“Allah said, O Jesus, I shall cause you to die and will raise you up to Me and shall purify you of the ungrateful disbelieving people, and shall place those who follow you above those who deny the truth, until the Day of Judgement; then to Me shall all return and I will judge between you regarding your disputes.” (Qur’an 3:55)
﷽
Shaykh Hamza Yusuf states in the interview with Kim Iversen: “What Islam Really Says About Jihad, Martyrdom, and Women’s Rights“, which has been shortened to: “What Islam Really Says About Jihad.“
@17:27 minute mark, Shaykh Hamza says: “The vast majority of Muslims believe in the second coming.”
“Moreover, if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the command of Allah. And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.” (Qur’an 49:9)
﷽
So today we are going to be looking at the following hadith:
Narrated by Zaid bin Arqam:
That the Messenger of Allah (saw) said to ‘Ali, Fatimah (ra), Al-Hasan and Al-Husain (ra): “I am at war with whoever makes war with you, and peace for whoever makes peace with you.”
You can see from the above source that it has a grading of Da’if (meaning weak/fabricated).
Now, even without going into the chains of narrators, we know that this hadith has a major weakness.
However, let us say, for the sake of argument, that this hadith had a grading of Sahih (meaning sound). It would still have a defect. Not even a hidden one. Not even something that would require a hadith specialist.
It would require familiarity with the text of the Qur’an.
CONTROL GROUP A: BEING OPPRESSED
CONTROL GROUP B: DOING THE OPPRESSING.
So, in the above scenario. Ali, Fatimah (ra), Al-Hasan and Al-Husain (ra) could be in control group B. They could be doing the oppressing. However, since our interlocutors (Shi’i, Sunni, ect) will get emotionally charged over such a suggestion, we will not entertain it at this point.
Thus, Ali, Fatimah (ra), Al-Hasan and Al-Husain (ra) could be in control group A. That means they are being oppressed. They are locked in conflict with control group B. However, notice Allah (swt) says:
“If two factions among the believers should fight.”
And since the hadith states that being in conflict or at war with Ali, Fatimah (ra), Al-Hasan and Al-Husain (ra) is ipso facto being at war with the Blessed Messenger (saw) and since it is not conceivable for one to be labeled as a believer and to be at war with or conflict with the Blessed Prophet (saw) himself that hadith is baseless. It is null and void.
Next: Aisha (ra) has Wilāyat al-Ḥaqīqah (real guardianship of Allah), whereas he (Ali) only has the Wilāyatal-Dhahir (apparent guardianship).
“The Prophet has a stronger affinity to the believers than they do themselves. And his wives are their mothers.” (Qur’an 33:6)
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “Allah said, ‘I will declare war against him who shows hostility to a pious worshipper of Mine. And the most beloved things with which My slave comes nearer to Me, is what I have enjoined upon him; and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil (praying or doing extra deeds besides what is obligatory) till I love him, 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.”
Narrated Abu Maryam `Abdullah bin Ziyad Al-Aasadi:
“When Talha, AzZubair and `Aisha moved to Basra, `Ali sent `Ammar bin Yasir and Hasan bin `Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. Al-Hasan bin `Ali was at the top of the pulpit and `Ammar was below Al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard `Ammar saying, “`Aisha has moved to Al-Busra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her (`Aisha).”
So using this standard of logic. It is Ali ibn Abi Talib who risks war with Allah (swt) and not Aisha (ra) who risks war with the Messenger of Allah!
Ali’s own brother Aqil fought on the side of Muawiya.
Aqil ibn Abi Talib (cousin of the Blessed Prophet) and elder brother of Ali. So does this now mean a cousin of the Blessed Prophet (saw) like Ali, and brother of Ali was at war with the Blessed Prophet (saw)?
Abu Hafs al ‘Asha (is munkar al hadith) — narrates unacceptable hadith)
The teacher of Muhammed ibn Suqah is majhul (unknown).
So, in the end, this hadith is discarded.
The Shi’i may not like it. The Zaydi may not like it. The Imami may not like it. But the evidence has been laid out and the refutation (if any awaits).
“Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is guided” (Qur’an 16:125)
﷽
There are so many people on social media these days saying this person refuted so and so. This Shaykh said this. However, upon a closer look you see that nothing of the kind too place.
Let me say this the books of Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness) they are banned in Saudi Arabia. While there are Shaykhs giving fatwa about drinking beer, and more and more concerts are planned. Keeping quite about what is happening to our brothers and sisters in Palestine. Ever ready to draw their tongue and sword against the Muslims. Let this Ummah realize who the real khawarij are!
The truth is many Muslims think that these people are their dawah is dominant. You see them all over social media. They are on YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, you name it. So for an English speaking audience it looks quite impressive. Rarely does anyone counter them. However, if they only had access to the Arabic language and you see these people try and attack our school they get absolutely pummeled. Dare we say you would even pity them!
Some Muslims have a deep resentment towards Saudi Arabia. We, however, do not. They have kept the sacred trust of Mecca and ensuring the safety of the pilgrims as well as maintaining the city of Madinah. Saudi Arabia is also one of the safest countries in the world. We hope for them peace and prosperity; We just hope that it does not come at the expense of the moral compass of the society. May Allah (swt) guide their leadership to do what is right by the Qur’an and Sunnah.
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan didn’t refute the Ibadi! He didn’t refute anything!!
Jahmi say that heaven and hell will disappear soon or later. They say Allah (swt ) is every where, and we do not say this.
“The knowledgeable ones in Oman are predominantly Ibadi’s. And the Ibadiyyah are a sect from the Khawarij. And Ahmed Ibn Hamad al-Khalili (Grand Mufti of Oman) is their Imam. And his writings entail the Madhab of the Khawarij and the Madhab of the Jahmiyyah. He has very evil writings! Do not take knowledge from him! Rather take knowledge from Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
What can we say? Ahmed Ibn Hamad al-Khalili (hafidhullah) has written numerous works and none of that is a secret. So which books or writings of books of Shaykh al-Khalili (hafidhullah) did Shaykh Salih al Fawzan refute? None! Which shows that these people who made this video are even willing to lie about their own Shaykh! They even made a lie upon Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan because he didn’t refute absolute jack!
@0:56 Then the producers claim that Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan “refutes the creed of the Ibadiyyah!”
Questioner: “Esteemed Shaykh, who are the Ibadiyyah sect? And is it obligatory to warn against them?”
“The Ibadiyyah are a subsect from the Khawarij (renegades) and are followers of a man named Abdullah Ibn Ibad. They are a sect from the Khawarij. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
The students of Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan should ask him what books and writings of ‘Abdullah Ibn Ibad‘ (rahemullah) is he familiar with? In what way do we follow him? What are the proofs and evidences?
Questioner: “Esteemed Shaykh, are the Ibadiyyah sect from the followers of Sufism?”
“The Ibadiyyah are from the Khawarij (renegades) & they have extremism upon the Madhab of the Khawarij, The Ibadiyyah make Takfeer upon those who commit major sins other than Shirk, and they believe that the sinful (Muslims) will reside in the hellfire forever. This is from the beliefs of the Khawarij. They are followers of a man named Abdullah Ibn Ibad. They are a sect from the Khawarij.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
“And they (the Ibadiyyah) say that the Qur’an is created, upon the Madhab of the Jahmiyyah. They combine between the beliefs of the Jahmiyyah and the Khawarij. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
“And they believe that the sinful (Muslims) will reside in the hellfire forever.”
Actually, we do not believe that the believers go to hell at all! Does Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan have a single verse from the Qur’an that says the believers got to hell or leave the hell?
“Theysay that the Qur’an is created.” That is because the Qur’an is created!
In fact, on this subject a golden opportunity was presented to Shaykh Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz to expose Shaykh Ahmed ibn Hamad Al Khalili (hafidullah) and by extension the belief that the Qur’an is created as false. However, ibn Baz backed down!
It is attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw) “Whoever guides someone to goodness will have a reward like the one who did it.”
Questioner: “Does the creed of the Ibadiyyah entail disbelief? And if someone prays Salah behind the Ibadi’s, should he repeat his Salah?”
“It is well known that the Ibadiyyah say that the Qur’an is created. They utter the speech the Jahmiyyah. The Salah is not valid behind anyone who says that the Qur’an is created. Yes.” -Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan
Prima Qur’an response:
Does having similar beliefs to a particular group of Muslims make one from among them? What kind of logic is that?! This must mean that Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan utters the speech of the Jahmiyyah because they believe that the Blessed Messenger (saw) is a Prophet of Allah (swt). Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan also believes this. So does this mean that Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan =a Jahmi?
The Jahmi believe that heaven and hell will disappear sooner or later. This is not our belief. The Jahmi believe that Allah (swt) is omnipresent and this is also not our belief. There are many more examples.
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan is known to speak falsehood and attribute speculation about Allah (swt) and since his aqeedah errors are published and well known he should publicly repent!
For example: Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan when speaking about the Qur’an 4:157 says, “Allah made this man resemble the Messiah.”
Meaning that Allah (swt) made some random person to look like Jesus. However, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, nor his students can produce any proof for this speculative assumption from the Qur’an or the Sunnah!
In summary Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan only warned his denomination about Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness) . He gave absolutely no refutations. Do not get it twisted!
Let us demonstrate how a refutation is done,
We will do this by refuting Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan’s speculation concerning Allah (swt) having two eyes.
Step 1)
Make your intention for the sake of Allah (swt) the purpose is not to glorify your ego but to establish the truth so that the people maybe guided.
Step 2)
You give the position of the other side. You do not edit, cut out or censor them. Lay out their evidence from their own sources. This is done like this…observe….
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan’s speculation concerning Allah (swt) having two eyes is based upon the following pieces of evidence:
Questioner ask: “Sheikh may Allah grant you success. In the hadith of the Prophet (saw) “And indeed your Lord is not one eyed.” Is this evidence for the attribute of the two eyes of Allah?”
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan replies “Yes, Ahlus-Sunnah-Wa-Al-Jamaa’ah derive from it the affirmation of the two eyes of Allah. If God is not one-eyed, so then the meaning of it is that He has two eyes, yes.”
Questioner ask: “And is there another evidence (that is) more sufficient than this?”
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan replies: “In the Qur’an “Which sailed on before Our eyes, as a reward for someone who has been rejected.” [Qur’an 54:14]
“Cast him into the chest, and toss it into the river. The current will throw him up on the shore where an enemy of Mine as well as an enemy of him will pick him up. I have lavished love of My own on you so that you are brought up under my two eyes.” [Qur’an 20:39]
Step 3)
Refutation. Show how the opposing sides conclusions are flawed. We will do this now.
“And they have thereof no knowledge. They follow not except assumption, and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all.” (Qur’an 53:28)
For the first evidence:
What they do is rely upon the following hadith:
The Prophet (saw) said, “Allah did not send any prophet but that he warned his nation of the one-eyed liar (Ad-Dajjal). He is one-eyed while your Lord is not one-eyed, The word ‘Kafir’ (unbeliever) is written between his two eyes.”
From they deduce that Allah (swt) must have two eyes. In the above hadith, they rely upon reason and speculation!! The very thing they accuse others of doing. No where does that hadith say that Allah (swt) has two eyes.
The second evidence:
“In the Qur’an “Which sailed on before Our eyes, as a reward for someone who has been rejected.” [Qur’an 20:39]
Prima Qur’an response:
From they deduce that Allah (swt) must have two eyes. In the above passage of the Qur’an they rely upon reason and speculation!! The very thing they accuse others of doing. No where does that text of the Qur’an does it say that Allah (swt) has two eyes. Even if they don’t want to allow for the fact that the Arabs in the time of the Blessed Messenger (saw) were masters of their language and understood fully idiom and expression and even if you want to take the literal meaning “Our eyes” is an unspecified number!
The third evidence used:
“Cast him into the chest, and toss it into the river. The current will throw him up on the shore where an enemy of Mine as well as an enemy of him will pick him up. I have lavished love of My own on you so that you are brought up under my two eyes.” [Qur’an 20:39]
Prima Qur’an response:
First of all these people lie upon their own Shaykh! Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan did not say ‘two‘ eyes. Even if he did in another speech or book then he has attributed to Allah (swt) speculative theology. Look at the two Saudi backed translations of the Qur’an into English.
Even if they don’t want to allow for the fact that the Arabs in the time of the Blessed Messenger (saw) were masters of their language and understood fully idiom and expression and even if you want to take the literal meaning the translation “Two eyes” is a flat lie! There is no word ‘two‘ in the Arabic text. Not only that but they are in a real pickle now! Because the text says, ‘eye‘ and other text says ‘our eyes‘. This is what happens when you do not understand language, idiom and expression.
You see this is a very different situation then the following text of the Qur’an:
“And the Jews say, ‘The hand of Allah is tied up.’ Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His Hands are extended, He spends however He wills…” (Qur’an 5:64)
Even if they don’t want to allow for the fact that the Arabs in the time of the Blessed Messenger (saw) were masters of their language and understood fully idiom and expression and even if you want to take the literal meaning the translation as ‘both‘ they have scope to say that Allah (swt) has two hands. Yet they have absolutely no proof that Allah (swt) has ‘two‘ eyes. Their position would have been more consistent if they simply stated: “We believe that Allah has eyes.” They could have done that without specifying a number.
That my friends is how a refutation is done.
We have done our level best to defend the honour of Shaykh Ahmed ibn Hamad Al Khalili (hafidullah). In reality he does not need my defense. His defense is the Qur’an and the Sunnah! We have also done our level best in defending again the slander against our brothers, the Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama (The People of Truth and Straightness)
“Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally in that. Those are the worst of creatures.” (Qur’an 98:6)
﷽
Analyzing the Hadith: Khawarij are the dogs of hellfire!!
This is an analysis of the hadith that are attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw), in terms of their chains of narration and analysis of the text being transmitted Insh’Allah.
This particular hadith which has been put in the mouth of the Blessed Messenger (saw) has him insult, revile and curse his companions!
Before we start dear reader one should be reminded. What I am about to share with you be extremely careful in what you attribute to the Blessed Messenger (saw).
Narrated by Ali: “The Prophet said, “Do not tell a lie against me for whosoever tells a lie against me then he will surely enter the hell-fire.”
Narrated By ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair: ” I said to my father, ‘I do not hear from you any narration (Hadith) of Allah s Apostle as I hear (his narrations) from so and so?” Az-Zubair replied. l was always with him (the Prophet) and I heard him saying “Whoever tells a lie against me then (surely) let him occupy, his seat in Hell-fire.”
Narrated By Anas: “The fact which stops me from narrating a great number of Hadiths to you is that the Prophet said: “Whoever tells a lie against me intentionally, then (surely) let him occupy his seat in Hell-fire.”
Narrated By Al-Mughira: “I heard the Prophet saying, “Ascribing false things to me is not like ascribing false things to anyone else. Whosoever tells a lie against me intentionally then surely let him occupy his seat in Hell-Fire.” I heard the Prophet saying, “The deceased who is wailed over is tortured for that wailing.”
There are two options here. If you lied about the Blessed Prophet (saw) intentionally than you will be in the hellfire. If you lied about the Prophet (saw) unintentionally you still need to make tauba (repentance) and vow to never repeat such again.
Ibn Sirin said:
“Nobody used to ask about the isnad (chain of narration), but when the fitna occurred (infighting among the companions), they would question others by asking: “Tell us the names of your men?” After this they were cautious about every narrator, and they would take narrations from those who were known to be scrupulous in following the Sunnah, and leave (or reject) the narrations of those who were known as innovators in religion.”
Source: (Muslim Volume 1 P. 15)
HADITH: KHAWARIJ ARE THE DOGS OF HELLFIRE.
This huge statement attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw) comes to us by way of two transmissions attributed to two companions.
Hadith #1 The first is by way of Abdullah Ibn Abi Awfa.
‘Abdullah Ibn Abi Awfa
It was narrated that Ibn Awfa said:
“The Messenger of Allah said: ‘The Khawarij are the dogs of Hell.'”
Hadith #2 This hadith is by way of Abu Umamah said:
“(The Khawarij) are the worst of the slain who are killed under heaven, and the best of the slain are those who were killed by them. “Those (Khawarij) are the dogs of Hell. Those people were Muslims but they became disbelievers.” I said: “O Abu Umamah, is that your opinion?” He said: “Rather I heard IT from the Messenger of Allah.”
An example of difference in the text when Abu Ghalib claims to narrate from Abu Umamah:
“Abu Umamah saw heads (of the Khawarij) hanging on the streets of Damascus. He said: ‘The dogs of the Fire and the worst dead people under the canopy of the heavens. The best dead men are those whom these have killed.’ He then recited: On the Day when some faces will become white and some faces will become black… (3:106) until the end of the Ayah. I said to Abu Umamah: ‘Did you hear IT from the Messenger of Allah (saw)?’ He said: ‘If I had not heard IT but one time, or two times, or three times, or four times – until he reached seven – I would not have narrated it to you.”
ANALYZING THE FOUR CHAINS THROUGH ABU UMAMAH AL BAHILI
1.Abu Ghalib
Ibn Hibban says we cannot take his hadith. An Nasai’ says he is weak. Ibn Sa’d also says he is weak. Yahya ibn Ma’in & Tirmidhi both comment that he is a good transmitter. Al Dhahabi comments that in all of his (Abu Ghalib’s) narrations there is something.
2. Safewan bin Suliam Almadni
He did not meet Abu Umamah Al Bahili He met with another Abu Umamah As Said ibn Suhair ibn Hanif On account of that Ibn Hajar Al Asqalni commented that it is possible this transmission is cut off. And it is proven that it has a cut as he did not meet the one he claims to transmit from. The lack of ‘an ‘an, that he was listening makes this clear he did not get from the source. This is why in the matn it says: “He entered” he did not say, “I heard from…” “I listened..” In the narration when the hadith is a strong and correct hadith the wording will be: “I saw him”, “I met him”, “I listened from him”
3. Shadad ibn Abdillah Abi Ammar
Ibn Hajar-says He is sincere; however, the hadith is musral. The sahaba is cut off.
3a. Ikrima ibn Ammar
Ibn Hajar says: sincere but a faulty individual. His narration through Yahya ibnu Kathir -His hadith via this route is Maqloob. Fulaan yasriq al-Hadith -so and so steals Hadith.
4.Siyar Ashami Al Amawi
Virtually none of the people of Jarh wa Tadeel has given him trust, with the exception of Al Bukhari. Even than it is not that Bukhari gave him trust but Bukhari uses him in Tarikh Al Kabir. Ibn Hibban gives him trust. However, it is noted that Ibn Hibban is lax when giving trust to narrators. No other is with Ibn Hibban considering him. Ibn Abi Hatim in his Al Jarh wa Tadeel claims no one gives Siyar Ashami Al Amawi trust. Al Dhahabi says of him ‘wuthiq’ and not ‘thiqa’. This indicates weakness in Siyar Ashami Al Amawi.
4a. Abi Saeed Abur Rahman bin Abdillah Al Basri
He is a mawla (client) of Bani Hashim. He is a Shaykh for Ahmed bin Hanbal. Ibn Hajar says about him: He is sincere but may have faults. Imam Al Uqali says Imam Ahmed mentioned that his teacher had “many faults”. Al Qabani also says that Imam Ahmed found found fault in his teacher.
The chain for this hadith is: Abu Bakr bin Abi Shayba narrates from Ishaq bin Yusuf bin Mrdas narrating from Sulaiman bin Mahran al-Ahmash narrating from Abdullah Ibn Abi Awfa.
ANALYZING THE TWO CHAINS THROUGH ABDULLAH IBN ABI AWFA
1.al-Amash
al-Amash is known as Mudallas.
A Mudallas (“concealed”) in hadith is one which is weak due to the uncertainty caused by tadlis. Tadlis (concealing) refers to an isnad where a reporter has concealed the identity of his Shaykh.
Tadlis al-Isnad. A person reports from his Shaykh whom he met, what he did not hear from him, or from a contemporary of his whom he did not meet, in such a way as to create the impression that he heard the hadith in person. A mudallis (one who practices tadlis) here usually uses the mode (“on the authority of”) or (“he said”) to conceal the truth about the isnad.
There is agreement that al-Amash did not meet Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa.
2.Saeed Ibnu Jamhan via Allalakaee via two ways:
2a.Allalakaee -via- Hashragu Ibnu Nabatha
Ibn Hajar says about him (Hashraju): Truthful but forgets allot.
2b.Allalakaee-via- Qutnu ibnu Nusair
Ibn Hajar says about him: Truthful but forgets allot. Abu Zuhra says he is carrying something in his heart about that man. Ibnul Adei says that he is stealing the hadith. Fulaan yasriq al-Hadith -so and so steals Hadith
MATN (TEXTUAL) CRITICISM OF THEHADITH: KHAWARIJ ARE THE DOGS OF HELLFIRE.
The statement:
“The dogs of the Fire and the worst dead people under the canopy of the heavens. The best dead men are those whom these have killed.”
This is not from pure Arabic grammar and the Prophet (saw) did not speak like this.
The statement: “Did you hear IT from the Messenger of Allah (saw)?’ He said: ‘If I had not heard IT but one time, or two times, or three times, or four times – until he reached seven – I would not have narrated it to you.”
Is hardly believable. This is a huge hadith this is not something light or small. Where are the other sahaba, companions?
This hadith is giving a hukm! It is talking about taking the life of others, which is not a small matter. How are we to believe that especially in light of the claim of one narrator that the Prophet (saw) mentioned as such seven times! Only 1 or 2 have heard this!?
After 64 hijri, this hadith mentions this term ‘khawarij’ which was not there in the time of the Prophet (saw).
Dr. Salahuddin ibn Ahmad al-Idlib says this hadith is mawdu, it is lies!
Source: (Manhaj Naqd al-Matn ‘Inda ‘Ulama’ al-Hadith al-Nabawi (منهج نقد المتن عند علماء الحديث النبوي) page 362)
Translated from the above:
Concerning the Condemnation of the Khawarij: Ibn Majah narrated from Ibn Abi Awfa that the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) said:
“The Khawarij are the dogs of Hellfire.” (1)
The fabricators did not neglect condemning the Rawafid (a term for some Shi’a sects), so they fabricated hadiths for that purpose. Among them is what Ibn al-Jawzi narrated from Abu Sa’id al-Khudri that the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) said:
[There will be] “The Qadariyyah, the Murji’ah, and the Rawafid.” (2)
And in Al-Mawdu’at (The Fabricated Hadiths), it is also narrated from Anas that the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) said:
“The Qadariyyah, the Jabriyyah, the Murji’ah, the Rawafid, and the Khawarij will be stripped of a quarter of Tawhid (monotheism), so they will meet Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, as disbelievers, abiding eternally in Hellfire.” (3)
These labels (for sects) did not exist during the time of the Messenger of God (peace be upon him), so it is not permissible to attribute these hadiths condemning them and insulting them to him.
The Second Issue: Fabricated Hadiths in Support of Jurisprudential Schools (Madhahib)
Ijtihad (legal reasoning) in subsidiary jurisprudential matters led to the emergence of different schools of thought (Madhahib). Each jurisprudential school had its principles, conclusions, and theories. Each group would support its viewpoint with what it understood from the texts of the Noble Quran and what was narrated from His Messenger (peace be upon him).
“Regrettably, some ignorant zealots among the followers of the jurists were not content to limit their evidence to sound, established texts. Instead, they wanted to silence their opponents with decisive proofs that did not accept rebuttal, even if they were not proven. Thus, they began to compose forged hadiths and attribute them to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).“
(1) Sunan Ibn Majah, No. 172 (2) Al-Mawdu’at (Ibn al-Jawzi), Vol. 1, p. 272 (3) Al-Mawdu’at (Ibn al-Jawzi), Vol. 1, p. 278
Notice that to Abu Ghalib this is not some common knowledge or something well known.
Also, note that he asked Abu Umamah if that was his opinion or rather he heard IT from the Blessed Messenger (saw). Another point of consideration is that the ‘it‘ is not qualified. What part of his statement is he actually saying he heard from the Blessed Messenger (saw)? Notice the statement of takfir “They used to be Muslims but they became disbelievers.”
The very thing they accuse the so called ‘Khawarij’ of doing are that which they themselves are doing!
Do take note of the following!
Notice how apparently this individual takes an ayat of the Qur’an that is used to describe unbelievers and arguably applies the text to believers (or former believers). Again, something they accuse the so called ‘Khawarij’ of doing!
Also, notice the ghastly image the narrator finds in Damascus. The heads of these people are on pikes: “Abu Umamah saw heads (of the Khawarij) hanging on the streets of Damascus.”
Now, that sounds like something that an imperium would do against dissenters.
Lastly, this text differs remarkably from the first one. Unless someone wants to make the spacious argument that Abu Ghalib is relating two different instances. That makes the matter worse because it makes Abu Ghalib question Abu Umamah’s statement as being truthful on two different occasions!
Also, it is extremely telling to note that Abu Umamah al Bahili was in the battle of Siffin on the side of Ali, even after the events.
OVER ALL ASSEMENT OF THE THREE HADITH ABOVE.
The Blessed Messenger (saw) never call people dogs.
The strongest condemnation of unbelievers and those who reject the message of truth comes from Allah (swt) in the Qur’an: “Those are the worst of creatures.” (Qur’an 98:6).
Allah (swt) never called anyone dogs, let alone the Blessed Messenger (saw)
Now dear reader imagine you are walking with a friend of yours. This friend suddenly says, “And the Litharians are the worst of people! They are absolute scum!”
Wouldn’t that be odd? Wouldn’t you want to have some context to this statement?
Considering this statement: “dogs of hellfire” coming from the lips of the Blessed Messenger (saw) it should have more context and more background to it and it simply doesn’t!
It just gives the impression that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was walking around during the brisk afternoon and stated: “The Khawarij are the dogs of Hell.” Really? Just like that?
No context?
The three hadith quoted above give you absolutely no context. Now what Ahl Sunnah does is that they take these hadith and juxtapose them besides other hadith to paint a picture. However, these hadith quoted above give no picture, no context and no clue to the situation that has given rise to the very strong words that are allegedly used by the Blessed Messenger (saw).
This is a huge statement of the Blessed Messenger (saw). Only two of the companions narrate this?
The other point is that the word ‘Khawarij’ was not in use in the time of 640 Hijra. This is a tell tale sign itself.
Now, if we want to talk about a hadith that talks about rebels or those who do khurooj. Why not talk about a hadith that has no ambiguity in the text or in its chain of transmission? Then we can know who these ‘khawarij’ are.
Narrated `Ikrima:
“That Ibn `Abbas told him and `Ali bin `Abdullah to go to Abu Sa`id and listen to some of his narrations; So they both went (and saw) Abu Sa`id and his brother irrigating a garden belonging to them. When he saw them, he came up to them and sat down with his legs drawn up and wrapped in his garment and said, “(During the construction of the mosque of the Prophet) we carried the adobe of the mosque, one brick at a time while `Ammar used to carry two at a time. The Prophet (saw) passed by `Ammar and removed the dust off his head and said, “May Allah be merciful to `Ammar. He will be killed by a rebellious aggressive group. `Ammar will invite them to (obey) Allah and they will invite him to the (Hell) fire.”
Now this presents a clear dilemma for Ahl Sunnah and the Pro Alid camp. They are in a pickle. However, it does not present a dilemma for truth seekers.
Are we to believe that Ikrima (ra) whom is an impeccable narrator, and whom narrated the above hadith about Ammar that is used by the pro Alid camp to attack the Umayyad’s was among the dogs of the hellfire?
Or,
Is it more likely given the ambiguity of the ‘dogs of the hell fire’ text quoted above, no context for such a tremendous statement of the Blessed Messenger (saw), and the issues surrounding the chains of transmission that they are indeed fabrications with malevolent intent?
May Allah (swt) open your hearts and your eyes dear Ummah! Muslims are to be guided by the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Our noble scholars lead the way.
The Amir of the Muslims is the head of the Muslims. It is not a theocracy. It is a human government. One in which the head of state can make mistakes and can be removed from office! Peacefully preferably and forcibly if need be.
I recommend the following articles for you dear reader. Remember the victors write history and know that Allah (swt) will allow the truth to prevail in the end.
Say, ‘Truth has come and falsehood has been banished; it is doomed to banishment.'” (Qur’an 17:81)
Dogs of hellfire? Who really believes that animals are going to hell?
This article addresses the bizarre belief that Allah (swt) has a goat into hell ….well…just because.
“Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.” (Qur’an 5:32)
﷽
Please excuse the tired clichés (khawārij). Nevertheless, this material may still be of value to researchers and interested readers.
Summary
Sālim ibn Ḥammūd ibn Shāmis al-Siyābī (1908–1993) was an Omani scholar, poet, historian, and judge. He was born in Ghāla, in the ولاية of Bawshār in eastern Oman. A largely self-taught scholar, al-Siyābī memorized the Qur’an at the age of seven and later studied classical Arabic works, including the Alfiyyah of Ibn Malik, a renowned 1,000-line poem on Arabic grammar.
Al-Siyābī was a prolific author, credited with as many as 84 works. According to Sultān ibn Mubārak al-Shaybānī, his writings can be categorized into prose and treatises, poetry and versified compositions, and research and correspondence.
This manuscript was copied by Yūsuf ibn Sāʻid al-Zakwānī in 1386 AH (1966 CE). Written in black ink with rubricated headings, it contains two works by al-Siyābī.
The first is a theological treatise defending Ibadism against accusations made by other Muslim scholars. The second, titled Wahb al-Samāʾ fī Aḥkām al-Dimāʾ (“The Gift from Heaven on the Rulings of Bloodshed”), is primarily composed in verse and addresses the jurisprudence of bodily injuries. It is organized into short sections, each outlining the legal ruling for injury to a specific part of the body.
In the first work, Aṣdaq al-Manāhij fī Tamyīz al-Ibāḍiyya min al-Khawārij(“The Most Truthful Method for Distinguishing the Ibāḍīs from the Khārijites”), al-Siyābī critiques the prejudices held by some scholars against the Ibāḍīs. Writing in a question-and-answer format, he argues that Ibāḍīs should be understood within the broader Sunni tradition rather than as Khārijites.
In the introduction, he explains that he composed the treatise after consulting numerous works of Islamic theology in which certain scholars expressed outrage at the claim that the Ibāḍīs were responsible for the killings of Ali ibn Abi Talib and Uthman ibn Affan.
This claim relates to the early political conflicts that followed the death of the Prophet (saw) and contributed to divisions within the Muslim community. The Khārijites initially supported ʿAlī but later rejected his leadership after he agreed to arbitration during his conflict with Muawiyah I. Declaring both sides illegitimate, they rebelled and became known as khawārij (“those who seceded” or “rebels”).
A subsequent internal split among the Khārijites—particularly regarding methods of political opposition—led to the emergence of the Ibāḍī movement. Today, Ibāḍī communities are found primarily in Oman, as well as in parts of North and East Africa.
“When Musa came to the place appointed by Us, and his Lord addressed him, He said: “O my Lord! show (Yourself) to me, that I may look upon you.” Allah said: “You shall never see me; But look upon the mount; if it abides in its place, then you will see me.”
When his Lord manifested His glory on the Mount, He made it as dust. And Moses fell down in a swoon. When he recovered his senses he said: “Glory be to Thee! to Thee I turn in repentance, and I am the first to believe.” (Qur’an 7:143)
﷽
Our brothers have done it again. An excellent overview of the meaning of the request of Musa (as) to see Allah (swt).
As for Musa (as), we get that he knows the attributes of Allah -Transcendent and Exalted He is. That which concerns the positive side and that which concerns the negative side. So he knows of the impossible -to affirm- attributes upon Allah. As we said that this is perceived through the natural instinct and the mind. And Musa (as) without doubt is greater than that; rather he is a prophet whom revelation is passed onto, and he has been chosen by Allah from all creation. So he cannot attribute to Allah that which is not suited. So he is not ignorant-dignified he is- rather he is knowledgeable. He is knowledgeable on the fact that it’s impossible for Allah to be described with being perceived.
As for connecting his request {“My Lord, show me [Yourself] that I may look at You.”} [Qur’an 7:143] and his Belief that this is impossible, then that is understood by saying that he didn’t request the ‘action of seeing’/ru’ya for himself. Rather, he asked (that) for his people. Even if it came in the singular form or first person(perspective). When he said {“My Lord, show me [Yourself] that I may look at You.”}. As for the proof that he asked it for his people then the ayats of the Qur’an are clear! {And [recall] when you said, “O Musa, we will never believe you until we see Allāh outright”;} [Qur’an 2:55].
So, they are the ones who asked Musa (as) for that. And they negate belief upon themselves until that is achieved for them. And Allah the Exalted also said, {For truly, they had asked Moses for something even greater than that, for they said, “Show us Allah openly.”} [Qur’an 4:153] The evidence is also when Musa (as) and those of those who were with him (from bani Israel, when asked for ru’ya) were struck.
He said {Will You annihilate us for what the fools among us have done?} [Qur’an 7:155]. So the sign here is that they are ignorant and they have brought this upon themselves. This all signifies that he asked the ‘action of seeing’ for them, as in him being attentive for them to believe. So he was Merciful to his people, benevolent towards them, even though he knows that this is a grave matter. But he wanted to prove its impossibility not in acceptance to them for what they asked. Rather they were stubborn, so he asked this not in respect to their request to them. All the while knowing it being impossible. Rather to show them by proof that it is not happening. Because they know with their stubbornness that he is better than them; and that he is a messenger of Alllah whom revelation is passed onto.
For if the perception was unachievable for him , then it will be all the more so unachievable for them, thus not happening. And indeed , this is what happened. And reality has been shown with the decimation of the mountain, and with them being struck alongside Mosa (as) by the lightning. And that signified the danger of what was asked.
And that was a punishment for them, but as for Musa (as) it was a type of guidance, because Allah the almighty knows the truth of Musa (as) , but this from Allah was due to Musa (as) being hasty in asking that which he should have sought permission in first. It was more appropriate and fitting for him to first ask permission from Allah the Exalted. Then, his repentance from this indicates that this is grave upon Allah, because when he became unconscious. What did he say, he first said {And when he awoke, he said, “Exalted are You! I have repented to You, and I am the first of the believers.”} [Qur’an 7:143]
“Do not follow what you have no knowledge of. Indeed, all will be called to account for ˹their˺ hearing, sight, and intellect.” (Qur’an 17:36)
﷽
“To Allah belongs whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth, that He may recompense those who do evil for what they have done, and recompense those who have done good (ahsanu) with the reward most fair (bil-hus’na).” (Qur’an 53:31)
The issue of the companions is a sensitive one among the Muslim ummah. Often one dives right into the subject without taking some time to define terms. For example:
Who actually is a companion (sahaba)? What are the criteria that are used?
Is there a universally agreed upon definition?
All of these preliminary questions would be very helpful in establishing the truth of the matter.
So, for us, we do not deal with emotions. We deal with proof and evidence because this is what ultimately establishes truth from error.
The following verses are those that the Sunni Muslims will use to somehow justify that a certain group of the companions are going to paradise. However, we need to do a tight textual analysis to see if this is actually correct.
“And why do you not spend in the cause of Allah while to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens and the earth? Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterward and fought. But to all Allah has promised reward (l-husna). And Allah, with what you do, is Acquainted.” (Qur’an 57:10)
“Not equal are those believers remaining [at home] – other than the disabled – and the mujahideen, [who strive and fight] in the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred the mujahideen through their wealth and their lives over those who remain [behind], by degrees. And to both Allah has promised reward (l-husna). But Allah has preferred the mujahideen over those who remain [behind] with a greater reward (ajran aziman).” (Qur’an 49:5)
First, neither of these verses are speaking about paradise or promising anyone paradise. Someone will need to show where in the Arabic text it says this.
This is the issue of comparison of deeds. What deeds are more meritorious than the other. This text does not address the issue that all of them will go to paradise.
Allah (swt) differentiates those who do jihad and those who remain at home. Allah (swt) differentiates between those who have spent and fought before and those who came later.
Also, if you juxtapose the two verses together, look at them closely.
The statement: ”With a greater reward (ajran aziman)” cannot mean paradise/heaven.
First, because the Arabic text does not say so.
Second, because it would exclude from paradise those from the statement: “But to all Allah has promised reward (l-husna)” because the verse in 49:5 indicates that ajran aziman is distinct from l-husna.
The only way for Sunni scholars to solve this is for them to use strained interpretative devices to suggest that husna means heaven and ajran aziman means seeing Allah, or that husna means heaven and ajran aziman means greater heaven.
The Qur’an speaks in generality. It speaks in terms of generality. When it speaks of the companions as we see above, it speaks in terms of generality. Thus, Qur’an 57:10 and Qur’an 49:5 speak in generalities and do not explicitly mention paradise. Therefore, we should not read paradise into those general verses simply because we assume that the recipients as a whole were righteous or guaranteed paradise.
This is methodologically sound. A general promise of al-ḥusnā (the best reward) does not, by itself, constitute an explicit guarantee of paradise for every individual within the groups mentioned, especially when:
The Qur’an itself affirms that hypocrites existed among the Muhājirūn and Anṣār (Qur’an 9:101).
The Prophet (saw) explicitly stated that some of his companions would be barred from his Ḥawḍ (Bukhārī, 6582).
Any creedal claim of universal salvation for all companions requires additional evidence beyond these two verses.
Contrast those verses above where no mention of paradise is in the Arabic text with a text that has explicit mention.
“And their Lord responded to them, “Never will I allow to be lost the work of [any] worker among you, whether male or female; you are of one another. So those who emigrated and were evicted from their homes and were harmed in My cause and fought and were killed – I will surely remove from them their misdeeds, and I will surely admit them to gardens (jannatin) beneath which rivers flow as reward from Allah , and Allah has with Him the best reward.” (Qur’an 3:195)
Notice how Allah (swt) describes those, their, them who receive the gardens(janna)? They are those whom: emigrated, were evicted, harmed, fought and were killed.
Qur’an 3:195 describes a specific group with specific qualities and promises them paradise. It does not say others are excluded, but it also does not authorize us to extend its promise beyond those qualities.
Allah does not cause the loss of anyone who does good.
So, certainly, if anyone does good, they will be rewarded with what is better. And whoever does evil will be rewarded for that. So, if this is the ruling for mankind in general, of course, the believers get reward for good, and it is no secret that in Islam some intentions are more noble than other intentions. Some actions are more meritorious than other actions.
Whoever comes with a good deed will be rewarded with what is better. And whoever comes with an evil deed, then the evildoers will only be rewarded for what they used to do.” (Qur’an 28:84)
“Be patient in hard times.(Oh Muhammed) Allah does not fail to repay those who do good.” (Qur’an 11:115)
Also, keep in mind, based upon the verses in the Qur’an, we know that people who die as a shaheed in the path of Allah (swt) will be in paradise. This is also our good opinion and outward perception. However, only Allah (swt) really knows what is in the heart of people.
“It has been narrated on the authority of Sulaiman b. Yasar who said:
People dispersed from around Abu Huraira, and Natil, who was from the Syrians. said to him: O Shaykh, relate (to us) a tradition you have heard from the Messenger of Allah (saw). He said: Yes. I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: The first of men (whose case) will be decided on the Day of Judgment will be a man who died as a martyr. He shall be brought (before the Judgment Seat). Allah will make him recount His blessings (i. e. the blessings which He had bestowed upon him) and he will recount them (and admit having enjoyed them in his life). (Then) will Allah say: What did you do (to requite these blessings)? He will say: I fought for Thee until I died as a martyr. Allah will say: You have told a lie. You fought that you might be called a” brave warrior”. And you were called so. (Then) orders will be passed against him and he will be dragged with his face downward and cast into Hell.”
The principles of interpreting the Qur’an are twofold.
When one text is general and another is specific, the specific is regarded as stronger as evidence.
A clear text is preferable to an interpretation of the text.
An example:
Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an:
“In it are Signs Manifest; (for example), the Station of Ibrahim; whoever enters it attains security; Pilgrimage therefore it is a duty mankind (nas) owe to Allah,- those who are able to perform the journey; but if any deny faith, Allah stands not in need of any of His creatures.” (Qur’an 3:97)
Nass (people/mankind) includes children, women, slaves, the insane; all are included in the word nass (people). When it comes to hadith, some are lifted from the obligation. Children must not go on hajj alone. Women must not go unless they have the company of a mahrim. The mentally challenged are not obligated at all. All of those categories are not obligated unless certain conditions are met—even though they are all nass (people, mankind)
For example the companion/sabaha that Allah (swt) called a fasiq.
“O you who believe! If a Fasiq (liar- evil person) comes to you with any news, verify it, lest you should harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful for what you have done” (Qur’an 49:6)
“And as for those who are Fasiqun (disbelievers and disobedient to Allah), their abode will be the Fire, every time they wish to get away therefrom, they will be put back thereto, and it will be said to them: “Taste you the torment of the Fire which you used to deny.” (Qur’an 32:20)
I said to ‘Ammar: What is your opinion about that which you have done in case (of your siding with Hadrat ‘Ali)? Is it your personal opinion or something you got from Allah’s Messenger (saw)? ‘Ammar said: We have got nothing from Allah’s Messenger (saw) which people at large did not get, but Hudhaifa told me that Allah’s Apostle (saw) had especially told him amongst his Companion, that there would be twelve hypocrites out of whom eight would not get into Paradise, until a camel would be able to pass through the needle hole. The ulcer would be itself sufficient (to kill) eight. So far as four are concerned, I do not remember what Shu’ba said about them.”
The Prophet (saw) said, “Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, ‘My companions!’ Then it will be said, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you.”
If Umar Ibn Al Khattab (ra) understood the verses of 57:10 and 49:5 in the way contemporary Sunni Muslims strenuously interpret them, then Umar(ra) would not go to Hudhayfah ibn Yaman (ra) and ask if he was a hypocrite.
Now someone will reply: “This is a sign of his sincerity.”
Yes, that is true, but it is a sign of nifaq to doubt a promise of Allah (swt)!
Rather, Umar Ibn Al Khattab (ra) did this because of both. He was not certain of his place in paradise, and he had sincerity and true fear of Allah (swt).
As the following verse reminds us:
“Did they feel secure against Allah’s planning? None would feel secure from Allah’s planning except the losers.” (Qur’an 7:99)
The next set of verses to look at:
“And the vanguard among (min’al) the emigrants and the helpers, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them forever; that is the mighty achievement.” And among (min’al) those around you of the Bedouins are hypocrites, and also from the people of Madinah. They have become accustomed to hypocrisy. You do not know them, We know them. We will punish them twice, once in this world; then they will be returned to a great punishment.” (Qur’an 9:100-101)
So when we look at this verse in Arabic and in context we realize a few important points.
This verse starts off with words of praise and reward for the vanguard among the emigrants and the helpers, as well as anyone ‘those‘ who followed them in goodness. They are the subject of Allah’s grace and promise.
So, the first part of the verse is not all the companions who immigrated to Madinah. However, the following verse also makes the first verse clear. ‘And among the Bedouins and people of Madinah.’
So is the second verse saying that all the Bedouins are hypocrites?
Is the second verse saying that all the people of Madinah are hypocrites?
So, when we consider that the Bedouins are people who could have migrated with the Blessed Messenger (saw), they could be among the Muhajirun.
When we consider that the Ansar are from Madinah, they could be from among those in Madinah. However, even after these clear points are presented, there are additional points of consideration.
“And those who came after them say: “Our Lord! Forgive us, and our brethren who came before us into the Faith, and leave not, in our hearts, rancour (or sense of injury) against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an 59:10)
This very beautiful revelation was revealed as a reminder to the people of Madinah who were receiving the immigrants, the people who were coming from Mecca to join them. Notice the verse does not say, “all those who came before us”. Rather, the verse says, ‘those who have believed.’.
Now, even though this verse was in the context of the Ansar receiving the Mujahirin, we should see no reason why not to apply this verse today for us as Muslims.
We should certainly harbor no ill will from those who came before us who were believers. No one needs to insert words into the text that is not there. There is no problem with praying, “leave not in our hearts rancour against those who believed”, because Allah (swt) knows those who believed and those who did not.
This is an issue of creed (aqidah) for Sunni Muslims, but it is not for our school, Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama
The Sunni Muslims state in Al-Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah.
“We love the companions of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him. We do not exaggerate in our love for any of them, nor do we disown any of them. We hate those who hate them or who mention them without good, for we do not mention them except with good. Love for them is a part of religion, faith, and spiritual excellence, and hatred for them is unbelief, hypocrisy, and transgression.”
This is the Sunni statement of creed in regards to the companions.
We respond to this with the angels du’a in the Qur’an:
“Those (angels) who bear the Throne and those around it glorify the praises of their Lord, and believe in Him, and ask forgiveness for those who believe (saying): ‘Our Lord! You comprehend all things in mercy and knowledge, so forgive those who repent and follow Your Way, and save them from the torment of the blazing Fire! Our Lord! And make them enter the Paradise which you have promised them, and to the righteous among their fathers, their wives, and their offspring! Verily, You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise. And save them from the sins, and whomsoever You save from the sins that Day, him verily, You have taken into mercy.” And that is the supreme success.’” (Qur’an 40: 7-9)
The beauty of this du’a is that it says: ‘for those who believe’ and ‘those who repent and follow Your Way’.
Thus, if Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Muaviya, Yazid or anyone else are those people, then the du’a lands on them. And if Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Muaviya, Yazid or anyone else are not them, then the du’a misses them.
The point being that is the purview of Allah (swt).
“Do not mix truth with falsehood, or hide the truth when you know it.” (Qur’an 2:42)
﷽
Responding to the claim of the Salafi agitator Ibn Shams al-Din about his claims against Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama; as well as his claims against the Mufti of Oman and imminent scholar, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h)-May Allah bless him and continue to bless us by him.
Ibn Shams al-Din uses deception in quoting from the book Majmu Al Fatawa. He makes claims such as the claim that Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama believes that anyone who is in Bara’ah it means they are a kafir. Which is patently false! This is in reply to him.
This is his video. This one makes constant attacks against our school. He has been replied to many times by the juniors and young people of our school. However, as one has come to realize, the people without little knowledge blossom and grow in this internet environment. Where as the voice of the people of real depth and penetrating insight remain buried in the cacophony.
The title of his video above is called: Ahmed Al-Khalili’s exaggeration in declaring Muslims to be infidels ~ Mufti of Ibadi ~ Muhammad bin Shams al-Din.
Shaykh Hilal Al Wardi-May Allah protect him is going to give a reply in English for the benefit of those whom are not grounded in Arabic. Prima-Qur’an is for the most part dedicated to an audience conversant in English.
Ibn Shams al-Din is quoting from Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili’s book Fatawa Aqidah pg.282
Someone asked Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (r) “Is Bara’ah obligatory for those people who are watching films and listening to music?”
Shaykh Ahmed replied:
“The people who are listening to or watching anything haram which is clear haram yes we can put him in bara’ah So the bara’ah is wajib for those who are watching the haram and listening to the haram. And it is very clear and there is no doubt that it is forbidden.”
So that is the first question.
The second question put to Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalii (h)
“Is bara’ah wajib for those people who are smoking and shaving the beard?”
A follow up question: “Is there any difference between reducing the beard and shaving it?”
Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) replies: “The man who smokes and the man who is shaving his beard or reduce it they are committing a big sin. And anyone who makes a big sin will be in bara’ah unless he made tauba/repentance.”
Our noble Shaykh Hilal -May Allah protect him says: that before we proceed let us understand something about Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama in regard to this issue of Bara’ah & Walayah.
There is a reply to this by Shaykh Saeed bin Nasser al-Naabi -May Allah protect him. In the reply Shaykh Saeed says that “Ibn Shams Al-Din does not understand what is Bara’ah with Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama.”
It is wajib in our school and it has three types:
Bara’ah al Haqiqah -the real dissociation. Bara’ah al Dhahir-the apparent dissociation. Bara’ah al Jumlah -the altogether, or common dissociation.
There are also three types of walayah.
Walayah al Haqiqah -the real friendship Walayah al Dhahir-the apparent friendship Walayah al Jumlah -the altogether, or common friendship.
Insh’Allah, I will write on this in the near future as not only is this important to the school it permeates the Qur’an and Sunnah. It is one of the chief reasons that Muslims are in such a bad way today. This subject has been wholly neglected or simply cast aside altogether.
What needs to be clear from the beginning is that Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili does not say that the Muwahid that they are kafir. However, they (Muwahid of any sect including Ibadi) would be in bara’ah, if they committed a big sin of which they did not repent from. So on this point Ibn Shams Al-Din is a Mudalis. He is covering the reality from the people. Insh’Allah you the reader will see this clear as day.
So we are going to explain to the people the reality from Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili’s (h) book.
So what is the evidence from the Qur’an and the hadith of the Prophet Muhammed (saw) that Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) relies upon to take this position & answer those questions in the way in which he did?
The first evidence is from the Qur’an:
“They swear to you so that you might be satisfied with them. But if you should be satisfied with them – indeed, Allah is not satisfied with a defiantly (l-fasiqinia) disobedient sinful people. ” (Qur’an 9:96)
Allah (swt) explains further about fisq in the following verse:
“Hajj is well-known months, so whoever has made ḥajj obligatory upon himself therein, there is no sexual relations and no fusuqa disobedience and no disputing during ḥajj. And whatever good you do – Allāh knows it. And take provisions, but indeed, the best provision is fear of Allāh. And fear Me, O you of understanding.” (Qur’an 2:197)
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet (saw) said, “Whoever does not give up forged speech and evil actions, Allah is not in need of his leaving his food and drink (i.e. Allah will not accept his fasting.)”
Hadith of the companion Midam whom other companions thought died as a martyr but in reality the Prophet (saw) said was in hell for stealing what he had no right to take. He stole and before he could make repentance and reconcile with Allah (swt) he died. It is one of the many reasons why we as believers must be vigilant.
Yahya related to me from Malik from Thawr ibn Zayd ad-Dili from Abu’l-Ghayth Salim, the mawla of ibn Muti that Abu Hurayra said, “We went out with the Messenger of Allah, (saw), in the year of Khaybar. We did not capture any gold or silver except for personal effects, clothes, and baggage. Rifaa ibn Zayd presented a black slave boy to the Messenger of Allah, (saw), whose name was Midam. The Messenger of Allah, (saw), made for Wadi’l-Qura, and when he arrived there, Midam was unsaddling the camel of the Messenger of Allah,(saw), when a stray arrow struck and killed him. The people said, ‘Good luck to him! The Garden!’ The Messenger of Allah said, ‘No! By He in whose hand my self is! The cloak which he took from the spoils on the Day of Khaybar before they were distributed will blaze with fire on him.‘ When the people heard that, a man brought a sandal-strap or two sandal-straps to the Messenger of Allah, (saw). The Messenger of Allah, (saw), said, ‘A sandal-strap or two sandal-straps of fire!’ “
“And Noah called to his Lord and said, “My Lord, indeed MY SON IS OF MY FAMILY (AHLI) and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges! He said, “O NOAH, INDEED HE IS NOT OF YOUR (AHLIKA) FAMILY; indeed, he is one whose work was other than righteous (ghayru salihin), so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant. Noah said, “My Lord, I seek refuge in You from asking that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have mercy upon me, I will be among the losers.” (Qur’an 11:45-47)
The Son of Noah (as) is no doubt a Muwahid when he (Noah) cries out for him and Allah (swt) replied that this Muwahid son of a Prophet -worked other than righteousness. So his son is not in walayah.
Narrated Abu Hurairah:
“That the Messenger of Allah (saw) passed by a pile of food. He put his fingers in it and felt wetness. He said: ‘O owner of the food! What is this ?’ He replied: ‘It was rained upon O Messenger of Allah.’ He said: ‘Why not put it on top of the food so the people can see it?’ Then he said: ‘Whoever cheats, he is not one of us.'”
“Abu Musa fell unconscious and they wept for him. He said: ‘I say to you the words of disavowal that the messenger of Allah said: He is not one of us who shaves his head (as a sign of mourning), rends his garments, or raises his voice in Lamentation.”
It was narrated from Ibn ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Wine is cursed from ten angles: The wine itself, the one who squeezes (the grapes etc), the one for whom it is squeezed, the one who sells it, the one who buys it, the one who carries it, the one to whom it is carried, the one who consumes its price, the one who drinks it and the one who pours it.”
“Jabir said that Allah’s Messenger cursed the one who accepted usury, the one who paid it, the one who recorded it, and the two witnesses to it, saying they were all alike.”
Do those particular hadiths mean that those people are out of Islam? No! But it means that they are in bara’ah until they give up what they are doing and repent to Allah (swt)
So going back to the fatwa of Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) those people who are going to the films and listening to the music and committing haram which is very clear haram they are in bara’ah . The Shaykh is quoting from the Qur’an and the hadith is he not?
Even Ibn Shams al-Din and his group (of Salafis) they themselves acknowledge that this is haram. You yourself (Ibn Shams al-Din) have acknowledged that all these things are sins. Drinking wine and the people who are smoking and shaving their beards. Even though we know full that the reducing of the beard has iktilaaf with the people of knowledge (even in our Ibadi school). We also know that it can be the case that scholars do not always stand by their statements until their death. They have been known to change their positions. The Mufti is a learned man and he has the right to give legal verdicts in accordance to what he understands as the evidence and what is more in accord with Wara’ (piety) and Taqwa (righteousness in conjunction with mindfulness of Allah)
For example, we know that the in the school of Imam Shafi’i they have what is called the ‘old madhab’ and the ‘new madhab’. We know our Shaykh Ahmed (h) is one man from the scholars yet once he has said something and he has brought the evidence so when you (Ibn Shams al-Din) are aware of this why do you deny our teacher this methodology, this manhaj?
The above image is the Questions and Answers section of the book from Shaykh Ahmad Al Khalili (r) for anyone whoever is partaking in and doing clear forbidden things that person is in bara’ah with us.
Ibn Shams al-Din goes to the same book page 177 and there he begins to quote the text and answers of Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) and let us look at what Ibn Shams al-Din is telling others.
On page 177 Ibn Shams al-Din is saying that any body who does these sins and does not make tauba (repentance) will stay in the hellfire forever.
So Ibn Shams al-Din rather than warning people to stay away from such things is instead stating that our teacher, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili(h) has exaggeration. Basically, if we could paraphrase Ibn Shams al-Din: ”You see this is what these Ibadi think why would you follow their school?” Rather, than dealing with the evidences he is fishing for the emotions. So we will look at the verses and see the evidences that support the aqidah of Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h)
So in the book someone is asking Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) about ijra. What is the aqidah of irja? Murjiʾah, (Arabic: “Those Who Postpone”) It is the belief of those who people who think they will go to paradise by committing sins without any repentance. Or they believe Allah (swt) will just simply forgive them. Among their beliefs is they may go to hell for a brief period and than enter into paradise. Dear readers does any of this sound familiar?
Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) has proven in his book that this is the belief of some of the Jews!
“Then they were succeeded by other generations who inherited the Scripture. They indulged in unlawful gains, claiming, “We will be forgiven ˹after all˺.” And if similar gain came their way, they would seize it. Was a covenant not taken from them in the Scripture that they would not say anything about Allah except the truth? And they were already well-versed in its teachings. But the ˹eternal˺ Home of the Hereafter is far better for those mindful ˹of Allah˺. Will you not then understand?” (Qur’an 7:169)
Another belief that is similar to some of the Jews is found here:
“And they say, “Never will the Fire touch us, except for a few days.” Say, “Have you taken a covenant with Allah ? For Allah will never break His covenant. Or do you say about Allah that which you do not know? “Yes, whoever earns evil and his sin has encompassed him – those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.” (Qur’an 2:80-81)
“Do you not consider, those who were given a portion of the Scripture? They are invited to the Scripture of Allah that it should arbitrate between them; then a party of them turns away, and they are refusing.” (Qur’an 3:23)
“This is because they say: ‘The fire of Hell shall not touch us except for a limited number of days.’ The false beliefs which they have forged have deluded them in their faith.” (Qur’an 3:24)
“How, then, will they fare when We shall gather them all together to witness the Day about (the coming of) which there is no doubt, and when every human being shall be repaid in full for what he has done, and none shall be wronged?” (Qur’an 3:25)
“˹Divine grace is˺ neither by your wishes nor those of the People of the Book! Whoever commits evil will be rewarded accordingly, and they will find no protector or helper besides Allah.” (Qur’an 4:123)
“And [mention] the Day when We will resurrect among every nation a witness over them from themselves. And We will bring you, as a witness over your nation. And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims. Indeed, Allah commands justice, grace, as well as generosity to close relatives. He forbids indecency, wickedness, and aggression. He instructs you so perhaps you will be mindful.” (Qur’an 16:89-90)
“Whoever comes with a good deed will be rewarded tenfold. But whoever comes with a bad deed will be punished for only one. None will be wronged.” (Qur’an 6:160)
There is a hadith of the Blessed Prophet (saw) relevant to the situation of our Ummah. The fact that we have allowed the beliefs and the ways of the previous people to influence us, this Muslim Ummah.
Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri:
The Prophet (saw) said, “You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure (lizard), you would follow them.” We said, “O Allah’s Messenger (saw)! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?” He said, “Whom else?“
Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) says when Allah (swt) says something he will fulfil it. Allah (swt) does not jest! May Allah (swt) protect us from being among the perverts!
“Allah will respond, “Do not dispute in My presence, since I had already given you a warning. My Word cannot be changed, nor am I unjust to ˹My˺ creation.” (Qur’an 50:28-29)
“For them is good news in this worldly life and the Hereafter. There is no change in the promise of Allah. That is ˹truly˺ the ultimate triumph.” (Qur’an 10:64)
“Our Lord! You will certainly gather all humanity for the ˹promised˺ Day—about which there is no doubt. Surely Allah does not break His promise.” (Qur’an 3:9)
Ibn Shams al-Din was basically telling people: “See! Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) telling the people that Allah (swt) will not forgive them!” Yet, Ibn Shams al-Din has brought no evidence to refute the strong evidence from Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) in his book!
In the video @2 minutes 40 seconds in Ibn Shams al-Din claims that Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) says, “That if anyone died and made a big sin you should not make du’a for him.”
For example: Asking Allah (swt) to have mercy on the day of judgement. Ibn Shams al-Din basically said, “For Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah we can make du’a for someone that Allah (swt) give him forgiveness but for Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) No! You cannot do like this!” This is what Ibn Shams al-Din is claiming. So leaving fishing for emotions aside. What is the evidence from Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h)?
As has already passed what did Allah (swt) say about the the fasiq?
“They swear to you so that you might be satisfied with them. But if you should be satisfied with them – indeed, Allah is not satisfied with a defiantly (l-fasiqinia) disobedient sinful people. ” (Qur’an 9:96)
So why does Ibn Shams al-Din feign that Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) is not upon the Qur’an and the Sunnah? Especially when Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) has quoted from the Qur’an and the Sunnah and the books accepted by the Ahl Sunnah.
Ibn Shams al-Din than goes to this book: Qawaid Al Islam on pg. 71.
Ibn Shams al-Din says, “What is the bara’ah in our religion? That is for us Ibadi. It is for the insulting and making insult for the kafirs.” So he says: “See! They are telling the bara’ah for the Muslims who are committing sins they are kafirs! They are taking them out from Islam!”
This is not correct from Ibn Shams al-Din and he has made a big tablis (deception). Why?
Because in his book Shaykh Abu Ismail Al-Jitali (r) talks in details about bara’ah in 10 chapters. We will walk you through these chapters.
In the first chapter he talks about the kafirs. Not about the Muslims! He talks about those people who commit sins in general. So insh’Allah we will proceed to give some of the key points from these chapters.
The picture above are pgs. 70 & 71. That which Ibn Shams al-Din quotes is page 71. This is chapter one. It talks about bara’ah and the evidence for it from the Qur’an and the Hadith and the Consensus (‘Ijma) of the scholars. That is the title for the first chapter.
In the underline text it says:
“Those people who make walayah for the mushrik they will be a mushrik like them.”
“And those people who make walayah for munafiq they will be munafiq like them.”
Like the one who is committing a big sin. So he said they are munafiq but they are not out of Islam.
So he brings the evidence from the Qur’an:
“Believers should not take disbelievers as guardians instead of the believers—and whoever does so will have nothing to hope for from Allah—unless it is a precaution against their tyranny. And Allah warns you about Himself. And to Allah is the final return.” (Qur’an 3:28)
“O believers! Do not ally yourselves with a people Allah is displeased with. They already have no hope for the Hereafter, just like the disbelievers lying in ˹their˺ graves.” (Qur’an 60:13)
“O believers! Take neither Jews nor Christians as guardians—they are guardians of each other. Whoever does so will be counted as one of them. Surely Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.” (Qur’an 3:51)
“You already have an excellent example in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people, “We totally dissociate ourselves from you and ˹shun˺ whatever ˹idols˺ you worship besides Allah. We reject you. The enmity and hatred that has arisen between us and you will last until you believe in Allah alone.” The only exception is when Abraham said to his father, “I will seek forgiveness for you,˹” adding, “but˺ I cannot protect you from Allah at all.” ˹The believers prayed,˺ “Our Lord! In You we trust. And to You we ˹always˺ turn. And to You is the final return.” (Qur’an 50:4)
and much more evidences…
Shaykh Abu Ismail Al-Jitali (r) brought the evidences from the Qur’an and from the Sunnah and from the ‘ijma, consensus of the Muslims. He brought the evidences about those who are doing the big sins and about the mushriks. He never once said all people who commit big sins are a Mushrik! He never said this!
See! Subhan’Allah! See line number 8 in this page when Ibn Shams al-Din misquoted that: “Anyone committing a sin he is in bara’ah and he’s a kafir.” Where as after that is the rest of the text lines 9, 10, 11 & 12 all continue to explain the difference between bara’ah and the origin of bara’ah. Shaykh Abu Ismail Al-Jitali explains the origin of bara’ah is against the actor and to make bara’ah of him.
Because Allah (swt) says:
“And if they deny you, then say, “For me are my deeds, and for you are your deeds. You are disassociated (bariuna) from what I do, and I am disassociated (barion) from what you do.” (Qur’an 10:41)
The alsi (the origin) of bara’ah means against. Where as walayah means acceptance or it can mean that I am accepting of him, and assisting him to the order of Allah.
So bara’ah is dissociation from him and walayah is friendship and assistance to him.
So here the Shaykh is explaining about this. Not that everyone in bara’ah is a mushrik. But this Ibn Shams al-Din is not reading the text carefully and not quoting context as a means to deceive his viewers. There are 10 chapters in this book and insh’Allah Shaykh Hilal -(May Allah protect him) will continue to comment on the other chapters.
This is the book Quwaid Al Islam which is Ibn Shams al-Din quoted the text from it. As mentioned there are 10 chapters and this is the first chapter. The first chapter on the right hand side (above) he is talking about bara’ah from the kuffar. The conclusion of Shaykh Abu Ismail Al-Jitali (r) is that it is wajib from the Qur’an and the Sunnah and the ‘ijma of the scholars.
The page you see to your left is the page which is misquoted from Ibn Shams al-Din that it is from the duty of the religion to insult and give lanat (curses) upon the kuffar. Which he is basically telling the people: “It is from the Ibadi that anyone who is bara’ah is a kafir!” That is totally wrong! Because it is not the Ibadi view that all the people who are in bara’ah that they are kafir. There are differences on these matters. As well as on the difference between walayah and al bara’ah.
The first chapter it is specifically speaking about kafirs. So what Ibn Shams al-Din did was to quote the bara’ah for kafirs and tried to be under handed in concealing this for the Ummah. Especially when he says that the Ibadi claim that bara’ah is just for the kuffar. This is from the first chapter.
As mentioned before the page on the right hand has verses from the Qur’an.
“Believers should not take disbelievers as guardians instead of the believers—and whoever does so will have nothing to hope for from Allah—unless it is a precaution against their tyranny. And Allah warns you about Himself. And to Allah is the final return.” (Qur’an 3:28)
“O believers! Do not ally yourselves with a people Allah is displeased with. They already have no hope for the Hereafter, just like the disbelievers lying in ˹their˺ graves.” (Qur’an 60:13)
“O believers! Take neither Jews nor Christians as guardians—they are guardians of each other. Whoever does so will be counted as one of them. Surely Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.” (Qur’an 3:51)
“You already have an excellent example in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people, “We totally dissociate ourselves from you and ˹shun˺ whatever ˹idols˺ you worship besides Allah. We reject you. The enmity and hatred that has arisen between us and you will last until you believe in Allah alone.” The only exception is when Abraham said to his father, “I will seek forgiveness for you,˹” adding, “but˺ I cannot protect you from Allah at all.” ˹The believers prayed,˺ “Our Lord! In You we trust. And to You we ˹always˺ turn. And to You is the final return.” (Qur’an 50:4)
“Believers should not take disbelievers as guardians instead of the believers—and whoever does so will have nothing to hope for from Allah—unless it is a precaution against their tyranny. And Allah warns you about Himself. And to Allah is the final return.”
“O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people.” (Qur’an 5:51)
All these verses are talking about bara’ah from the people –especially kafirs.
This is the second chapter and it is talking about Bara’ah Jumlah. (The over all or General Dissociation).
You have to put all of a particular type of people in bara’ah who are not following the orders of Allah (swt) without you necessarily going to every individual person himself. This means you are personally not required to know each and every person you meet. Are they committing good or bad/sin or not etc.
Examples being: The non believers, the Muslims who commit big sins, those among the Jinn.
Where as in the opposite is true:
We do walayah for all of a particular type of people who follow Allah (swt) -in general.
From among the Muslims, human beings and from among the Jinn.
This is chapter 3. This is bara’ah from the Qur’an. The Qur’an has censored them.
Bara’ah al Haqiqah -The Real Bara’ah
For example: Abu Lahab the uncle of the Prophet (saw). Goliath killed by the Prophet David (as). Qarun, The people of ‘Ad and Thamud and Noah and Lut those people went astray and they are all Kafir and they are all in Bara’ah.
Sometimes our brothers from among the Muslims use a flawed argument using Abu Lahab as an example to prove the truth of the Qur’an. They say: “You see Allah says Abu Lahab will be in hell. If Abu Lahab take the shahada it would make the Qur’an false.”
This in and of itself is a false argument. The words of Allah (swt) are true and those of Abu Lahab are false. So even if Abu Lahab took the shahada, it would be in deception as Allah (swt) told us the truth about his fate.
The inverse is true. If Allah (swt) said in the Qur’an someone would be in paradise and this person did a sins or big sins, it is Allah (swt) who knows that this one made sincere repentance. So their ending was a good ending.
Chapter 4 Title: Bara’ah from the unjust Imam; as well as those who follow the unjust Imam.
Here we are admonished when you do bara’ah of the unjust Imam do be careful not to do general bara’ah of all of his followers. There could be the real believers among them. Those who are doing taqiyah to protect themselves because the brutality of the unjust Imam.
Example of doing taqiyah to save ones life: Ammar bin Yasir (ra).
(Whosoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief…) [16:106]. Said Ibn ‘Abbas: “This verse was revealed about ‘Ammar ibn Yasir. The idolaters had taken him away along with his father Yasir, his mother Sumayyah, Suhayb [al-Rumi], Bilal [ibn Rabah], Khabbab [ibn al-Aratt] and Salim [the client of Hudhayfah] and tortured them. As for Sumayyah, she was tied up between two camels and stabbed with a spear in her female organ. She was told: ‘You embraced Islam for the men’, and was then killed. Her husband Yasir was also killed. They were the first two persons who were killed in Islam. As for ‘Ammar, he was coerced to let them hear what they wanted to hear. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, was told that ‘Ammar has renounced faith, but he said: ‘Never, ‘Ammar is filled with faith from his head to his toes; faith is admixed with his flesh and blood!’ ‘Ammar then went to see the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, crying. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, wiped his tears with his own hand and said: ‘if they return to you, let them hear again what you told them’. Then, Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”. Mujahid said: “This verse was revealed about some Meccans who accepted faith. The Muslims of Medina wrote to them urging them to migrate and told them that they did not consider them part of them unless they migrated. And so they left Mecca intending to migrate to Medina. The Quraysh caught up with them on the way and coerced them to renounce their faith. It is about them that this verse was revealed”.
Whoever disbelieves in Allah after their belief—not those who are forced while their hearts are firm in faith, but those who embrace disbelief wholeheartedly—they will be condemned by Allah and suffer a tremendous punishment.” (Qur’an 16:106)
This point in this chapter itself defeats Ibn Shams al-Din. Again Ibn Shams al-Din makes a deception basically telling everyone: “Who the Ibadi put in bara’ah they are kafir.”
Let us see how he would respond to chapter 4? He would be defeated on this point alone.
Shaykh Imam Abu Ismail Al Jitali (r) brought a very powerful hadith.
From the Sahaba Thauban (ra). This has been narrated by Musnad Abi Dawud at-Tayalasi & Al-Tabarani So than how? Can the Quraysh said to be in walayah if they are fought against? If they go against the Qur’an & the Sunnah?
Not everyone in bara’ah means they are mushrik.
“Make the Quraysh ahead of you and do not go ahead of them. Learn from them, you are not their teachers. You follow them as long as they follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah. If they do not follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah you do not follow them. Than take the swords from off your shoulders and strike them until you finish them. Or they over take you when you are weak.”
Some translations would render the Arabic as: “Annihilate their green ones. If you do not, then be miserable farmers, eating from the toil of your own hands.”
To use English idioms this basically translates as: “Strike while the iron is hot otherwise; you reap what you sow, or in this case don’t sow.”
The hadith in question is in between the two green brackets above.
This is the 5th chapter. This chapter is about the people who left Islam and go to shirk. The Murtadeen are in bara’ah.
The following hadith: “Who ever changes his religion kill him.” those are in the books that Ibn Shams al-Din relies upon.
These are not from the books of the Ibadis. These statements are in their (Sunni) books. We do not accept that those people who left Islam they are to be killed because of suspicion or doubts or something is not made clear to him. The Imam would take such people and discuss with them and you have to clear the doubt from them. Then after that the Imam will decide. These hadith are in Ibn Shams al-Din books. So why is he against the Ibadi on this?
The 6th chapter those who left the Ibadi school to go to another school they are put in bara’ah.
This is the point where Ibn Shams al-Din will try to catch us. He may say: “Ah you see! If you left the Ibadi and became a Shafi’i, Sunni, Shi’a they will put that one in bara’ah!”
You see how these people act tough?
What is actually written here? Whoever goes out from our school not simply because he has an evidence, but he is putting the scholars of the Ibadi in bara’ah he attacks the Ibadi school and tries to defeat the Ibadi school.
In one example such a one in the past was killed:
He quotes from Jabir Bin Zayd (ra) a man asked Jabir Bin Zayd (ra) what is the best type of Jihad? Jabir Bin Zayd said, ‘Killing Khardalah,’ because this man would run around and pop off at the mouth insulting the Muslims, was trying to defeat Islam and cause doubts with people. So a man killed in him in that time.
So this person who left the Ibadi school and now attacks it, his case is similar to the one who left Islam and became one of the murtadeen, and now spends his energy and efforts to bring Islam down. So likewise, if a person leaves Islam and goes about their own way they are left to their devices. Likewise, someone leaves the Ibadi school and follows another school and they are left to their own devices we leave them to it.
*note to the reader*
You will hear Shaykh Hilal say something like this person defeated the Ibadi or defeated Islam. English is not his first language. That can be seen in the next voice note where he is searching for the words to describe the division of a chapter. However, he is doing what many in our school fail to do and that is to share knowledge. He will always have our love and respect for it. May Allah (swt) honour him in this life and in the life to come. Amin.
Without doubt he is one who has tremendous love for humanity and for the Ummah in his heart. So when he says, “defeated Ibadi or defeated Islam“-what he means is that they come against it with force.
I need to clarify this because this website/blog is visited by those who are opportunistic enemies of the faith and they will seize on anything.
This is chapter 7 Bara’ah/dissociation from the specialist -which is shown by his name.
This chapter is divided into three parts.
A) What is the daleel (evidence) for the bara’ah for the person himself.
B) What is the hukm (judgement) of bara’ah in him?
C) The bara’ah in him by his name.
So let us deal with the first part.
A) What is the daleel (evidence) for the Bara’ah for the person himself.
Evidences for this are as follows:
“O you who have believed, do not take the disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do you wish to give Allāh against yourselves a clear case?” (Qur’an 4:144)
“So woe to those who pray!” (Qur’an, 107:4)
What? Woe be to those who pray? The Musaleen?
Read the next verse:
“Those who are heedless of their prayer.” (Qur’an 107:5)
sāhūna-heedless/neglectful. Not one who makes a mistake but one is negligent of praying altogether! They are inattentive about prayer. The timing, proper performance, prerequisites of prayer, showing off in prayer etc.
“Woe to every backbiter, slanderer.” (Qur’an 104:1)
“So woe to those ˹hypocrites˺ who pray yet are unmindful of their prayers; those who ˹only˺ show off.” (Qur’an 107:4-6)
And many more verses and evidences can be produced for this type of bara’ah.
So these type of people Allah (swt) curse and strong punishment awaits them. Thus, we put them in bara’ah
Here we will deal with the second part.
B) What is the hukm (judgement) of Bara’ah in him? The evidences for those who are against the commands of Allah (swt).
In this is evidence that defeats Ibn Shams al-Din. Ibn Shams al-Din mentioned before about Al-Murji’ah, those who died committing big sins and did not make any tauba. We, Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama put such people in bara’ah because of what Allah (swt) has already mentioned:
“They swear to you so that you might be satisfied with them. But if you should be satisfied with them – indeed, Allah is not satisfied with a defiantly (l-fasiqinia) disobedient sinful people. ” (Qur’an 9:96)
The Murji’ah believe that Ahl Kibar the big sins of Ahl Qiblah, it could be that Allah would just forgive them. Yet, what has already been established by Allah (swt) is against them!
“And all faces will be humbled before the Ever-Living, All-Sustaining. Those burdened with their evil deeds (zul’man)will be in utter loss.” (Qur’an 20:111)
We will all stand before a Holy and Just and Sovereign God.
So these questions really come back upon Ibn Shams al-Din and those from the Sunni who follow these views in general. This is the justice of Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama. We follow the clear evidences.
Alas, we don’t have the view that simply because we are Muslims or simply because we follow the Ibadi school we can be unjust to people, rape people, take their money, and than do what ever we want and we go to paradise(after a possible brief stint in hell). In reality this is the aqidah of the Murji’ah.
Here we will deal with the third part.
C) The bara’ah in him by his name.
This is the third section. Is those who are in walayah and bara’ah by their names in the Qur’an.
Here the Shaykh has given a very powerful evidence. He said that anyone who is not mentioned by name in the Qur’an, that Allah (swt) put them in bara’ah, then that one is by default in walayah.
Meaning that in general the default position of all people is that they are in walayah. The good thinking is that they will go to paradise. For example, one may have sinned and came back to Allah (swt) and we are not aware of that.
So in general all Muslims are in walayah .
This is why in general there are also people in bara’ah. Meaning in general the thinking is that they will go to hell. An example would be Atheist. They are in a general category but Allah (swt) knows best the individual cases. For example, one in this category may do meritorious acts even though they are in bara’ah. Because Allah (swt) knows best where this person will end up.
Some examples and evidences:
The case of Ayesha (ra) in the battle of the Camel. She was against the rightful Imam. That Imam being Ali Ibn Abu Talib. She is known as the mother of the believers, as we know the mother of the believers are in paradise. Yet, it is not written in paradise her name ‘Aisha’ (ra). So when Ammar ibn Yasir (ra) was fighting with Imam Ali Ibn Abu Talib against Ahl Sham what did Ammar ibn Yasir(ra) say?
Narrated Abu Maryam `Abdullah bin Ziyad Al-Aasadi:
When Talha, AzZubair and `Aisha moved to Basra, `Ali sent `Ammar bin Yasir and Hasan bin `Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. Al-Hasan bin `Ali was at the top of the pulpit and `Ammar was below Al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard `Ammar saying, “`Aisha has moved to Al-Busra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her (`Aisha).
Even Ammar bin Yasir (ra) fought in Siffin and was killed by Ahl Sham.
We know she is the wife of the Prophet (saw) and she is in Paradise but we will not go against the orders of Allah (swt). Even if Aisha (ra) in the battle of the Camel she is with the opposition! We are with the rightful Imam, Imam Ali Ibn Abu Talib. Even if she is in paradise we are not going to leave the orders of Allah (swt).
Before proceeding it may be well for the reader to go back to the top and re-read the section about Abu Lahab, because he is in the real bara’ah. He specifically mentioned by name that his ending his doom. So the inverse is true. When Allah (swt) specifically mentions a person will be in paradise the Qur’an is a biding decisive proof.
Where as the hadith could be the machinations of the schismatics.
The hadith are examined in a case by case scenario.
So here this means that if Allah (swt) put the person in walayah like the Umm al mu’minin -mothers of the believers; Allah (swt) says that she will be in paradise.
“The Prophet is more worthy of the believers than themselves, and his wives are their mothers (ummahatuhum). And those of relationship are more entitled in the decree of Allah than the] believers and the emigrants, except that you may do to your close associates a kindness. That was in the Book inscribed.” (Qur’an 33:6)
So in our school the above is evidence that Allah (swt) knows the end of Aisha (ra) and that her ending is a good ending.
This was stated in the aforementioned hadith related by Ammar bin Yasir (ra). However, she is not called by her name ‘Ayesha’ as being a woman of paradise. So even though she opposed the rightful Imam, Ali Ibn Abu Talib, Allah’s knowledge does not change and he knows that she would make a tauba (repentance).
This is what has been stated by our Imam, Imam Jabir Bin Zayed (ra) that she, Aisha (ra) made tauba (repentance) before she died. Not like for example, Mu’awiya ibn Sufyan. He never made a tauba (repentance) as we know. Where as Allah (swt) knows that Aisha (ra) will go out against the rightful Imam, Ali Ibn Abu Talib, however, her ending is a good ending.
It is reported that both Jabir b. Zaid and Abu Bilal Mirdas discussed with ‘A’ishah her attitude at the battle of the Camel and blamed her for her opposition to ‘Ali who was the legal Caliph at that time, and she once more repented.
Source: (Darjini, Tabaqat., Ms. 198)
Ibn Shams al-Din is basically saying, ” Ahl al-Haqq wa-l istiqama telling people who are committing a sin are in bara’ah; Even though we saw the people here are fighting against Aisha (ra) and she is the mother of the believers? We saw Uthman Ibn Affan against Abu Dhahr.”
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr: that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “There is no one more truthful, that the sky has shaded and the earth has carried, than Abu Dharr.” Source: (https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3801)
Here in chapter 8 there are four conditions and directions for Bara‘ah
First if he says he did sins. By his own proclamation.
If someone saw him committing a big sin and continues to persist in it.
If two good and truthful people saw him committing a big sin.
He is infamous. He is well known to do these things. Like Epstein for example.
Chapter 9 is about tauba (repentance) for those who have committed a sin.
This is a point that Ibn Shams al-Din does not understand either from willful ignorance or tadblis (deception). It shows that Ibn Shams al-Din is not just. He is not reading the whole of the text but picking and choosing to make his interlocutors (namely us) to look bad.
What he is extremely ignorant about is that if someone is in walaya with us and than committed a sin. He is going to be put in bara’ah directly/immediately without calling him to repentance.
For example, someone is wali of Allah (swt) and they committed a big sin.
No better example than Adam (as) and he made tauba (repentance) and came back to Allah (swt). Adam (as) is someone whom Allah (swt) himself selected.
So what about those who are less than Adam? Less than the prophets? Can we without reason or rhyme, someone did a big sin and you put him in bara’ah and keep him in bara’ah without calling to tauba directly? No! He is called to straight himself out, and to reform himself. This all of course is depending upon the nature and type of sin. Some things may require temporary banishment.
The evidence for this is many. However, we will quote one hadith that hits the nail on the head on this matter.
It was narrated from Anas bin Malik that:
“The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother” or he said “for his neighbor, what he loves for himself.”
So what would you like for yourself dear reader if you committed a sin? To be forgiven or to be lost? Any one of us would like to be reconciled to Allah (swt). We would love to be forgiven and so this is our wish for those Muslims who are in bara’ah. So we call them to repentance and reformation of character and anyone who truly believes wants this for the one who has been ensnared by Satan.
Any school of the Muslims who does not love for his brother/sister to repent and come back to Allah (swt) is not a school worthy of consideration by the Muslims.
This is the last chapter /chapter 10. What is the reality of walayah and bara’ah and the reality with Allah (swt).
This is divided into three sections.
The first section the reality of walayah/ is to accept them in sharia and to be against them if they are not following the shariah
“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. And remember the favor of Allah upon you – when you were enemies and He brought your hearts together and you became, by His favor, brothers. And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses that you may be guided.” (Qur’an 3:103)
Bara’ah is being against unbelievers and those among Muslims who commit big sins.
Also ,in the book the Shaykh Jitali (r) said that the Prophet (saw) advised new Muslims to be away from the mushrik and be close to the believers.
This is the second section. The walayah of Allah (swt) with his servants.
Allah knows best who is obligated for forgiveness and who is obligated for punishment. That is Allah’s knowledge does not change. Allah (swt) knows who will die upon faith even if in his/her life they have committed all types of sins. He knows which of his servants will make sincere repentance before their ending. The bara’ah of Allah (swt) with his servants. Allah (swt) knows will die as a mushrik, or as someone who made big sins without making repentance. Even though this one may for a portion of their life did meritorious works.
The third section of chapter 10. This sums up the whole philosophy. The one in walayah we love him/her we pray for him/her we talk nicely about him/her. What we put the person in bara’ah and we insult him/her and we ask for curses upon him/her.
Walayah wal Bara’ah in the heart is one thing. Dealing with people in general is something else.
For example: we ultimately want good for all people that are open to good. We want all people whose heart is receptive to the light to enter into Islam. The best we can hope for humanity is that which is the best they can hope for. To live and die upon Islam.
Final thoughts: Dear readers thank you for your patience in reading the article in full.
The reality is that this concept of friendship and dissociation is not even something unique to the Ibadi school, or even to Islam, or even to people of faith. Countries take each other in friendship or dissociate. In everyday life people have a circle of those who are in their trust and friendship and those they dissociate from. We live in times where people , even Muslims do ungodly things. They have no wara’ (piety) or taqwa (fear of and being conscious of Allah). We live in a world of tiktok videos where youth knock out random people (often the elderly)walking by them. Muslims engage in serious haram.
You do not encourage this by holding such people in your trust and continuing to extend the ties of friendship. These people and this behavior is to be shunned, not celebrated, embraced and even broadcasted.
At the same time Allah (swt) has clearly stated:
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)
“Is one who is devoutly obedient during periods of the night, prostrating and standing [in prayer], fearing the Hereafter and hoping for the mercy of his Lord, [like one who does not]? Say, “Are those who know equal to those who do not know?” Only they will remember [who are] people of understanding.” (Qur’an 39:9)
“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)
As has been said: “Ours is not a caravan of despair”.
Come back to the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Follow the way of the bearer of the flags of truth, and those who hold up the light in a world of darkness, come back to Allah, The Most Merciful, The Most Compassionate, come back to Him, Oh Ummah of Muhammed (saw)!
“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 49:13)
﷽
In the Qur’an, it is shown that to be truly ‘sharif‘ or noble, is based on how righteous we are and not based upon the blood that flows in our veins. It is not based upon our tribal affiliation. It is not based upon our gender. It is not based on how little or how much melanin permeates my epidermis.
This post is not for the people of whims and desires. It is not for the people of emotion and passions. This post is for people who are interested in the truth. People who follow the proofs and the evidences. May Allah (swt) guide those who seek truth to the Truth.
“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 49:13)
I could be a man and far excel a woman in my piety.
I could be a woman and far excel a man in my piety.
I could be an Arab and far excel a non Arab in my piety.
I could be a Non-Arab and far excel an Arab in my piety.
I could be black and far excel someone white in my piety.
I could be white and far excel someone black in my piety.
I could be a descendant of a Prophet and far excel someone in my piety.
I could not be a descendant of a Prophet and far excel a descendant of a Prophet in my piety.
Allah (swt) has made it very clear:
Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you
In this entry, we will explore the question of rather or not simply being a Syed or a descendant of a Prophet makes a person default: righteous, noble, or infallible.
We will explore questions like: If all the people on the Ark were noble and pious where did evil come from after they embarked?
How Islam (Judaism) and Islam (Christianity) were betrayed by the very guardians asked to protect it.
Hence the meaning of the word Kafir-is Ungrateful.
All too often those who have been given the light are the very ones who betray it. While those groping in utter darkness often become the very vanguards of light.
Who is truly noble and righteous before Allah (swt) has nothing to do with lineage, pigmentation of one’s skin, nationality, tribal affiliation, wealth, or intellectual acumen.
“So when the Horn is blown, no relationship will there be among them that Day, nor will they ask about one another.” (Qur’an 23:10)
“O humanity! Be mindful of your Lord, and beware of a Day when no parent will be of any benefit to their child, nor will a child be of any benefit to their parent. Surely Allah’s promise is true. So do not let the life of this world deceive you, nor let the Chief Deceiver deceive you about Allah.” (Qur’an 31:33)
Notice something interesting that Allah (swt) says about animals that are sacrificed to him.
“Neither their meat nor their blood reaches Allah. Rather, it is your piety that reaches Him. This is how He has subjected them to you so that you may proclaim the greatness of Allah for what He has guided you to, and give good news to the good-doers.” (Qur’an 22:37)
Narrated AbuHurayrah:
“The Prophet (saw) said: Allah, Most High, has removed from you the pride of the pre-Islamic period and its boasting in ancestors. One is only a pious believer or a miserable sinner. You are sons of Adam, and Adam came from dust. Let the people cease to boast about their ancestors. They are merely fuel in Jahannam; or they will certainly be of less account with Allah than the beetle which rolls dung with its nose.”
The Ahl Bayt of Adam (as). The household of the Prophet Adam (as)
The first murderer in human history was a descendant of a Prophet.
Cain killed his brother Abel. Both were descendants of the Prophet Adam (as). Yet, one was righteous and the other became the ‘first’ murderer. Such that Allah (swt) made an example of this particular incident throughout time.
“So his soul permitted to him the murder of his brother, so he killed him and became among the losers.” (Qur’an 5:30)
“And recite to them the story of Adam’s two sons, in truth, when they both offered a sacrifice, and it was accepted from one of them but was not accepted from the other. Said [the latter], “I will surely kill you.” Said [the former], “Indeed, Allah only accepts from the righteous [who fear Him]”. (Qur’an 5:27)
Humanity has not even in its infancy and here we have two descendants of the Prophet Adam (as). One of them has the hallmark of being remembered for all time as being the first murderer. Allah (swt) said that one of them was (mutaqi) righteous meaning the other was not.
Does the son of Adam (as) get a pass for murdering his brother simply because he is the son of a Prophet?
The Ahl Bayt of Ibrahim (as). The household of the Prophet Ibrahim (as)
“Also, remember that Ibrahim was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: “I will make you an Imam to the Nations.” He pleaded: “And also (Imams) from my offspring!” He answered: “But My Promise is not within the reach of (zalimin) evil-doers.” (Qur’an 2:124)
If you notice Allah (swt) didn’t write a blank check for the descendants of Ibrahim (as) . If you were made virtuous by being a descendant of a prophet than Allah(swt) would have simply granted Ibrahim’s du’a without a caveat. However, He did not. Allah (swt) made a caveat, “My promise is not within reach of the (zalimin)evildoers.”
In other words, I will grant your du’a to those who hold on to my commands and strive their utmost to be righteous servants.
The following verses in the Qur’an are more than enough proof for us of this du’a.
The Ahl Bayt of Jacob (as). The household of the Prophet Jacob (as)
“Indeed, in the story of Joseph and his brothers there are lessons for all who ask.” (Qur’an 12:7)
The sons of Prophet Jacob are descendant of Prophet Ibrahim through his son Ishaq
But My Promise is not within the reach of (zalimin) evil-doers.” (Qur’an 2:124)
What did these descendants of Prophet Ibrahim (as) get up to?
They cried, “Our father! We went racing and left Joseph with our belongings, and a wolf devoured him! But you will not believe us, no matter how truthful we are.” (Qur’an 12:17)
These Muwahid, The Ahl Bayt of Jacob (as), Sons of a Prophet lied to their father! Imagine telling your own father that his son (your own brother) was eaten by a wolf! Can you imagine the grief it would bring him?!
Allah (swt) tells us in very vivid language how severe was the grief and trauma of Jacob (as). The trauma that Prophet Jacob (as) went through on account of his progeny, the progeny of the Household.
“He turned away from them, lamenting, “Alas, poor Joseph!” And his eyes turned white out of the grief he suppressed.” (Qur’an 12:84)
He replied, “O my dear son! Do not relate your vision to your brothers, or they will devise a plot against you. Surely Satan is a sworn enemy to humankind.” (Qur’an 12:5)
Jacob (as) knew among his ahl bayt were schemers!
“˹Remember˺ when they said ˹to one another˺, “Surely Joseph and his brother ˹Benjamin˺ are more beloved to our father than we, even though we are a group of so many. Indeed, our father is clearly mistaken.” (Qur’an 12:8)
Can you imagine talking about your father (a Prophet) like that?
“Kill Joseph or cast him out to some ˹distant˺ land so that our father’s attention will be only ours, then after that you may ˹repent and˺ become righteous people!” (Qur’an 12:9)
Imagine the audacity to plan to kill your brother (a Prophet) and than expect that Allah will simply forgive you?
They said, “O our father! Why do you not trust us with Joseph, although we truly wish him well? (Qur’an 12:11)
The Ahl Bayt of Jacob (as) Lie #1 to their father.
“Send him out with us tomorrow so that he may enjoy himself and play. And we will really watch over him.” (Qur’an 12:12)
So he can enjoy himself Lie #2 and they will watch over him Lie #3
“Then they returned to their father in the evening, weeping. They cried, “Our father! We went racing and left Joseph with our belongings, and a wolf devoured him! But you will not believe us, no matter how truthful we are.” (Qur’an 12:16-17)
“And they brought his shirt, stained with false blood. He responded, “No! Your souls must have tempted you to do something ˹evil˺. So ˹I can only endure with˺ beautiful patience! It is Allah’s help that I seek to bear your claims.” (Qur’an 12:18)
Look at the extent of their manipulation! Fake tears like actors crying on que! A prop piece-his shirt stained with false blood. Gaslighting their father.
Joseph eaten by a wolf Lie #4 Brought a shirt with false blood Lie #5
“Return to your father and say, ‘O our father! Your son (Benjamin)committed theft. We testify only to what we know. We could not guard against the unforeseen.” (Qur’an 12:81)
They claimed their other brother, Benjamin was a thief and lied to their father, yet again. Lie #6
The Ahl Bayt of Jacob, the guilty among them finally return in repentance to Allah (swt)
“They admitted, “By Allah! Allah has truly preferred you over us, and we have surely been sinful.” (Qur’an 12:91)
“They begged, “O our father! Pray for the forgiveness of our sins. We have certainly been sinful.”(Qur’an 12:97)
Satan ignited rivalry between the Ahl Bayt of Jacob (as)
“Then he raised his parents to the throne, and they all fell down in prostration to Joseph,1 who then said, “O my dear father! This is the interpretation of my old dream. My Lord has made it come true. He was truly kind to me when He freed me from prison, and brought you all from the desert after Satan had ignited rivalry between me and my siblings. Indeed my Lord is subtle in fulfilling what He wills. Surely He ˹alone˺ is the All-Knowing, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 12:100)
What to make of the sons of Jacob (as) Al Muwahid who lied to their father (a Prophet) because they are jealous of their brother? The sons of a Prophet can conspire against their brother, but all the companions are saints & angels?
“Allah made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel and We raised among them twelve chieftains, and Allah said: Lo! I am with you. If you establish worship and pay the poor-due, and believe in My messengers and support them, and lend unto Allah a kindly loan, surely I shall remit your sins, and surely I shall bring you into Gardens underneath which rivers flow. Whosoever among you disbelieves after this will go astray from a plain road.” (Qur’an 5:12)
The Ahl Bayt of Nuh (as). The household of the Prophet Nuh (as)
“So it sailed with them through waves like mountains, and NOAH CALLED TO HIS SON who was apart, “O MY SON, come aboard with us and be not with the ungrateful. But he said, “I will take refuge on a mountain to protect me from the water.” Noah said, “There is no protector today from the decree of Allah, except for whom He gives mercy.” And the waves came between them, and he was among the drowned.” (Qur’an 11:42-43)
Then Allah (swt) informed Noah…
“And Noah called to his Lord and said, “My Lord, indeed MY SON IS OF MY FAMILY (AHLI) and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges! He said, “O NOAH, INDEED HE IS NOT OF YOUR (AHLIKA) FAMILY; indeed, he is one whose work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant. Noah said, “My Lord, I seek refuge in You from asking that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have mercy upon me, I will be among the losers.” (Qur’an 11:45-47)
Tabataba’i says that this flood was universal. Everyone on the Earth except those on the Ark was drowned.
Source: (Ṭabāṭabāʾī, al-Mīzān, vol. 10, p. 102 and 260.)
Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:
When we were sitting with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), he talked about periods of trial (fitnahs), mentioning many of them.
When he mentioned the one when people should stay in their houses, some asked him: Messenger of Allah, what is the trial (fitnah) of staying at home?
He replied: It will be flight and plunder. Then will come a test which is pleasant. Its murkiness is due to the fact that it is produced by a man from the people of my house, who will assert that he belongs to me, whereas he does not, for my friends are only the God-fearing. (رَجُلٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِي يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ مِنِّي وَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَإِنَّمَا أَوْلِيَائِيَ الْمُتَّقُونَ) Then the people will unite under a man who will be like a hip-bone on a rib. Then there will be the little black trial which will leave none of this community without giving him a slap, and when people say that it is finished, it will be extended. During it a man will be a believer in the morning and an infidel in the evening, so that the people will be in two camps: the camp of faith which will contain no hypocrisy, and the camp of hypocrisy which will contain no faith. When that happens, expect the Antichrist (Dajjal) that day or the next.
So let us ponder this for a minute. As some of our brothers want to use this ‘hadith of the Ark‘ to suggest that only those who were on the Ark were people who are pure and rightly guided.
So it stands to reason that all the vile, evil, and sinful people were wiped out by Allah (swt) during the flood.
It also stands to reason that the inhabitants on the Ark had to embark.
That is how I am able to write to you today. We are all descendants of those people. Which leads to two points.
First Point.
We are all descendants of the Ahl Bayt of Noah (as) according to Tabataba’i
Second Point.
Evil and Mischief came from those were saved on the Ark.
Where did the sin, villainy, and evil come from that we know today? Obviously it came from the descendants of the people of the Ark. This means within the Ahl Bayt of the Ark itself was the inclination towards righteousness and the inclination towards evil.
So certainly the people on the Ark and their descendants were not infallible. That is just a common sense deduction.
Here is something to think about.
What happened to the descendants of the earlier prophets?
How could Judaism be corrupted if we had infallible Imams who were guiding the people all the time?
The answer, because the descendants of the Prophets and the guardians themselves apostatized from the faith!
“Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah ] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses to that.” (Qur’an 5:44)
“Their descendants who inherited the Book gained (by bribery only) worthless things from the worldly life saying, “We shall be forgiven (for what we have done). They would have even doubled such gains if they could have received more. Did they not make a covenant (with Allah) in the Book not to speak anything other than the Truth about Allah and to study its contents well? The life hereafter is much better for the pious ones. Will you not then think?(Qur’an 7:169)
Though this is an uncomfortable answer for many, it is a truthful one.
We do not have unbroken chains of the lineage of people who ‘kept the faith’ all the way until the coming of the Blessed Messenger.
All we have in reality is the narrative of the Qur’an that puts focus on Ibrahim (as), Ishaq (as), Ismail (as), & Jacob (as) and their descendants -who were Messengers and Prophets.
However, it becomes obvious to all who reflect that those who were entrusted to be the guardians of the faith were the very ones who betrayed it.
Allah (swt) would send Prophets (upon whom be peace) who would entrust this message to their households and their family and over time their descendants would apostate -wholesale from faith.
Wash – Rinse – Repeat.
In reality, if you want to be technical. From the perspective that we all came from Adam (as) or are ‘Bani Adam‘ -the children of Adam, we are in reality all descendants of Prophets. Some of us will be deemed righteous and others of us not righteous.
These are clear verses in the Qur’an that give us clear examples.
Yes, we should love and respect those people who are descendants of Prophets. Yet, we are not beholden to anyone who does not hold fast to the Book of Allah (swt) or the Sunnah of the Beloved Messenger (saw).
Look at what the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) said about family ties and justice.
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.”
Usama approached the Prophet (saw) on behalf of a woman (who had committed theft). The Prophet (saw) said, “The people before you were destroyed because they used to inflict the legal punishments on the poor and forgive the rich. By Him in Whose Hand my soul is! If Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet (saw) did that (i.e. stole), I would cut off her hand.”
Now, does one need to hate Fatima (ra) in order to administer the justice of Allah? How do people reason?
Does anyone think that Adam (as) did not love both his sons?
Does anyone think that Noah (as) did not love the son that Allah instructed to leave behind?
How is that this some in this Ummah have come to the conclusion that certain people’s blood is cheap while others is expensive? May Allah (swt) guide us!
Just as Aisha (ra) was a test on rather the people will follow her or the rightful Imam, Imam Ali Ibn Abu Talib. Ali himself became a test at Siffin to see rather or not people will follow what Allah (swt) ordered in the Qur’an or Ali’s decision.
Narrated Abu Maryam `Abdullah bin Ziyad Al-Aasadi:
“When Talha, AzZubair and `Aisha moved to Basra, `Ali sent `Ammar bin Yasir and Hasan bin `Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. Al-Hasan bin `Ali was at the top of the pulpit and `Ammar was below Al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard `Ammar saying, “`Aisha has moved to Al-Busra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her (`Aisha).”
Does it sound like in the above text that Ammar bin Yasir (ra) had hate in his heart towards Aisha (ra)? Of course not! Yet, justice is justice and truth is truth.
I have met some descendants of the Blessed Prophet (saw) myself, some of whom were amazingly pious people, (based upon what I was able to observe) and some who were not really observing the very basic practices of Islam, like prayer.
“Then he raised his parents to the throne, and they all fell down in prostration to Joseph,1 who then said, “O my dear father! This is the interpretation of my old dream. My Lord has made it come true. He was truly kind to me when He freed me from prison, and brought you all from the desert after Satan had ignited rivalry between me and my siblings. Indeed my Lord is subtle in fulfilling what He wills. Surely He ˹alone˺ is the All-Knowing, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 12:100)
Descendants of Ali Ibn Abu Talib and Ibn Abbas slaughter and assassinate one another.
Later on we see the members of the Ahl Bayt in an all-out war against one another.
Or does anyone want to think that the Abbasid Caliphate Al-Mansur or Abu Ja’far Abdallah ibn Muhammad al-Mansur was righteous and just?
Abdullah ibn Muhammad Al-Mansur was a great-grandson of the Prophet Muhammed (saw) cousin, Ibn Abbas.
Here are some of the things he did:
He had one of his governors send spies to spy on Imam Malik. He had Imam Malik tortured, had his arm pulled out of his socket, and publicly humiliated.
He had the grandsons of Hassan ibn Ali the sons of Abdullah ibn Hasan ibn Al Hasan ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib killed, namely Muhammed and Ibrahim.
Jalāl al-Dīn al-Khuḍayrī al-Suyūṭī mentions that he was the one that made that already tenuous relationship between the house ‘Abbas and the house of ‘Ali completely fractured. Source: (Tarikh al-Khulafa p.279-280)
He jailed Sufyan al-Thawri and Abbad ibn Kathir and, Abu Hanifa an-Nu’man.
He had Abu Muslim Abd al-Rahman ibn Muslim al-Khorasani murdered.
The list goes on and on.
Question: What are the people to do when there become violent fractious splits between these infallible, descendants of the Prophets?
Answer: Pick up your sword and hope to Allah that you start stabbing the wrong one. Apparently you have no way of objectively knowing which one is the right one!
The English say: Blood is thicker than water. In Islam we say: Faith is thicker than Blood.
Believers, do not take your fathers and brothers for allies if unbelief is dearer to them than faith; those of you who do so are unjust. (Qur’an 9:23)
You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day having affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even if they were their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their kindred. Those – He has decreed within their hearts faith and supported them with spirit from Him. And We will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they abide eternally. Allah is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him – those are the party of Allah . Unquestionably, the party of Allah – they are the successful. (Qur’an 58:22)
Once again these types of things will only disturb people who place a lot of stock in a person’s lineage.
‘Abdullah bin ‘Utbah bin Mas’ud reported:
I heard ‘Umar bin Al- Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him) reported saying: “In the lifetime of Messenger of Allah (saw) some people were called to account through Revelation. Now Revelation has discontinued and we shall judge you by your apparent acts. Whoever displays to us good, we shall grant him peace and security, and treat him as a near one. We have nothing to do with his insight. Allah will call him to account for that. But whosoever shows evil to us, we shall not grant him security nor shall we believe him, even if he professed that his intention is good.”
“Say: “O Allah! Lord of Sovereignty! You give power to whom You please, and You strip off power from whom You please: You endow with honour whom You please, and You bring low whom You please: In Your hand is all good. Verily, over all things You have power.” (Qur’an 3:26)
“And We have already sent Noah and Abraham and placed in their descendant’s prophethood and scripture; and among them is he who is guided, but many of them are (fasiqun) defiantly disobedient.” (Qur’an 57:26)
“There is no god except Him. He gives life and causes death. Your Lord, and the Lord of your forefathers.” (Qur’an 44:8)
“That is because Allah is the Truth, He gives life to the dead, and He is Most Capable of everything.” (Qur’an 22:6)
“Allah said, “Jesus, I will cause you to die and raise you up to me, and purify you from those who denied the truth, and I will exalt your followers over those who deny you until the Resurrection Day. Then you all will return to me, and I will judge between you in matters about which you disagree.” (Qur’an 3:55)
﷽
So it was brought to my attention that a Christian thought this was a good argument to prove that Jesus (as) is God. Really these people insult their own followers and readers.
“O people, a parable is set forth: pay heed to it. Those who call upon aught other than Allah shall never be able to create even a fly, even if all of them were to come together to do that. And if the fly were to snatch away anything from them, they would not be able to recover that from it. How powerless are those who invoke and those invoked!“ (Qur’an 22:73)
“And a messenger to the Children of Israel, ‘I have come to you with a sign from your Lord: I will create for you a bird from clay, breathe into it, and it will become a bird—by Allah’s Will. I will heal the blind and the leper and raise the dead to life—by Allah’s Will. And I will prophesize what you eat and store in your houses. Surely in this is a sign for you if you ˹truly˺ believe.” (Qur’an 3:49)
O people, a parable is set forth
A parable is: A short moral story that illustrates a universal truth.
“Those who call upon aught other than Allah shall never be able to create even a fly.”
The statement is directed at that those deities that worshippers petition in their prayers. This is drawling attention to the fact that Allah (swt) alone is the originator of the heavens and the earth.
“Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, “Be,” and it is.” (Qur’an 2:117)
A fly is something that most common people would consider to be a nuisance. We swat it away as it comes near our food or our face. Allah (swt) is saying that those whom people call upon other than Allah they are not even able to create a fly.
The other interesting point and implication of this verse is that today scientist are in their labs trying to create life. However, what is simply goes over our heads in such experiments is that:
a) The scientist are intelligent beings attempting to create life. The scientist themselves are part of the variables in the experiment.
If they do indeed create anything it is the result of intelligent design, a creation directed by an intelligence.
“And if the fly were to snatch away anything from themthey would not be able to recover that from it.”
First there is something very deep about this verse upon tafakkur- notice that the verse says: “They would not be able to recover that from it.” If one person was to steal a watch from another individual as long as that watch has not been altered or destroyed it is possible to recover that watch.
However, what the fly does is vomit on the food and liquify it now uses a proboscis to slurp the liquified food. So even if you caught the fly you would not be able to recuperate that which was taken from it.
Now when it comes to the verse that the Christian thinks proves the deity of Christ let us look at it:
“I will create for you a bird from clay, breathe into it, and it will become a bird—by Allah’s Will.“
This is where the real insult to the readers intelligence begins. They quote half the verse thinking that the reader will not read the whole of the verse. When we do, we quickly find that these actions are by Allah’s Will. They are not by the will of Jesus (as).
“I will heal the blind and the leper and raise the dead to life—by Allah’s Will.“
Notice something else interesting. When Jesus (as) continues he says: ” And I will prophesize what you eat and store in your houses.” Yet the statement does not end with the statement “by Allah’s Will”. This is because it is already established that Jesus (as) is a Prophet of Allah (swt) and he is authoritative. Yet, when Jesus (as) performs acts that look as if they break some supposed “laws of causality” he clearly needs to mention that this is by Allah’s Power and not his power. By Allah’s Will and not his will.
We shouldn’t be surprised by this because even in the text considered sacred by Christians we find:
“You men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as you yourselves also know.” (Acts 2:22)
Also what is a bit amusing about this supposed argument from the Christian is that it shows just how stepped in ignorance they are over some of the basics of Islamic theology and doctrine-this is across the board. I have personally never heard or seen any of them being grounded in Islamic theology.
What is amusing is the following: The statement in Arabic that you see above: “There is no Might or Power except with Allah.” The transliteration from Arabic would be: La hawla wa la quwwata illa Billah.
So Jesus (as) does not need to create a bird out of clay. He doesn’t even have to do anything fancy really.
Jesus (as) could simply say: “I eat this banana independently from the Might and Power of Allah”, and that in ad of itself would be a claim to deity.
If a Muslim says: “I obtained this PhD independently from the Might and Power of Allah.” That person would have existed the religion of Islam and would need to reaffirm their testification of faith.
There is no action done in existence that is not dependent upon the Might and Power of Allah. Allah is the Sovereign King of our entire existence!
There is no Kingdom of Satan and Kingdom of Allah (swt). All of existence is the Kingdom of Allah (swt).
Even when we steal an apple, our limbs, various systems in our bodies down to the molecular and atomic levels are all acting in accordance with the Might and Power of Allah What is not acting in accord with it is our Will. *Note* Not independent of Allah’s Power or Might but not in accord with it. Allah has willed that we have will that can act not in accordance with Allah (swt). However, it is impossible for anything in existence to act independently of the Might and Power of Allah (swt).
“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)
To learn and understand more about the doctrine of kasb (acquisition) you may be interested in reading the following:
Allah (swt) has power over the life and death of Jesus
“Allah said, “Jesus, I will cause you to die and raise you up to me, and purify you from those who denied the truth, and I will exalt your followers over those who deny you until the Resurrection Day. Then you all will return to me, and I will judge between you in matters about which you disagree.” (Qur’an 3:55)
Allah (swt) can destroy Jesus.
Even if Allah (swt) endowed Jesus with power over life and death, Allah (swt) has power over the life and death of Jesus himself!
“Say: “And who could have prevailed with Allah in any way had it been His will to destroy the Christ, son of Mary, and his mother, and everyone who is on earth-all of them? For, Allah’s is the dominion over the heavens and the earth and all that is between them; He creates what He wills: and Allah has the power to will anything!” (Qur’an 5:17)
In this situation Jesus has about as much chance as a moth in a candle stick factory.
According to the sacred text of the Christians the miracles of Jesus in the Qur’an are a big whoopty doo (a nothing burger)
In fact, if we are to believe the New Testament, Christians should be able to outshine and outclass the miracles of Jesus.
“Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.” (John 14:12)
Which follower of Jesus ever turned water into wine?
Which follower of Jesus walked on water?
Elisha’s dead bones could bring people to life.
“Once while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. When the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet.” (2 Kings 13:21)
“Have you not considered the one who argued with Abraham about his Lord [merely] because Allah had given him kingship? When Abraham said, “My Lord is the one who gives life and causes death,” he said, “I give life and cause death.” Abraham said, “Indeed, Allah brings up the sun from the east, so bring it up from the west.” Then the unbeliever was confounded. God guides not the people of the evildoers.” (Qur’an 2:258)
Notice that when the man replied to Abraham saying: “My Lord is the one who gives life and causes death,” he said in reply: “I give life and cause death.” Abraham did not dispute this.
Why? Because on an observable empirical data the man has a point. He can get a woman pregnant. He can take his sword and end a life. This man is not seeing from the vantage point of a believer that knows that Allah (swt) ultimately is the one behind life and death. Thus, Abraham had another argument which left the man confounded.
When Allah (swt) says:
“That is because Allah is the Truth, He gives life to the dead, and He is Most Capable of everything.” (Qur’an 22:6)
This is true because ultimately it is Allah that has power over life and death. We see people who should not be able to have children, have children. We see people beat cancer. That is why Jesus (as) is saying: “by Allah’s Will” it is by his qudra, his will, his power.
May Allah (swt) guide the Christians to the truth before they taste the eternal hellfire.
Prima Quran 