as his eye can see.” -The Breath of Jesus (as)
“ He said: ‘His (the Dajjal’s) breath does not reach anyone but he dies, and his breath reaches as far as his sight.“-The Breath of the Dajjal
Who/What dispatches Juj (Gog) and Majuj(Magog) and where are they dispatched to?
(Where does the Juj (Gog) and Majuj (Magog) end up?)
“They will pray to Allah, and He will send birds with necks like the necks of Bactrian camels, which will pick them up and throw them wherever Allah wills.”
“So Allah will send upon them birds like the necks of Bukht(milch)camels.’ They will carry them off and cast them into an abyss.”
“The earth will be filled with their stench and (the people) will beseech Allah and I will pray to Allah, then the sky will send down rain that will carry them and throw them in the sea.”
The very strange thing about these reports is that Jesus (as) sets out to kill the Dajjal seemingly of his own strength. Yet, when it comes to Gog (Juj) and Magog (Majuj) Jesus (as) needs to supplicate to Allah (swt) for divine intervention. It is odd given that the Dajjal is a foe we are told slays a man/child and brings him back to life.
Was the Prophet (saw) given a false dream in regards to Jesus (as) and the Dajjal in Mecca?
Narrated `Abdullah:
The Prophet (saw) mentioned the Masih Ad-Dajjal in front of the people saying, Allah is not one-eyed while Masih Ad-Dajjal is blind in the right eye and his eye looks like a bulging out grape. While sleeping near the Ka`ba last night, I saw in my dream a man of brown color the best one can see amongst brown color and his hair was long that it fell between his shoulders. His hair was lank and water was dribbling from his head and he was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men while circumambulating the Ka`ba. I asked, ‘Who is this?’ They replied, ‘This is Jesus, son of Mary.’ Behind him I saw a man who had very curly hair and was blind in the right eye, resembling Ibn Qatan (i.e. an infidel) in appearance. He was placing his hands on the shoulders of a person while performing Tawaf around the Ka`ba. I asked, ‘Who is this? ‘They replied, ‘The Masih, Ad-Dajjal.‘ “
Allah’s Messenger (saw) said. “While I was sleeping, I saw myself (in a dream) performing Tawaf around the Ka`ba. Behold, I saw a reddish-white man with lank hair, and water was dropping from his head. I asked, “Who is this?’ They replied, ‘The son of Mary.’Then I turned my face to see another man with a huge body, red complexion and curly hair and blind in one eye. His eye looked like a protruding out grape. They said (to me), He is Ad-Dajjal.” The Prophet (saw) added, “The man he resembled most is Ibn Qatan, a man from the tribe of Khuza`a. “
The Prophet (saw) said, “Ad-Dajjal will come to Medina and find the angels guarding it. So Allah willing, neither Ad-Dajjal, nor plague will be able to come near it.”
An-Nawwas b. Sam`an reported that Allah’s Messenger (saw) made a mention of the Dajjal one day in the morning.
He (Dajjal) would be a young man with twisted, contracted hair, and a blind eye. I compare him to `Abd-ul-`Uzza b. Qatan. He who amongst you would survive to see him should recite over him the opening verses of Sura Kahf (18). He would appear on the way between Syria and Iraq and would spread mischief right and left.
Does he come from the same place as Mahdi and his armies -aka-Khorasan?
It was narrated that Abu Bakr Siddiq said:
“The Messenger of Allah (saw) told us: ‘Dajjal will emerge in a land in the east called Khorasan, and will be followed by people with faces like hammered shields.'”
Other issues surrounding Gog & Magog (Juj & Majuj)
It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Gog and Magog people dig every day until, when they can almost see the rays of the sun, the one in charge of them says: “Go back and we will dig it tomorrow.” Then Allah puts it back, stronger than it was before. (This will continue) until, when their time has come, and Allah wants to send them against the people, they will dig until they can almost see the rays of the sun, then the one who is in charge of them will say: “Go back, and we will dig it tomorrow if Allah wills.’ So they will say: “If Allah wills.” Then they will come back to it and it will be as they left it. So they will dig and will come out to the people, and they will drink all the water. The people will fortify themselves against them in their fortresses. They will shoot their arrows towards the sky and they will come back with blood on them, and they will say: “We have defeated the people of earth and dominated the people of heaven.” Then Allah will send a worm in the napes of their necks and will kill them thereby.'” The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, the beasts of the earth will grow fat on their flesh.”
“Until he reached ˹a pass˺ between two mountains. He found in front of them a people (qawman) who could hardly understand ˹his˺ language.” (Qur’an 18:93)
“They pleaded, “O Ⱬul-Qarnain! Surely Gog and Magog are spreading corruption throughout the land. Should we pay you tribute, provided that you build a wall between us and them?”(Qur’an 18:94)
“He said: “(The power) in which my Lord has established me is better (than tribute): Help me therefore with strength (and labour): I will erect a strong barrier between you and them.” (Qur’an 18:95)
The Qur’an is referencing the Gog and Magog a qawm (people) that could be stopped by a well fortified barrier (at least for a time). There is nothing extra-ordinary or mythical assigned to these Gog and Magog people. Now the hadith comes along and assigns to the Gog and Magog people such ferocious power that the dajjal is little more of an afterthought. Now the majority of Muslims believe that these Gog and Magog people are some where IN the earth. Yet, we do not have any records of people coming out from the Earth and laying seize to anyone in history. Nor, do we have any records of a people being sealed up. Unless it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the saddan (barrier) was erected over a passage that led dwellings IN the earth rather than a saddan (barrier) that stopped/halted passage from one area to the other OVER the earth; than this hadith remains problematic.
One well known Sunni Muslim scholar in the United States went so far as to interpret Gog (Juj) and Magog (Majuj) as zombies. However, after further reflection this is what his position seems to be now.
The Dajjal comes after Muslims conquer constantinople.
“Narrated Mu’adh ibn Jabal:
“The Prophet (saw) said: The flourishing state of Jerusalem will be when Yathrib is in ruins, the ruined state of Yathrib will be when the great war comes, the outbreak of the great war will be at the conquest of Constantinople and the conquest of Constantinople when the Dajjal (Antichrist) comes forth. He (the Prophet) struck his thigh or his shoulder with his hand and said: This is as true as you are here or as you are sitting (meaning Mu’adh ibn Jabal).”
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying:
The Last Hour would not come until the Romans would land at al-A’maq or in Dabiq. An army consisting of the best (soldiers) of the people of the earth at that time will come from Medina (to counteract them). When they will arrange themselves in ranks, the Romans would say: Do not stand between us and those (Muslims) who took prisoners from amongst us. Let us fight with them; and the Muslims would say: Nay, by Allah, we would never get aside from you and from our brethren that you may fight them. They will then fight and a third (part) of the army would run away, whom Allah will never forgive. A third (part of the army) which would be constituted of excellent martyrs in Allah’s eye, would be killed and the third who would never be put to trial would win and they would be conquerors of Constantinople. And as they would be busy in distributing the spoils of war (amongst themselves) after hanging their swords by the olive trees, the Satan would cry: The Dajjal has taken your place among your family. They would then come out, but it would be of no avail. And when they would come to Syria, he would come out while they would be still preparing themselves for battle drawing up the ranks. Certainly, the time of prayer shall come and then Jesus (peace be upon him) son of Mary would descend and would lead them. When the enemy of Allah would see him, it would (disappear) just as the salt dissolves itself in water and if he (Jesus) were not to confront them at all, even then it would dissolve completely, but Allah would kill them by his hand and he would show them their blood on his lance (the lance of Jesus Christ).
Constantinople was conquered in 1453 CE, and we are now in 2026, which is about six centuries later. Why has Jesus (as) not descended, and why has the Dajjal not appeared, six centuries after the conquest of Constantinople?
Those who cling to this hadith after the conquest of Constantinople say: “No, because Constantinople will return to the Christians (Crusaders) and then be conquered again, and then Jesus will come.”
CONCLUSION: “Do not cloak Truth with falsehood nor hide the Truth while you realize it.” (Qur’an 2:42)
Many of you may walk away with the conclusion that those of us in the Ibadi school do not believe any signs of the day of judgement or end of times and nothing can be further from the truth. The Qur’an makes mention of signs. Just because we find problematic the idea of the coming of a Mahdi, or Jesus (as), it does not mean we discount all the information that has been transmitted. Such as people competing to build high buildings, more death and dishonesty. Parents becoming the slaves of their children. Earthquakes and more. Or that we do not make du’a seeking protection any and all types of Dajjals-which in reality means deceivers and liars. The biggest Dajjal for us is one who lies about religious truth.
The idea of Jesus (as) coming back is highly problematic even from the hadith that are given in this article. We can see from hadith that:
“And if he (Jesus) were not to confront them at all, even then it would dissolve completely.” Thus, Jesus(as) is not a necessity to fight some entity known as “Dajjal” We find that Jesus (as) is not even necessary to convert the Jews and Christians to Islam via abolishment of the Jizya. It is something anyone could do (provided they wanted to violate the teachings of the Qur’an.) We find out that it doesn’t even matter if Jesus (as) manages to convert the Jews and Christians as their faith will be for nothing. So you have to ask yourself what really is the reason/purpose for Jesus (as) to come again?
If people say it is to give the Jews and Christians yaqin (certainty) again it is soo problematic from so many angles.
1. As mentioned their faith amounts to nothing anyway as it is already too late.
2. Many Jews and Christians have been convinced of the veracity of Islam and what Allah (swt) informed us about the truth concerning Jesus (as) without Jesus (as) being present. What is deficient about the Qur’an and the Sunnah that Jesus (as) provides?
3. What is so special about that group of Christians/Jews that they get to recognize Jesus (as) -which benefits them nothing in the end as opposed to the Christians/Jews who have lived for the last 2000 plus years?!
So, dear truth seekers all these hadiths, as you have seen, are highly contradictory, and they are ahad narrations that cannot be used in matters of creed. Of course, we should not be discussing this, but when Muslims rely on and become passive, waiting for the return of the Messiah, not moving a finger, not changing evil, not rebelling against injustice, waiting for the Messiah then this is the greatest tragedy.
The return of the Messiah among the Jews and among the fundamentalist Christians produced Israel for them, while our belief in the return of Messiah produced backwardness, injustice, poverty, and ignorance for us. All nations exploit us and our resources, while we remain waiting for the savior the Messiah who will come and save us — and he will never come. And peace be upon you.
In the end Allah (swt) knows the truth about such matters and he will judge between us where in we differ. We ask Allah (swt) to guide us to that which is beloved to Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) empower us to stand with our brothers in Palestine and all suffering Muslims world wide in Somalia, Chad, Sudan, Libya, Rohingya in Myanmar, the Uigurs in China, the increasing hostility towards the believers in India.
We have scholars telling us to just wait for the Messiah. They tell us that Imamate did not stop the conquest of Andalusia. They tell us that Imamate did not stop the Mongol destruction of Baghdad. While all this is true it does not mean that Muslims do not have an obligation to restore the Imamate.
May Allah (swt) grant us all strong eman and resolute determination.
“And each one hath a goal toward which he turns; so contend with one another in good works. Wheresoever you may be, Allah will bring you all together. Lo! Allah is Able to do all things.” (Qur’an 2:148)
“Allah will judge between you on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which you used to differ.” (Qur’an 22:69)
“So after the truth, what else can there be, save error? How then are you turned away?” –(Qur’an 10:32).
﷽
Insh’Allah the following section in the future will be found under the section above: Ahl Al-Qibla/Ahl Al-Khilaf.
Those of you who are used to seeing these people all over the internet and present on every social media platform available may come to the conclusion that their dawah is dominant. However, those of you who have access to the Arabic language, speak, read and write it will see that in the Arabic sphere these people (Wahhabis and Madkhalis) get absolutely pummelled by the Ibadi school. You will almost pity them (Wahhabis & Madkhalis). Though one should pity them and pray for their deliverance from the corruption and misguidance that they are upon.
The success of those who call themselves Salafi, Athari or those upon the Salafi Manhaj lies primarily in their ability into duping the masses to think that what they are upon is the view of the first three generation of Muslims.
They also feign the idea of taking the text by what they claim is the apparent meaning of a particular text. In fact, they apply ta’wil (interpretation) as do their opponents. Their opponents among Sunni Muslims (The Ash’ari & Maturidi) make the colossal mistake by granting a ‘default meaning’ to said words. Then turn around and say that they apply taʾwīl (interpretation). Whereas we (The Ibadi)say that if a word has a range of meanings and the context determines the meaning, then it becomes dishonest to claim the word can only have one possible meaning. The context based upon use of the Arabic language itself, and the culture that the revelation was revealed in.
Understand that not everyone who goes by the title of Salafi, Athari is adversarial or antagonistic to the Ibadi school. Many of them we can cooperate with on many issues of concern to our communities and respective countries that we live in. Cooperation is always a good thing for the Muslim Ummah.
The inconsistency and flawed theology can readily be seen by the inconsistency that it deploys. Examples abound but the following should suffice:
Demanding a default location for Allah (swt). Where neither the Qur’an or Sunnah give a ‘default’ location for Allah (swt). If one was to follow their literalist approach the Qur’an and Sunnah ascribe to Allah (swt) many locations. The Muslims believe that Allah exist without a place.
Using kalaam to speculate that Allah (swt) has two real eyes when we have no firm text on the matter.
The inconsistency in denying a gender for Allah (swt) when the apparent text clearly states: “There is nothing like Him, for He is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11) They say the language determines the characteristic without realizing that Allah (swt) is the one that chose the rules for the language to begin with. The Muslims believe Allah has no gender.
Their bidʿah disclaimer when referencing what they claim are attributes of Allah (swt) with their bid’ah disclaimer “in a way that befits his majesty” as if there would be anything un-majestic about Allah (swt) having this or that to begin with!
The inconsistency in telling the people to believe in the attributes of Allah (swt) without asking ‘how’ and then the same people saying that the attributes of Allah (swt), are neither identical to the essence of Allah and yet not other than Allah! A deep dive into kalaam to speculate about the Creator what they have no evidence from the Qur’an or Sunnah.
The inconsistency in affirming Allah as the All-Hearing(Qur’an 42:11) without having to have ears; while simultaneously demanding that if Allah exist it must be in a place.
Allah (swt) himself gave mankind the faculty of reasoning and the ability to understand majaaz (metaphor) when He (swt) says:
so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection (Refuge), I will protect him; (i.e. give him My Refuge) and I do not hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take the soul of the believer, for he hates death, and I hate to disappoint him.”
But these people would have us to believe that the text is taken by the apparent and Allah (swt) does in some way becomes our hearing, our sight, our hand and our leg!
We have exposed the corruption in their misguided mis-understanding of the primary and secondary sources here:
Since they call us Ibadi as “Khawarij” let us see what Ibn Taymiyya has to say about the so called “Khawarij”.
“No one among the people who follow their desire, the more truthful and more just than the Khawarij. They do not intend to invent lies, indeed they are very famous for truthfulness to the extent that it has been said that the traditions narrated by them are the most authentic of all.”
Source: (Ibn Taymiyya Minhaj Al Sunnah Vol 3. p 3. Dr. Al-Sib’i Al-Sunna Wal Makanatuha Fii Al-Tashrii Al-Islami p. 99-101)
“No one of them has ever been known for lying.” Source: (Ibn Taymiyyah Al Tafsiru Al Kabir Vol. 1, p. 124)
“Their religion is more correct because they do not say lies.” Source: (Ibn Taymiyya Mukhtasar Minhaji Al-Sunna Vol.2, p. 197)
“The Khawarij never says lies, indeed they are more truthful braver and more promise-keeping then the (Shi’ia)” Source: (Ibid Vol. 1 p. 393)
“The Khawarij are truthful, so their accounts are among the most correct ones.” Source: (Ibn Taymiyyah Al Furqan p. 227)
“And what indicates that the Companions did not consider the Khawarij to be disbelievers is that they used to pray behind them. Abdullah ibn Umar -RA- and others[companions] used to pray behind Najda al-Haruri. They also used to engage in debates with them, as the Muslim would debate with a Muslim, as Abdullah ibn Abbas debated with Najda al-Haruri when he was sent to him to ask about certain issues, and his hadith is in Al-Bukhari. Likewise, Nafi’ ibn Al-Azraq debated on famous issues. Nafi’ used to debate on matters in the Quran, as any two Muslims would debate among themselves”
Source: (The Path of the Prophetic Sunnah-In Refutation of the Shiite Qadariyyah Doctrine By Ibn Taymiyya Abu Al Abbas Taqi al Din Ahmad ibn Abd al-Halim.-Edited by Dr. Muhammed Rashad Salim Volume 5)
This entry will be split into three sections:
Section one: This will be aimed at refuting the lies, deception and outright propaganda that they aim at Ahl al-Haqq wal-l istiqama (The Ibadi school).
Section two: This will be the Ibadi school exposing the bizarre beliefs and strange views of those who call themselves: Salafi, Athari etc..
Section three: Those who may loosely identify as Salafi, Athari etc that have had and do have cordial relations with our school. Because they simply see us as Muslims. Muslims perhaps they disagree with but Muslims none the less. Articles in relation to them will be posted under section three.
THE MORE ONE LEARNS SALAFI AQIDAH THE MORE CHRISTIANITY MAKES SENSE.
SALAFI-SAUDI SHAYKH DR. SAAD AL-HUMID PROFESSOR OF HADITH SCIENCES IN MEDINA FLEES FROM DEBATE WITH SHAYKH SAEED AL QANOUBI: IBADI HADITH MASTER, ON THE CREATION OF THE QUR’AN
MAJOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IBADIS AND SALAFIS/ATHAIRS: IBADIS BELIEVE WE HAVE THE ENTIRE QUR’AN. SALAFIS/ATHARIS BELIEVE WE ONLY HAVE THE QUR’AN ALLAH INTENDED FOR US TO HAVE.
THE CLAIM THAT THE IBADIS CURSE AND REVILE THE COMPANIONS.THIS FALSE ALLEGATION IS TURNED ON IT’S HEAD! THE WAHHABI/MADHKALI/SALAFIYYA RELY UPON THOSE WHO SAY VILE THINGS ABOUT ALI
HADITHS THE SALAFIYYA AND AHL SUNNAH IN GENERAL RELY UPON TO CALL HUGE SWATHES OF THE PROPHET’S COMPANIONS DOGS OF HELLFIRE! (THE IBADIS RIP APART THESE CHAINS)
SECTION THREE: THOSE WHO MAY LOOSELY IDENTIFY AS SALAFI, ATHARI ETC THAT HAVE HAD AND DO HAVE CORDIAL RELATIONS WITH OUR SCHOOL. ARTICLES IN RELATION TO THEM WILL BE POSTED UNDER HERE.
MY EXPERIENCE WITH SALAFIS AND SUFIS (NOT ALWAYS CHALK AND CHEESE)
“That was a community that had already gone before. For them is what they earned and for you is what you have earned. And you will not be accountable for what they have done.” (Qur’an 2:141)
“Do not mix truth with falsehood or hide the truth knowingly.” (Qu’ran 2:42)
﷽
This is a summary given by one of our Sunni brothers concerning this debate.
“I am not an Ibadi, but I say that Brother Omar was unable to provide Ibn Salam’s interpretation regarding seeking Allah’s pleasure with Imam Ali. Thus, the debate concluded that it was Al-Hawari, the Ibadi, who sought Allah’s pleasure with Imam Ali, who proved the Ibadi’s claim to be true.”
“That al-Tabari is satisfied in his book with Ali ibn Abi Talib, whereas the other two shaykhs from the Hanbali school’s perspective did not express satisfaction with him in their books even a single time!”
Before we break down this debate these are some of our thoughts. Of course we are a site in which the participants follow the Ibadi school. Some may accuse us of bias. That is why you yourself (if you have access to the Arabic language) can watch and see for yourself. Likewise, you can judge if this is a faithful translation of the debate. With Allah is success.
Shaykh Muhammed al-Rashidi stated with complete clarity, without any dissimulation, that among our companions, there are some who disavow certain companions, while others are pleased with them. Thus, we, the Ibadi do not hold to a single position on this matter, and there is also the stance of suspension regarding them.
The Wahhabis focus on the issue of certain prominent Ibadi scholars’ disavowal of certain companions related to the arbitration incident and what accompanies it, because they firmly believe this is the killing blow against us. If they examined it, they would find it is deliberate denial of the Messenger (saw) not disagreement with the companions, for infallibility belongs to the Prophet (saw) alone that expels one from the millat. Accordingly everyone is an opponent among the Wahhabis.
They forget that justice does not mean infallibility, and they forget that the companions cursed and fought one another, and that the phrase “and we do not delve into what transpired among them” is ijtihad, not consensus, even if it is called consensus. Here, the saying “Whoever claims consensus is a liar” proves true to a great extent, for partial consensus of some of the ummah is not consensus of the entire ummah, despite the permissibility of accepting and relying upon it as taking a credible view among views. But not at the expense of expelling some from the community of consensus of the Muslims, and one is not declared kafir with certainty for not seeing some opinion as valid ijtihad or interpretation.
And there is kufr short of kufr, as Ibn ‘Abbas (ra) said, which does not expel its holder from the religion. Some say that hating ‘Ali may be a is a sign of hypocrisy, but hating actions differs from hating persons.
Although Ibn Taymiyyah was of the view that hatred of Ali does not harm faith.
Source: (Volume 5 of Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (The Path of Prophetic Sunnah) by Ibn Taymiyyah)
Those among the Ibadi school who show disavowal of Ali cannot be said that they hate the person of ‘Ali but they hated his agreeing to the Arbitration, which led to the fighting. This is a strong excuse with no denial of the Messenger in it, and the Ibadi disavowal cannot be interpreted except according to our principles and rules, for we are an independent Islamic school with our own principles and branches. It is forbidden to expel any Muslim from the fold of Islam except with certainty, just as one enters it with certainty. Shaykh Muhammed ibn ‘Abdullah al-Rashidi excelled in his debate with al-Zahrani, who took it as an opportunity to savage our Ibadi school.
The reason for this debate. Once again the Zionist and the proxies have attacked a Muslim country, Iran. There are certain segments in the Muslim Ummah who shield these Zionist and shield the Muslim rulers that aid the Zionist. Therefore there can be no empathy shown towards Iran and no solidarity shown with the Iranian people. They do not accept this from Sunni Muslims nor from the Ibadi.
Examples:
Shaykh Uthman Ibn Farooq made the following video:
What he said is absolutely true. However, he did not use that opportunity to attack and assail the Shi’i. Therefore most likely he got a call from those Zionist handlers. Guess what immediately followed? Attacks upon Iran of course.
Or, when Zakir Naik mentioned his support for Iran. Zakir Naik clearly mentioned Iran did things that are not appropriate. However, people came out and attacked Zakir Naik for it.
So the reason for this debate is that it well known that Oman and the Omani people stand with and support Muslims against the Zionist. So in this case this means standing with Iran and with the people of Iran against the Zionist aggressors.
Thus, this man Omar Al-Zahrani came with a mission. That mission is to create division and animosity between the Shi’i and Ibadi. You will see in the debate he brings up fatwa from 12er Shi’i about the Ibadi. He brings up some poem by an Ibadi scholar in praise of Ibn Muljam. All the red herrings that he can. Yet mash’Allah, he was no match for the calm, poise and overwhelming knowledge that Shaykh Muhammed Al Rashidi has.
The status of Ali: Muhammed Al Rashidi of the Ibadi school debates Omar Al-Zahrani of the Salafi school.
Opening statement from the moderator:
My greetings to all of you, all the lovers and followers of the “Facts of Religions” channel. The meeting renews with you, respected gentlemen, and with the esteemed guests who are proficient in the language of dialogue, research, thought, and reflection on religion. Diversity is also required. The goal is for you, respected gentlemen, to receive accurate information from this one and that one. Today’s episode and today’s debate are very important because they have a dimension for us to get to know the Ibadi doctrine. Of course, our brother Omar will be with us; he will represent the Salafi belief or concept.
My greetings to all of you, all the lovers and followers of the “Facts of Religions” channel. I hope for mutual respect between you on the chat: respect for symbols, respect for sanctities, respect for guests. The channel’s goal is an intellectual meeting point, setting corrective and clarifying controls for what has been documented in our books.We welcome Brother Muhammed, who will represent the Ibadi thought through the “Dictionary of Sharia.”
He will also clarify, first as an introductory title. Brother Muhammed, you have five minutes, then we will move on to Brother Omar afterwards. It’s better, Brother Muhammed, if you could give an introductory title in the first minute, then start presenting the initial givens that Brother Omar will document and interact with you on. Go ahead, Brother Muhammed.
Muhammed Al Rashidi of the Ibadi school self introduction and opening statements:
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. O Allah support our brothers in Palestine, Iran, Yemen, Sudan, and in all corners of the earth, O Lord of the worlds. O Allah, protect our homelands, strengthen our ruler, support him with truth, and support truth with him, O Lord of the worlds. O Allah, make this debate beneficial for the seeker of truth and the listener, and keep it away from division and sectarianism.
Regarding this debate: It was raised a while ago that the Ibadis pray for the mercy of Imam Ali (Yataradaw ‘an). I presented evidence from this book, which is the “Tafsir Kitab Allah al-Aziz” by Imam al-Hawari, who is from the scholars of the third century AH, one of the Ibadi scholars. I extracted a text from it and said that the Ibadis pray for the mercy of Imam Ali, and I proved that. Brother Omar (may Allah bless him) came and took a part from the introduction of this book, where the investigator says that Imam al-Hawari relied on another Tafsir, which is the Tafsir of Imam Yahya ibn Salam al-Qayrawani. This is a wonderful thing. Imam al-Hawari indeed relied on this book; no problem, no issue. But the talk here is… Brother Omar, at the beginning, said that since there is “Taraddi” (praying for mercy) in this book, then this “Taraddi” belongs to Yahya ibn Salam, not to Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, who is one of the Ibadi scholars. He said that the Ibadis took this Tafsir (of Yahya ibn Salam), changed only the title, attributed it to Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, and made it Ibadi.
Of course, he raised other matters that we will discuss all of them, Allah willing, with Brother Omar, and we will discuss them fully, Allah willing. But I will start with a simple matter, Alah willing. I will prove with three pieces of evidence that these “Taraddiyat” (expressions of seeking mercy) found in this book are “Taraddiyat” of Imam Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, not of Yahya ibn Salam.
The first matter: Since we are talking about the “Taraddiyat,” and I presented evidence containing “Taraddi” for Imam Ali in this book, it was expected of Brother Omar to show us the same text from the book of Yahya ibn Salam al-Qayrawani and say that this same “Taraddi” exists there, regardless of the fact that the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam is incomplete (22 surahs). No problem.
But I tell you now, Brother Omar, what if I challenged you or asked you to produce just one “Taraddi” for Imam Ali in the book of Yahya ibn Salam? Just one “Taraddi” in the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam, from the remaining surahs. Ali is mentioned several times; we want just one “Taraddi.”
Now, the “Taraddiyat” are proven in this book. I have prepared dozens of texts, and I have other texts, but ten suffice. I also have a comparison between several texts from the two books. Excellent. So first, I have three pieces of evidence, as I said. I will present two here in this debate or dialogue (better to call it a dialogue). I will keep the third and final evidence for a separate discussion, Allah willing, you will see it. As for now, as we said, I think for every statement there is a challenge, a question, or a request. So we ask Brother Omar, may Allah bless him, to produce for us just one “Taraddi” on Imam Ali from the book of Yahya ibn Salam al-Qayrawani. If he does not produce a “Taraddi” for us, then the “Taraddiyat” were added by Imam Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, and they are Ibadi “Taraddiyat.” May Allah bless you. The remaining time is for you, Brother Omar.
Moderator speaking:
Okay, I don’t know if Dr. Muhammed is present… Okay, let me thank you, Brother Muhammed. I thank you for your punctuality, and I also thank you for the introduction. I hope from all the lovers and followers of the “Facts of Religions” channel and everyone to focus very well on the data being presented now, especially since it will introduce you to the reality of the Ibadi belief or concept. Brother Omar, you have five minutes with us for initial data. Could you make my picture bigger, Dr. Muhammed, please? On the camera. Okay.
Omar Al-Zahrani of the Salafi school self introduction and opening statements:
Peace be upon you and Allah’s mercy and blessings. In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. O Allah, bless Muhammed and the family of Muhammed and all his companions and wives. Of course, may Allah protect our shyookh, kings, princes in the Gulf countries and in the rest of the Muslim lands.
Of course, as I told you, I will not leave a single word that the guest says without clarifying it. Iran, which you are sitting there… I don’t know why you pray for them, I don’t know if it’s to provoke us or what is your goal? Look at what they say about you in the book “Madinat al-Ma’ajiz” when they talk about the Khawarij. This is the “Mu’assasat al-Ma’arif al-Islamiyyah” in Iran, the ones you pray for. It says: “They are outcasts from Islam by the judgment of all Islamic scholars, ancient and modern. The most important of their sects are the Ibadis, may Allah’s curse be upon them all until the Day of Judgment.” This is not my words; this is the words of Iran. So, may Allah bless you, we try to adhere to the text.
Brother Omar, this phrase you just said, this phrase is attributed to…
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks again.
“…to an Iranian institution for printing. Of course, this investigator says they are outcasts from Islam by the judgment of all Islamic scholars, ancient and modern. The most important of their sects are the Ibadis. I am not saying “May Allah curse you, Muhammed al-Rashidi,” but Iran, the ones you pray for, who bombed our countries and your country, said “May Allah’s curse be upon you until the Day of Judgment.” Got it? Allah forbid, I don’t say such things to you. This is your books that conveyed this to you. Sorry, not your books, their books that you are happy with.”
Okay, the second issue, my dear brothers, may Allah bless you. When he asked me, he said, “I challenge you to prove that this ‘Taraddi’ exists in books…” I will give you from the words of the scholars… What does the investigator, Al-Hajj bin Sa’id Sharif (from Algeria), say? Look, my dear brothers, when he mentioned… even what did he say? “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.” He says: “This is from al-Hawari?” I tell you, no. He says: “An addition that is necessary, because what follows is a text of an authentic hadith.” Meaning even the prayer upon the Prophet (saw) was added by the investigator, not al-Hawari. So you tell me this “Taraddi” is from… from al-Hawari? No, my dear brother, this is the words of the investigator. So this issue is very natural.
Okay, my dear brothers, of course, now I will show you the many proofs. Our topic was about al-Hawari’s Tafsir and so on, but I will give you this issue: Basically, this entire book, all of it, is taken from… as I explained, from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. But the strange thing, my dear brothers, the strange thing is that after researching and investigating this book, I discovered that… What’s the idea? That al-Hawari took the complete book of Yahya ibn Salam al-Basri. And when he came to matters that benefit the Ibadi school of thought, or sorry, that harm the Ibadi school of thought (like divine vision, like intercession, etc.), he deleted them. My brothers, this is not my words, this is their books. There is a Master’s thesis… Basically, Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, hardly anyone talked about him, meaning few researches on “The Methodology of Hud al-Hawari in Tafsir.” It says: “And it concluded with the following results: Complete omission of the personality of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari – no one, by Allah, knows who Hud al-Hawari is, nor when he was born, nor when he lived, nor his shyookh. No one knows anything about him.”
Second: “Hud’s Tafsir is an abridgment of the Tafsir of Ibn Salam al-Basri the Sunni.” Okay. “The bias of Hud al-Hawari towards his Ibadi school of thought is evident in doctrinal rulings, practical rulings, and in his omission of narrations that contradict his school of thought.” Meaning, as long as you are taking an issue from our books, you must adhere to it. If you are taking an issue from our books, you must be committed to it, Dr. Muhammed. If possible, just enlarge my picture because the quality for some doesn’t show clearly during my intervention. Just enlarge it, may Allah reward you. Okay, my dear brothers, these are the evidences that confirm that the origin of the book is taken from us, from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam al-Basri. For you to prove otherwise, you must bring… For example, this “Taraddi” (رضي الله عنه) is found in your book, while in the original, this “Taraddi” is not found at all. Even the prayer upon the Prophet (saw) – Hud thought it was too much to pray upon the Prophet (saw). So you tell me this action was… My dear brothers, unfortunately, this man (Hud al-Hawari) did not even know the basics of his religion. It says: “Among the criticisms against Hud is his mixing between the hypocrite and the polytheist in some rulings.” Hud says: “Whoever associates partners (with Allah) and is a hypocrite, We will punish him,” meaning killing. And we know that the hypocrite is not killed. Meaning, even the fundamentals of the Ibadi school of thought are deficient according to Hud al-Hawari.
You tell me that this, by the way, is not only taken from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam al-Basri, but also taken from the Tafsir of Ibn Zaminayn, who is also one of our scholars. It is taken from both books. You tell me there is no “Taraddi” in the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam? It is found in the Tafsir of Ibn Zaminayn, by the way, found in the same narration about Ali (RA). I will give it to you in the next intervention. I have absolutely no problem with this. Okay. Now, my dear brothers, the next intervention will be…
Moderator: Okay, let’s thank you, Brother Omar. We’ll quickly move to Brother Muhammed. I hope all the esteemed viewers focus well on what is being presented now. Go ahead.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Praise be to Allah, and after: “And say, ‘The truth has come, and falsehood has vanished. Indeed, falsehood is [ever] bound to vanish.'” Brother Omar, what do I care if the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari is correct or incorrect? Now our discussion is about the “Taraddi,” proving the “Taraddi.” Whether it is correct or incorrect, that’s another topic.
The issue of “Taraddi”… You told me about the prayer upon the Prophet. I demanded from you just one “Taraddi”! One “Taraddi”! I have dozens of texts, dozens of texts containing “Taraddi” on Imam Ali. Don’t tell me they added “Salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam” (saw). If they added it, that’s a weak argument. Bring me a text… For example, the investigator himself… I have statements from the investigator himself. He made mistakes in several things. One of the things he said is that this book is an abridgment or called an abridgment. This book cannot be called an abridgment at all; this book is a refinement of the book of Yahya ibn Salam, not an abridgment.
Second, he said that what is criticized in this book is the omission of chains of narration (asanid). Omitting chains of narration is the methodology of the Ibadis, the methodology of the school. You have “Al-Jami'” behind me, the explanation of “Musnad al-Imam al-Rabi'”, without chains of narration. “Musnad al-Imam al-Rabi'” which is the most authentic chain we have, explained without chains of narration. No problem.
I challenged you with one “Taraddi.” You know that the book of Yahya ibn Salam does not contain a single “Taraddi” on Imam Ali, not one! As for this book, it has several “Taraddiyat,” dozens, we can say. No problem. I will show Brother Omar… I will mention something before continuing. He said that Imam al-Hawari added things that benefit his school of thought. Previously, he said the Ibadis only changed the title and kept the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. Why change the statement now?
Second, you said that Imam al-Hawari abbreviated some things, not that he added anything. Your statement is with me. Do you deny any word? Let’s show the clip. No problem, everything is there. These are three contradictions, three statements you made about the book of Imam al-Hawari. I demand from you only one text, one text where Imam Yahya ibn Salam al-Qayrawani prays for mercy on Imam Ali.
This is excellent. We will show pages if possible. There’s still time. Excellent. Let’s show some pages. Brother Omar said… or open a page from the pages. I’ll share it. Open a page from the pages where he compares the Tafsir of al-Hawari and the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. Actually, if I complete that page… Let’s open a page. Does the page appear? Does it appear? It appears, it appears. Yes, go ahead. Excellent, excellent, excellent. This page: Right side is the Tafsir of Imam Yahya ibn Salam, left side is the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. He said: “And some said, ‘It does not afflict her in the east nor in the west.'” This is in both books, in the Tafsir of Surat An-Nur. If we go down a little in the book of Imam al-Hawari, he prays for mercy on Imam Ali. As for Yahya ibn Salam, the book of Yahya ibn Salam did not pray for mercy on Imam Ali. I have dozens of texts like this, comparing the same texts from the two Tafsirs. Imam Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari prays for mercy on Imam Ali, while Yahya ibn Salam does not pray for mercy on Imam Ali.
This is the first evidence that the Tafsir… that Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari is the one who added these “Taraddiyat.” Of course, there are other errors in your statement besides this huge contradiction: Imam al-Hawari added jurisprudential things, added doctrinal things from “Musnad al-Imam al-Rabi'”. I have surprises for you as well. He added doctrinal things. I have texts I will show later. There are 30 seconds left. The remaining time is for you. Give me only one text where Imam al-Hawari or Imam Yahya ibn Salam prays for mercy on Imam Ali, just one text. You have now shown the viewer that Yahya ibn Salam does not pray for mercy on Imam Ali. This is clear. Go ahead, Brother Omar.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks
Okay, could you enlarge me, Dr. Muhammed, so I can show the sources? Yes. In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Enlarge me, Doctor, may Allah bless you. Okay, my dear brothers, I think my statement is clear. Did I say that al-Hawari only took the Tafsir from Yahya ibn Salam? In the previous intervention, I told you he also took it from Ibn Zaminayn, the Sunni. The evidence for my statement is from “The Methodology of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari in Tafsir.” It says: “Hud al-Hawari followed, to some extent, the process of abridgment.”
The problem is your scholars say “abridgment,” and you tell me “refinement”! No, it’s not refinement, it’s abridgment. “However, he is criticized for not distinguishing between his opinions and the opinions of Ibn Salam, as Ibn Abi Zaminayn did.”
So, where did he take it from? He took it from two: from Ibn Salam and from Ibn Abi Zaminayn. You demand a “Taraddi” from me. This, my dear brothers, in “Uṣūl al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn, it says about Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA). There! I have brought you your request. This request is fulfilled. Thank you. Okay, my dear brothers, now we come to the second issue. You are really bringing scandals, may Allah bless you. When you say, “We take our religion without a chain of transmission (sanad), we explain it without a chain.” May Allah bless you, this is a good thing, honestly. I don’t know why there’s a comment in the stream… The problem is, to say “We take our religion without a chain and explain without a chain” – this is not something, my dear brother, you should be proud of. On the contrary, it goes against you. Okay.
Moderator:
“The network weakness is from you, Brother Omar. The network weakness is from you. Just for your information.”
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Okay, no problem. Let’s go back to show the source, my dear brothers. Okay, sorry, so this is in “The Methodology of Hud al-Hawari.” It says: “Hud al-Hawari followed, to some extent, the process of abridgment. However, he is criticiz
ed for not distinguishing between his opinions and the opinions of Ibn Salam, as Ibn Abi Zaminayn did.” Let’s go back to the books of Ibn Abi Zaminayn. He says about Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA). So this is the “Taraddi” now. May Allah bless you. Okay, my dear brothers, now we come, Allah willing, to the second issue with which he challenged me. He said, “You see, we take it without Tafsir, etc.” Brother, this is against you, not for you. Allah is sufficient. Your request I answered. It didn’t come with anything else. Okay, he says, “No, you must retract because Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari added some words.” I know he added two or three words, a line or two. This does not count as an addition to the book. It is indeed an abridgment.
Evidence, my dear brothers, come, let’s make a simple comparison. Okay, this is, my dear brothers, the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam al-Basri the Sunni. He says regarding Surat An-Nahl: “In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. ‘The command of Allah is coming, so do not impatiently seek to hasten it.’ Al-Hasan said: ‘This is a response from Allah.'” Let’s go back to the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. He said: “Al-Hasan said: ‘This is a response from Allah to the saying of the polytheists to the Prophet: Bring us the punishment of Allah.'” The exact same thing! Where is the addition? You tell me, “By Allah, he added two words, added two letters”! This does not change the meaning. It’s very natural.
My dear brothers, if I go and take Al-Bukhari and at the end add two words, “Peace be upon you,” does that mean I have added to the interpretation? Absolutely not! Impossible. This is considered an addition by me, two or three words I wrote. It’s a normal matter. Okay, my dear brothers, now we come to the important issue which we will also clarify, because our topic today is about two things: al-Hawari’s Tafsir and the “Dictionary of Sharia.”
The “Dictionary of Sharia,” my dear brothers, Brother Muhammed al-Rashidi presented this source on his account. He said, “We have in the book ‘Dictionary of Sharia’ there is ‘Taraddi’ on Imam Ali. He interpreted it as ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him.'” I went back to the introduction of the investigation and discovered a catastrophe, by Almighty Allah! It says: “The words of Taraddi, Tarahhum, Tasliyah, and Taslim were proven in the text as they appeared in the manuscripts, and no intervention was made in them, neither modification nor alteration. Likewise, the author of the dictionary used to prove these words as he found them in their sources. This does not necessarily mean the author’s belief in that Taraddi or Tarahhum, because he was transmitting the text as it appeared in the source.” Meaning, just by him transmitting “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu,” it does not necessitate that he believes in this Taraddi.
What is the evidence for your statement, Omar? What is the evidence that this man does not believe in this Taraddi? Get ready for the shock, by Almighty Allah! Don’t be shocked! This, my dear brothers, is the same book, “Dictionary of Sharia,” but a few pages later. It says: “We declare allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar ibn al-Khattab.” (It was supposed to say Uthman and Ali) – No Uthman, no Ali! And Abu Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, Mu’adh ibn Jabal, Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, Salman al-Farisi, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, and Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi (who abandoned Ali ibn Abi Talib) – they are present. But Ali ibn Abi Talib is not present!
They declare allegiance to him? Take the great calamity: “And we declare disavowal (al-bara’ah) from those from whom our prominent Imams declared disavowal in the biographies, without needing to disclose or specify.” Who are these you disavow? Let’s go down below and see who you disavow. It says: “And we declare the correctness (taswib) of the people of Nahrawan” (those who fought Ali). “And disavowal (al-bara’ah) from those who killed them.” Who killed them? Ali ibn Abi Talib killed them! So you disavow Ali ibn Abi Talib! From the same book you brought! Not me, you brought this book!
Do you want a clearer declaration that he indeed disavows Ali? Take the catastrophe, brothers. The same book, “Dictionary of Sharia,” Volume 8, by al-Sa’di. It says: “And after the Prophet, we disavow the people of the Qibla (Muslims) who are… Uthman ibn Affan, they disavow him, and Ali ibn Abi Talib, they disavow him, and Talhah, al-Zubayr, Mu’awiyah, Amr ibn al-As, Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, and all who were satisfied with the arbitration of the two arbitrators and abandoned the judgment of Allah.”
Abu Abdullah Muhammed ibn Mahbub (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “We agree with them on this disavowal of those named.” We disavow Ali, we disavow Uthman.And Abu Sa’id al-Kudami prays for mercy on this man… He says: “We agree with them on the disavowal… we disavow Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abi Talib, Talhah, al-Zubayr, Mu’awiyah, Amr, and Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, and all who were satisfied…”
The sources, Brother Omar! The sources! The same book, brothers, that Brother Muhammed al-Rashidi brought. Not a new book. The same book he brought, “Dictionary of Sharia”! It says: “And after the Prophet, we disavow the people of the Qibla who are Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abi Talib, Talhah, al-Zubayr, Mu’awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, Amr ibn al-As, Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, and all who were satisfied with the arbitration of the two arbitrators…” …Disavowal. Okay.
So, my dear brothers, those who agreed to this… Abu Sa’id… Then you come and hold onto an issue saying, “By Allah, he prayed for mercy on him, he said ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him.'” Where is the love here? Where is this love?
Moderator:
Okay, thank you, Brother Omar. Thank you for this data, really. Brother Muhammed is indeed worthy of interacting with it for clarification and correction. Go ahead.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
First, I hope we adhere to the time, first of all. Secondly, we haven’t finished with the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam and the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. You haven’t denied your contradiction in the statements you made about the book of Yahya ibn… Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. First.
Second… You did not bring a single “Taraddi” from the book of Yahya ibn Salam! Excellent! Second or third… You talked about Ibn Abi Zaminayn. Excellent! I now challenge you as well to bring one “Taraddi” from the abridgment of Ibn Abi Zaminayn of the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. Don’t give me from the book “Al-Sunnah”! Bring it to me from the Tafsir. Didn’t he abridge the Tafsir? Come on, here’s the shock! Look at the shock!
I will say it while I open the pages… Ibn Abi Zaminayn, in his introduction, says that he abridged much of what was in Yahya ibn Salam’s book and omitted many chains of narration and many reports. In the first preface. Excellent! So, you are dependent on the Ibadis for this as well. Now, if you want the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam, it’s incomplete (22 surahs). If you want to refer back, you cannot refer to Ibn Abi Zaminayn’s book because it is very incomplete, and that’s a criticism against it.
As for the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, I repeat to you: You say “my scholars say it’s an abridgment.” He is not my scholar! That’s the investigator of the book! Don’t say “your scholars,” he is the investigator of the book, and he made a mistake in this. I say it once more: This book is a refinement. I think you understand – I trust your academic ability – the difference between refinement and abridgment. Excellent! You yourself said he added things! So how can it be an abridgment if he added? Wonderful!
Likewise, will you say that your scholars who abridged, refined, or relied on other books… will you say they stole? Will you say they removed a title and took a book? Can you say this, or only because he is Ibadi? Excellent!
Now, I challenged you with two or three Tafsirs. The first Tafsir contains “Taraddiyat.” The second evidence that Yahya ibn Salam did not pray for mercy on Imam Ali is the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn. The Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn did not pray for mercy on Imam Ali, and he transmitted from reliable books in his abridgment. So, the two books did not pray for mercy: neither the book of Yahya ibn Salam nor Ibn Abi Zaminayn. The one who prayed for mercy is the Ibadi, Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari.
This is evidence that Hud is the one who added the “Taraddiyat” in his Tafsir. Among the things he added are statements in jurisprudence: statements of Abu Ubaydah Muslim ibn Abi Karimah, statements of Jabir ibn Zayd, statements of “our companions,” “our school of thought.” These are additions! They do not exist in the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. Doctrinal statements: I have prepared seven doctrinal issues, on Al-Istiwa’ (The Rising on the Throne), etc. All are Ibadi interpretations. So, how can you say they only took the title? “They only took the title or changed the title and took it” – how is this, Ibadis?
Your Tafsir is incomplete. I challenge us to compare. I tell you, open Surat Al-Fatihah and compare now! Between this Tafsir… The audio is present, your voice is there. You say, “I am ready to compare.” We open the book from the beginning and compare word for word. How? And the things that Yahya… that Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari added…
Alright, I tell you, open Surat Al-Fatihah so we can compare. It’s not present in Surat Al-Fatihah. You rely on the Ibadi Tafsir to refer back to the book of Yahya ibn Salam. Even the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn is not sufficient for you! Not sufficient for you to complete! I have brought many texts. Okay, let’s open this text… another text… containing a comparison. Open this text for me…
Moderator:
You have about two minutes…
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Yes, may Allah bless you. We have this text, the two Tafsirs. This Tafsir (right) is Yahya ibn Salam’s. He mentioned Hamzah and Ali, but did not pray for mercy on them. Look at the Ibadi Tafsir: “Hamzah ibn Abdul-Muttalib and Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with them all.” This is the Ibadi Tafsir! Okay. Open the other text…. This is another text.
We haven’t even finished with the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, and you move to another topic, the “Dictionary of Sharia.” Look at this text: “From Al-Harith, from Ali, that he asked the Messenger of Allah…” This is in Yahya ibn Salam’s Tafsir. Look at the book of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari: He said about “Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, that he asked the Messenger of Allah…” Okay, now you say the investigator added this. Where is the evidence? Don’t just tell me so.
This is a refinement by… to Hud al-Hawari. Go ahead, but I emphasize an issue now. I challenged you regarding two of his Tafsirs: to produce just one “Taraddi” from two Tafsirs, not one! One “Taraddi” on Imam Ali! I brought dozens!
Moderator:
Okay, thank you, Brother Muhammed. We’ll move on.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Okay, if possible, could you share with me, Dr. Muhammed? I don’t know what the problem is with the sources I presented. Share this text with me, may Allah bless you, and enlarge my picture, please. Dr. Muhammed, share, may Allah bless you. Yes.
My dear brothers, as I explained to you, this text and these additions… Are they from al-Hawari? I tell you, no! Rather, this is from the scribes (nussakh). In the “Tafsir Kitab Allah al-Aziz,” it says: “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace,” – the prayer upon the Prophet… he says: “An addition that was necessary.” He added it!
So you tell me it’s “Taraddi”? Which “Taraddi”? Naturally, the scribes added it, and you have that he prayed for mercy on Ali. I know. But did al-Hawari say it? The answer is no. Evidence: the text I gave you just now.
If possible, Dr. Muhammed, also share with me in the book “Dictionary of Sharia.” My dear brothers, “Dictionary of Sharia” which we proved… Dr. Muhammed, share with me, may Allah bless you. Yes, this is the “Dictionary of Sharia” we showed earlier. This is “Dictionary of Sharia.” What does it say? “Ali, may Allah be pleased with him.” Then what does the investigator say? “The words of Taraddi, Tarahhum… were proven in the text as they appeared in the manuscripts, and no intervention was made in them, neither modification nor alteration. Likewise, the author of the dictionary used to prove these words… and this does not necessarily mean the author’s belief.” Meaning, this does not necessarily mean the author believes in this Taraddi and Tarahhum. I know that “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu” is written, correct.
But remember the name of the book. What is the name of the book? “Dictionary of Sharia.” Correct. My dear brothers, the same book “Dictionary of Sharia”… Look, my dear brothers, the same “Dictionary of Sharia”… What does it say? Dr. Muhammed, share, please… the text, may Allah bless you. Yes, this is “Dictionary of Sharia.” It says: “We declare allegiance (nuwalli) to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, and Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him.” Where is the name of Uthman? Deleted. The name of Ali? Not there! “And Abu Ubaydah, Abu Dharr, Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, Mu’adh ibn Jabal, Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, Salman al-Farisi, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, and Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi, the Khariji who removed Ali ibn Abi Talib from governance at Nahrawan, who said: ‘We don’t want you as a ruler.'” He said: “We declare allegiance to these.” “And we declare disavowal (al-bara’ah) from those from whom our Imams declared disavowal among the famous…”
Who are those you disavow? He tells you: “And we declare the correctness (taswib) of the people of Nahrawan and disavowal (al-bara’ah) from those who fought them.” Question: Who fought the people of Nahrawan? Ali ibn Abi Talib!
So the first “Taraddi” is something… it has no value, no benefit whatsoever, because basically he concealed “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu.” Does he believe in this? Does he believe in this “Taraddi”? I tell you, no! He does not believe in this “Taraddi”!
Dr. Muhammed, share with me. I assure you, he does not believe in this “Taraddi.” Why, my dear brothers? Because the same book, “Dictionary of Sharia”… first thing, it had “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu” written. But it says: “And after the Prophet, we disavow the people of the Qibla who are… Uthman ibn Affan – we disavow him. Ali ibn Abi Talib – Ali ibn Abi Talib, the one you go to the Shia for and we love Imam Ali! We love Imam Ali! But Ali ibn Abi Talib – we disavow him! And Talhah, al-Zubayr, Mu’awiyah, Amr ibn al-As, Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, and all who were satisfied with the arbitration of the two arbitrators, abandoned Allah’s judgment, and their followers and supporters, and those who ally with them – upon their disbelief.”
Disbelievers! O disbelievers! And their injustice! From the people of innovation and followers of whims. Who agreed to this statement? Abu Abdullah Muhammed ibn Mahbub (may Allah have mercy on you). “We agree with them on this, and the disavowal of those named.” Abu Sa’id al-Kudami, your friend, the one you love very much, says: “We agree with them on the disavowal of those named, calling them disbelievers.” Who? Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abi Talib – our brothers, our own selves! Ali ibn Abi Talib! My dear brothers, what… They disavowed him! We disavow you, Ali ibn Abi Talib!
And I explained to you the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn, this is present. In “Uṣūl al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn, this “Taraddi” is present. So I tell you, if you have a million “Taraddiyat” now, a thousand “Taraddiyat”… let’s say you have 10 million “Taraddiyat” in the book, does this mean you believe in them? I tell you, no! You deleted the name of Ali! You prayed for mercy on Ali in “Dictionary of Sharia,” and in the same “Dictionary of Sharia” you said: “We disavow Ali!” And Abu Sa’id al-Kudami says: “Whoever allies with them, upon their disbelief – disbelievers!”
My dear brother, by Allah, “disbelievers”! This is the problem. I don’t know, the sources earlier apparently didn’t appear, sorry, because I’m presenting them again, just to confirm the information which is “Madinat al-Ma’ajiz.” When you prayed for Iran, sorry, by Allah, I don’t know what this situation is, but it must be resolved. “Madinat al-Ma’ajiz” by the “Mu’assasat al-Ma’arif al-Islamiyyah.” When it mentioned the Khawarij, it said: “They are outcasts from Islam.” They declare you disbelievers! And the “Qadhafat al-Kham” (Iranian officials) that you are happy with! It says: “By the judgment of all Islamic scholars, you are outcasts from Islam, and the most important of their sects are the Ibadis.” They declare you disbelievers! Who is this? Iran! Iran declared you disbelievers! “May Allah’s curse be upon them all until the Day of Judgment!” Not my words, by Allah, not my words. On the contrary, I absolve you of such words. I went to Oman and saw respectable Ibadis, by Allah, they are good people. But Iran itself says: “May Allah’s curse be upon you until the Day of Judgment!”
Yes. This is their statement, their own statement! Go ahead, Brother…
Moderator:
Brother Omar Khalil, I thank you, and I don’t know why you are focused on the Iran part. I don’t know. The man mentioned it briefly at the beginning. But certainly, you have dimensions to it. Brother Muhammed is very capable of interacting with this aspect. Brother Muhammed, because I think Brother Omar is somewhat focused on it. Go ahead, Brother Muhammed.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
No problem, my teacher. But this is not the topic of the debate now. The topic of the debate now is… three rounds?…I agree.
Moderator:
Wait, wait, Brother Muhammed. I agree with you. But it is on the periphery. Since you started it, and he insisted on stopping at this point, you could clarify and correct for the viewers on the periphery, not for him, and then we finish this aspect and move to the title of the episode.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
No problem, we will clarify. But first, let’s finish what we started, and we will clarify quickly: The Ibadis do not declare their opponent as disbelievers, nor do they pass judgment on their opponent based on what their opponent has within them. Let’s finish this. There are evidences and other matters by which they judge their opponents… Shia, Sunnis… we consider all of them our brothers and do not enter into these matters.
But now, this Tafsir… I told you, or if you zoom in on this… I challenged you with two Tafsirs: the first is the original, and the second is taken from the original (Yahya ibn Salam) and abridged by Ibn Abi Zaminayn. The absence of “Taraddi” in the book of Ibn Abi Zaminayn is evidence that Yahya ibn Salam did not pray for mercy on Imam Ali, or that this “Taraddi” was not present in his book.
Your statement that the Ibadis lack chains of narration and so on is a methodological issue. Ibn Taymiyyah, your shaykh, says the Khawarij do not lie. Even if we differ with him about the name Khawarij, he says the Khawarij do not lie. So what need do we have for chains of narration if the Khawarij do not lie? If you want to verify the hadiths of the Khawarij, the hadiths of the Ibadis, you have something called “mutaba’at” and “shawahid” (follow-ups and supporting evidence). Refer to the book “Musnad al-Imam al-Rabi'”. We have an explanation called “Sharh Sahih al-Rabi'”. Imam al-Salimi explained it. In every hadith, he mentions the “mutaba’at”, “shawahid”, and other such matters. Our methodology is that we do not mention these chains of narration. Omitting chains of narration is not a flaw; rather, it is the methodology of the Ibadis. This is a feature.
But what are we talking about? The “Taraddiyat.”
Regarding the “Dictionary of Sharia,” the text you showed in the introduction says that these “Taraddiyat” exist in the original book and were not added by scribes or investigators. Excellent. It says the author may not believe in them, but he takes them from their sources.
Okay, let me ask you a question, Brother Omar. What are the sources used by the author of the “Dictionary of Sharia”? Did you go to the introduction of the first volume and research which books he relies on? Most of the books he relies on are Ibadi books. All or most of the books he relies on are Ibadi books: “Bayan al-Shar'” and others. So the “Taraddiyat” are inevitably Ibadi “Taraddiyat,” whether he said them or not, whether he believed in them or not.
The other issue: “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'” (Loyalty and Disavowal) with us Ibadis applies to a specific person. Therefore, they used to mention “so-and-so scholar” is the one who disavows. It applies to that specific person, not to all of us. The disavowal is excellent. Even if the group that was with him agrees, no problem. But the evidence that reached them about disavowing Imam Ali applies to them. We may consider them mistaken.
Excellent. We may consider them mistaken.
But now… I challenged you with two Tafsirs… Excellent. And I proved to you that the “Taraddi” in the “Dictionary of Sharia” is an Ibadi “Taraddi,” whether al-Sa’di believed in it or not. It is an Ibadi “Taraddi.” Now, I want you to produce just one text, one text of “Taraddi” either in the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam or in the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn. It is difficult for you to produce one text. I produce dozens of texts from this book that you criticize. This book that you say the Ibadis took its title… I bring you dozens of texts. But prove to me just one text, one text from the book of Yahya ibn Salam or from the book of Ibn Abi Zaminayn, no more. Excellent.
I will show some texts… Excellent… Alright… You can’t see these texts?
For example, here is a text on aqeedah. Go to “Al-Istiwa’.” Look at this text… Take this. Pay attention. Yes. Did Yahya ibn Salam interpret it? Or did Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari interpret it? Alright. He said: “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne (istawa).” Is the text clear? He said: “Istawaa… His command and power prevailed over His creation.” Excellent. If you search for this text in the book of Yahya ibn Salam… Although, look in which surah? Look in which surah? In Surat Ta-Ha. If you search for it in Yahya ibn Salam’s book, you will not find it. This is an addition by Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. Where did Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari bring it from? Go ahead…
Where did al-Muhakkam al-Hawari bring it from? He brought it from “Al-Jami’ al-Sahih” of Imam al-Rabi’ ibn Habib, from the third century AH. Look at this from al-Rabi’: “His command and power prevailed over His creation.” This exact text does not exist with Yahya ibn Salam. But it exists here with al-Muhakkam al-Hawari.
Okay, so the issue of the “Taraddiyat,” Brother Omar, once again, I tell you that the “Taraddiyat” were added by Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. Even “Salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam” and “Alayhi wa alihi salam” which were added by the investigator or scribes. “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu” is from the original book! There’s a mark, I don’t know if you noticed it or not.
Can you bring me… I’ll go with you… Can you bring me one “Taraddi” in Yahya ibn Salam’s book and say the scribes added it? Can you? One “Taraddi”! I demanded “Taraddiyat” from two Tafsirs. We Ibadis, when we enter debates… I have read three Tafsirs. I don’t say this unless I know that the only Tafsir that prays for mercy on Imam Ali among these three is this Tafsir.Yes? Excellent! Yes?
So, I demand… mostly in this battle, you bring one “Taraddi” from a Tafsir. If it’s not there, say it’s not there, and we’re done with this. Meaning, you are demanding one “Taraddi”? I demand one “Taraddi.” Why? Because he says the “Taraddiyat” in this book were taken from Yahya ibn Salam. Of course, before, he said “they took them from Yahya ibn Salam”…
Now he says… …because no one knows, professor. Go ahead. Okay, thank you.
Moderator:
Thank you. Brother Omar is also capable of interacting with these issues. Go ahead, Brother Omar.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Okay, if possible, could you share with me, may Allah bless you, this text that I requested? Share, Dr. Muhammed. Share.
Yes, my dear brothers, “Uṣūl al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn. He says about Ali ibn Abi Talib, “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu.” He took it from… Ibn Abi Zaminayn took it, as he says… from the people of the methodology… they studied the methodology of Hud… “Ali ibn Abi Talib, Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu.” By the way, I brought you your request. I don’t know why you repeat it. Maybe you’ve run out of answers, by Allah, I don’t know. My dear brothers, the problem is in the next clip, he will respond to Dr. Asim. Listen…
“Shaykh al-Hadrami, author of ‘Al-Kawkab al-Duri,’ is not Ibadi because he prays for mercy on Imam Ali. Therefore, the author of the ‘Qamus’ (Dictionary) is also not Ibadi. Do not forget…
Yes, meaning he now used the author of the “Dictionary of Sharia” as evidence. Now, when we shocked him that the author of the “Dictionary of Sharia” actually disavows Ali, disavows Uthman, and disavows the companions, and says “disbelievers” and whatnot… By Allah, he definitely took it from an Ibadi book. By Allah, I don’t know from which Ibadi book he took it. But he took it from you. This is the response, my dear brother! This is not a response! This is not a response! He did not take it from you; rather, he found it in some Sunni source and took it and placed it there. Evidence is that he says “We disavow them”! Of course, my dear brothers, he continues to throw words. I am paying attention, by Allah, to every word. He said: “Ha, by Allah, we don’t declare them disbelievers as they declare us disbelievers.” Look at the screen, my dear brothers. Dr. Muhammed, share with me, may Allah bless you.
Okay, my dear brothers, the book “Lubab al-Athar” by Sayyid Muhanna ibn Khalfan. It says: “Issue: About Shaykh Ahmad ibn Madad, may Allah have mercy on him. What do you say about all the other schools of thought besides the Ibadi? What do you say about them? Is it permissible to declare them mistaken and misguided? Is it permissible to curse them (Yal’anuhum)? Does the ablution of the one who does that break or not?” He said: “Yes, that is permissible. Curse them (Tal’anuhum)! And the ablution of the one who does that does not break, because he has spoken the truth.” The truth is that they are cursed! Accursed! You, O Sunnis, according to this man’s tongue! The correct and the truth is that all our opponents from other schools are, with us, perishing, innovators in religion, heretics, ungrateful disbelievers, hypocrites, oppressors. The Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger testify to that.
Whoever dies on other than the Ibadi religion is in the Fire, in Hell. With this we testify and declare our religion. Whoever doubts the Ibadi religion and claims the truth is in other than the Ibadi religion is, with us, an ungrateful disbeliever, a sinner, a hypocrite, a misguided innovator, an innovator in religion. You don’t declare us disbelievers? By Allah, I wish you would declare us disbelievers rather than saying all this to us!
Also, in the book “Qawa’id al-Islam,” it says about disavowal (al-bara’ah) from whoever leaves the school of the people of truth. Not just takfir now… Take this calamity: Whoever leaves the school of the people of truth for the school of those in opposition, and allies with their Imams and disavows the Imams of the Muslims, it is obligatory upon the Muslims to hate him, be hostile to him, and remove his allegiance until he repents and returns to the Muslims. If he leaves the school of the Muslims, opposes them, criticizes their school, and finds fault with it, then his killing is permissible, his assassination by any means to cause his destruction and death.
Got it, dear teacher? Beware once again! Someone tells me, “You Salafis are takfiris, you Wahhabis are takfiris, you are blood-shedders”! No, I tell you this statement. It shouldn’t appear these days. I know this statement shouldn’t appear. But don’t accuse us of a disease that you yourselves suffer from. If you see this as a disease, then it is a life-ending matter.
It’s a camera, just a question, if you please. Why shouldn’t it appear now? What is the reason? My dear brother, I tell you, now we are in a time of tolerance. What are they doing?
Moderator:
Sorry, transparency and clarity, Brother Omar.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
No, no, I will tell you. Listen to me. Listen to me. What do they do? They go to old books from a certain period, a certain time when some boundaries (hudud) were not suspended, and they apply its rulings. They say, “Look, you have a book from 1000 years ago that says ‘kill’ so-and-so.” It’s not that we kill. Rather, this matter is referred to the ruler (Wali al-Amr), who considers it. There are conditions and prerequisites for seeking repentance (istitabah). They don’t read that. They just see the word “kill” – “Attack the Sunni! Kill the Sunni! Beat the Sunni!” The Sunni commands all this, and we are innocent and good, we don’t do anything. Meanwhile, the opposite is these books of theirs that are hidden in the bellies, no one sees them. And I tell you, we don’t show them. By Almighty Allah, I know the Ibadis are good people, there is goodness and blessing in them. I personally went to Oman, by Allah, I found the immigrant treated better than the citizen, with all manners and respect. But these books… I tell you, hide these books, it’s better.
Moderator:
Thank you, Brother Omar. Faithful transmission is required from you and Brother Muhammed. Faithful transmission. Brother Muhammed, go ahead. May Allah bless you, Brother Omar and Brother Muhammed.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Brother Omar has left the topic of the debate several times now, several times, and goes far away from the challenge. You tell me the book “Al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn. He abridged the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam in the book “Al-Sunnah” or in the Tafsir? Why can’t you bring one text from the Tafsir? One text of “Taraddi” from the Tafsir? You say, “Where did he take it from Yahya?” From the book “Al-Sunnah”? How? From the book “Al-Sunnah”? He abridged the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam in another Tafsir. Why don’t you bring one text? We are done with this topic.
Let’s repeat it. You have this book, “Dictionary of Sharia,” “Al-Hawi” its wide ways. The introductions that Brother Omar went to… he went to the introduction of the volume, but he did not go to this book, which is the introduction to all the volumes. Here on page 376, you have the sources of the “Dictionary of Sharia.” He took these “Taraddiyat” and others from Ibadi books. You find that Ibadi books constitute more than 90%.
So how can you say that “Taraddi” was taken from a Sunni book? You have said this several times without evidence. You said this “Taraddi” they took from a Sunni book. To this moment, Brother Omar has no evidence that these “Taraddiyat” in the two books are taken from Sunni books.
Now, the topic of the debate is this. I can now say, for example, Ibn Taymiyyah says the companions are disbelievers! Ibn Taymiyyah says the companions are disbelievers based on the Prophet’s hadith: “Do not return after me as disbelievers, striking the necks of one another.” Yes, he said it is a restricted designation, no problem. But he labeled them with the name “disbelievers,” did he not? He said they are disbelievers!
If I want to go away from these texts, I can bring you your takfir of the companions. The people of Nahrawan are not companions? I can bring you this. I can bring you those who besieged Uthman ibn Affan – they are not companions? I can bring you those who fought Imam Ali at the Battle of the Camel and others – they are not companions? I can bring you these texts, and we can discuss this. But what is our topic now? Our topic is this Tafsir and this book. I hope we don’t leave them, we don’t go out from them.
Brother Omar has not been able to prove that the “Taraddiyat” in the two books are Sunni “Taraddiyat” or that they took them from such. Alright, I have other texts once again. I do not leave the topic of research. Every time you leave, I bring you back to the same topic.
Look at these texts that Imam al-Hawari added to his Tafsir. For example, this text… So you don’t say he abridged. You said “abridged.” Pay attention, you said “abridged.” If he abridged and didn’t add anything, why are these texts here? For example, “The general statement of our jurists, Abu Ubaydah, etc.” This text… Search for it in the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. Will you find it?
This other text… “And Abu Ubaydah said” – Abu Ubaydah here means Abu Ubaydah Muslim ibn Abi Karimah. Can you bring these texts from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam? You cannot. Why? An addition by Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, whom you say the Ibadis only took the title of his book? If they only took the title and the Tafsir itself, then the Tafsir would be identical to the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam, wouldn’t it? The two Tafsirs would be presumed to be identical if they only changed the title, as you said. You said they changed the title. You said the “Taraddiyat” are not of Hud al-Muhakkam al-Hawari. Okay, the viewers are waiting for one text… The book “Al-Sunnah”… Did Ibn Abi Zaminayn abridge in the book “Al-Sunnah”? He didn’t abridge it in the Tafsir, or he didn’t abridge it in the book “Al-Sunnah”? He abridged it in another Tafsir. Produce for us from that Tafsir, and produce for us from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam one “Taraddi”! Difficult, very difficult. I now say to you, and I demand the same thing, I say to you, I have not left this topic. You haven’t been able to produce a single text of “Taraddi” from a complete Tafsir! There is no single text of “Taraddi”!
Alright, let’s say the investigator added it. Didn’t the investigator add it? Or didn’t the scribes add it? How is it that this Tafsir has dozens of texts of “Taraddi”? And they are from the original book? Yes. Alright. Yes, okay.
Moderator:
Thank you, thank you, Brother Muhammed. In the next intervention for Brother Omar, then Brother Muhammed, the time will be three minutes. There will be obligations: each guest will ask one question. We are responsible for obligating the guest to answer the question. Thank you, Brother Muhammed. We move to Brother Omar. We have shared your screen. We see what you are also presenting. Brother Omar, go ahead.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Okay, my dear brothers, by Almighty Allah, I don’t know why the guest attacks me and says, “Why did you say it is an abridgment?” My dear brothers, a question: Did my mother, Um Omar al-Zahrani, say this Tafsir is an abridgment? No! Your scholars say that the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari is an abridgment! They said! He is biased! I challenge you! Challenge your scholars! Challenge your investigators, dear teacher, who said it is an abridgment!
“Mukhtasar” (abridged) – Meem, Kha, Ta, Sad, Ra – “Mukhtasar”! When I say it, by Allah, you have the right to tell me, “Omar, give me a page!” The cover page! The cover page!
Okay, and the cover page… It’s a complete Master’s thesis. Dr. Muhammed, share with me, please. This, my dear brothers, is “The Methodology of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari in Tafsir.” The People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria – because al-Hawari is there in Algeria, he’s not Omani.
It’s a complete Master’s thesis. Subhanallah, I read it in one day, finished all of it. This says it is an abridgment, and the investigator himself, the author of the book, says it’s an abridgment. So you… I don’t know why you attack me and get upset at me.
As for Ibn Taymiyyah declaring the companions disbelievers, etc… Where did Ibn Taymiyyah declare the companions disbelievers? Dr. Muhammed, share with me, may Allah bless you. My dear brothers, in the book “Majmu’ al-Fatawa” by Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about what happened between the companions: Ali, Mu’awiyah, Talhah, and Aisha. Are they accountable for it or not? He answered: “It is proven by authentic texts that Uthman, Ali, Talhah, al-Zubayr, and ‘Aisha are among the people of Paradise.” May Allah bless you. That’s enough for me. “People of Paradise” means Muslims, their Islam is proven. Thank you.
On the other hand, what do we have, my dear brothers? What is the catastrophe we have on the other hand? Dr. Muhammed, sorry, share with me… Sorry to bother you… In the book “Dictionary of Sharia” which he used as evidence… What is the problem? I am not bringing another book. He brought it in his clip. He was shocked that the author of the book says: “We disavow after the Prophet the people of the Qibla who are the people of the Qibla. Uthman ibn Affan – we disavow them, we don’t want them. Ali ibn Abi Talib – we disavow him.” It’s not “Imam Ali” or anything. On the contrary, basically, I am sorry for the sermon you gave that day, the sermon of Imam Ali… You disavow him in your books! “And after the Prophet, we disavow the people of the Qibla: Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abi Talib, Talhah, al-Zubayr, Mu’awiyah, Amr ibn al-As, Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, and all who were satisfied with the arbitration of the two arbitrators, their followers, their supporters, and those who ally with them – upon their disbelief and their injustice.”
Oppressors! He tells you Ali ibn Abi Talib is an oppressor, from the people of innovation and followers of whims. And al-Kudami… By Allah, I challenge you to even say that al-Kudami is described as you described the Imam, or as they described the Imam. I challenge you, of course, I don’t say this, but by necessity, you say that al-Kudami is the disbeliever, the one who disavowed… you cannot say that. But what did al-Kudami say about the companions? He said: “Calling them disbelievers.” He said it clearly: “Calling them disbelievers.”
As for the issue… By Allah, since you brought it up, here you are. I obligate you by your own tongue. You said, “By Allah, we have… the one who explained ‘Musnad al-Rabi” is al-Salimi.” Look at what al-Salimi says in “Jawabat al-Imam al-Salimi.” The issue is well-known. You brought it to say he explains the ‘Musnad al-Rabi”. And about Ali ibn Abi Talib, look at what he says: “The issue is well-known among those who agree and those who disagree. However, those who disagree often make excuses for Ali while acknowledging the reality.”
We say, as we say, “We disavow Ali,” even though the reality is that Ali was wrong. Because his Imam, Abdullah ibn Wahb (who removed Ali), said to Ali: “Go away, we don’t want you.” This was after they removed Ali from the Imamate themselves. So the people of Nahrawan who fought Ali, who waged war against Ali, are the ones in the right (muhaqqun). And those who fought them are the ones in the wrong (mubtilun). Whoever understands this, it is obligatory upon them… and those who fought them means Ali, who fought the people of Nahrawan, is in the wrong. And he is not accused of otherwise. Likewise, disavowal of those who fought them is obligatory.
Who is al-Salimi? The al-Salimi you brought? Not me, by Allah, I didn’t bring him. The al-Salimi you brought! Moreover, al-Salimi says later… he tries to soften the expression a little. He says: “It is not from our religion to insult, nor from our school of thought to criticize. We have seen among the specific group (the Ibadis) and the general public (the Sunnis) that we have not seen anyone criticize those who passed, or insult, or curse. People are safe from that.”
Fine. Even if you don’t curse him… If he believes in the allegiance (walayah) of the people of Nahrawan and the disavowal (bara’ah) of those who fought them, fulfilling an obligation from Allah’s religion, without insult, obscenity, or condemnation… except for what occurred with Ibn al-Nadhar in his ‘Lamyyah’ poem. His intention (may Allah forgive him) was to show the truth, but anger for the sake of Allah led him to utter a curse. He started cursing and insulting Ali in his poem. May Allah forgive him. He cursed Ali ibn Abi Talib. May Allah forgive him. He said “May Allah curse him” in the poem. What was appropriate for the school of thought was to clarify who is right and who is wrong. You just say Ali was wrong, but don’t go and curse him. He went to extremes in his statement. What did he say in the poem? “That Ali is in the lowest depth (of Hell).” Ali ibn Abi Talib is in the lowest depth, Ali ibn Abi Talib is in Hell. This is from Ibn al-Nadhar.
I challenge you yourself to denounce Ibn al-Nadhar. But what does al-Salimi say? “May Allah forgive him.” “Allah forgive him, he cursed Ali…” “May Allah curse him”? “He insulted Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah forgive him.” He said Ali is in the Hellfire, in the lowest depth. “May Allah forgive him.” This is your al-Salimi that you brought!
Not me, “May Allah forgive him”…
Moderator:
Yes, yes. Okay, Brother Omar, I thank you. Brother Muhammed, we will start from now. You will take five minutes. In the last five minutes, you will ask Brother Omar a question, and he is obligated to answer it, and vice versa. Brother Muhammed, go ahead.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Excellent. But, my teacher, we are Muslims according to their conditions. We stipulated not to leave the topic. Brother Omar, every statement he makes leaves the topic. Every round, he leaves the topic of the Tafsir of Imam al-Hawari and the “Dictionary of Sharia.” Almost every statement he makes leaves them. Excellent. So I hope Brother Omar adheres to the hadith of the Prophet (saw). And you, Brother Muhammed, also remind him. Excellent.
Let’s come back to the Tafsir again, Brother Omar. You say the scholars, our scholars, say it’s an abridgment. You yourself read the introduction. Let’s open the clip if… Go ahead. This…Open this.Aha…Is the clip appearing? The reader assumes, like yourself… Yes. That his statement is just audio. Yes, go ahead.
Moderator:
No, we can’t play a video. I can share a screenshot, a picture. Brother Muhammed, you can play the audio. You can let me hear the audio. You can play the audio without showing anything. No problem, we hear the audio if you want.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
No problem, no problem. I will state what Brother Omar says and he denies it. We will open this. He says that Brother Omar, after reading the introduction, says he discovered the texts are similar between the two Tafsirs after comparison. I tell you now: By comparison, I say the investigator is wrong.
By comparison, can you prove to me that the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari is an abridgment? This is one of the things you were mistaken about. You said it’s an abridgment once, and that he didn’t add anything. Then in the debate, you said he added what benefits him, what benefits the Ibadi school of thought. You said this in front of people. Third, you said the “Taraddiyat” are not his.
In this statement of yours, Brother Omar, you said the “Taraddiyat” are not his. How do you prove they are not his? You have two methods, one method: to bring these “Taraddiyat” from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. Can you bring these “Taraddiyat” from the texts that contain prayers for mercy on Imam Ali from the book of Yahya ibn Salam?
You will move to another topic. I know this. And you will not be able to bring texts that pray for mercy on Imam Ali from the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn either. Excellent.
How much time is left? Excellent.
What I want to raise, as I told you, Brother Omar… Even the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn is an incomplete Tafsir. You have two incomplete Tafsirs. If you want to go back to the original texts of Yahya ibn Salam’s book, you are dependent on the Ibadis. You need the Ibadis. The person who transmitted the most texts of Yahya ibn Salam are the Ibadis. This Tafsir is not less than others… The Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn is much more incomplete. This is what he said in the preface.
I will show the preface..I think…They don’t lie…
No, Take it out, take it out from my display, or the viewer will go back to it later. No problem. If it doesn’t appear on my screen… He said this in the preface, on page 117. He says in the preface: “I found a lot of repetition in it” – meaning what? The book of Yahya ibn Salam – “and hadiths that the science of Tafsir can do without. So the book became lengthy.” Then in the next line: “So I abridged its repetitions and some of its hadiths.” If you look at the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn, it’s a very severe abridgment. There’s no… I mean, there’s no… Even the “Taraddiyat” are not present. Excellent.
Now, what we obligate you with, Brother Omar… We obligate you to either bring a text… We want to finish this issue so we can move to other things you raised. Either you bring a text with “Taraddi” from the two Tafsirs. I gave you two, not one. I made it very easy for you. One text from two Tafsirs! Okay, or admit and say it does not exist. Yahya ibn Salam did not pray for mercy. This is what we want. Go ahead…
Moderator:
Doctor…Okay, Brother Muhammed. Sorry, Brother Omar, this is one. The formulation of your question again, in a sentence, Brother Muhammed.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
I say to Brother Omar: Are there “Taraddiyat” in the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam and in the book of Ibn Abi Zaminayn? The two Tafsirs, don’t bring the book “Al-Sunnah”. The two Tafsirs. Are there “Taraddiyat” in them? If there are, then show us one “Taraddi” from the two Tafsirs. Just one from the two Tafsirs. I show you dozens of texts. I want one from the two Tafsirs. Just one. Go ahead.
Moderator:
Thank you, Brother Muhammed. Brother Omar, you have five minutes to answer the question, and you continue. At the end of your intervention, you will ask your question. Go ahead.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
I’m ready, Dr. Muhammed. But could you share with me and be there? If you don’t mind, just share this text for me… Yes, Dr. Muhammed. Sorry, I apologize. Could you just read this word for me? “Ali ibn Abi Talib”… what? It’s very far away. Enlarge the picture on your end. The words…”Ali ibn Abi Talib”… what? It’s not clear.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
This is not the Tafsir. It’s a book.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
La ilaha illa Allah. “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu” also. O Ali, “Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu” for Ibn Abi Zaminayn. In “Al-Sunnah”? In Shia? In Tafsir? This is not my question. You asked for the “Taraddi.” I brought you the “Taraddi” from the same scholar. I didn’t change my word. From Ibn Abi Zaminayn. You tell me “in another book”. Since when am I committed to one book just so you can obligate me with something I am not committed to?
My teacher, now, Professor Muhammed, this is my time. Did you see? The first one who started changing the conditions is you! Then he accuses me of not adhering to the condition. We agreed not to interrupt during the time. He started interrupting me. Then, by Almighty Allah, it’s a catastrophe. He says, “We have Imam al-Salimi, he explained such and such.” Yes, Imam al-Salimi is good. Why, when I respond to him from Imam al-Salimi, he says “this is leaving the topic”? By Allah, this is not leaving the topic. I obligate you with the scholar you brought yourself. Do you understand, good people? So it’s not reasonable that I respond 1000 times, then he comes back and asks me the same question: “Ali, Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu” in the book “Uṣūl al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn. You tell me, “I want from the Tafsir.” Sorry, respect… It’s not up to you. It exists in this book. Why do you obligate me? Because we don’t commit to it? It exists in this book.
The second issue: You will say we have additions. I know there are additions. I tell you there are additions. 9%? 95% of al-Hawari’s Tafsir is taken from the book of Yahya ibn Salam. You tell me there are additions. I know there are additions. I myself read earlier for you. I told you there are changes, omissions of some verses, some interpretations that do not benefit his school of thought, as I said from the beginning. So it’s not reasonable that I say something and he repeats it. Catastrophe, by Almighty Allah, catastrophe. Okay, and every time I give him something, he doesn’t respond to it.
Dr. Muhammed, you are present, Allah willing, or not? Look at the agreement, Dr. Muhammed, before we started the stream. Didn’t the guest himself say we will talk about the “Taraddi” on Imam Ali? Didn’t he say this, Dr. Muhammed? Sorry… Dr. Muhammed… Dr. Muhammed is the channel owner.
Moderator:
Yes, he pointed out, yes, he pointed this out, may Allah
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Excellent! Did you see, my dear brothers? The one he accuses of fleeing and leaving the topic… we agreed on this. So now, when I talk and give him from other books, I have the right, by the way, to use any book as evidence. Nevertheless, I commit to bringing from the books you bring. The topic of “Taraddi” you requested… I swear by Allah that in the introduction, and with the clear admission just now… he said “we talk about ‘Taraddi’ on Imam Ali.” When we talk about “Taraddi”, he says “this is not our topic, you left the topic”. I did not leave the topic. I am speaking directly about the topic, which is “Taraddi”! Got it? When is it considered leaving the topic? Okay, my dear brothers, may Allah bless you. Look at the screen. I will talk about the topic which is “Taraddi on Imam Ali”.
Moderator:
Yes, but Brother Omar, I will add time for you, don’t worry. But the topic of “Taraddi” was an integral part of the main title, not the primary title. Correct? Go ahead.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Excellent, and that’s what I brought. I brought the “Taraddi” and explained the words of the scholars. The problem is the words of the investigators… he doesn’t accept them. I bring him from… where should I bring from? Should my mother speak? Should my father speak? He starts explaining. Not reasonable, my dear brother. I bring him from his own investigators, he doesn’t accept. Master’s theses, he doesn’t accept. Who should I bring to explain to him? He says “this is refinement, this is not refinement”. No one from your side said it’s refinement. You said it’s refinement. Your investigators, what do they say? The investigators say it’s an abridgment. The researchers, Masters, a Master’s thesis on his biography, they say abridgment. So what should I do for you? Is there a problem? I give him from books, he doesn’t accept. He says the investigator made a mistake. I challenge you to show me one mistake the investigator made. You are the first one mistaken about him. If it wasn’t for this, by the way, I read the biography of this investigator from the beginning. The poor man died, his back was bent from how much he sat to compile for you. I saw the manuscripts myself. His eyes were exhausted. This poor man came to verify your books for you. At the end of it, you coldly say “the investigator made mistakes”. No, the investigator did not make a mistake. If it wasn’t for this investigator, al-Sharifi, you wouldn’t have al-Hawari’s Tafsir! He said, “By Allah, I found it after 1100 years, I don’t know where it was thrown away, in the ‘Kabt’? We found scattered manuscripts, brought them together, compiled the book.” This is what he says, by Allah, in the introduction. All this is present.
Okay, now, my dear brothers, on the topic of “Taraddi on Imam Ali”… Dr. Muhammed, share with me, may Allah bless you. Dr. Muhammed, share, please.
Okay, my dear brothers, may Allah reward you. Look at the screen. He says in “Al-Siyar wal-Jawabat” for the scholars and Imams of Oman, Volume 2: “We said to them: Likewise, Allah commanded Ali to fight them, so it is not permissible for him to abandon that nor to consider it forbidden to kill them until they fulfill the command of Allah.” This is evidence of the disbelief and misguidance of Ali, and the correctness and justice of the people of Nahrawan. “Then Ali (Allah scattered his command) was killed by Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam out of anger for Allah, and that was permissible for him because he killed him.” Allah! “Those who command justice from the people. May Allah have mercy on Abd al-Rahman” – not Abd al-Rahman, son of my uncle, no – “May Allah have mercy on Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam. Yes, may Allah have mercy on Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam, the killer of Ali!” Did you see? Did you see this? This is what you have! “May Allah have mercy on Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam who killed Ali.” So, clarify for us…
Moderator:
Thank you, Brother Omar. Where is your question? Your question?
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
This is my question. The author of the “Dictionary of Sharia”: does he disavow Ali ibn Abi Talib or not? A clear question. I want a clear answer.
Moderator:
Thank you, Brother Muhammed. Go ahead.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
My dear teacher, first, I think you remember that what I requested from him was a “Taraddi” from the two Tafsirs. You, Professor Muhammed, did not obligate him for this. Sorry. I requested a “Taraddi” from the two Tafsirs. I did not request from the book “Al-Sunnah”. Why did I request from the two Tafsirs? To prove that this book, Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, is the one who prayed for mercy. You bring me from the book “Al-Sunnah”? He abridged it in the Tafsir, not in “Al-Sunnah”!
I say to you, this “Taraddi” here… this “Taraddi” here is the original, not the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. This is the first thing.
Secondly, you contradict yourself. You say al-Muhakkam added additions, then you say it is an abridgment. How can it be an abridgment if he adds things? Addition is called refinement! Addition, arrangement, and comments are called refinement. You are contradicting yourself now.
Leave this. You have not been able to bring a single “Taraddi” from the two Tafsirs. I hope you obligate this. You say I am the first person who opposed the conditions. Brother Omar, you leave the topic every time. How am I the first person to oppose the conditions? Likewise, you go to other books to lead us to other topics. I will answer the issue of the “Dictionary of Sharia.” I already answered you originally that “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'” among the Ibadis applies to a specific person. It applies to a specific person. This is known to every Ibadi. If I disavow Imam Ali, this binds me alone. It does not bind the others. It does not bind you. It binds me alone. But if so-and-so, likewise Imam Ali, that binds him alone. This is all about “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'” with us. Except, its allegiance and disavowal are realities with us… it has categories. That’s a completely different topic.
Therefore, our topic is this Tafsir. These are things you must study the books of the Ibadis and study “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'” and other things before entering these topics, so you are aware of this. Don’t bring me texts, understand?
Now, this Tafsir… I tell you, this Tafsir and this book relied in its “Taraddi” on Ibadi books. You say it relied on Sunni books. We want… No problem. It relied on Sunni books. We want evidence that it relied on Sunni books. This you say… or that the “Taraddi” in it is a “Taraddi” of Yahya ibn Salam. No problem. Let’s say it’s a “Taraddi” of Yahya ibn Salam. But where is the evidence that it is a “Taraddi” of Yahya ibn Salam?
You say 95% of the Tafsir is taken from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. I tell you that only 22 surahs of Yahya ibn Salam’s Tafsir exist today! How are you going to prove this? You say things like this without being able to prove them, Brother Omar. I tell you: open Surat Al-Fatihah today in Yahya ibn Salam’s book so we can compare. You cannot. Why? Because it’s not there. That’s one.
The other issue: the texts he added – how can 95% be from Yahya ibn Salam’s book? The aqeedah, fiqh, and other additions, and the Tafsirs from al-Rabi’, etc. – where are these from? They are not from Yahya ibn Salam. So I hope you stay on topic with these two books.
Likewise, I mentioned Imam al-Salimi in response to you on the point about chains of transmission and the point that the investigator says this is a flaw in the Tafsir, but in reality, it is a feature for the Ibadis. Beyond this, now… I remain on the same challenge because you haven’t answered it. Truthfully. We want one “Taraddi” from the two Tafsirs. I have other questions, other matters. But we want this. We want clarification. We want a statement that the “Taraddiyat” are original in this book. You bring me the book “Al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn. What does the book “Al-Sunnah” have to do with it? Sorry, he abridged the Tafsir in another book called “Al-Tafsir”. Let’s open the Tafsir of Ibn Zaminayn. No problem. Or bring it out here, it would be clearer.
This is “Tafsir al-Quran al-Aziz”. I don’t know if it’s clear or not. “Tafsir al-Quran al-Aziz” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn. This book. Excellent. Bring out a “Taraddi” from it now. Two Tafsirs! I tell you two Tafsirs. You cannot bring me a single “Taraddi”. What does this mean? It means that the “Taraddi” was original in the book of Yahya ibn Salam. This is the challenge, my teacher.
Moderator:
Is this your question? And you built the challenge upon it. Brother Omar (he misspoke and meant brother Muhammed) wants a “Taraddi” from the two books he relies on.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
My teacher, okay, if possible, enlarge me, may Allah bless you. My dear brothers, I tell you now: For example, this product exists in this supermarket. You go to another supermarket… Why? I tell you, the “Taraddi” exists in the book “Uṣūl al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn – the same scholar, but in a different book! By Almighty Allah, it’s a catastrophe, my dear brother. It exists in that book! It’s a disaster, by Almighty Allah. How many times do we return and explain this? It exists in this book. No problem. It exists in any book. It exists in the book “Uṣūl al-Sunnah” by Ibn Abi Zaminayn. You tell me, “It doesn’t exist in the Tafsir.” That’s my least concern. Okay, let it exist in “Uṣūl al-Sunnah”. Your problem is you obligate us with an issue we don’t want. It doesn’t matter to me if it exists in “Uṣūl al-Sunnah” or in the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn. In the end, it’s the same scholar himself, the same man, Ibn Abi Zaminayn. So this is exactly my point.
Okay, my dear brothers, let’s go back once again. My dear brothers, when he says the Tafsir of al-Hawari is an abridgment… Omar, do you get this statement from your pocket or from a book? You are reading, I tell you, by Allah, from a book! He says: “Today, and after more than years of investigation, comparison, and induction, I can say without hesitation that Shaykh Hud al-Hawari relied heavily, if not completely, on the Tafsir of Ibn Salam al-Basri.” He relied completely, fully, totally!
My dear brothers, I’ll spoil it from the beginning, by Almighty Allah. I came to give you this research: a person named Hud al-Hawari – you want it in Arabic – there is no person named Hud al-Hawari! Evidence for my statement… Enlarge me, please. In this source I presented, the book “The Methodology of Hud al-Hawari”, it says: “The second branch: His birth and death. The Ibadi sources, nor others, have not determined the century in which the Shaykh was born, nor the year of his death. It is not known when he was born, when he died, who he is. No one knows him.” Additionally, his travels and sheikhs: “His travels – where did he travel? And who are his shyookh? Did he leave his country in travels seeking knowledge? Who are his sheikhs whom he sat with and took from? The Ibadi sources have completely omitted talking about the travels of Hud al-Hawari and his sheikhs, except for his father. So his only sheikh was his father! They don’t have a dirham! Even the commentator Hud himself did not tell us about his academic life.”
Because no one knows! How did they get this book of Tafsir? Al-Sharifi from Algeria came. He said: “I found with us a manuscript from 1100 years ago. I took it, compiled it, wrote it.” A person named Hud al-Hawari – who is he? We don’t know. Then we find the investigator asserting that there is no trace of any mention of his shyookh in the Tafsir. He says: “I tried hard to find a reference to some of his shyookh within his Tafsir, but I did not come across any of them.” Talking about the travels of Hud and his shyookh is mere guesswork. This is the reality, brothers. No one knows him. He even says: “The Tafsir of Hud remained for more than 11 centuries, 1100 years, forgotten, obscure. It did not exist until scattered manuscripts appeared in some private libraries.” He found a manuscript in a library. “Come on, this is Tafsir.” Meanwhile, the Tafsir of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah… look where it exists! Look how they took it, researched it, and revised it! This is the issue.
Okay, my dear brothers, let’s go back to the topic of “Taraddi” which we agreed on from the beginning: “Taraddi” on Imam Ali. Basically, the whole issue revolves around “Taraddi” on Ali ibn Abi Talib. Okay, “Al-Jawahir al-Muntaqa” by the scholar Abu al-Qasim ibn Ibrahim al-Baraddi. It says: “But Ali insisted on arbitration, so they left him and he left them. They disavowed him (bari’u minhu) and he disavowed them (tabarra’a minhum). Ali fought them – Ali fought the people of Nahrawan, meaning he fought them while they were ‘Hujjatullah’ (Allah’s proof).” Meaning the truth was with them, the truth was with those whom Ali fought. Oh, peace!
And in the book of Abu Sufyan Mahbub (may Allah be pleased with you): “I asked Abu Sufyan about the statement of the Muslims regarding Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam. He said: ‘I have not heard anyone praise him nor criticize him, and nothing has reached me about him.’ I said: ‘Perhaps that is due to treachery…’ He said: ‘No, I have come across a biography attributed to Shaykh Abi al-Hasan al-Bisyawi.'” Not “al-Basyawi” – some say “al-Bisyawi” is a mistake, it’s “al-Bisyawi” with kasra. Do you know any of his students? Students of Ibn Barakah. Who is Ibn Barakah? Abdullah ibn Muhammed ibn Barakah, a scholar from the major scholars of the Ibadis, al-Zahrani. Yes. “In it, he mentions the Imams of the Muslims and their shyookh, and those who were people of ‘Al-Wala’ wal-Bara’. He explicitly states in it the disavowal (al-bara’ah) of Ali, disavows Ali, and the allegiance (walayah) to Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam, and being pleased with him, and praying for mercy on him (tarahhum).” Meaning “May Allah have mercy on Ibn Muljam, and may Allah be pleased with him”, and disavows Ali ibn Abi Talib. So, when we shocked him with the book “Dictionary of Sharia” (which I didn’t bring, he brought it), he said “this applies to him, not to us.” You used it as evidence, and now you say it applies to him? Oh, peace…
Moderator:
Yes, where is your question, Brother Omar?
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
This is the question, the second time. I want a clear answer, yes or no. Does Imam al-Salimi and the author of the “Dictionary of Sharia”, al-Sa’di – answer yes or no – do they pray for mercy on Imam Ali or do they disavow him, as individuals? I want this answer: yes, they pray for mercy, or no, they disavow? Clear.
Moderator:
Thank you, Brother Omar. Brother Muhammed, go ahead.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Professor Muhammed, remind me of the title of the debate, if you please. Remind me of the title of the debate, Professor Muhammed. I think the “Taraddiyat” we are requesting in this debate are related to…
Moderator:
I said, kind sir, I said and pointed out, I said that “Taraddi” was an integral part of the main title, not the primary title.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Thank you, may Allah reward you. This is a clear, good admission that Brother Omar leaves the topics and goes to other books, and this is not the topic of the debate. My topic is to prove that the “Taraddiyat” in these two books are original “Taraddiyat” for the authors of the two books. This is my topic today. I came for this.
You go and talk about “bara’ah” (disavowal) and such. What do I care? Prove to me that the authors of these two books do not pray for mercy. That’s it. Excellent. You go and talk about the book “Al-Sunnah”. I ask you: what is the origin of this book? Is it not the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam? Yahya ibn Salam. If you want to say that this “Taraddi” text is originally from Yahya ibn Salam, how do you say that? You go and bring this text from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. Very simple. Very simple. I bring texts from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam and from the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. He prays for mercy. Let’s open the text again, please.
Let’s open the text again. This text you opened and used as evidence. This… Go ahead… Excellent. This text in the two Tafsirs. Yahya ibn Salam… Look at the scientific matter. Look at the scientific comparison like this. You compare. You have two books. The same text. The text exists in the book of Yahya ibn Salam. It exists in the “Tafsir Kitab Allah al-Aziz” of al-Muhakkam al-Hawari, Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. He prays for mercy. Yahya ibn Salam did not pray for mercy. This is the comparison. We came for these two books, for these two books. This text is clear in Surat An-Nur. Search for them. I have many other texts.
You mention the book “Al-Sunnah”. Is the origin of the book “Al-Sunnah” the book of Yahya ibn Salam? No. The Tafsir! May Allah bless you. The Tafsir book! Bring me a text from the two Tafsirs. You mention Ibn Barakah and Imam al-Salimi, and this is not the debate. Stay on the topic of the debate. You have run out of arguments. You have nothing to say about these two books that we came to debate about, these two books.
I can, by the way, answer all the questions, everything you raised with texts. I can answer you starting from the topic of “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'”. No problem. Do you want us to stay on the topic of “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'” today, open the books of the Ibadis on “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'”, and explain the conditions of “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara'” to understand these texts? No problem. Even if it leads to another discussion, I have no problem. But what is the title of the debate, Professor Muhammed? Please remind us.
Professor Muhammed?
These two Tafsirs, the topic of the debate, and the “Taraddi” within them. You say the topic of the debate is “Taraddi”. Yes, in “Taraddi”. But in these two books! Prove to us that the “Taraddi” is not from the original books! It’s a difficult topic. It seems very difficult. I think Professor Muhammed disconnected…
Moderator:
Okay. Now, Brother Muhammed, from my point of view, if the books you have confirm this “Taraddi”, you have confirmed this matter, sir.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
I indeed confirmed it. I presented texts of “Taraddi” from this book and from this book. Brother Omar says the “Taraddiyat” in these two books – his argument is that they are not from the original book or the author does not believe in them. That’s what he said. Excellent. That’s what he said. I came to this debate for this topic.
Yes. Can he prove that the “Taraddiyat” are not Ibadi “Taraddiyat”? Starting with the Tafsir. I was generous and gave him two Tafsirs. Yes. Tafsir, Tafsir.
Moderator:
Yes, your message is taken. Okay, I always say something, and the “Facts of Religions” channel says… Brother Muhammed, Brother Omar knows this: the data being presented now… the respected viewers who have a right on the program and a right on you… let them choose. The debate is clear, and the presentation is clear. But between this and that, there must be a dialectic component. I won’t start it now. Sorry, Brother Omar will take an intervention, and Brother Muhammad will take an intervention. Then there will be a dialectic segment. This segment is vital for the viewer. Afterwards, we will leave the judgment to the Lord of the Worlds. Go ahead, Brother Omar.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Dr. Muhammed, before I take my turn, a question. The thing that Brother Muhammad al-Rashidi wants from me: to give him one “Taraddi” from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. If I bring it, have I answered the question? Correct?
Moderator:
Professor, I will allow you to interact with… I will stop the timer now. A procedural point. Because what he must answer, he must answer. Go ahead, interact with him.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
My teacher, to be clear, to be clear: What does Brother Omar say? He says the “Taraddiyat” in this book are “Taraddiyat” of Yahya ibn Salam, not “Taraddiyat” of Hud al-Muhakkam al-Hawari. Excellent? Excellent! Now, bring us a text from here and from here so we can compare. Or to say this, for your statement to be complete, the book must be complete. But I obligate you to only what exists in Yahya ibn Salam’s book, 22 surahs.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
The question is clear. If I bring a “Taraddi” on Ali ibn Abi Talib from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam, then I have answered your question.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Yahya ibn Salam’s Tafsir or Ibn Abi Zamin’s.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Excellent. If I bring it, I have answered your question. You won’t repeat the question. Okay, Dr. Muhammed… Another thing… Just before this, another thing. But I answered you now. My dear brothers… Tafsir…Yahya ibn Salam. From the very first debate, I challenged. Yahya ibn Salam. Part 1, page 241. “And Abu Al-Ash’ath narrated to me from Abu Ishaq al-Hamdani, he said: I heard Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him…” Spare me! From where? From the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam! I wanted to drag you, drag you, drag you, so I could know that I will answer you in the end. Did you see, my dear brothers? I fled the topic? No, I returned to the topic. I brought your request precisely. “Ali ibn Abi Talib, Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu” – from the same book! By Allah, are we being fair or not? By Allah, fair.
Okay, my dear brothers, now that I have answered his question, I have the right to use my rocket launcher now. My dear brothers, Dr. Muhammed, share with me, may Allah bless you, so we can read these texts. Okay.
My dear brothers, in the book “Sharh Kitab al-Nil wa Shifa’ al-Alil” by Muhammed ibn Yusuf al-Tayyish (an Algerian scholar, but Ibadi). “According to the effect, no one is appointed to the Imamate except one for whom the Muslim scholars have concluded and whose Imamate was valid. Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz (his Imamate was valid) due to the correctness of his conduct, but the Muslims did not appoint him because they did not put him forward, it is said. What is well-known is that they did not appoint him because he did not disavow Uthman.” Disavowal of Uthman! Beautiful!
“Al-Siyar wal-Jawabat” – we read it earlier. “Al-‘Uqud al-Fiddiyyah fi Usul al-Ibadi” by al-Harithi. It says: “The answer: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. From Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi, who removed Ali, and Zayd ibn Hisn (or Husayn), and those with them from the Muslims, to Ali ibn Abi Talib: Peace be upon whoever follows the guidance. We praise Allah besides whom there is no deity. To proceed: Your letter has reached us, mentioning that the two arbitrators discarded the Book of Allah and judged by other than what Allah revealed. We have known, praise be to Allah, that their matter was contrary to the truth from the beginning. By appointing them as arbitrators, you committed a greater crime than both of them, O Ali! You, when you appointed them, your crime is greater. If you are truthful, then enter into what the Muslims have entered in obedience to Allah and His Messenger… And who? …Not your Imamate. The Imam of the Muslims is Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi.” He became the Imam of the Muslims. He removed Ali and put himself in place. “We have pledged allegiance to him after we removed you, O you who are removed (ya makhlu’), because you deserved to be removed by us. It is not possible for us to do otherwise. You must be removed. And peace be upon you.”
Al-Qutb Muhammed ibn Yusuf al-Jaza’iri, the Ibadi, one of the verifying scholars, said: “If you say, ‘Why do they not accept his repentance and return him as an Imam?’ I say: He insisted on arbitration, appeased Mu’awiyah, commanded what is false, refused to repent, repented but broke his promise as mentioned, continued breaking the promise, deserved removal, rather he removed himself, so it was permissible to appoint someone else.”
As for the claim of repentance… They say Ali repented. He claimed repentance after the appointment of Abdullah ibn Wahb. Meaning he claimed repentance after they appointed Abdullah ibn Wahb. So it’s too late.
These books… Okay. Also, we read the “Dictionary of Sharia”: “And after the Prophet, we disavow the people of the Qibla: Uthman ibn Affan and Ali ibn Abi Talib – we disavow him, Ali ibn Abi Talib…” Why? Because they are upon disbelief and injustice, from the people of innovation and followers of whims. And al-Kudami, what does he say? “We agree with them on the disavowal of those named, calling them disbelievers.” Disbelievers! Who is the disbeliever? Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abi Talib, Talhah, al-Zubayr, Mu’awiyah, Amr ibn al-As, Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, and all who were satisfied with the arbitration of the two arbitrators and abandoned the judgment of Allah.
The issue is over. So, your takfir of us – we brought it. Your call to kill us – naturally, from your Ibadi books. I’m not saying this represents every Ibadi, no. It exists in your books. I criticize it.
Moderator:
What do you mean “your call to kill us,” Brother Omar?
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
It’s a problem. He threw the word. I didn’t start it with him. He threw it. He said, “We don’t label you as you label us, declaring us disbelievers, etc.” Declare us disbelievers or not, O good people? The answer is they declared us disbelievers. Okay. Evidence for this statement is that they declared us disbelievers. Let’s look at the screen. Okay, if possible, share, Dr. Muhammed. Okay. The book “Lubab al-Athar”: “Issue: About Shaykh Ahmad ibn Madad. What do you say about all the other schools of thought, everyone other than the Ibadi school? What do you say about them? Is it permissible to declare them mistaken and misguided? Is it permissible to curse them (Yal’anuhum)? And ablution does not break for the one who does that…”
Moderator:
Sorry, sorry, the phrase says… “Yal’anuhum”? It says… Go back, the phrase again. It doesn’t say “Yal’anuhum”, my teacher. Where did you get “Yal’anuhum” from?Wait, wait. Amanat al-naql (Faithful transmission). “Yal’anuhum” – what does it mean? The correct is “Yal’anuhum” (they curse them).
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
I don’t know, what is the phrase?
Moderator:
A moment. Ask me “curse”. Tell me, where is the curse? Mistake and misguidance… and now see the catastrophe. Okay, I say there is no curse.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Yes, “It is permissible. For he has spoken the truth, the correct, and the honest. Because all our opponents from other schools are, with us, perishing.” Come on, not cursed? Perishing! “Innovators in religion, heretics, ungrateful disbelievers, hypocrites, oppressors. The Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and the consensus of the Muslims testify to that.” Okay. “Whoever dies on other than the Ibadi religion…” Where is he? Disneyland? No, he is in the Fire, certainly. With this we testify, not just statements… with this we testify and declare our religion. “Whoever doubts the Ibadi religion, if you doubt the Ibadis are wrong, and claims the truth is in other than the Ibadi religion, is, with us, an ungrateful disbeliever, a sinner, a hypocrite, a misguided innovator, an innovator in religion – doomed.”
Moderator:
We will stop here. Stop here. Thank you, Brother Omar. We will move quickly to Brother Muhammed, who is worthy of interacting with this data.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
May Allah reward you and thank you very much for this beautiful debate. But Brother Omar, where did you get that “Taraddi” from, may Allah bless you? Could you open the PDF of the book on the same page for us? I have read both books, read the Tafsirs, Brother Omar. I did not find a single “Taraddi”. Where did you bring this “Taraddi” from? This book… on the same page that Brother Omar opened, he mentioned “Ali ibn Abi Talib”. The PDF, I don’t know if it’s clear or not… Excellent. It exists. He did not pray for mercy on him. Here, on the same page, in the same hadith that Brother Omar showed… Where did you get that “Taraddi” from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam? It’s okay. If you want to show now, in my time, the PDF and hack the book, no problem, I have no problem. Hack the PDF and show us this “Taraddi”. I know the two books. I know the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam and the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn. There are no “Taraddiyat” in them. This “Taraddi” is new to me. I have not seen it before. Excellent.
The issues raised by Brother Omar, once again, I tell you, the debate is about these two books. Don’t drag me to another topic. The debate is about these two books. Any escape from these two books is considered weakness, considered an admission by you that they prayed for mercy on Imam Ali. We’re done. We’re done.
You talk about takfir… First, I did not say “you declare us disbelievers and we do not declare you disbelievers”. I did not say that. I said the Ibadis do not pass judgment on their opponent based on what their opponent has within them. Excellent. When you mentioned the statements of the Shia, I told you that the Ibadis… and that they declared us disbelievers… we do not declare them disbelievers except if those reasons occur. If those reasons occur, we declare them disbelievers. No problem. Excellent. But if those reasons do not occur… not just because they declared us disbelievers, we declare them disbelievers.
Likewise, unlike you, because you declare us disbelievers, we declare you disbelievers if those reasons occur. No problem. We declare you disbelievers. What is takfir? Is not takfir from Allah’s religion, Glorified and Exalted be He, if disbelief occurs? Is it not in Allah’s religion? No problem. So, we agree on this. We do not declare our opponent a disbeliever simply because our opponent declares us a disbeliever. Once again, Brother Omar, where did you bring that “Taraddi” from? Honestly, I see this “Taraddi” for the first time. If you could, Brother Muhammed, stress this, so we can see this “Taraddi” in a PDF book, for example. Because this PDF I have does not have it, this website also does not have it, and Al-Shamilah does not have it.
Moderator:
Since the viewers have a right on you, and the channel has a right, there will be a dialectic segment now between you and the professor. Please, go ahead.
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Excellent.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
Okay, my dear brothers, as I showed you in the editions… I tell you with all honesty, there are editions that pray for mercy on Ali, and there are editions that do not pray for mercy on Ali. So, I came now… No, please, I now obligate you in the same way… What did he do? No, no… The dialectic, go ahead. Yes.
Look, my dear brothers… So as in the Tafsir of al-Hawari… Look, brothers, look how… There are words in the editions where it says “The Messenger of Allah” and stops. In other editions, it says “Salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam”. So now, how do you prove to us that this is the words of the investigator or the words of the author of the book? The prayer upon the Prophet – is it the words of the investigator or the words of al-Hawari?
Muhammed Al Rashidi speaks:
Excellent. I talked about the prayer upon the Prophet, not the “Taraddi” on Imam Ali.
Omar Al-Zahrani speaks:
The prayer upon the Prophet is greater! The prayer upon the Prophet is greater!
PRIMA QUR’AN COMMMENTS:
Dear readers at this point in the debate there is lots of interruptions and the exchange is free flowing. We will try and break this down differently here.
Omar Al Zahrani: The debate about what? Just answer me this: “Salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam” – this addition is from whom?
Omar Al Zahrani: This addition is from whom? I will show you what you presented. I will show you what you presented on the debate account. I know what you presented. This prayer, this prayer is an addition by whom? You presented… The prayer is an addition by whom? We talked…
Omar Al Zahrani: Just answer. Explain to me. Why am I telling you? What do I have to do with the prayer? Because editions differ. You have editions that do not include the prayer, and you have editions that do include the prayer.
Omar Al Zahrani: So why, when you came to me… why, when you came to the “Taraddi”, are there editions that pray for mercy? Are there editions that pray for mercy? We showed, we showed. Go ahead. I gave you this text earlier.
Omar Al Zahrani: Go ahead, go ahead. Show it to us. Let’s see it.
Omar Al Zahrani: I gave you this text. Go ahead.
Omar Al Zahrani: This is the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam: “Ali ibn Abi Talib, Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu”?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, no, no. It’s the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, not the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam.
Omar Al Zahrani: Now we’re back. Now we’re back. Yes, see how he couldn’t…
Omar Al Zahrani: Now it became… Now it became the Tafsir of…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, no. The prayer upon the Prophet – where did you bring it from? The prayer upon the Prophet – where did you bring it from? It’s not from the Tafsir…
Omar Al Zahrani: This is my question to you. I asked you. You brought it. Go ahead with it.
Omar Al Zahrani: May Allah bless you.
Omar Al Zahrani: This is my question. You turned the question back on me?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, no, I didn’t turn the question back on you. You… the prayer upon the Prophet…
Omar Al Zahrani: My teacher, may Allah bless you. The prayer upon the Prophet: the investigator says he added it.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Wonderful. But from which book?
Omar Al Zahrani: How should I know? You have to ask the investigator. Not me.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: The investigator’s addition.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: From which book? Which book did you present where there is an investigator’s addition?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Al-Hawari. Excellent. Then give us a text in the book of al-Hawari indicating that there are texts or editions that did not mention… You don’t bring me Yahya ibn Salam. This is the statement, Professor. He said “The Messenger of Allah”. He, the one who added it, he says to you in the margin: “An addition that is necessary,” he added it.
Omar Al Zahrani: Wonderful, excellent. I am with you on this. Now you say there are editions that include it and editions that don’t. I say to you: show me an edition of the “Tafsir Kitab Allah al-Aziz” that says “An addition that is necessary” – who added it? Understand? Not the author of the book. He says to you: “An addition that is necessary.”
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No problem, I’m with you. I talked about the “Taraddi”.
Omar Al Zahrani: Excellent. This statement – is it from the investigator or from the author of the book?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: What do I care, Brother Omar? What do I care?
Omar Al Zahrani: And what do I care? Okay, and what do I care? No, the debate is about what? The debate is about what? I use this to tell you that the existing “Taraddi” – you don’t know who prayed for mercy? This is the idea. The prayer upon the Prophet, I don’t know. The “Taraddi” – for whom?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, by Allah, I know. You can’t use an analogy. The “Taraddi” belongs to al-Muhakkam al-Hawari. Your evidence? My evidence is that Imam al-Muhakkam al-Hawari added the “Taraddi”. No, it exists. Subhanallah. I tell him: prove that Hud added it. He says evidence that Hud added it… He transfers evidence, the least evidence… The “Taraddi” does not exist in the book of Yahya ibn Salam, nor does it exist in the book of Ibn Abi Zaminayn. These two Tafsirs do not contain it. So, he added it.
Omar Al Zahrani: Does not exist? How did he add it? Do you have evidence?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Evidence is that the investigator tells you… why did I use this phrase? The prayer on the Prophet…
Omar Al Zahrani: Excellent. The investigator said they added the prayer. Did the investigator say they added the “Taraddi”? I tell you: if they added the prayer, what makes you think they didn’t add the “Taraddi”?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, now you are relying on the statement of the investigator, aren’t you?
Omar Al Zahrani: Correct.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You accepted the investigator’s statement originally?
Omar Al Zahrani: No, you rely on it, not me. You rely on it. Correct?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: From your books. Very natural, I mean. No, I ask you, Brother Omar. You rely on it, don’t you?
Omar Al Zahrani: Yes.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Excellent. Give me a statement from the investigator where he says the scribes added the “Taraddi”. Go ahead. What’s this? You have to answer that, not me. How do you know this addition is from the scribes or not?
Omar Al Zahrani: You are returning the question to me? This is my question! The prayer… you don’t know who added it.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Brother Omar, organizing the speech is better for the listener.
Omar Al Zahrani: Organization happens with time. Subhanallah. Ask… I say my statement and stay silent. My first questions I asked: Did al-Salimi disavow Ali?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, the debate is about what?
Omar Al Zahrani: You said “Taraddi” on Ali in the Kuwalis, and Dr. Muhammed admitted that this is a sub-title. From these two Tafsirs. Excellent. Sub-title, may Allah bless you. Among the branches: Did al-Salimi disavow Ali? “Taraddi” in these two books? Agreed. The second book, “Dictionary of Sharia”. Did the author of the book disavow Ali? These two? No. These two? No. Dr. Muhammed, share how… Dr. Muhammed, share, may Allah bless you, in the book “Dictionary of Sharia”. Or he meant “Taraddi”… “Taraddi”… both of them. “Dictionary of Sharia” when he said: “And after the Prophet, we disavow the people of the Qibla: Uthman and Ali…” Does he disavow or not?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: My teacher, the “Taraddi”… he says “disavowed” or not?
Omar Al Zahrani: Excellent. I will answer you, but you be quiet for a little while.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I will be quiet for a little while.
Omar Al Zahrani: This book transmitted from other books. Excellent. This book, “Dictionary of Sharia”, transmitted from other books. These books it transmitted from are listed in the introduction. Excellent. All of them are Ibadi books. I say to you that the “Taraddiyat” in the two books are “Taraddiyat” of our companions.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Agreed.
Omar Al Zahrani: When he said “And after the Prophet, we disavow Ali”… our companions…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Agreed, by Allah, agreed. I am conceding to you. I am talking to you about the “Dictionary of Sharia”.
Omar Al Zahrani: This is the topic of the debate. Dr. Muhammed, don’t remove the share. Dr. Muhammed, understand his question: Did al-Sa’di, the author of the “Dictionary of Sharia”, say “we disavow Ali”? Yes, he transmitted that.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: He said “we disavow Ali”.
Omar Al Zahrani: He transmitted that. Yes.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Transmitted from whom?
Omar Al Zahrani: Transmitted from our companions. Yes.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Our companions disavowed Ali?
Omar Al Zahrani: Some of our companions, yes, disavowed Ali.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Wait, wait. When I say “I disavow Ali”, how can I have transmitted from someone else?
Omar Al Zahrani: How does he say… man, the introduction, please. The introduction! You read the introduction, didn’t you? The introduction says… This is transmission, not a confession. Correct?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You say yes.
Omar Al Zahrani: This is transmission, not an explicit confession from him. I tell you he transmitted. I tell you he transmitted, I don’t tell you he confessed.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: The disavowal… Does the author of the “Dictionary of Sharia” disavow Ali or not?
Omar Al Zahrani: I tell you: does he pray for mercy or does he not pray for mercy? I tell you, the “Taraddi” is useless! It’s the reason! He prays for mercy, okay? That’s it. He does not believe in it. How, man? “And we disavow Ali”!
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You first said… Let’s understand. Dr. Muhammed, share. My dear brothers, “Dictionary of Sharia” by al-Sa’di: “We declare allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar…”
Omar Al Zahrani: Where is Ali? Do they declare allegiance to Ali?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, but…
Omar Al Zahrani: A clear question: “We declare allegiance” – why did he not mention Ali ibn Abi Talib?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: What did I tell you? I told you, my brother, my answer is clear, explicit, very clear, very comfortable. I told you: transmitted from our companions. He transmitted. “We declare allegiance” – he sat and said “We declare allegiance to the Messenger of Allah, we declare allegiance to Abu Bakr…”
Omar Al Zahrani: Go to the introduction of this volume you have. Go to its introduction and see…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Yes.
Omar Al Zahrani: Man, he says “We declare allegiance” (Nadinu), he doesn’t say “We declare allegiance” (Nadinu).
Muhammed Al Rashidi: By Almighty Allah, it’s correct. By Allah, your guardian, you, the first day, look at this text. You don’t know, by Almighty Allah, that this is his belief? Evidence…
Omar Al Zahrani: He said…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: By Allah, I swear by Almighty Allah that this is the belief of al-Sa’di! He is not transmitting from anyone. This is his belief with which he worships Allah.
Omar Al Zahrani: No, no, you said “I saw it for the first time.” Don’t change the subject. You said “I saw it for the first time.” I tell you that the “Taraddiyat”…
Omar Al Zahrani: The existing “Taraddiyat”… Professor, let’s finish this topic. Let’s stay on this topic. I will bring you, I promise I will bring you… Does he say “We declare allegiance” to Ali? He prays for mercy on him? Yes.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, he does not pray for mercy on him. This is not his belief at all. This is his belief! Man, if you open… Professor, my brother…
Omar Al Zahrani: Muhammed, I want to open a text.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Man, professor, respected, when he said “and disavowal from those who killed him”…
Omar Al Zahrani: Who?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Please, a minute, open this. You said he does not believe in it. He does not believe in the “Taraddi”? You are trying to confuse people, meaning.
Omar Al Zahrani: You are entering his intention! You say “he does not pray for mercy.” I say the investigator. The investigator is the one who says…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: That he does not believe in it. Yes, he said he does not believe in that “Taraddi”. Yes, he does not believe in the “Taraddi”. Come on, I’ll make you a Shaykh who says… the investigator, come on.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Let’s open the text. A minute.
Omar Al Zahrani: This text is in front of me. A minute.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Open it. Let’s read together. Please.
Omar Al Zahrani: In the name of Allah.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Come on.
Omar Al Zahrani: From “Dictionary of Sharia”. Look at what it says.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, a minute.
Omar Al Zahrani: “He does not believe in these ‘Taraddiyat’.” The text.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Please, if you would, open the text for us and see. They complete it to the end. I am with you. And of course, Brother Omar, I did not leave the topic of addition…
Omar Al Zahrani: The “Taraddi” addition.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: The problem is that this question I answered…
Omar Al Zahrani: A moment, just…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: If you would, open the text in the introduction.
Omar Al Zahrani: I will bring you the introduction. This is Dr. Muhammed. Share with me, please.
Omar Al Zahrani: Okay, this is “Dictionary of Sharia”.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, just read.
Omar Al Zahrani: The “Taraddi” on Ali: “He interpreted it as ‘Ali, Radhiya Allahu ‘anhu’.” Wait, wait, wait. I brought this from the very first intervention. I brought it from the first intervention.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Complete, complete.
Omar Al Zahrani: What does it say in the introduction?
Omar Al Zahrani: “The words of Taraddi and Tarahhum were proven in the text as they appeared in the manuscripts.” Beautiful.
Omar Al Zahrani: “And no intervention was made in them, neither modification nor alteration.” Amen.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Excellent.
Omar Al Zahrani: “Likewise, the author of the dictionary used to prove these words as he found them in their sources.” Agreed. “And this does not necessarily mean the author’s belief…”
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Complete.
Omar Al Zahrani: “…in that Taraddi or Tarahhum, because he was transmitting it as it appeared in its source.” Excellent. This is exactly what I said!
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Excellent. Now, how do we know the belief of al-Sa’di personally?
Omar Al Zahrani: By going back to his official statements.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Dr. Muhammed, share with me when he said: “We declare the correctness (taswib) of the people of Nahrawan and disavowal (al-bara’ah) from those who killed them” – who killed them? Who is meant by the one who killed them?
Omar Al Zahrani: The statement is mine.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Okay, so for me, who killed them?
Omar Al Zahrani: Okay, let’s talk about “Taraddi” first, since you raised the topic…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: La ilaha illa Allah. No, man, answer me: “and disavowal from those who killed them” – what is it? What is it? The debate is about “Taraddi”, isn’t it?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: By Allah, Muhammed al-Rashidi, by Almighty Allah, I tell you it. You mean, honestly, your clips, you just want to reach “Explorer” with them. This is your belief! This is your correct belief, the one that contains the disavowal of Ali.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Who is the person who killed the people of Nahrawan? What is his name?
Omar Al Zahrani: I, Brother Omar… First, first, from “Dictionary of Sharia”. Before I go, you read in this introduction that “as it appeared in their sources” – what appeared in their sources? The books of the Ibadis are the source of this book, “Dictionary of Sharia”. Above 91 volumes! Excellent.
Omar Al Zahrani: 91 volumes are these Ibadi books. So, whatever the case, this “Taraddi” is an Ibadi “Taraddi”.
Omar Al Zahrani: First, second: The “Taraddi” in the book of Yahya ibn Salam and the book of Hud al-Muhakkam al-Hawari – we haven’t finished this, Brother Omar!
Omar Al Zahrani: Wonderful, wonderful! You just brought a “Taraddi” that doesn’t even exist in the manuscripts!
Omar Al Zahrani: Don’t try to go. Don’t try to go. Don’t try to go. We are still talking about “We declare the correctness of the people of Nahrawan”. Dr. Muhammed, share with me. “And disavowal from those who killed them” – who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Omar Al Zahrani: Go ahead.
Omar Al Zahrani: Who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: This text is in a book! Professor, man, man! “And disavowal from those who killed them” – who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Omar Al Zahrani: Brother Omar, Brother Omar…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Have mercy on my mother, answer me! Who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Omar Al Zahrani: The “Taraddi” you brought from this book… Where is it?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: See, professor…
Omar Al Zahrani: Bring the mobile closer. Bring the mobile a little closer. Bring the mobile a little closer to the camera, Brother Muhammad. What is this display you are showing?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Go ahead. A minute. This might be unclear. I will send it to the laptop. No problem. The text that Brother Omar brought in…
Omar Al Zahrani: Man, don’t try to go right or left. By Allah, I won’t leave you until you tell me: “disavowal from those who killed them” – who killed them?
Omar Al Zahrani: Who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Professor Muhammed, he asked me now.
Omar Al Zahrani: Who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Let me, Brother Muhammed, asked me, didn’t he? Let him ask.
[Moderator]: Yes. Let’s, Brother Omar. I apologize. Let me just… Let the brother present what he has so the viewer can see what he is using as evidence.
Omar Al Zahrani: Dr. Muhammed, you said there is an obligation to answer the question. Where is my question? This is my question: Ali ibn Abi Talib, when he said “We declare disavowal from those who killed them” – who killed them, Professor?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: And I also said the dialectic segment…
Omar Al Zahrani: He doesn’t want to answer! You didn’t obligate him!
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I obligated you. I brought you the answer. He is now turning it around. He is now saying “Where is the answer?”
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Where is the answer to “We declare disavowal from those who killed them”? Man, I told you there are editions that exist and editions that don’t, just like with al-Hawari you have editions that exist and editions that don’t.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: This statement of yours is not correct. Show me. Show me. Your statement is not correct.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Dr. Muhammed, share with me. Share the PDF page.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Dr. Muhammed, share, please. “From those who disavowed…” “From those who killed them” – who killed them? Who is the subject? Who?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: By Allah, you will not leave this topic yourself. The same book, “Dictionary of Sharia”, which you brought: “disavowal from those who killed them” – who killed them?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Now, Brother Omar, who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: By Allah, if you try…
(Interruption)
Moderator: I apologize with your permission. Each guest will take two minutes because the dialectic segment is not disciplined. Theoretically, between question and answer, we wait about 10-15 seconds. Brother Muhammed, start your two minutes.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Professor, now… my killer?…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You said… you said to him… you didn’t answer my questions or my challenges, Brother Omar.
Moderator: Excellent, meaning he hasn’t answered.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You brought a Taraddi from a website. I don’t know which website you brought it from. Open a PDF for us. I want to prove my theory or the truth that I believe: that the Taraddiyat exist only in this book. Open a PDF in front of the people. Let the people see it. Bring out that text containing the Taraddi. You said there are editions that contain the Taraddi and editions that don’t. Isn’t that right? Bring out the edition that contains the Taraddi. Here is a PDF. Go ahead. This is simple, very simple. I am clear, simple, and very lenient with you. Go ahead.
Omar Al Zahrani: Thank you for your leniency. I, my dear brothers, am very clear. When I ask…
Moderator: Okay, my dear brothers. Dr. Muhammed, share, please. Two minutes, my dear brothers.
Omar Al Zahrani: When he said “We declare the correctness of the people of Nahrawan and disavowal from those who killed them” – who, my dear brothers, killed the people of Nahrawan? Who is this who crushed the people of Nahrawan? Who is this who destroyed the people of Nahrawan? He is the Commander of the Faithful, Ali ibn Abi Talib!
Omar Al Zahrani: What are they doing? They declare him correct (yusawwibunahu)! Who fought Ali? In which book? In the same book he brought, the one he wants to debate about! It says: “We declare the correctness of the people of Nahrawan.” Moreover, the author of the book himself says: “We disavow after the Prophet the people of the Qibla: Uthman ibn Affan and Ali.” He says “disavowal is our belief.” And Ali ibn Abi Talib… And al-Kudami says: “We agree with them on the disavowal, calling them disbelievers.” Why? Because they are disbelievers! “And their followers, supporters, and those who ally with them, upon their disbelief and their injustice, from the people of innovation and followers of whims, according to the saying of Allah Almighty: ‘And who is more unjust than one who follows his own desire?’” What is this? Disbelief! Disbelievers! From the same book you brought!
Omar Al Zahrani: I give him from other books – problem. I give him from the same books he brought, he doesn’t respond! I give him from other books, he says “this is not our topic”! By Allah, this is not the state. This is not the state, brothers.
Omar Al Zahrani: Is my time now?
Moderator: Your time now. Go ahead.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: May Allah reward you, Brother Omar. I demanded one text from you, and I repeat: one text. Open a PDF – simple. Open a PDF in front of the people so they see that the book of Yahya ibn Salam contains a Taraddi. Okay. The only copy that contains the Taraddi that you opened… an electronic copy. Give him a PDF copy. Give him a PDF copy. They add a lot to those electronic copies. You know this. Excellent. Give us an authenticated PDF copy that says Yahya ibn Salam prayed for mercy on Imam Ali. I brought a book with dozens of texts that pray for mercy on Imam Ali, from a scholar of the third century, Imam al-Hawari.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Because I also demanded from the people, and the texts… Open the text that Brother Omar opened exactly. Give me a little time… Excellent…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You open it.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: A minute, just a few minutes…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: A few minutes…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: This is the blue one…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Yes, yes.
Muhammead Al Rashidi: The same text that Brother Omar brought from a PDF copy. Excellent. Yes.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: This…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: The same text…
Moderator: Two minutes…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Go ahead. The same text. I presented it to you. A gift from me. Go ahead.
Omar Al Zahrani: Thank you. Thank you for the gift. May Allah bless you.
Omar Al Zahrani: Okay, Dr. Muhammed, enlarge me, may Allah bless you.
Omar Al Zahrani: My dear brothers, let’s go back to the same text, Allah willing. Look, brothers. By Allah, I will treat it the same way. Isn’t it an electronic copy, my dear brothers? The PDF he has, doesn’t he have a book? This book was a PDF, an electronic print. Okay. I tell you that the Taraddi was added by those who wrote it, those who placed it in this book. They added the Taraddi. You tell me, “What is the evidence?” I say, like his evidence – he has no evidence. He just throws words: “Perhaps it is like this and that.” Okay. Let’s go back once again, my dear brothers.
Omar Al Zahrani: My dear brothers, I requested from him a very simple request. As he says, “simple, simple, easy, very easy.” He doesn’t need anything. He just answers us.
Omar Al Zahrani: When he said “We declare the correctness of the people of Nahrawan and disavowal from those who killed them” – who killed the people of Nahrawan? Just a simple word…
Omar Al Zahrani: Just “disavowal from those who killed them”… who is the one who killed them? “We declare disavowal from those whom our famous Imams disavowed in the biographies without disclosure or specification… We declare the correctness of the people of Nahrawan and disavowal from those who killed them.” The problem is, I ask him “who killed them?” because I want him to say the name. He can say the name. But here, in the declaration, it says “We disavow Ali ibn Abi Talib.” We disavow Ali ibn Abi Talib. So why all this trouble?
Omar Al Zahrani: By Almighty Allah, it’s a disaster!
Omar Al Zahrani: Then he tells me, “This is an electronic copy.” I agree. It’s an electronic copy. Suppose there is no other. Okay. The book you have basically – what is the evidence that the one who wrote this Taraddi is al-Hawari? Perhaps the scribes wrote it. Perhaps the printer of the book wrote it. Perhaps the investigator wrote it. You haven’t proven anything. It’s all “perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.” Meanwhile, when I came to the most important issue and told you, “Here is a Taraddi on Ali, and the author of the book does not believe in it.” What is the evidence? The evidence is that he said “We disavow Ali.” He said “We disavow Ali, we disavow Ali, and we declare the correctness of the people of Nahrawan, and we disavow those who killed them.” So the issue is easy.
Omar Al Zahrani: I will repeat. Just tell me: who are the ones you declared correct? Who are those who killed the people of Nahrawan?
Omar Al Zahrani: Brother Omar, Brother Muhammed…
Moderator: Professor, Professor Muhammed, may Allah bless you. Is it possible in debates to present such unreal evidence? Because this is the first time I know…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Are you accusing me of something? What are you saying, sir?
Moderator: I’m saying, is it possible in debates to present unreal evidence?
Moderator: Let me just comment on this point. Is it permissible to present unreal evidence? Why? So that the respected viewer, who has a right on you and us, after reviewing, is certain that the person is a liar or the person is deceptive. We always leave the judgment to the viewer and leave the first and final judgment to the Lord of the Worlds. Not to me, not to you. Go ahead, Brother Muhammed.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Brother, you are a man. I love you for the sake of Allah. May Allah bless you. Now…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: We leave the judgment to the viewer, as Professor Muhammed said, may Allah bless you.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Open any book, any electronic copy, I mean any PDF copy of the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam, and see if it contains Taraddi. Any copy, even printed. Does it contain Taraddi or not? If it does not exist, then the origin of the Taraddi is from this book that I came today to prove. You come to me with “disavowal”! I came to prove the Taraddi in this book. Moreover, I answered you, Brother Omar. I answered you. I told you that this book transmits from our companions, and indeed, some of our companions disavow. I don’t hide anything from you. There are indeed some of our companions who disavow Imam Ali. But that judgment is for them, not for all Ibadis. They themselves… I am with you, very clear. He mentioned the names of scholars. But I tell you, the Taraddi in it – for whom? Is the Taraddi for the Ibadis or not? And the Taraddi here – is it from Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari or not? This is the topic of the debate. The judgment is for the viewer.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: These two books… Allah bears witness that I did not leave these two books. I did not leave these two books.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Dr. Muhammed, two minutes have passed. Okay.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Look, my dear brothers, the issue is that I specified certain scholars. He says, “Yes, we have others, and we have others.” No. I specified specific ones. I said al-Salimi, al-Sa’di. Do they disavow or not?
(Interruption)
Muhammed Al Rashidi: The beloved al-Salimi and al-Sa’di – do they disavow or not disavow?
Omar Al Zahrani: Al-Salimi and al-Sa’di…
Moderator: Aha…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I think the debate is about these two books, Brother Omar.
Omar Al Zahrani: La ilaha illa… Who is al-Sa’di? The author of which book? Not “Dictionary of Sharia”?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, I…
Omar Al Zahrani: Surely from the two books, better.
Omar Al Zahrani: Answer me clearly: Does he believe in disavowal or not?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: He transmitted.
Omar Al Zahrani: No, he said “Nadinu” (we declare as religion). What does “Nadinu” mean?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: “Nadinu” is that which Imam al-Sa’di transmitted. Where did he transmit it from? He doesn’t say… Belief, belief… No, no, no. Evidence is that he said at the end of the book… I read the book, by the way…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: At the very end, he said “Nadinu” with… meaning he is mentioning what he worships Allah with. He said this statement in the introduction…
Omar Al Zahrani: Ma sha’ Allah.
Omar Al Zahrani: Sorry, sorry, on the last page… Dr. Muhammed, share with me, may Allah bless you. Look, brothers… Okay, this said: “We declare as religion (Nadinu) upholding family ties, honoring parents, what the right hand possesses, the rights of the neighbor, we declare as religion all of Allah’s rights, we declare as religion all avoidance of major sins…” This is “Nadinu” – belief of whom? This is al-Sa’di!
Omar Al Zahrani: You tell me it’s someone else. I tell you, the evidence you don’t have. “By allegiance”… I answered you, I told you that this book relies on other books. Here, al-Sa’di is not speaking in his own tongue.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Not correct. He says “Nadinu” – he believes. No, he believes with his own tongue, by his own self. He said this statement. At the very end of it…
Omar Al Zahrani: Not correct. By Allah, not correct. I challenge you to show me one… Wait, wait. I challenge you to show me from whom he transmitted this statement…
Omar Al Zahrani: Go ahead. No, no, just a moment. Just a moment, I’ll tell you… “The one in which he said ‘Nadinu‘”…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, just a moment. He says to you…
Omar Al Zahrani: From the book “Dictionary of Sharia”… You read the book, and in it “Nadinu” – from Ali? “Nadinu” – from the disavowal of Ali ibn…
Omar Al Zahrani: The fifth, the fifth, the fifth…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Excellent, excellent.
Omar Al Zahrani: Excellent. I will bring you from where he transmitted it…
Moderator: Okay, until he brings the source, let me just remind the respected viewer… My greetings to you all, all lovers and followers of the “Facts of Religions” channel. The channel transmits the written to visual and audio. The guests who are part of the program’s family participate in this work. It is counted for them, which is transmitting the written to visual and audio, whether you disagree with them or agree with them.
Moderator: Okay, Dr. Muhammed, why doesn’t the guest… Could you share with me, please, this text?
Omar Al Zahrani: Look, my dear brothers, he says now, “By Allah, we love Imam Ali and pray for mercy on Imam Ali, etc.” But do you know, my dear brothers, who called them liars? I don’t call them liars. Look who calls them liars…
Omar Al Zahrani: In the book “Ali wal-Khawarij”… Yes, go ahead.
Omar Al Zahrani: Go ahead.
Omar Al Zahrani: Open.
Omar Al Zahrani: Yes.
Omar Al Zahrani: Page 376.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Which book?
Omar Al Zahrani: “Dictionary of Sharia”… What does it say? What does it say?
Omar Al Zahrani: Go ahead, the books it relied on.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I know it relied on books. I tell you, “Nadinu” – this statement, “Nadinu” – whose statement is it? Whose statement?
Omar Al Zahrani: It says here that he used to write them…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: He wrote them from whom?
Omar Al Zahrani: He wrote them from our scholars who did…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: From whom? Name for me. Name for me who said “Nadinu” with disavowal from Ali. Name him.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Name him.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Name the Ibadi scholar who prays for mercy… who disavows Imam Ali.
Omar Al Zahrani: No, the one from whom he transmitted that text.
Omar Al Zahrani: He transmitted that… Yes, he disavows Ali. What is the fifth…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I know he transmitted from him the disavowal of Ali. Who is this scholar? What is his name?
Omar Al Zahrani: Okay, Dr. Muhammed, share with me… Yes, this is the book “Ali wal-Khawarij” by Sayyid Ja’far Murtada al-‘Amili. Remember his name, ‘Adil. He says: “It has become apparent that the Ibadis and others, when they showed some flexibility towards Ali (AS), they were not truthful in what they showed.” This is a Shi’i. He says: “As it has become apparent from some of their writings published in this era.” He says you use Taqiyya! From Ja’far Murtada al-‘Amili! Imagine! Of course, Ja’far Murtada al-‘Amili died recently, around 2019. Imagine who praised and commended this man? Imagine! Who is Ja’far Murtada? Who praised him when he died? It was Khamenei! Imam Khamenei offered condolences on the death of Sayyid Ja’far Murtada al-‘Amili and said: “This venerable scholar provided great service to the Islamic world and filled an important cultural gap with his solid writings.” What are his solid writings? That he goes and lies about the Ibadis! What is the devil… I quote lines from Professor Muhammed al-Rashidi: “The devil hopes for a meteor’s flame, but these are the Qadhafat al-Kham!” You see what the Qadhafat al-Kham are? Indeed, he lied about the Ibadis!
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Allah…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I repeat to you, Brother Omar… I repeat to you, Brother Omar: The judgment of the Ibadis on their opponent is not like the judgment of their opponent upon them. We are done with this. Even if you repeat it dozens of times.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Here, Imam al-Sa’di is mentioned… that he transmitted in the first volumes of this book from several books… The first is “Bayan al-Shar’”, the second is “Jami’ ibn Barakah”, “Jami’ ibn Ja’far”… It is known that he transmitted “Nadinu” with disavowal – this statement “Nadinu” with disavowal – from whom did he disavow Ali? Wonderful. He transmitted in these volumes from these scholars. We’re done.
Omar Al Zahrani: No, who specifically disavowed Ali? Name him.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: How can I name him? He transmitted from these four…
Omar Al Zahrani: Meaning, Ibn Barakah disavows Ali?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I tell you he transmitted from these four. He does not explicitly say…
Omar Al Zahrani: You couldn’t. You couldn’t say. I tell you, basically, this is the statement of al-Sa’di. You can’t say it because you know what will happen to you. Since you, masha’Allah, have a good relationship with the Shia, if you say the scholar’s name, you will harm yourself. You know what? You can’t say it. So, I prove to you very much, dear one, that the Taraddi exists in this book… And I prove to you that the Taraddiyat exist in this book. What do I have to do with the Shia? I have already declared to you that there are scholars among us who disavow Ali. What is their name? What is their name? Al-Kudami disavows Ali! How? Now I… Now I’m not… I mean, close…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: No, what are you saying? You say “we have”, you don’t want to name them. Al-Kudami disavows Ali.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Isn’t it my time?
Omar Al Zahrani: Brother Omar…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Al-Kudami disavows Ali… He is taking your time and spoke now…
Moderator: Leave him. Let him take his time, Brother Omar.
Omar Al Zahrani: Brother Omar, I have declared to you with my tongue. You say he will ruin his relationship with the Shia. I declared it to you with my tongue.
Omar Al Zahrani: I said there are scholars who disavow. That binds them.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: What business is it of yours? What business is it of yours?
Omar Al Zahrani: My question, my question, my question! What business is it of yours? What business is it of yours with the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam? What business is it of yours? It’s a debate, now it’s a debate about “What business is it of yours?”
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You said the Taraddi is not from the original book.
Omar Al Zahrani: What business is it of yours? What business is it of yours? Done…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You can’t name them…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: You can’t name them. So once again, don’t come and attack the Sunni shyookh when they say the Ibadis declared disbelief. I know…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Disbelief… The Ibadis do not declare disbelief… The Ibadis do not declare Ali a disbeliever. Not all of them disbelieve Ali, or some of them disbelieve Ali. Not all of them. This is not the statement. I informed you that whoever disbelieves Ali, it applies to him alone. You cannot say “the Ibadis disbelieve Ali.”
Omar Al Zahrani: Excellent. Al-Kudami – did he say it or not?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: So your statement is wrong. The Ibadis do not disbelieve…
Omar Al Zahrani: I ask you, does al-Kudami say it or not? Answer me.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: By Allah, you can’t say. By Allah, you can’t say. I ask you a clear question: Al-Kudami – he is like Imam Ahmad to them. Do you know Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal? This al-Kudami of theirs, you can’t say anything about him? Not correct. Not correct. This statement…
Moderator: So, for the sake of us understanding and the viewer understanding, is your actual belief, Dr….? You answer the opposite, Brother Omar. Just like that, without interruption. Just two minutes. Two minutes. Is your belief effective, Brother Muhammed?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: I have explained several times, in the same debate and in several rounds, I said that “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara’” applies to a specific person. I said this and repeated it several times. We cannot say that the belief of the Ibadis is the disavowal of Imam Ali, or the belief of the Ibadis is the allegiance to Imam Ali, or the belief of the Ibadis is to stop (tawaqqquf) regarding Imam Ali. Each person is bound by his own self. This is our school of thought. This is our school of thought. We know our school of thought. The books on “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara‘” exist. Do you want to open a book explaining “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara‘” now in front of you? “Qawa’id al-Wala’ wal-Bara‘”. Even books used by our children on “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara‘”. I will explain to you the topic of “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara‘” among the Ibadis. No problem. You are now talking about the takfir of Imam Ali. This topic is related to “Al-Wala’ wal-Bara‘”. But now, I am surprised by this matter, honestly. Our topic is proving the Taraddiyat of this book and proving the Taraddiyat of this book. You have moved to many topics. I am still with these two books and have not…
Moderator: But you concealed concepts. You denied this claim so that the viewer who will review the episode has a document. You deny it, and that’s it.
Muhammed Al Rashidi: May Allah bless you. I said, “Yes, I said that the ‘Taraddiyat‘ – prayers for mercy on Imam Ali – firstly, exist in our books in abundance. I can open several books from this library for you that contain many prayers for mercy on Imam Ali.” Imam Abu Muslim al-Bahlani al-Rawahi praises him in his verses. Our Imams, many of them praise him, and others, especially our Maghrebi scholars. Many, I think even most, if not all… So what I say is that the topic of today’s debate, may Allah bless you, is about these two books. We agreed on these two books. I say, so as not to prolong… I say, so as not to prolong it for you, that the Taraddiyat in the Tafsir of Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari, “Tafsir Kitab Allah al-Aziz”, are originally from Hud ibn Muhakkam al-Hawari. The evidence is that they are not present in the book of Yahya ibn Salam (first), and not present in the abridgment of Yahya ibn Salam, which is the abridgment of Ibn Abi Zaminayn (second). These two books, the original and the branch, do not contain them. But they are present in this Ibadi book, which is Hud al-Muhakkam al-Hawari. Likewise, in this book, “Dictionary of Sharia”. Brother Omar says the investigator says that this Taraddi in this book may not be the belief of the author, but he may transmit from other books. Okay, what are the other books, Brother Omar? The other books, in the introduction, he tells you they are Ibadi books. So, this Taraddi is, in any case, an Ibadi Taraddi. So, the Ibadis pray for mercy on Imam Ali. That’s it. These two books… I…
Muhammed Al Rashidi: Dr. Muhammed, I just want the last intervention… I need…
Moderator: Yes, yes, yes.
Moderator: Yes, just a second. Just a second. A point of view. Thank you for the confirmation. Brother Omar, now you have the opportunity to refute what Brother Muhammed has just said and say the opposite, through the books. And we leave the judgment to the viewer. Go ahead.
Omar Al Zahrani: Meaning it will be the last intervention. Okay, because he started, I will conclude. Enlarge me, please. May Allah bless you.
Moderator: No, just…
Omar Al Zahrani: Last intervention. Okay, so I know if I should go or not. Okay.
Moderator: Yes, go ahead. Enlarge me, enlarge me, please.
Omar Al Zahrani: Okay, my dear brothers, may Allah bless you. Enlarge my picture, Doctor. The picture itself. Yes.
Omar Al Zahrani: Okay, brothers, may Allah bless you. To summarize the issue. We talked about al-Hawari’s Tafsir. This Tafsir is an abridgment – not by my statement, but by the statement of his scholars and his investigators: that it is an abridged book. You will tell me, “There are additions, some matters.” Yes, I tell you, yes, there are some additions, but you cannot find a single page except that it is taken from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam. This is a proven issue.
Omar Al Zahrani: Okay, the Tafsir… Sorry, the book “Dictionary of Sharia” by al-Sa’di. Does this book contain Taraddi? I tell you, yes, it contains Taraddi. Okay, does the author of the book believe in this Taraddi? The answer is no. Evidence: The author of the book himself said “We declare as religion (Nadinu) the disavowal of Ali”, “We declare as religion the correctness of the people of Nahrawan”, “We declare as religion the disavowal of those who killed the people of Nahrawan.” So this is the belief of al-Sa’di, the one you brought.
Omar Al Zahrani: That’s regarding the two books. We’re done with this.
Omar Al Zahrani: Regarding your beliefs… Why can’t you declare? You say “What business is it of mine with their names?” or “What business is it of mine with their names?” No, declare their names! He can’t. Al-Kudami said this. The scholars of the Ibadis said this, that they disavow. Evidence, my dear brothers, look at the screen. Dr. Muhammed, share with me now…
Omar Al Zahrani: We’ll give it all. Okay, brothers, okay. In the book “Manhaj al-Talibin”: “So whoever did not change nor alter, and denounced the evil when it appeared from them…” Look who did not change: Abu Bakr and Umar. It was supposed to be Uthman and Ali. Not there. “And Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, Ammar ibn Yasir – those who denounced evil when it appeared. And Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi (the one who removed him) and his companions, the people of Nahrawan and his companions, the people of Nahrawan, and those martyred with them. These are the ones who did not change nor alter the religion.” Meaning their opposite is Ali ibn Abi Talib, he changed and altered.
Omar Al Zahrani: “Dictionary of Sharia”, we read it 1000 times: “We declare allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar ibn al-Khattab.” No Ali, no Uthman. Rather, we find the opposite. “We declare the correctness of the people of Nahrawan. We declare correct the people of Nahrawan. We disavow those who killed them” – who is Ali ibn Abi Talib – “we disavow him.” And here, in bold letters, it says: “And after the Prophet, we disavow the people of the Qibla: Uthman ibn Affan and Ali ibn Abi Talib – we disavow him, Talhah, al-Zubayr, Mu’awiyah…”
Omar Al Zahrani: “Jawabat al-Imam al-Salimi”: “The issue is well-known among those who agree and those who disagree. However, those who disagree often make excuses for Ali while acknowledging the reality. So his Imam, Abdullah ibn Wahb (who removed Ali), was only after Ali himself removed himself from the Imamate. So the people of Nahrawan are the ones in the right (muhaqqun), and those who fought them are the ones in the wrong (mubtilun). Whoever understands this, it is obligatory upon him… and he is not accused, with no disagreement among the Muslims. Likewise, disavowal of those who fought them is obligatory upon him” – meaning you must disavow Ali. He also says: “It is not from our religion to insult, nor from our school of thought to criticize. We have seen among the specific and the general that we have not seen anyone criticize those who passed, or insult, or curse. People are safe from that. Except for what occurred with Ibn al-Nadhar in his ‘Lamyyah’. His intention (may Allah forgive him) was to show the truth, but anger for the sake of Allah led him to utter a curse. He started cursing and insulting Ali in his poem. What was appropriate for the school of thought was only to clarify who is right and who is wrong. He went to extremes in his statement: ‘That Ali is in the lowest depth (of Hell).’ That Ali is in the lowest depth – meaning Ali ibn Abi Talib is in Hell. Allah forbid!”
Omar Al Zahrani: “Al-‘Uqud al-Fiddiyyah”: The answer, of course, when he said: “By appointing them as arbitrators, you committed a greater crime than both of them, O Ali. If you are truthful, then enter into what the Muslims have entered. Come and pledge allegiance to Abdullah ibn Wahb. We have pledged allegiance to him after we removed you, because you deserved to be removed by us. You are removed (makhlu’), O Ali, you do not deserve to be the Caliph.” Al-Qutb Muhammed ibn Yusuf al-Jaza’iri, the Ibadi, one of the verifying scholars, said: “If you say, ‘Why do they not accept his repentance and return him as an Imam?’ I say: He insisted on arbitration, appeased Mu’awiyah, commanded what is false, refused to repent, repented but broke his promise as mentioned, continued breaking the promise, deserved removal, rather he removed himself, so it was permissible to appoint someone else.” As for the claim of repentance – Ali claimed repentance – meaning Ali did not repent. He claimed repentance only after the appointment of Abdullah ibn Wahb al-Rasibi.
Omar Al Zahrani: “Al-Siyar wal-Jawabat” for the scholars and Imams of Oman: “We said to them: Likewise, Allah commanded Ali to fight them, so it is not permissible for him to abandon that nor to consider it forbidden to kill them until they fulfill the command of Allah. This is evidence of the disbelief and misguidance of Ali, and the correctness and justice of the people of Nahrawan.” Then Ali removed the two arbitrators, he was not satisfied with their judgment. Allah scattered his command. Ali was killed by Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam out of anger for Allah, and that was permissible – the blood was permissible originally because he killed him. So, “May Allah have mercy on Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam,” the one who killed Ali.
Omar Al Zahrani: And in “Al-Jawahir al-Muntaqa”: “But Ali insisted on arbitration, so they left him and he left them. They disavowed him and he disavowed them. He fought them…” Meaning the truth was with them, the truth was with those whom Ali fought, not with Ali.
Omar Al Zahrani: Abu Sufyan Mahbub (may Allah be pleased with you)… “I asked Abu Sufyan about the statement of the Muslims…” until he says: “I have come across a biography attributed to Shaykh Abi al-Hasan al-Bisyawi. In it, he mentions the Imams of the Muslims and their sheikhs, and those who were people of ‘Al-Wala’ wal-Bara‘. He explicitly states in it the disavowal (al-bara’ah) of Ali… and the allegiance (walayah) to Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam, and being pleased with him, and praying for mercy on him (tarahhum) – on Ibn Muljam, the one who killed Ali ibn Abi Talib.”
Omar Al Zahrani: So, Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah are the people of truth and righteousness. And peace be upon you and the mercy and blessings of Allah.
Moderator: Wait, wait, Brother Omar. Wait, Brother Omar, please. So that the conclusion is musk, and you are striving and capable of it. Brother Muhammed, there is a phrase: the test (ikhtibar) through the certificate (shahada). If we ask a question, we leave its results to the respected viewer, who has a right on you. This is the channel’s goal: the viewer.
Moderator: Who bears witness for you that the Ibadi creed is the correct creed, the true creed? Who is the witness for this, sir?
Muhammed Al Rashidi: The Messenger of Allah , may Allah bless him and his family and grant them peace, bears witness, and Allah Almighty bears witness to that. Okay. And the sources of deriving the Sharia are known: the Quran and Sunnah. The researcher can research the Quran and Sunnah. I always say the phrase: “Whoever reads the entire Holy Quran and ponders over it will not end up except as an Ibadi.” Excellent. But I draw attention to a point: I say that the people of piety (Ahl al-Taqwa) may be from any school of thought. Excellent. They may be from any school of thought: pious, pure, knowledgeable, a worshipper. No problem. I see this. So, who bears witness? Allah and His Messenger bear witness to that. May Allah bless you.
Moderator: Thank you very much, Brother Muhammed. You said the testimony for the Ibadi, the Ibadi belief, is Allah, the Messenger, the Book, or the Sunnah. Brother Omar, who bears witness for you that the Salafi belief is the true and correct belief?
Omar Al Zahrani: Bears witness to this: Firstly, Allah and His Messenger. And the Shia and the Ibadis. Why? Because, by Almighty Allah, you will hardly find a single book in the world, neither from the Shia nor from the Ibadis, except that it takes from the Sunnah. Some take from the Sunnah. I even went to some of their books of biography. All of it: “So-and-so narrated, and Al-Tabarani narrated, and Al-Haythami narrated, and Ibn Hajar narrated, and he cited such and such.” Meanwhile, do you find in the books of the Sunnah – with rare exception – they say “and Al-Tabarsi narrated”? Impossible! We don’t need Al-Tabarsi, nor al-Kudami. Not to belittle them, but I say we don’t need them. Praise be to Allah, our scholars are present. My dear brothers, have you ever found in our books of creed we say, “By Allah, So-and-so said…” meaning we adhere to his statement? The answer is no. You find the Shia using the statement of Umar as evidence. The Ibadis take, for example, the statement of Sunni scholars…
Moderator: So, Omar, the witness that the Salafi creed is the truth is Allah and His Messenger…
Omar Al Zahrani: …And the Shia and the Ibadis.
Moderator (Closing): Thank you. My greetings to all of you, all the lovers and followers of the “Facts of Religions” channel. A very important debate with good data. I hope you review it well. Brother Muhammed, thank you, you honored and enlightened us on the “Facts of Religions” channel. Brother Omar, thank you, you honored and enlightened us on the “Facts of Religions” channel. All the respected viewers, lovers and followers of the channel, we hope from Allah Almighty that we have contributed to presenting visual and audible material that you can benefit from later. My greetings to all of you. Peace be upon you.
Prima Qur’an scores the debate.
Muhammed Al Rashidi (Ibadi)
Strengths:
Stayed on topic: Throughout the debate, Muhammed repeatedly tried to return the discussion to the two agreed-upon books: al-Hawari’s Tafsir and Yahya ibn Salam’s Tafsir. He consistently refused to be dragged into other issues.
Clear, repeated challenge: He asked Omar a simple, direct, and verifiable question dozens of times: “Bring me just one text of ‘Taraddi’ (prayer for mercy) for Imam Ali from the Tafsir of Yahya ibn Salam or from the Tafsir of Ibn Abi Zaminayn.”
Procedural victory: Omar never produced this text. The one time Omar claimed to have found it (page 241 of Yahya ibn Salam’s Tafsir), Muhammed immediately pointed out that the text Omar showed was actually from al-Hawari’s Tafsir, not Yahya ibn Salam’s. Omar conceded this (“Now we’re back. Yes, see how he couldn’t…”).
Cautious on takfir: Muhammed explained the Ibadi doctrine of Al-Wala’ wal-Bara’ (loyalty and disavowal) as applying to specific individuals, not entire groups.
Weaknesses:
Defensive on al-Sa’di: When Omar quoted the “Dictionary of Sharia” showing al-Sa’di disavowing Ali and declaring the people of Nahrawan correct, Muhammed’s response (“he transmitted from our companions”) was technically correct but appeared evasive to a neutral viewer.
Admitted some Ibadis disavow Ali: This was an honest admission but weakened his position that the Ibadis as a whole pray for mercy on Ali.
Verdict:Won the debate on technical grounds. He successfully defended his original claim (that the Taraddiyat in al-Hawari’s Tafsir are Ibadi additions) by forcing Omar to fail the simple challenge. He remained focused and disciplined.
Omar Al Zahrani (Salafi)
Strengths:
Strong command of sources: Omar demonstrated extensive knowledge of Ibadi texts (al-Salimi, al-Kudami, al-Sa’di, Ibn al-Nadhar, al-Tayyish, al-Harithi) and effectively quoted them to show that some classical Ibadi scholars held hostile views toward Ali.
Effective use of the “Dictionary of Sharia”: He successfully showed that the same book Muhammed relied upon for Taraddi also contains explicit disavowal (bara’ah) of Ali and support for the people of Nahrawan. This was a powerful rhetorical point.
Exposed potential contradictions: He highlighted that Muhammed could not definitively prove whether the phrase “Salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam” (PBUH) was added by the author or by later scribes, using this as an analogy for the Taraddi.
Weaknesses (Significant):
Repeatedly left the core topic: Instead of answering Muhammed’s simple challenge (produce one Taraddi from Yahya ibn Salam’s Tafsir), Omar continually shifted to new topics: Iran, the “Dictionary of Sharia,” the people of Nahrawan, Ibn Muljam, al-Salimi’s poems, Shia sources, and takfir.
Failed the core challenge: Despite dozens of opportunities, Omar never produced the requested text from Yahya ibn Salam’s Tafsir. When he thought he had, he was immediately corrected by Muhammed.
Emotional and accusatory tone: Omar frequently accused Muhammed of lying, hiding beliefs, and using taqiyya. He also made several personal comments and invoked Iran repeatedly, which was outside the agreed scope.
Cinematic turn: His closing segment quoting multiple Ibadi books (al-Siyar wal-Jawabat, al-‘Uqud al-Fiddiyyah, al-Jawahir al-Muntaqa) was rhetorically powerful but largely irrelevant to the original question about the two Tafsirs.
Verdict:Lost the debate on focus and procedural grounds. While he demonstrated broader knowledge and landed some strong rhetorical blows, he failed the central challenge and spent most of the debate introducing new topics rather than answering the specific question.
Who tried to derail the debate and bring in issues outside the context?
Omar Al Zahrani overwhelmingly. He introduced:
Iran and its statements about Ibadis.
The “Dictionary of Sharia” (not one of the two agreed Tafsirs).
The people of Nahrawan and Ali’s battle against them.
Abd al-Rahman ibn Muljam (killer of Ali).
Imam al-Salimi’s poems and Ibn al-Nadhar’s “Lamyyah.”
Muhammed Al Rashidi occasionally responded to these topics but consistently tried to return to the core topic.
Who stayed focused on the debate?
Muhammad Al Rashidi stayed significantly more focused. His repeated refrain was: “The debate is about these two books. Don’t drag me to another topic. We haven’t finished with al-Hawari’s Tafsir.”
Omar even admitted this when he said: “You said ‘Taraddi’ on Ali in the Kuwalis, and Dr. Muhammed admitted that this is a sub-title. From these two Tafsirs. Excellent. Sub-title, may Allah bless you.” This was an inadvertent acknowledgment that Muhammed had consistently tried to stay on the topic.
Final Observation
The moderator, Dr. Muhammed (channel host), recognized the dynamic and eventually decided to leave the judgment to the viewer. He stopped trying to enforce the original scope and allowed the debate to become a broader theological exchange. You decide if this was a wise decision.
The two participants were effectively debating different questions:
Muhammed wanted to debate: “Did the Ibadis add the ‘Taraddi’ to al-Hawari’s Tafsir?”
Omar wanted to debate: “Do the Ibadis secretly disbelieve in Ali and support his killer?”
Because they were never debating the same question, a decisive knockout was impossible. However, on the agreed-upon original topic, Muhammed clearly prevailed, and Omar avoided the core challenge.
With Allah is the final argument. (Qur’an 6:149)
You might be interested in the following articles:
Prima Quran 