Tag Archives: sunnah

The Truth about the Qur’an: Created or Uncreated?

“Then if you were to dispute among yourselves about anything refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you indeed believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is better and more commendable in the end.” (Qur’an 4:59)

﷽ 

This subject is something that has stirred the emotions and passions of the Muslims in their history. It is a highly volatile subject.  In the history of Islam, one party of Muslims, would persecute the other. When the persecuted party came into power, they returned the favour.

The Ibadi school was removed from these bloody affairs and allowed them to approach the subject with sobriety dealing only with the proof text and the justifications for the views.

From the outset it should be clear that all sides have their proofs and justifications for their positions. Albeit some like to pretend that the other side blatantly ignore verses of the Qur’an, this is a clear misrepresentation and meanness.

So, in this dispute we are commanded by Allah (swt) In the Qur’an:

“Then if you were to dispute among yourselves about anything refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you indeed believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is better and more commendable in the end.” (Qur’an 4:59)

It is up to you dear reader to see who relies more upon revealed text and who relies more upon theological speculation to draw their conclusions.

Any clear statement from the Blessed Messenger (saw) on this matter?

There is no clear statement from the Blessed Messenger (saw) on this matter.

Any clear statement from the immediate companions on this matter?

The only clear statement we have from a companion(sahabah) is the following:

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud:

“Allah has not created (khalaq) in the heavens nor in the earth what is more magnificent than Ayat Al-Kursi.”

حَدِيثِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ قَالَ مَا خَلَقَ اللَّهُ مِنْ سَمَاءٍ وَلاَ أَرْضٍ أَعْظَمَ مِنْ آيَةِ الْكُرْسِيِّ

Source: https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:2884

We do not have any reports from a companion(sahabah) to the contrary.  So, our interlocutors will either have to weaken the hadith or employ interpretive principles to dismiss it as sound evidence.

Any clear statement from the Qur’an on the matter?

As regarding the Qur’an there is no clear statement that is it is uncreated. Those who oppose us on this matter have made it a theological conclusion. This is deduced after making certain assumptions about Allah (swt) and what are his essential attributes.

Whereas the Qur’an does have a clear text that states that is created. If there was such a text our interlocutors would be quick to quote it.

“Indeed, We have made it (ja’alnahu) an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

Our interlocutors have never been able to find any usage of the above word (ja’alnahu) in the Qur’an to show that something is uncreated, unmade, without origin, having an eternally abiding quality or trait.

In the Ibadi school we ground our aqidah on the source common to all Muslims (the Qur’an) and then we draw our beliefs from this. 

We do not have theological speculations about Allah (swt) and then try and make the Qur’an conform to our theological suppositions about Allah (swt) as you the reader will soon see.

The issue regarding Sifat (Attributes) and Dhat (Essence) of Allah (swt)

Before I have approached this topic as a novice, and I still very much am a layman and not a scholar.   With that out of the way I think it is very important to start with the crux of this issue which is really about the clash of understanding of essence (dhat) of Allah (swt) and what are/are not his essential sifat (attributes) and what categories they fall under as well as how different schools of aqidah (creed) further categorize those sifat (attributes).

The following is taken from: https://abukhadeejah.com/categories-of-the-attributes-sifat-of-allah/

The categorization of the Attributes of Allah is based on whether the Attributes are intrinsically bound to the Self (or Dhāt) of Allah or not bound intrinsically to the Self of Allah. So according to this, the Attributes are divided into three categories:

  1. Attributes ascribed to His Self (Sifāt Dhātiyyah).
  2. Attributes ascribed to His Actions (Sifāt Fi’liyyah).
  3. Attributes ascribed to both His Self and His Actions (Sifāt Dhātiyyah Fi’liyyah)

A definition for each: 1. As for As-Sifāt Adh-Dhātiyyah (Attributes ascribed to His Self) then what is intended is those Attributes that are intrinsically bound to the Self of Allah such that He never ceases and will never cease to be described with them. Examples are Life (Al-Hayāt), Knowledge (Al-‘Ilm), Ability (Al-Qudrah), Might and Power (Al-‘Izzah), Wisdom (Al-Hikmah), Majesty (Al-Jalāl), Highness (Al-‘Uluw) and other such Attributes of the Self. They are referred to as Adh-Dhātiyyah (i.e. ascribed to the Self) because they are intrinsically bound to the Self of Allah, and similarly His other Attributes such as His Two Hands (Al-Yadayn),Two-Eyes(Al-‘Aynayn) and Face (Al-Wajh) — and these Attributes can be called As-Sifāt Al-Khabariyyah (i.e. Attributes that provide information of the Self of Allah, such as, Two Hands, Two Eyes, Fingers, etc.).

2. As for As-Sifāt Al-Fi’liyyah (Attributes ascribed to His Actions), they are the Attributes connected to His Will (Al-Mashee’ah) and they are not intrinsically bound to His Self (Adh-Dhāt), not in type and nor in their individual occurrence. Examples are the Ascending (Al-Istiwā) of Allah over the Throne, the Descending (An-Nuzool) of Allah to nearest Heaven of this world and the Coming (Al-Majee’u) of Allah on the Day of Resurrection to judge between the people. These are all Attributes ascribed to His Actions and connected to His Will — If He Wills, He does these actions and if He Wills, He does not do them. So, these Attributes are [newly] happening events in terms of their type and in their individual occurrences. So, the Ascending of Allah over the Throne did not take place until after He had created the Throne; the Descending of Allah to the nearest Heaven of this world did not occur except after He had created the Heavens, and [of course] the Coming of Allah will not occur before the Hour is established.

3. As for As-Sifāt Adh-Dhātiyyah Al-Fi’liyyah (Attributes ascribed to both His Self and His Actions) then if one was to consider this type of Attribute, he would find that Allah never ceases and will never cease to be described with it, so it is intrinsically bound to the Self (Dhāt) of Allah. And if one was to consider its occurrence, he would find that it is also connected to His Will, and not intrinsically bound to the Self (Adh-Dhāt). The Scholars use as an example the Speech (Kalām) of Allāh, the Most High. Speech (Al-Kalām) — in terms of the type of Attribute, it is ascribed to Allah’s Self, since He does not cease and will not cease to be described with speaking. His Speech is from His perfection that is due to Him (free is He from all imperfections). And as for individual occurrences of His Speech, then He speaks whenever He Wills [to whom He Wills at a time designated by Him] — so His Speaking is from the Sifāt Fi’liyyah (i.e. it is an Attribute ascribed to His Actions) because it is done according to His Will (i.e. when He Wills).

Do note that these categories and descriptions are the categories and descriptions not found in the Qur’an or the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

Our main point of difference with this sect of the Sunni Muslims (the ones who have been most vocal on the issue) is that where they would put the quality of speaking in category 3, we would put the quality of speaking in category 2. That being Sifāt Al-Fi’liyyah.

“These are all Attributes ascribed to His Actions and connected to His Will — If He Wills, He does these actions and if He Wills, He does not do them. So, these Attributes are [newly] happening events in terms of their type and in their individual occurrences.”

Also note some interesting admission in their description in point 3. They state: And if one was to consider its occurrence, he would find that it is also connected to His Will, and not intrinsically bound to the Self.”

So what are the points of difference between us on this?

First, we don’t’ agree with them that anything and everything attributed to Allah (swt)is an attribute. Examples being but not limited to the following:  Their belief that Allah (swt) has such attributes as: hands, face, eyes, that Allah chuckles or laughs, has a leg or foot. Some of them even affirm the idea that Allah (swt) has an uvular, runs, trots or jogs and so forth.

Then they make lofty claims that they take the outward meaning of text and leave it at and do not perform ta’wil (interpretation)yet from their own sources

We can see this is not the case. For example:https://www.abuaminaelias.com/al-aqeedah-al-wasitiyyah-by-ibn-taymiyyah/

You will notice a section where it states that:

Affirming the omnipresence of Allah with His creation (by His Knowledge, not His Essence)

وَقَوْلُهُ وَهُوَ مَعَكُمْ أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُمْ وَاللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ‏

And His saying, “He is with you wherever you are, for Allah sees what you are doing.” (Qur’an 57:4)

 مَا يَكُونُ مِن نَّجْوَى ثَلاثَةٍ إِلاَّ هُوَ رَابِعُهُمْ وَلا خَمْسَةٍ إِلاَّ هُوَ سَادِسُهُمْ وَلا أَدْنَى مِن ذَلِكَ وَلا أَكْثَرَ إِلاَّ هُوَ مَعَهُمْ أَيْنَمَا كَانُوا ثُمَّ يُنَبِّئُهُم بِمَا عَمِلُوا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ‏‏

“There is in no private conversation of three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them, and no less than that and no more but that He is with them wherever they are. Then, He will inform them of what they did on the Day of Resurrection. Verily, Allah knows all things.” (Qur’an 58:7)

Notice the title when speaking about the text in the Qur’an states: “By His Knowledge not His Essence) and that is not what the text (of the Qur’an) says at all! This is them applying their understanding of a text to refute other rival Muslim sects.

Another view concerning Allah (swt) that they have which has no support in the Qur’an or Sunnah is a what can be termed as pseudo-attributes or quasi-attributes of Allah (swt).  Their claim ultimately is that Allah (swt) has attributes that are not identical to his essence nor other than it!  You can see them try and make justification for it here: https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/282904/elaboration-required-if-one-says-allaahs-attributes-are-other-than-him

Notice that they make no recourse to the Qur’an nor to the Sunnah. This is speculative theology, and, in this manner, they are ahl kalam.  Though they will claim they are people who take only the text.

 “And that you say about Allah that which you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)

Whereas we rely upon the following text to show the absolute oneness of Allah (swt)

Your God is One (wāḥidun) God; there is no god but He, the All-merciful, the All-compassionate.” (Qur’an 2:153)

 Say: ‘He is God, One (ahadun),” (Qur’an 112:1)

Wahid is that Allah (swt) is one and there is no other.  When this is coupled with ahad it means that Allah (swt) is absolutely one.  This is what the Qur’an affirms, and it is what we believe.

“The word ahad, -conveys an uncountable oneness. It is not one in a series. It cannot be added to or divided into fractions. It stands for a singular, unique entity.”-Shaykh Salman al-Oadah

However, our interlocutors believe Allah (swt) has attributes that are neither his essence nor other than it. This is important to keep in mind when reading the article.

The belief in the eternity of the Qur’an though its meanings differ, and its ways are diverse because of the differences among its supporters emanates from one source, namely not differentiating between Speaking as an Essential attribute of Allah and its EFFECTS, the Books that Allah has sent down to His Messengers. All who hold this opinion must necessarily believe in the eternity of all originated things, because these (also) are effects of Allah’s attributes. Because the creatures, regardless of their differences (from each other), are not other than effects of His Power, Will and Knowledge. His Power, Will and Knowledge is an eternal essential attribute because of the impossibility of Allah’s qualification with their opposites.

So, understand that by this when we say kalaam Allah it literally translates as the speech of Allah. And it is known the speech is but a by-product, an EFFECT of the attribute of Speaking. This is what we affirm.

And now here comes the real differentiation between the two:

1.Having the ability to speak.

2.Creating the speech itself.

If it’s the first, then it’s a necessary for the mind to affirm it as an attribute. If it’s the latter, then it’s a possible attribute, as Allah (swt) make create speech or may not create speech.

So, the kalaam Allah is from the Sifāt Al-Fi’liyyah

Remember above they themselves have defined Sifat Al-Fi’liyyah as:

These are all Attributes ascribed to His Actions and connected to His Will — If He Wills, He does these actions and if He Wills, He does not do them. So, these Attributes are [newly] happening events in terms of their type and in their individual occurrences.

You know that those among them who hold that Allah’s being Speaking is without His Will base their opinion on what is necessitated by making His worldly speech an eternal attribute abiding in His Essence. For the Eternal, no Will can precede His Eternity, as also for knowledge, Power, Life and other attribute of Allah, exalted is He. Just as it cannot be said that Allah is Powerful by His Will, Alive by His Will, Knower by His Will lest minds should infer origination (and contingency) in respect of these attributes, in the same way it becomes necessary for those who believe in the eternity of His being Speaking to say that it is not bound by His Will.

SPEAKING AS AN ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTE ABIDING WITH ALLAH (SWT)

Whereas the Athari (also called Salafi), Ash’ari and Maturidi schools of aqidah (creed)of what is known as Sunni Islam affirm speaking as an essential attribute we do not. Whereas Power, Will, and Knowledge are essential attributes of Allah (swt) because of the impossibility of Allah’s being qualified by their opposites. Revealed books are, indications of His Knowledge which is an attribute of His Essence.

They are not the attribute of the Knowledge itself which is a quality of his eternal Essence.

Our response to the first rational objection by the Athari/Salafi school of Sunni Islam.

They will say: “Just as the attribute of speech is a noble attribute, its opposite, muteness, is a characteristic that is not desired, nor is it considered praiseworthy. It is well known that the one who is mute is not like the one who speaks. Therefore, to claim that Allah does not possess the attribute of speech (or to interpret it away as the Ash’aris do) is in reality blasphemous, as this then implies that the Creator is mute, yet Allah is free of all attributes of imperfection.” 

Source: (pg. 45. An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an by Yasir Qadhi)

The above statement is inter-Sunni polemic. Salafi/Athari Sunni Muslims directing this at Ash’ari Sunni Muslims, this line of thinking is severely flawed.

First, it is sufficient to attribute to Allah (swt) the attribute of Power without the attribution of speech. Speech is not the opposite of dumbness such that dumbness is negated by affirming it. The opposite of speech is silence. It does not mean that a non-speaking person is dumb; rather he is not non-silent.

We affirm the attribute of speech for Allah (swt) as Imam Diya al-Din ‘Abd al-Aziza Thamini (raheemullah), says in his Mu’alim:

“Know that speech is sometimes referred to Allah in the meaning of negating dumbness of Him, and it then to be understood as an essential attribute in the way of such attributes. And sometimes it is referred to Him in the sense of its being one of His actions, and it is then to be understood as such. So, the meaning of His being Speaking, according to the first interpretation, is that He is not dumb; and according to the second that He is a Creator of Speech.”

 Source: (Ma’alim al-din (Oman: Wizarat al-Turath al-Qawmi wa l-Thaqafah, 1st edition 2:9.)

The meaning of Allah’s being Speaking is producing speech on the occasion of it.

  What is not in dispute between us and the Sunni Muslims.

1) That Allah (swt) has never been unable to produce speech from all eternity.

2) That the Qur’an does not originate from any other than Allah (swt).

3) It is his Word, His Revelation and that which He sent down.

4) It was revealed in letters and words.

5) It was revealed to the heart of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

6) It is inimitable in its combinations and meanings. No human being can produce the like thereof.

7) It has been narrated from the Blessed Messenger (saw) through firm tawatur

It does not emanate from other than Allah (swt). 

Just as all created things. “That is Allah—your Lord! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Him. ˹He is˺ the Creator of all things, so worship Him ˹alone˺. And He is the Maintainer of everything.” (Qur’an 6:102)

The dispute among the Sunni Hanbali school of Aqidah(creed). Due to the Hanbali school being among the Ahl Kalaam and people of speculative theology they have produced some of the more bizarre debates the Muslim Ummah has ever seen. If you research this matter you will find it to be true.

Among the Hanbali differences:

a) The voice of the reciter of the Qur’an and his recitation. Are they created or not?

b) The letters of the alphabet from which the words of the Qur’an and others are composed. Is it created or not?

c) Allah’s being Speaking, whether it is by His Will or not (By His Will).

Since their differences about the letters, sounds and recitation overlap, we have considered them together in reviewing and criticizing their opinions about them.

They attribute to Imam Ahmad the statement: ‘Whoever says My utterance of the Qur’an is created, he is a Jahmi and whoever says it is not created, he is an innovator.’

Source: (al-Sawa’iq al-mursalah (Cairo: Matbat al-Imam), 440.

In this text that they have narrated, there is a contradiction that cannot be obscure to any intelligent person. There is no intermediary between creature and non-creature.

The thing is neither created nor non-created. If it is created, then why does he not accuse of error those who speak of its creation? If it is not, then why does he attribute innovation to those who speak of its non-creation? “Ahmad said: ‘Whoever says that any letter of the alphabet is created, he is a Jahmi, because he has walked on a path of innovation, and whoever says that the alphabet is created, then he [also] says that the Qur’an is created.’

Source: (Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah, 12:83-85)

That is an excuse of no use. To deny the being created of what is known by reason and tawatur tradition to be created, and to attach it to Allah, exalted is He, in eternity, avoiding the firm Qur’anic texts that everything other than Allah is created-such as Allah’s saying:

“That is Allah—your Lord! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Him. ˹He is˺ the Creator of all things, so worship Him ˹alone˺. And He is the Maintainer of everything.” (Qur’an 6:102)

His saying: “The One Who holds control over Heaven and Earth, Who has not adopted any son nor has He any associate in control. He has created everything and measured it out precisely.” (Qur’an 25:2) is in no way permissible. How so, when the driving force behind this is only the fear of the rising sun of reality, and the evaporation of the fog of fancies, which they intended as a veil between reason and their grasp of the realities. Not content with mere refusal of reality, they went further to pass judgements on those who proclaim the reality as being Jahmi, innovators and unbelievers. Fa in-na li-l-lahi wa in-na ilayhi raji’un: so surely, we belong to Allah and to Him surely, we are returning!!

In how wretched a state Islam is left when interpreted in these contradictory directions! How far astray are the people of Islam if they do not recognize Islam but through these things.

Imam Ahmad was asked: “What is your opinion concerning those who say, ‘Our recitation of the Qur’an is created”? Imam Ahmad replied: “These people are worse than the Jahmiyah. Whoever believes this, then he believes that Gabriel came with something created, and the Prophet (saw) preached something created!” Source: (adh-Dhahabi, Ual-Uluww, p 212.)

So, then is our recitation uncreated?

No evidence from the Qur’an, the Sunnah or rational proofs, except what they bring from Ahmad. The make Ahmad and their scholars the standard by which the truth is measured.  They will often use the term “salaaf” as the standard but what was the standard that Allah (swt) gave the salaaf if they should fall into disputes?

“Then if you were to dispute among yourselves about anything refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you indeed believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is better and more commendable in the end.” (Qur’an 4:59)

If that standard is good enough for them it is good enough for us! Whoever wants a more comprehensive understanding (of their various positions) should refer to the books of the holders of this belief, such as the 12th volume of Fatawa Ibn Taymiyya, which exceeds 600 pages. You will not move from one topic therein to another without witnessing the contradiction of what he says such as will suffice to demonstrate that the foundation on which they have laid down this belief is crumbling from its bases.

These huge disagreements among them are an indication that they are the people of innovation -differing among themselves in these matters in Aqidah (creed).

The positive evidence advanced by those that say that the Qur’an is uncreated.

Please note that the Sunni are divided on this issue, thus not all of them will agree to using the same arguments. However, this is as brief over view of arguments and evidences that they claim justify their position.

What they feel are logical/rational arguments.

The first one was already dealt with above. That was under the section: Our response to the first rational objection by the Athari/Salafi school of Sunni Islam.

Another logical/rational argument they bring is the following:

Only Allah (swt) is perfect, and the creation is imperfect. Thus, the trap they intend is this.  Those who say that the Qur’an is created must therefore have to admit that it is imperfect!

However, this is a very flawed argument that you will see them retreat from. This argument destroys them.  If A=B and B=C than A=C.  So let us play the game:  If only Allah (swt) is perfect. And the Qur’an is perfect = Allah (swt) is the Qur’an!

So, they must retreat further to their quasi-attribute. The one that is neither Allah(swt) nor other than Allah (swt).  Since that is between negation and affirmation that really can’t say by their reasoning that the Qur’an is not Allah (swt).

Secondly, this can be answered by saying that the Qur’an is perfect in one way in that is a perfection revelation of Allah (swt).  This is affirmed by:

“Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian.” (Qur’an 15:9)

Allah (swt) doesn’t have a guardian. That should be clear.

However, it is not absolutely perfect as Allah (swt) and the proof for that is:

There is nothing like unto Him. (Qur’an 42:11)

Yet do not be surprised nor dismayed if those who disputed on rather or not the ink, recitation or mushaf is created would not be swayed by such clear evidence.

Positive evidence from the Qur’an for those who argue it is eternal and uncreated.

The Creation and the Command argument:

“His are the creation and the command.” (Qur’an 7:54)

The argument that those who believe the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated is that the creation is the created and the command is His Word -which is not-created.

The command is His saying ‘Be’: “Indeed when He intents a thing, His is “be” and it is’ (Qur’an 36:82)

So, they feel this is strong evidence for their position. For if His Word which is command has been created, then He would have said: “His are the creation and the creation.”

Their reasoning fails on several counts:

1) The first is that the context of this statement is nothing other than Allah’s being alone in originating the originated things and turning them according to His will.

The text of the whole verse is: “Surely your Lord is none other than Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and then ascended His Throne; Who causes the night to cover the day and then the day swiftly pursues the night; Who created the sun and the moon and the stars making them all subservient to His command. Lo! His is the creation and His is the command. Blessed is Allah, the Lord of the universe.” (Qur’an 7:54)

The most that this verse tells us is that, just as Allah, glorified is He, is alone in bringing the universe out of non-being (into being), in the same way He is alone

in the management of it. He has no partner in its creation and in its management. None other than Him alone belong the creations and the command. The meaning here, clearly, is management. And there is nothing in that which even remotely points either to the eternity of the Qur’an or to its contingency.

2) The second point that the conjunction ‘Wa’ or ‘And’ in English does not necessarily mean difference between the conjoined elements in every respect. Rather, it is enough that the difference is relatively, like the difference between specific and general, unconditioned and conditioned, or the difference of qualifiers with sameness of the noun.

Among the examples of that are His saying: “Guard strictly prayers and the middle prayer.” (Qur’an 2:238) The middle prayer is not (separated) out of the genus of the prayers, the guarding of which has been commanded.

And His saying:

“Whoever is an enemy to Allah, and His angels, and His Messengers, and Jibril and Mikael.” (Qur’an 2:98)

No-one says that Jibril and Mikael are (separated) out of the genus of angels.

There are many other examples. That should suffice.

3) The third point is that the command of Allah, exalted is He, has been mentioned in the Qur’an jointly with what denotes its creation. He says:
“And Allah’s command must be fulfilled.” (Qur’an 33:37)

And He says: “So that Allah might accomplish a matter (amr) already decided.” (Qur’an 8:42)

And he says” “And the command of Allah is a decree determined.” (Qur’an 33:38)

4) The fourth point is that His command means in one place in the Qur’an something different from what it means in another. In His saying: “(So it was) till then there came Our Command and the oven gushed forth (water like fountains from the earth)” (Qur’an 11:40). It is not the same as in His saying: “Has come the command of Allah, seek not then to hasten it.” (Qur’an 16:1)

5) The fifth is that the interpretation of ‘the command’ in these verses which we have cited as (meaning) the Qur’an is not correct. It is known with certainty that the Qur’an is not meant (by ‘command’) in His saying: “Or there comes the command of your Lord.” (Qur’an 16:33) and His saying: “Until, when Our command came, and the oven overflowed.” (Qur’an 11:40)

As well as His saying: “So that Allah might accomplish a matter(amran) already destined.” (Qur’an 8:42)

So how can ‘command’ (amr) in His saying; “His are the creation and the command” be interpreted as the Qur’an, whereas the text denotes the opposite of it?

The next argument that they advance is creating with ‘be’ and the understanding of bi-l-haqq.

“We created not the heavens, the earth and all between them, but for just ends (bi-l-haqq) (Qur’an 15:85)

The way they argue is that the ‘haqq’ with which Allah has created them is His saying to them ‘Be’. If this saying (of ‘Be’) had (itself) been created, then it would not be correct to (say that) the creations were created by it, because the creation is not created by a creature. First, we do not accept that the meaning of ‘bi-l’haqq’ is as they say. The best tafsir of the Qur’an is the Qur’an itself.

His saying: “Our Lord, not for nothing have you created this.” (Qur’an 3:191), firmly denotes that the meaning of bi-l-haqq in the verse is in opposition to al-batil (i.e. Creation for nothing, vanity). The intention of describing Allah’s creation of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them as bi-l-haqq is to negate the futility of Allah, exalted is He, in His actions.

It is refutation of the futility that the unbelievers thought of His actions, as is clear His saying: “Not without purpose did We create heaven and earth and all between. That was the thought of the unbelievers. But woe to the unbelievers because of the Fire.” (Qur’an 38:27)

The meaning of ‘Be’ in the like of His saying, exalted is He, “For to anything which We have willed, We but say “Be” then it is.” (Qur’an 16:40)

This relates to the execution of His Will, exalted is He, in respect of anything of the mumkinat (what is possible) in the context of giving it existence or completing it. It is explained by his Saing, “When We have willed’ i.e. When Our Will has conjoined with it in a way of execution (of the command). Because ‘when’ is for time in the future, and this is emphasized in His saying: “an naqula la-hu.”  (that We say to it), (Qur’an16:40) which is in the imperfect tense which, when it is with ‘an’, means the future.

It is known with certainty that whatever is since forever-like His Knowledge, His Power and His Life-the Will cannot be conjoined with it, because nothing can precede (what is eternal).

And this is emphasized by His saying ‘fa-yakun’ (then it is), the connecting particle ‘fa’ meaning order and sequence. From this you know that His saying, exalted is He, ‘kun fa-yakun’, is, wherever it occurs, nothing but an indirect expression of the speedy response of things to Him, glorified is He, in accordance with the conjunction of His Will with these things. Otherwise, there is no utterance of kaf nun (kun) in the concrete sense (of utterance). If we accept that, then we will say that our discussion is about the Word revealed such as the Qur’an, not the Word unrevealed.

It is also a metaphor for the expediency of Allah’s creative command.

“Allah created the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them, in six days” (Qur’an 7:54).

“The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be”. And he was.” (Qur’an 3:59) Yet didn’t Jesus (as) take time to form in the womb?

Some scholars have said that Allah (swt) created this word and willed for it to follow his orders. So, all in all it’s not something coexisting with Allah (swt).

The next argument they bring:  Seeking refuge in Allah’s complete words.

This is from the following hadith:

Khaula bint Hakim Sulamiyya reported:

I heard Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying: When anyone lands at a place, and then says: “I seek refuge in the Perfect Word of Allah from the evil of what He has created,” nothing would harm him until he marches from that stopping place.

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:2708a)

The argument here is that if His words had been created then seeking refuge in them would not be allowed.

The answer to this is first that this would need to be in harmony with the hadith that clearly states the Qur’an is created:

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud:

“Allah has not created (khalaq) in the heavens nor in the earth what is more magnificent than Ayat Al-Kursi.”

حَدِيثِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ قَالَ مَا خَلَقَ اللَّهُ مِنْ سَمَاءٍ وَلاَ أَرْضٍ أَعْظَمَ مِنْ آيَةِ الْكُرْسِيِّ

Source: https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:2884

Second, that this seeking refuge in fact is with Allah (swt), because He is the Lord of the words. The words are included (in the sense) because of the blessing and goodness that Allah (swt) has put therein. It is a kind of metaphor.

And in the sound hadith has come seeking refuge in His actions, exalted is He, as in the prayer of the Prophet (saw) as follows:

It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that ‘Aishah said:

“I noticed the Prophet (saw) was not there one night, so I started looking for him with my hand. My hand touched his feet, and they were held upright, and he was prostrating and saying: ‘I seek refuge in Your pleasure from Your anger, in Your forgiveness from Your punishment, and I seek refuge in You from You. I cannot praise You enough, You are as You have praised yourself.'” Source: (https://sunnah.com/nasai:169)

Forgiveness is one of His actions, exalted is He, and it is (therefore) definitely originated. Seeking refuge in it was allowed because (forgiveness) does not emanate from other than Allah (swt).

Is Allah’s forgiveness Allah himself? Is Allah’s punishment Allah himself?

The next argument is the hadith of Ali in making the Qur’an and not a creature a judge.

The fifth is what Abu l-Qasim al-Lalka’i has narrated from Ali bin Abi Talib that he said -when it was to him that you made two men as your judges -‘I did make a creature a judge, I did not make a judge but the Qur’an’.

The answer to this is simple: His negation of making a creature as judge by making the Qur’an as judge is because the Qur’an is from Allah (swt). All that it in it the commands, prohibitions, permissions, restrictions, approval, rejection it is from Allah (swt). So, making the Qur’an as judge is referring for judgement to Allah who has sent it down with His Knowledge, and has related its judgement to Himself.

He says: “Who is better than Allah in judgement?” (Qur’an 5:50)

Do Note I have not been able to find the hadith attributed to Ali bin Abi Talib. Insh’Allah when I have the source it will be included.

The next argument is that Ibn Abbas (ra) critiqued a man for saying: Lord of the Qur’an

 Is what has been narrated from ‘Abdullah b Abbas (ra) that he criticized a man who said: “Lord of the Qur’an.”

The answer is: that the evidence as to its not being sound is in abundance.

Do Note I have not been able to find the hadith attributed to Ali bin Abi Talib. Insh’Allah when I have the source it will be included.

Some discussion on Allah (swt) speaking with Musa (as)

The Hanbali/Salafi agree with us (The Ibadi School) that Musa (as) heard from Allah’s Speaking a speech composed of letters and that it had sound. On this point the Ashari disagree with us both. However, we differ on its eternity or origination. They believe in its eternity, and we believe in its origination.

Those who said that the speaking to Musa (as) that it is an eternal attribute, or that it is abiding with the essence of Allah (swt) both are incorrect.

Weak argument used by Hanbali/Salafi Sunni Muslims against Ashari Sunni Muslims.

There is however a very weak argument used by the Hanbali/Salafi in their discussion with the Ashari.  They feel it is a strong argument.

The Hanbali/Salafi argument against the Ashari goes like this:

“If the Kalaam of Allah is without sound, then what did Musa (as) hear when Allah spoke to Him? If they respond that Allah (swt) created a sound, and caused Musa (as) to hear that created sound, then this means that this created object stated, “Oh Musa, Verily, I am your Lord, Verily, I am Allah, there is no god save me, so worship Me.” (Qur’an 20:12-14)

Source: (Pg. 44 An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an by Yasir Qadhi)

Yet, obviously, we know that Musa (as) did not perform any act of worship towards the direction of the voice. Or at least no act of worship is recorded.

Shaykh Yasir Qadhi and those who think this is some knock down killer argument must really have to wonder about the following:

What did Rasul Allah (saw) think when Angel Gabriel (as) said. “Indeed this, your religion, is one religion, and I am your Lord, so worship Me.” (Qur’an 21:92)

What? Did the Blessed Messenger (saw) make sujud and worship Gabriel? Obviously not!

Gabriel(as) was used as a medium in the same way the burning bush was.

Has the story of Musa reached you ˹O Prophet˺? When he saw a fire, he said to his family, “Wait here, ˹for˺ I have spotted a fire. Perhaps I can bring you a torch from it or find some guidance at the fire.” But when he approached it, he was called, “O Moses! It is truly I. I am your Lord! So, take off your sandals, for you are in the sacred valley of Ṭuwa. I have chosen you, so listen to what is revealed: ‘It is truly I. I am Allah! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Me. So, worship Me ˹alone˺, and establish prayer for My remembrance.” (Qur’an 20:9-14)

“And when Musa had completed the term and was traveling with his family, he perceived from the direction of the mount a fire. He said to his family, “Stay here; indeed, I have perceived a fire. Perhaps I will bring you from there [some] information or burning wood from the fire that you may warm yourselves.” But when he came to it, he was called from the right side of the valley in a blessed spot – from the tree (mina l-shajarati), “O Musa, indeed I am Allah, Lord of the worlds.” (Qur’an 28:29-30)

So rather it was a created word, or created tree or created angel, the Prophets of Allah (swt) are peak monotheist and understand the difference between the which is spoken (created) and the real source of the one speaking (Creator).

Allah (swt) also can make anything speak that wishes to make speak. An example would be:

“And they will say to their skins, “Why have you testified against us?” They will say, “We were made to speak by Allah , who has made everything speak; and He created you the first time, and to Him you are returned.” (Qur’an 41:21)

Imagine being in a masjid and a man recites from the Qur’an: “Indeed, this, your religion, is one religion, and I am your Lord, so worship me!” 

Would anyone in that masjid begin to worship that man?  Of course, they wouldn’t.  The man is a created being reciting created speech. Yet, understanding the ultimate source of the statement is the key.

Another example: “Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him ˹alone˺. This is the Straight Path.” (Qur’an 19:36)

Allah (swt) could have revealed the Qur’an in which he was always spoken about in the third person such as above. 

However, he has allowed for his creation to recite the created speech: “I am Allah! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Me. So, worship Me ˹alone.”

The scholars have never declared someone a kafir for reciting this if they speaker did not claim the speech was a reference to him/herself.

“When Musa came at the appointed time and his Lord spoke to him.” (Qur’an 7:143)

“And messengers We have mentioned unto you before and messengers We have not mentioned unto thee; and Allah spoke (takliman) directly unto Musa.” (Qur’an 4:164)

“And it is not for any human being that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a partition or that He sends a messenger to reveal, by His permission, what He wills. Indeed, He is Most High and Wise.” (Qur’an 42:51)

Unless our interlocutors want to say that the Qur’an contains a flat contradiction than they will need to understand ‘Allah spoke to Musa with directly’ considering the above verse.

This spoke to Musa directly must fall under the category of inspiration, behind a partition or by sending a messenger to reveal his will to them.

Surely this is something to ponder for those who believe that Allah (swt) has a location.

WORDS OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE QUR’AN AND THE IMPACT UPON THIS DEBATE.

This is not an argument from the scholars our school (Ibadi Scholars). Nor is it an argument that they rely upon.

 This is an argument that I (Prima-Qur’an) conceived when investigating this issue.

“In other words, these particular phrases are originally non-Arabic in origin. However, as is the case with any language, these words were ‘borrowed’ by Arabic, and were used so commonly that they became a part of the Arabic language. Thus, for all practical purposes, these words became ‘a part of fluent Arabic, and were use din poetry…and if an Arab were ignorant of these words, it was as if he were ignorant of other Arabic words.” Source: (az-Zarkashee, v 1, p, 289)

“Therefore, the correct opinion is that there are no non-Arabic words in the Qur’an, although there are words that have non-Arabic origins. Due to the continued usage of these words by the Arabs, however, they can no longer be considered foreign.”

Source: (pg. 27 An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an by Yasir Qadhi)

Now this is a matter of debate among Muslim scholars and orientalist. That is rather or not the Qur’an contains words of foreign origin.  Now, Praise be to Allah (swt) no matter the outcome:  Yes, the Qur’an contains words that are borrowed from other languages and became part of the Arabic language or no it does not contain as such either way our position is untouched.

However, if one was to believe that the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated the discovery of foreign words borrowed from other languages is devastating to such a theological position A revelation that is eternal and uncreated does not need to incorporate words and expressions that are from languages that do not even exist at the time.

Now some clever theologian may try and argue: “Yes, but Allah (swt) knew in his infinite knowledge that those words would one day end up in the Qur’an, and thus he chose them for his revelation.” That creates a type of paradox in which a series of events are caused in such a way to have created words from a created language that are chosen to be part of an uncreated eternal attribute.

All in all, no matter the outcome it does not have an impact on our theological position on the matter.

The origins of statements in the Qur’an and the eternal knowledge of such statements.

If the khatib during a Friday sermon quotes a hadith of the Blessed Messenger (saw) the whole of the sermon is the speech of the khatib. However, it cannot be said that everything stated with the in speech of the khatib had its origin with the khatib. For example, if the khatib is quoting a hadith of the Prophet (saw), even though it is the speech of the khatib the quote has its origin with the speech of the Blessed Prophet (saw).

The Qur’an is Kalam Allah.

The Qur’an is a revelation from Allah.

It is clear when we read the Qur’an that we can see Allah (swt) speaking and addressing His creation in it.  We can also see conversations between Iblis and Allah (swt). We can see conversations between Allah (swt) and his Angels.  We can see conversations between the created beings.  All of this known in the pre-eternal knowledge of Allah (swt).  However, not all statements in the Qur’an are original statements of Allah (swt).

Examples:

Allah said, “What made you disobey Me?” Iblis replied, “I am better than Adam, for You have created me out of fire and Adam out of clay.” (Qur’an 7:12)

The part: “I am better than Adam, for you created me out of fire and Adam out of clay.” Is originally the statement of Iblis.  In the Qur’an Allah (swt) is quoting Iblis.

Anyone who believes that it was Allah (swt) who stated: “You have created me out of fire.” And not that it was the words of Iblis has entered disbelief.

“And lo! those who disbelieve would fain disconcert you with their eyes when they hear the Reminder, and they say: Lo! he is indeed mad.” (Qur’an 68:51)

Anyone who believes that it was Allah (swt) who said about the Blessed Prophet (saw): “Lo! He is indeed mad!” that person has entered disbelief.

The part: “Lo he is indeed mad!” This is the statement of some of the Quraish against the Blessed Prophet (saw).  In The Qur’an Allah (swt) is quoting the Quraish.

All this is from the knowledge of Allah (swt). Yet, the origins of the statements are from created entities. These statements from them are from the actions they have acquired.

The eternity of knowledge does not imply the eternity of the known, otherwise, all things that have come into being would be eternal!

Positive evidence from the Qur’an for those who argue it created.

Arguments from logic and rationality.

  1. An obvious point is that everything other than Allah (swt) is created.  So, is the Qur’an a creation or not?

If the interlocutors respond that the attributes of Allah (swt) are uncreated do keep in mind as above that the attributes are in a quasi-or pseudo status. They cannot say that they are the essence nor other than the essence.

  • Argument against attributing multiplicity to Allah (swt)

Permitting multiplicity of the eternal is contradictory to the unicity which is the most special of the attributes of Allah, Exalted Is He. (It is rejected) because it leads to permitting multiplicity of gods. Because the True God, Glorified and Exalted is He, only deserved Godhood in connection with His precedence over everything in existence. If there were any equal to Him in being eternal, then it would be correct for that equal to be His partner in Godhood, for there is nothing to prevent its being creator, sustainer, manager and wise.

If it is said that Allah (swt) is distinct from the Qur’an and other (instances of the) eternal Word, because of attributes other than eternity -such as Knowledge, Power, Hearing, Seeing-by Which He alone merits Godhood and Lordship.

The answer to it is that specification of Allah, glorified is He, with these attributes, as against His equal in being eternal, is giving a preference to Him over it, and this giving preference must have a justification. If it is said-that the (attribute of) being Speaking is itself, one of those attributes by which Allah merits being alone in the creation and command than We say that those attributes are not separated from Him, glorified is He.

Everything whose eternity is affirmed, its non-existence is impossible because the existence of the eternal is Essential Necessary Existence, which does not need justification in contrast to the existence of (that which) is only permissible (not necessary). It is impossible that anyone should have any authority over it in establishing, or removing, sending down or raising up, maintaining or taking away. While Allah Exalted is He, says about the Qur’an: “If it were Our Will, We could take away which we have revealed to you. (Qur’an 17:86)

The effects of that which is produced is apparent in the Qur’an. Each letter of it needs the other in sequence, its words being composed form them. And each word needs other words to combine as a sentence. Composition is an artwork that points to the artist and the artist must precede in existence the made art.

That kind of reasoning in not allowed in respect of any of His attributes.  Thus, (in respect of His attribute of Power) it will not be said that Allah got power over this because of this, and (in respect of His Knowledge) that He knows this because of this, and (in respect of His being All-Seeing) that He saw this for this reason. And the same in respect of the other attributes.

The Proof Text from The Qur’an That Establish that is Created.

1. The first proof is that Allah (swt) has explicitly told us he created it in Arabic.

“Indeed, We have made it (ja’alnahu) an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)

Our interlocutors have never been able to find any usage of the above word (ja’alnahu) in the Qur’an to show that something is uncreated, unmade or without origin.

“And thus, We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command. You did not know what the Book is or, what is faith, but We have made (ja’alnahu) it a light by which We guide whom We will of Our servants. And indeed, you are guiding to a straight path.” (Qur’an 42:52)

“It is He who CREATED you from one soul and CREATED from it its mate that he might dwell in security with her.” (Qur’an 7:189)   

The above text the first term used is “khalaqakum” (created) and the second term “ja’ala” (created).  Again, this shows the interchangeable nature of these two terms.

We could simply stop here. That which is made-namely, the Qur’an in its Arabic, its giving light and its guidance is an established reality. Whoever rejects it, he has certainly unbelieved.

The Maker is other than the made. Making precedes the made.

2. The second proof is regarding its obvious order and arrangement.

“And He created all things, then made them in order.” (Qur’an 25:2)

“Verily, all things have We created in proportion and measure.” (Qur’an 54:49)

This is a quality apparent in the Qur’an. It is also showing the Qur’an is subject to order.

 Just as Ibrahim (as) understood that the celestial bodies were subject to order.

That which follows laws and order is not that which creates the laws and order, namely Allah (swt). Ibrahim (as) understood this, yet it seems some Muslims do not.

Each letter needs the other in sequence, its words being composed from them. And each word needs other words to combine as a sentence. The letters are different, and none of them is not in need of the other. From what has been said of the distinctness of these letters, and their being absorbed in the composition, (it is clear) that someone has made this distinctness and has made each of them different from the other, and composed them with this art of composition, and made of it this eloquent speech!

3. The third proof is a Logical and textual proof. 

Is the Qur’an a thing or nothing?


If the Qur’an is nothing than let that stand on the record. No need to discuss with those who do not see the obvious. If the Qur’an was a nothing or a non-thing there would be no discussion or dispute about it. However, If the Qur’an is a thing, then please be reminded of what Allah (swt) says:

“That is Allah, your Lord; there is no deity except Him, the Creator of all things, so worship Him. And He is Disposer of all things.” (Qur’an 6:102)

So if the Qur’an is a thing, what excludes it from the generality of ‘all things’ mentioned in the verse?

4. The fourth proof. Nothing comes anew from your Lord.

Muhdath in Arabic means newly made. And since it’s newly made it cannot be eternal. i.e. It came after being nothing which means it is created.

“No mention comes to them anew (muh’dathin) from their Lord except that they listen to it while they are at play.” (Qur’an 21:2)

“And no revelation comes to them anew (muh’dathin) from the Most Merciful except that they turn away from it. (Qur’an 26:5)

Our interlocutors and opponents say it refers to the sending down of the book and not the book itself. The response to this is that the eternal does not shift from its root, and that which is merely (accidental) cannot happen to it.

Second there is no authority of anyone or anything over the eternal because the eternal is not caused to be.

5. The fifth proof is that the Qur’an itself has been established and detailed by something external to it.

“This is a Book with verse established and further explained in detail from One who is All-Wise and All Informed.” (Qur’an 11:1)

The argument from this verse is that Allah has described the Qur’an as being established and detailed. Both attributes are an effect emanating from an effect-giver. It is not possible that the effect should be eternal since forever, because of the necessity of the effect-giver having precedence over it. The preceded is originated because evidently it is after when it was not.

So either

A) This Qur’an either it is joined with being established and detailed from its beginning, or these are qualities that Allah has created in it, after it had been void of them. Both possibilities point to its creation and origination.

B) Establishing and detailing are two effects falling upon it. The effect emanates from the effect-giver, attesting to the transferring from one state to the other of that upon which the effect has fallen. That is impossible for the eternal, because of the impossibility of anyone having authority over it. That is the reason why it is impossible to say that Allah has established His Power, or detailed It, or that He has established His Knowledge or detailed it.

Because that phrase necessarily implies origination of His Power and His Knowledge, exalted is He.

 “Indeed, We brought them a Book, We detailed it knowingly.” (Qur’an 7:52) A) being ‘brought’ is transferal from one state to another state. That is impossible for the eternal as was explained above.

B) The second is the report about it that it is detailed. As in the foregoing already mentioned point.

C) The third is that its detailing emanates from His Knowledge, glorified is He. The emanating from a thing must be preceded by it.

6. The abrogation is impossible for the eternal.

“None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar.” (Qur’an 2:106)

Abrogation is omission and removal, and that is impossible for the eternal. The idea that some part of Allah’s eternal attribute of speech would be more perfect or more suited than other parts merits pensive reflection. Remember their argument from reason is the Qur’an perfect or not. This also falls back on them like a crushing tsunami wave.

7. Is that which is sent greater than that which sent it?

“The month of Ramadan, in which the Qur’an was sent down.” (Qur’an 2:185)

Sending down is moving from one place to the other, which is impossible for the eternal, because of the impossibility of anything having authority over it, or its being changed in its state.

“Very truly I tell you, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.” (John 13:16)

Is the Qur’an fulfilling a task or a mission or a purpose from Allah (swt) is or Allah (swt) fulfilling a mission, task or purpose of the Qur’an?

8. The preservation of the Qur’an.

“Surely We have sent down the message, and surely We will preserve it.” (Qur’an 15:9)

The preserved cannot but be the created, because the eternal does not need preserving by those that preserve. It is impermissible to say that Allah preserved His Life, or His Existence, or His Power, whereas it is permissible to say that Allah (swt) has preserved his Word, if the Word revealed is intended by that, and not kalam al-nafsi. The verse is a proof of its permissibility.

9. The division of the Qur’an into clear and allegorical and one is dependent upon the other.

The saying, exalted is He: “In it are verses clearly defined-they are the core of the Book-and others allegorical (mutashabihat).” (Qur’an 3:7)

The argument from this verse is that the verses of the Qur’an are divided into two types: the clearly defined and the allegorical, and that the clearly defined verses are the base for the allegorical which should be referred to the former in interpretation. That is impossible in respect of what is eternal.

This shows the division in the Qur’an. The Qur’an has division; this cannot be an abiding quality with Allah (swt) that has a division within it. If it has division as mukham and mutashabi it is divided, and we cannot ascribe that to Allah (swt).

10. The created cannot be a vessel for the uncreated.

“Rather: it is clear verses in the hearts of those who are given the knowledge.” (Qur’an 29:49)

The argument from it is that the hearts of scholars are originated the originated cannot be a vessel for the eternal. It is not appropriate to say we contain Allah (swt) in our hearts. That maybe appropriately only in a metaphorical way as mystics say. This is another objection to those Christians and other belief systems or ideas who believe that something eternal can reside in that which is originated.

11. The Qur’an itself mentions it is preserved in a created tablet.

“But it is a Glorious Qur’an, in a Preserved Tablet.” (Qur’an 85:21)

A) The Tablet is created, and the created cannot be a vessel for the non -created, as mentioned above. After all, if one were to believe that the Tablet is eternal and uncreated, then this is nothing other than Allah (swt).

B) This is the perfect opportunity for Allah (swt) the All-Mighty to say: “But it is a Glorious Qur’an, abiding with the All-Mighty, the All Praised.” That is not what was said. It is abiding in a preserved tablet, a created thing.

This is like Christian theology here:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)

12. The evidence of that which is mastered is originated.

“We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, confirming the Book before it, and mastering it.” (Qur’an 5:48)

The argument (from this verse) is that He has affirmed its being preceded by other (than it). The preceded cannot but be originated. And He has said that it is mastering its predecessor. The mastering is evidence that the mastered is originated. If the one before it is originated, then the quality of being originated its quite appropriate for it also.

The mastering is evidence that the mastered is originated. Alas the Torah is revealed in Hebrew, and the Injeel in Aramaic and thus the opponents cannot say that this eternal attribute is in Arabic, for it is also in Hebrew, and Syriac and Greek and all other languages, which is an attribute of his knowledge of the diverse languages of humanity and that revelation is produced in the language of the recipients.

13. Is Allah (swt) divided?

“It is a Qur’an which We have divided in order that you might recite it to men at intervals: We have revealed it by stages.” (Qur’an 17:106)

That which is divided is made and the made cannot be but originated.

So, are the believers in Allah (swt) saying He is One or divided?

14. No mention or admonishment of human beings in an eternal uncreated attribute that has mention and admonishment of human beings?

“There was certainly a time when there was no mention of the human being.” (Qur’an 76:1) 

If the Qur’an is eternal than this verse would make little sense. Allah (swt) would be speaking for all eternity and human beings would be mentioned/remembered and given admonishment all throughout the Qur’an.

15. Allah (swt) acting upon a revelation prior to the Qur’an.

“Before this We wrote in the Zabur, after the reminder: My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth.” (Qur’an 21:105)

The fact that Allah (swt) wrote in the Zabur (before the Qur’an) says that he did not something to a revelation that was prior to the Qur’an.

16. Allah (swt) is ascribed as writing his supposed eternal attribute of speech in the Torah

Narrated Abu Huraira:

“The Prophet (saw) said, “Adam and Moses argued with each other. Moses said to Adam. ‘O Adam! You are our father who disappointed us and turned us out of Paradise.’ Then Adam said to him, ‘O Moses! Allah favored you with His talk (talked to you directly) and He wrote (the Torah) for you with His Own Hand. Do you blame me for action which Allah had written in my fate forty years before my creation?’ So Adam confuted Moses, Adam confuted Moses,” the Prophet (saw) added, repeating the Statement three times.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6614)

17. Allah (swt) the effects of Allah (swt) upon revelation given to Musa

And We wrote for him on the tablets [something] of all things – instruction and explanation for all things, [saying], “Take them with determination and order your people to take the best of it. I will show you the home of the defiantly disobedient.” (Qur’an 7:145)

This clearly shows that this is creation from Allah (swt)

18. Did Musa (as) throw down a creation of Allah (swt) or did he throw down something uncreated from Allah (swt)?

“And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by [the hair of] his head, pulling him toward him.” (Qur’an 7:150)

Wonder what the Hanbali would have thought of Musa (as) and this action?

19. The Qur’an taking on forms and shapes and making intercession for us?

The eternal attribute of speech making intercession with the dhat (essence) of Allah?

“Abu Umama said he heard Allah’s Messenger (saw) say:

“Recite the Qur’an, for on the Day of Resurrection it will come as an intercessor for those who recite It. Recite the two bright ones, al-Baqara and Surah Al ‘Imran, for on the Day of Resurrection they will come as two clouds or two shades, or two flocks of birds in ranks, pleading for those who recite them. Recite Surah al-Baqara, for to take recourse to it is a blessing and to give it up is a cause of grief, and the magicians cannot confront it.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:804a)

Narrated Abu Hurairah narrated that the Prophet (saw) said:

“The one who memorized the Qur’an shall come on the Day of Judgement and (the reward for reciting the Qur’an) says: ‘O Lord! Decorate him.” So he is donned with a crown of nobility. Then it says: “O Lord! Give him more!’ So he is donned with a suit of nobility. Then it says: “O Lord! Be pleased with him.’ So He is pleased with him and says: “Recite and rise up, and be increased in reward with every Ayah.'”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:2915)

This text is not devastating for those Sunni Muslims who follow the Māturīdī & Ash`ari schools of aqidah (creed) This is because they apply taw’il (interpretation) as you can see in the second hadith quoted above: (the reward for reciting the Qur’an) The are smart enough to realize the dangers to their creed in taking the position that an uncreated attribute of Allah (swt) comes in forms and shapes.

However, these text are absolutely devastating to those Sunni Muslims who follow the Salafi/Athari/ strand of aqidah (creed). Because they take the text as it is without taw’il (figurative interpretation).

So they have to do one of two very unpleasant things by their standards and one is a bitter pill to swallow and the other is simply game over on this whole debate.

a) follow the Ash’ari & Maturidi in applying taw’il (interpretation) to the text which they have apparently done at sunnah.com

b) admit that the eternal attribute of Allah (swt) takes on forms and shapes and thus check mate.

20. Can Allah (swt) destroy Jesus (as) completely or partially?

“They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allāh is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allāh at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allāh belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allāh is over all things competent.” (Qur’an 5:17)

Naturally Allah (swt) can destroy Jesus (as) completely. This includes him as flesh and blood and as (bikalimatin). If a word from Allah (swt) can be destroyed it is not eternal.

21. Is Jesus the created word of Allah or the uncreated word of Allah?

“When the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word (bikalimatin)from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary – distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah]. (Qur’an 3:45)

Jesus (as) is a word from Him.

“And [the example of] Mary, the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We blew into [her garment] through Our angel, and she believed in the words (bikalimati) of her Lord and His scriptures and was of the devoutly obedient.” (Qur’an 66:12)

Mary (as) is believing in the Lord and his words. Meaning they are not identical.

“O People of the Scripture do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and a word (kalimatuhu) from Him which He directed to Mary and a soul from Him. So, believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist – it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.” (Qur’an 4:171)

Jesus (as) is a word from Him.

“And if anyone of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the (kalam al-lahi) Words of Allah.” (Quran 9:6)

“Those who remained behind will say when you set out toward the war booty to take it, “Let us follow you.” They wish to change the (kalama l-lahi) Words of Allah.” (Quran 48:15)

All these words come from the same Arabic trilateral root.

ك ل م (kaf) (lam) (mim) Jesus is the created word of Allah (swt) just as the Qur’an is the created word of Allah (swt).  If someone was to believe that Jesus (as) is the uncreated word of Allah (swt) than that would be Christianity.  If someone was to believe that Jesus (as) is the created word of Allah (swt) that would be Islam and the path of safety.

One of our teachers has known of people who have left Islam for Christianity.  You also encounter them online and some of them have said a study of the Qur’an helped them make that decision.

I have never heard of a Muslim that believes that Allah (swt) alone is the Creator and everything else (including the Qur’an as being created) become a Christian. 

I do not doubt, respected reader, that after your acquaintance with the arguments and debates presented in this discussion on the issue of the Creation of the Qur’an, you will have realized that the correctness and safety lie in the belief that it is, like all other existing things, other than Allah. It came into existence after it had not been. Whatever is like that, it is without doubt created. You will have realized also that this belief in its being eternal opens the door for those who believe in the possibility of multiplicity of the eternal to the extent that it leads to belief in the world’s being eternal.

Our reliance is upon Allah (swt).

“So, in Allah let the believers put their trust.” (Qur’an 9:51)

5 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Are Sunni sources correct that we don’t have the entire Qur’an with us?

And recite that which hath been revealed unto you of the Scripture of thy Lord. There is none who can change His words, and you will find no refuge beside Him. (Qur’an 18:27)

“We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it.” (Qur’an 15:9)

It is for us to assemble it and to promulgate it. And when we have promulgated it, follow thou its recital (as promulgated). Nay more, it is for us to explain it.” (Qur’an 75:17-19)

“It is not you who slew them; it was Allah: when you threw , it was not your act, but Allah’s: in order that He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself: for Allah is He Who hears and knows (all things). (Qur’an 8:17)

﷽ 

Perhaps one of the most fundamental things that sets the Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqama (The People of Truth and Steadfastness) is the issue of the integrity of the sacred sources. None more important than the foundation of our faith, the Qur’an.

One can say they love the Blessed Messenger (saw) with every fiber of their beings. One can say they are defenders and vanguard of the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw). However, all of that is an absolute façade if one cannot defend the integrity of the foundation of our faith; namely the Qur’an.

In fact one Sunni apologist whom is known for mostly engaging with Shi’i made a video exclaiming that the fact that chapters of the Qur’an were forgotten and the fact that people forgot it was a proof for it’s veracity and integrity! Can you Imagine!

This article is written to refute the very dangerous assertion by those sources of the Sunni denomination whom proclaim that the Qur’an that Muslims have today does not have the entirety of the Qur’an with in it!

Those particular sources of the Sunni denomination lead us to the following conclusions:

a) There are large portions of the Qur’an that are simply missing (because they were forgotten)!

b) There is some Qur’an that is not in the Qur’an that Muslims have today.

c) The Qur’an abrogates (over rides/cancels) other parts of the Qur’an.

d) That c leads to the concept of redundant revelation.

The position of such people that believe these concepts and sources are an accurate portrayal of our faith is that we do not have the whole of the Qur’an today but we simply have the Qur’an that Allah (swt) intended us to have. Read that again because such a position is extremely nuanced and slippery.

Before I begin I would like to say that I would consider myself a fairly open minded Muslim. I would also consider myself able to accept a wide range of opinions and views with in the Islamic tradition.

However, when it comes to anyone trying to undermine the revelation of the Qur’an and thus undermine Islam in the process I am not open to such a position. It is without doubt a major redline.

In fact when some of the early scholars were writing text on issues of creed I do not see how they left out this most important issue; namely that the total Qur’an has come down to us without being tampered with, intact, guarded, preserved.

I do not compromise on the position that the Qur’an is 100% complete. Now those scholars of the Sunni denomination may allege that I misrepresent their position.

They will claim that they too believe that the Qur’an is 100% complete and at the same time they will affirm all of the oral traditions below. This tongue and cheek approach is anything but sincere.  I believe in what Allah has said in the Qur’an.

1) Allah will guard the Qur’an.

2) None can change Allah’s words

3) Allah will collect, propagate and distribute the Qur’an.

4) Nothing Allah (swt) revealed is redundant.

The Qur’an itself claims it is easy to remember and itself is called the dhikr, that which is remembered, recalled.

“And We have certainly made the Quran easy to remember. So is there anyone who will be mindful?” (Qur’an 54:17)

“This (is) a Reminder. And indeed, for the righteous surely, is a good place of return.” (Qur’an 38: 49) 

So imagine that Allah (swt) has said the Qur’an is easy to remember and even calls the Qur’an something that is recalled. Yet, these people want to claim that even the Blessed Messenger (saw) forgot his revelation.

They will often cite the following as evidence:

“We will have you recite ˹the Quran, O  Prophet,˺ so you will not forget ˹any of it˺, unless Allah wills otherwise. He surely knows what is open and what is hidden.” (Qur’an 87: 6-7)

Some of the detractors focus on the part “unless Allah wills”.

First, it is important to understand that Allah’s will is not like a human will. If a human being wills something today that person may change their mind tomorrow, and when tomorrow comes they may again adopt a completely different idea.

Because exception by the Will of Allah comes in the Word of Allah to emphasize that what is reported happens by His Will (not otherwise). If he wills the opposite of that, it will be so. When Allah (swt) says that something happens if He wills it, it is intended to show His power and majesty because He has control over all things.

That is like in His saying, Exalted is He:

“We would have invented against Allah a lie if we returned to your religion after Allah had saved us from it. And it is not for us to return to it except what Allah wills. Our Lord has encompassed all things in knowledge. Upon Allah, we have relied. Our Lord, decide between us and our people in truth, and You are the best of those who give a decision.” (Qur’an 7:89)

We can see the phrase: ‘Except what Allah wills‘ above.

Does anyone think for a moment that the will of Allah (swt) that people leave Islam for their previous religion? Does anyone think, ‘Well you know there may be exceptions were Allah wants people to leave Islam and practice Shirk again!‘. It is an absolutely ridiculous idea.

Another example:

Certainly, has Allah showed to His Messenger the vision in truth. You will certainly enter al-Masjid al-Haram, if Allah wills, in safety, with your heads shaved and hair shortened, not fearing anyone. He knew what you did not know and has arranged before that a conquest near at hand.” (Qur’an 48:27)   

This verse cannot be construed that Allah (swt) will ‘change his mind‘ as Allah (swt) has already given his decision on this matter: “You will CERTAINLY enter.” 

Another example:

He will say, “The Fire is your residence, wherein you will abide eternally, except for what Allah wills. Indeed, your Lord is Wise and Knowing.” (Qur’an 6:128)

People use this to try and argue that people will not remain in the hellfire forever.

This is also clear from the following text:

“They would desire to go forth from the fire, and they shall not go forth from it, and they shall have a lasting punishment.” (Qur’an 5:37)

“Surely as for those who reject Our communications and turn away from them haughtily, the doors of heaven shall not be opened for them, nor shall they enter the garden until the camel pass through the eye of the needle; and thus do We reward the guilty.” (Qur’an 7:40)

So as we have seen ‘Except what Allah wills‘ can be seen as a rhetorical device.

They will also bring the following as evidence:

“We do not abrogate an ayat or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?” (Qur’an 2:106)

They are so certain that the word ‘ayat’ is used for the Qur’an itself rather than previous revelations or even miracles for that matter.

“There is no changing in the words of Allah.” (Qur’an 10:64)

So what about those who say what about the previous revelations? I have an article on that and Allah (swt) clearly told us in the Qur’an whom was responsible for safeguarding the previous revelations:

“Verily, It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (the Qur’an) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption) .” (Qur’an 15:9)

“…and the rabbis and the priest (judged according to their Scriptures), FOR TO THEM WAS ENTRUSTED THE PROTECTION OF THE BOOK OF ALLAH, and they were witnesses to it.” (Qur’an 5:44)

For those interested you may read my article: Is the Bible the Unadulterated Word of God?

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/is-the-bible-the-unadulterated-word-of-god/

So let us look at the claims contained with in Sunni sources.

The claims of Sayuti have mostly not been translated into English but remain in Arabic and other language sources.

The great Sunni Imam Sayuti claims records that

“It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: “Let none of you say ‘I have full knowledge of the Quran’. How could he know what full knowledge of it is when much of the Quran has passed by him! Rather, let him say ‘I have acquired of the Qur’an that which is present.’”.

Source: (As-Suyuti, AlItqan fii Ulum al-Quran page 524)

‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Qur’an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Qur’an (and recited by the Muslims).

Source: https://sunnah.com/muslim:1452a

Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash’ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur’an and he said:

You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:” If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust.And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:” Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practice” (lxi 2.) and” that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection” (xvii. 13).

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1050)

Abu Waqid al-Laithii said, “When the messenger of Allah (saw) received the revelation we would come to him and he would teach us what had been revealed. (I came) to him and he said ‘It was suddenly communicated to me one day: Verily Allah says, We sent down wealth to maintain prayer and deeds of charity, and if the son of Adam had a valley he would leave it in search for another like it and, if he got another like it, he would press on for a third, and nothing would satisfy the stomach of the son of Adam but dust, yet Allah is relenting towards those who relent.”

Source: (As-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur’an , p.525).

We used to recite a surah similar to one of the Musabbihaat, and I no longer remember it but this much I have indeed preserved: ‘O you who truly believe why do you preach that which you do not practice?’ (and) ‘that is inscribed on your necks as a witness and you will be examined about it on the Day of Resurrection.’ 

Source: (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur’an, p.526).

“Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam from al-Qaqa ibn Hakim that Abu Yunus, the mawla of A’isha, umm al-muminin said, “A’isha ordered me to write out a Qur’an for her. She said, ‘When you reach this ayat, let me know, “Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and stand obedient to Allah.”‘ When I reached it I told her, and she dictated to me, ‘Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.’ A’isha said, ‘I heard it from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.'”

Source: https://sunnah.com/malik/8/27

“Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that Amr ibn Rafi said, “I was writing a Qur’an for Hafsa, umm al-muminin, and she said, ‘When you reach this ayat, let me know, “Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and stand obedient to Allah.”‘ When I reached it I told her and she dictated to me, ‘Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.”

Source: (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 8, Number 8.8.27)

Prima Qur’an comments:

Let me ask you my Muslim brothers and sisters when you open up the Qur’an do you find “Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.” ?

https://www.islamawakened.com/index.php/qur-an  (just in case you do not have a Qur’an with you) Now for me the above are less serious as they can easily be attributed to a scribal error. People would often sit for long sessions taking information and transcribing. So I do not find the above to be truly problematic. However, it is a glaring reality that lone narrator reports do not necessarily convey absolute certainty.

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:

`Umar said, “I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, “We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book,” and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession.” Sufyan added, “I have memorized this narration in this way.” `Umar added, “Surely Allah’s Messenger (saw) carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6829)

Zirr ibn Hubaish reported: “Ubayy ibn Ka’b said to me, ‘What is the extent of Suratul-Ahzab? ‘I said, ‘Seventy or seventy-three verses’. He said, ‘Yet it used to be equal to Suratul-Baqarah and in it we recited the verse of stoning’. I said, ‘And what is the verse of stoning’? He replied, ‘The fornicators among the married men ( ash-shaikh)) and married women (ash-shaikhah), stone them as an exemplary punishment from Allah, and Allah is Mighty and Wise.”‘

Source: (As-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur’an , p.524).

The other issue is that scholars of the Sunni have adopted a theological position which states that the Qur’an is eternal.

You can see another Sunni Muslim apologist outline that position below.

http://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2012/08/17/clarity-on-the-different-sayings-about-the-quraan/

Why I bring this up is that the Sunni Muslim scholars hold to the doctrine of abrogation.

So now we have a Qur’an that is both eternal that contains verses that abrogate each other?

Welcome to the very weird theological position of eternal abrogation!  This is as weird a theological position as the Christian claim of ‘eternally begotten’.   How are you going to be eternal and begotten at the same time?  How is the Qur’an going to be eternal and abrogated simultaneously?  Odd, very odd indeed.

How could you have an eternal perfect revelation that is at the same time replaced by other eternal revelation that is either similar to or superior than it?

But this is where it gets very messy.

I could very well see them making the counter claim.  “No brother you see all the verses are eternal, what you don’t understand is that they were revealed in different sequences.”

Yet, the Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an:

“Do they not consider the Qur’an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.” (Qur’an 4:82)

The idea that the Qur’an would contain eternal redundant revelation is both blasphemous and cause for pensive reflection

Prima Qur’an Conclusion:

The ideas that the sources of the Sunni denomination are propagating that the Qur’an does not contain the entire Qur’an I feel greatly undermines the preservation, and veracity of the text of the Qur’an.

Perhaps more than any other view on aqidah it is this belief that separates the Ibadi perspective from that of the Sunni perspective (with dissenting voices) as mentioned.

It puts the ultimate weapon in the hands of the detractors of faith to tear down the entirety of Islam.

The sources of the Sunni denomination have no moral ground, and in fact no justification to lift a pen in the defense of Islam, do a radio or television program, or write an article or book  to defend this great faith because it is all done in vain.

Why on Earth Princess Leia would hand over plans to the death star to the empire, and than claim she has the best interest of the rebellion at heart is beyond me!

As a follow up I need to write an entry for the following. (Allah-willing)

a) showing the problematic nature of believing the Qur’an to be eternal.

https://primaquran.com/2023/04/09/the-quran-is-created-4/

b) refuting the idea that the Qur’an abrogates itself.

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/why-abrogation-in-the-quran-is-a-false-doctrine/

I leave you with the supreme words of the Creator.

Those who distort Our revelations are not hidden from Us. Is one who is thrown into Hell better, or one who comes secure on the Day of Resurrection? Do whatever you wish; He is Seer of what you do. Those who have rejected the Reminder when it came to them; and it is an Honorable Book. No falsehood could enter it, presently or afterwards; a revelation from One Most Wise, Praiseworthy. (Qur’an 41:40-42)

Moses said to them: “Woe to you, do not invent lies about God, else the retribution will take you, and miserable is the one who invents.” (Qur’an 20:61)

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

5 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Ibadi view: Gog and Magog (Juj Wa Majuj) & The Coming of Jesus

They pleaded, “O Zul-Qarnain! Surely Gog and Magog are spreading corruption throughout the land. Should we pay you tribute, provided that you build a wall between us and them?” (Qur’an 18:94)

﷽ 

He said, “This is a mercy from my Lord. And when the Promise of my Lord comes, He will crumble it to dust. And the Promise of my Lord is true.” (Qur’an 18:98)

“And We shall leave them, on that Day, to surge against one another like waves. And the trumpet shall be blown, and We shall gather them together.” (Qur’an 18:99)

First we will share a clip in which the Mufti of Oman, the Islamic Scholar, the Sword on the Neck of the Munafiq, His Imminence, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) touches upon two topics:

The emergence of Gog and Magog and the so-called second coming of Jesus (as). For those of you conversant in Arabic, you may follow along. Otherwise, a translation in English is provided below: insh’Allah.

First question about Juj & Majuj

Grand Mufti was asked if there are some signs in the Qur’an about Juj & Majuj. Can you share with us your view on this issue? Have they already come or are they yet to come later?

Grand Mufti replies: “This depends upon the research of the scholars. As there are many scholars who have agreed that they have already come forth. And this is not far away from reality, because it is possible that between their coming and the day of judgement there is a lot of time in between these events. Time is different from how we measure time. It is like the time on the day of judgement would be like 50,00 years of our time.”

Dr. Saif AlHadi asked what is meant in the Qur’an:

“Until he reached ˹a pass˺ between two mountains. He found in front of them a people who could hardly understand ˹his˺ language.” (Qur’an 18:93) and than the following verse:

“They pleaded, “O Zul-Qarnain! Surely Gog and Magog are spreading corruption throughout the land. Should we pay you tribute, provided that you build a wall between us and them?” (Qur’an 18:94)

So Dr Saif AlHadi is asking how we join these verses? Because if you take the apparent text of the Qur’an without approach to interpretative measures, it may not make sense. At first, they find a people who scarcely understands any word, and then suddenly, in the next verse, are those people able to communicate their issue with him?

So, to this, the Grand Mufti replies: There are two possibilities. 1) “That the majority of them do not understand anything but this would not mean all of them do not understand. So it is possible they have learned among those who understand but not the masses of them. “

2) “The other possibility is the use of another language common between the two.”

Now the question comes to the: The Coming of Jesus.

Grand Mufti replies: “There is a difference of opinion among scholars. This revolves around the (Qur’an 3:55) “I will give you death and I will raise you up to me.” and how one understands it. As well as: Rather, “Allah raised him up to Himself. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise” (Qur’an 4:158) as well as the various narrations on the matter. Yet these hadith for us are not tawatur. We also have to take into account that the Prophet is the last prophet and no prophet is coming after him. The Messenger of Allah and seal of the prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, The Knowing. (Qur’an 33:40) So as we understand this Jesus (as) will not come. The narrations are not mutawatir and thus we cannot take on this matter.

Prima-Qur’an comments:

Thus, dear readers, when one reads the Qur’an, you can see that Juj (Gog) & Majuj (Magog) were real people, real nations or tribes that would accost and harass some people. Zul-Qarnain was asked to erect a barrier to keep those people out. They were not supranatural peoples.

wanufikha fi l-suri (AND) will be blown the Trumpet. As Shaykh explained, he is of the mind that this event (The coming of Gog and Magog) has already happened. Now in English it is easy to get caught up in the flow of the language. Yet, the WA (And) is not something that indicates immediately after. We saw this in our article here:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/05/shaykh-salek-bin-siddina-al-maliki-return-of-jesus-the-use-of-hysteron-proteron/

In the above article, the respected Shaykh understood the WA(And) in Qur’an 3:55 as a vast period of time. Allowing him to believe that a lapse of time of more than 2000 years has passed.

The Shaykh also mentioned that it is possible we are in those end times now. However, we should understand that how Allah (swt) views and measures time is quite different from our vantage point.

“And they ask you to hasten on the punishment, and Allah will by no means fail in His promise, and surely a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you count.” (Qur’an 22:47)

Next, another verse not brought up in the discussion above, but the other place we am aware of in the Qur’an speaking of Gog and Magog is the following:

“Until ˹after˺ Gog and Magog have broken loose ˹from the barrier˺, swarming down from every hill, ushering in the True Promise. Then—behold!—the disbelievers will stare ˹in horror, crying,˺ “Oh, woe to us! We have truly been heedless of this. In fact, we have been wrongdoers.” (Qur’an 21:96-97)

The above verse simply reinforces the point made here:

“And We shall leave them, on that Day, to surge against one another like waves. And the trumpet shall be blown, and We shall gather them together.” (Qur’an 18:99)

Which, again, is not on the day of judgement but at a time before it.

Conclusion: In the Ibadi school. Juj(Gog) and Majuj (Magog) have already come. Jesus (as) has died, and he will not come back.

In the end, we defer our matter to the masters of the Arabic language. May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).

If you would like, perhaps you would be interested in reading the following:

https://primaquran.com/2023/07/26/assistant-grand-mufti-of-oman-says-no-coming-of-mahdi-and-jesus-is-dead-and-will-not-return/

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

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

https://primaquran.com/2023/03/11/ibadi-view-on-dajjal-end-times-eschatology/

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

10 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Madhkali Salafiyyah The scourge of the Ummah?

“And DO NOT OBEY the order of the transgressors, Who cause corruption in the land and do not amend their ways” (Qur’an 26:151-152

﷽ 

“They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time’ I will kill them as the people of ‘Ad were killed (i.e. I will kill all of them)”

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3344

Two points I want to dive into from the get go.

As mentioned before in a previous article. Having a stable government and a country or nation that you live in where your basic needs and necessities are being met is a huge provision and blessing of Allah (swt). Political stability is a huge blessing and provision from Allah (swt).

Yet, political stability cannot come as an enjoyment to one group of people and one class of people and a hardship for others.

Allah (swt) has commanded that we stand firm for justice and that this justice cannot be selective justice or a justice that is subservient to our whims and desires.

“O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both.” (Qur’an 4:135)

From Palestine to Yemen from Libya to Sudan. We have Muslim brothers who do not speak out against the leaders not because they are afraid of Abdel Fattah El-Sisi or Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud. They do not speak up because they fear that if they do they are going against Allah (swt) and his Blessed Messenger (saw). This has been implanted in their minds so that powerful rulers can stay in place and justify what ever decision or policy they wish and the masses have nothing to do but to keep quite on the matter.

Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman reported: I asked, “O Messenger of Allah, we were living in an evil time and Allah brought us good in which we live now. Will there be evil after this good?” The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Yes.” I said, “And any good after this evil?” The Prophet said, “Yes.” I said, “And any evil after this good?” The Prophet said, “Yes.” I said, “How will it be?” The Prophet said, “Leaders after me will come who do not follow my guidance and my Sunnah. Some of their men will have the hearts of devils in a human body.” I said, “O Messenger of Allah, what should I do if I live to see that time?” The Prophet said, “You should listen and obey the ruler, even if he strikes your back and takes your wealth, even still listen and obey.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/muslim:1847b

This is the hadith that is used by the Madhkali Salafiyyah as a proof text to justify their position.

We say that this hadith if taken the way the Madhkali want you to take it will cause confusion and clashes with other equally authentic reports that report contrary statements from the Blessed Messenger (saw).

The first point is to acknowledge that the in this hadith the Blessed Messenger (saw) is clearly stating they these leaders are not upon the guidance that the Prophet (saw) is upon. It is also clearly stating that they do not follow his way.

The second point where it is attributed to the Prophet (saw) the following:

“The Prophet said, “You should listen and obey the ruler, even if he strikes your back and takes your wealth, even still listen and obey.”

This means with right. That taw’il or interpretation of this is if the leader strikes your back or takes your wealth (with right).

Examples could be: The punishment for flogging. For fornication for drinking etc. There are examples of sahabah being whipped for drinking etc.

Taking your money could mean zakaat that is not paid. Abu Bakr (ra) fought what was known as the rida wars for those who did not pay the zakaat.

However….

It cannot mean that obey the leader even if he takes your wealth or strikes your back (without right).

So now let us look at what is the truth on this matter and openings are only with Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) guide is to the truth of these matters.

Three inconvenient points that Madhkali Salafi leave out when talking about obeying the ruler.

1. That ruler is singular.

2. That when the Blessed messenger (saw) says rulers (plural) it is always in succession and never concurrent. Meaning Muslims are not divided in their leadership.

3. The audience that is being addressed is a united Muslim body under united leadership.

Notice a very relatable argument that Prophet Joseph (as) uses:

Prophet Joseph (as) uses a relatable argument to his fellow prisoners. Something to think about.

“Oh my fellow companions of this prison, are masters with separate agendas better or Allah, The One, The Subjugator?” (Qur’an 12:39)

O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in the result. (Qur’an 4:59).

Understanding the proof.

In this clear verse, we find that in matters of disagreement between those in authority and those under authority, we need to refer back to Allah and the Messenger. Had it been that, those in authority were infallible or divinely appointed, or to be given absolute obedience then, Allah (swt) wouldn’t have given any scope to disagree with them.

The fact that there is disagreement proves that “those in authority aka the Uli-l-amri”, are neither an absolute nor an infallible authority, nor are Muslims to submit to their seat of power in all things.

These two verses together (Qur’an 4:59 & Qur’an 49:9) absolutely debunk the idea that Muslims cannot rebel against a leader. It is not reasonable to think that if two groups of believers were fighting each other (with intent to kill) that the leader would not be among one of the two warring factions himself! Thus, he would be opposed.

The leader would either be in group A or in group B.

Notice that it uses the word ‘believers’ when discussing those who would be fighting (with intent to kill). Also says until it complies with Allah’s command (amri-l-lahi). Notice it does not say until it complies with the uli-l-amri (those that are given authority over you).

Let it be known that the Qur’an is qati (it is decisive in proof and evidences).

Looking at hadith from the sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

“Verily, tyrannical rulers will come after me and whoever affirms their lies and supports their oppression has nothing to do with me and I have nothing to do with him, and he will not drink with me at the fountain in Paradise. Whoever does not affirm their lies and does not support their oppression is part of me and I am part of him, and he will drink with me at the fountain in Paradise.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/nasai:4207

“If an Ethiopian slave with a cut off nose and ear were appointed as your ruler, you would have to listen to and obey his orders as long as he rules in accordance with the Book of Allah.

Source: https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:2861

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said, “A Muslim has to listen to and obey (the order of his ruler) whether he likes it or not, as long as his orders involve not one in disobedience (to Allah), but if an act of disobedience (to Allah) is imposed one should not listen to it or obey it.

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7144

Explanation of the apparent contradiction.

Look carefully at the two hadith. The Blessed Messenger (saw) is acknowledging that we as Muslims may outright have hypocrites as leaders. “Will have the hearts of devils in a human body.” This is the batin (the hidden). In Islam we do not judge by the batin (hidden). The man could be rotten to the core. This could be true of any of us for that matter. Allah (swt) sees and knows all.

If we were to put the two hadith together we have the following hadith of the Blessed Messenger (saw):

“A Muslim has to listen to and obey the ruler, even if he strikes your back and takes your wealth, even still listen and obey. As long as his orders do not involve one in disobedience, but if an act of disobedience is imposed one should not listen to it or obey it.

Now it makes total sense. Now the apparent contradiction is resolved.

Now we know what was meant by the righteous Amir of the Muslims. Umar Ibn Al Khattab (ra).

Abdullah ibn ‘Utbah reported: Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) said,

“Verily, people were judged by revelation in the time of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, and the revelation has ceased. We only judge now what is manifested outwardly of your deeds. Whoever shows us good, we will trust him and bring him close. It is not for us to judge anything of his inner secrets. Allah will hold him accountable for his inner secrets. Whoever shows us evil, we will never trust him or believe him even if it is said his intentions are good.

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2641

The highest Jihad in Islam.

It was narrated from Tariq bin Shihab that:

‘”A man asked the Prophet, when he had put his leg in the stirrup: “Which kind of Jihad is best?'” He said: ” A word of truth spoken before an unjust rulers.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/nasai:4209

Now some people may also want to interpret this hadith to mean something pacifist. It is the right of every Muslim to receive good counsel, even the corrupt rulers. Yet, why is this the highest form of Jihad? Because more often than not it leads to martyrdom.

“[Pharaoh] said, “You believed him before I gave you permission. Indeed, he is your leader who has taught you magic. So I will surely cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will impale you on/in the trunks of palm trees, and you will surely know which of us is more severe in [giving] punishment and more enduring.” (Qur’an 20:71)

Did these magicians incite rebellion? Well, that depends. They are not recorded to have incited rebellion against Pharaoh. They did not take up weapons against him. However, some times simply by speaking the truth and uncovering that which is false can undermine a ruler, a false idea or a false ideology. Hence censorship and telling the people to keep quite.

Thus,

“Which kind of Jihad is best?” The Blessed Messenger (saw) replies:

“A word of truth spoken before an unjust rulers.”

Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sudays is basically saying that the killings are “fitna”. That we should not get involved and that we refer the matter back to the ruler and the scholars.

Meanwhile the military police stand close watch. Some how does not seem very convincing.

We should not be so quick as to condemn Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sudays or any of the other scholars. However, when geopolitical allegiances and alliances are involved we should be careful of who is saying what and what is the affiliation of their government.

On the authority of Abu Sa`eed al-Khudree (ra) who said:

I heard the Messenger of Allah (swt) say, “Whosoever of you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then [let him change it] with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart — and that is the weakest of faith.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/nawawi40:34

So be very careful dear brothers and sisters on racing to condemn each other. The Blessed Messenger (saw) has left some scope based upon the abilities of each individual.

  1. He (saw) started by saying we should change the munkar (evil) with our hands.
  2. However, if you cannot do so with your hands than through your speech.
  3. If you are unable to do so via speech than at the very least hate it in your heart.

Not everyone is ready or prepared for martyrdom and even those of us who are may not be prepared to have our families threatened, or killed or horrific ways.

So condemning these nation state “rulers” you will end up with labels, “Khawarij” you may end u imprisoned and/or face horrific torture.

Make du’a for every single scholar of Islam from all the various Islamic schools of thought that Allah (swt) protect them guide them and give them strength.

“One does not deviate from obedience to the ruler, even if he commits adultery and drinks alcohol on live television!” ?

The improper understanding of the Qur’an and the Sunnah is what leads people like Dr. Abdulaziz Al-Rays to say the following:

This actually depends.

“If an Ethiopian slave with a cut off nose and ear were appointed as your ruler, you would have to listen to and obey his orders as long as he rules in accordance with the Book of Allah.

Source: https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:2861

So in the case of adultery on live television he would have enough witnesses to bring the punishment of adultery upon him and thus would be the leader no more as he would be executed.

In the case of drinking alcohol he would be whipped.

If he submits to the book of Allah (swt) one has scope to argue that he is to be obeyed. If he does not submit to the book of Allah (swt) than he is a hypocrite and what has Allah (swt) told us about the hypocrites?

“O Prophet! Fear Allah and do not obey the unbelievers and the hypocrites: certainly Allah is aware and wise.” (Qur’an 33:1)

There are a few scenarios when it comes to the rulers.

Example 1 Outwardly pious but inwardly evil. This was already discussed.


Example 2 Outwardly impious and ask us to go against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Than he is definitely not to be obeyed.

Example 3 Outwardly impious does not ask us to go against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. However, he himself goes against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. This will depend upon the nature of his rebellion against the the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

Be very careful with point number 3. That is where things can get slippery. For example look at the following hadith:

Narrated ‘Ali:

“The Prophet sent an army unit (for some campaign) and appointed a man from the Ansar as its commander and ordered them (the soldiers) to obey him. (During the campaign) he became angry with them and said, “Didn’t the Prophet order you to obey me?” They said, “Yes.” He said, “I order you to collect wood and make a fire and then throw yourselves into it.” So they collected wood and made a fire, but when they were about to throw themselves into it, they started looking at each other, and some of them said, “We followed the Prophet to escape from the fire. How should we enter it now?” So while they were in that state, the fire extinguished and their commander’s anger abated. The event was mentioned to the Prophet and he said, “If they had entered it (the fire) they would never have come out of it, for obedience is required only in what is good.

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7145

Similar to this:

Ali said, “The Messenger of Allah(saw) sent an army and appointed a man as a commander for them and he commanded them to listen to him and obey. He kindled fire and ordered them to jump into it. A group refused to enter into it and said “We escaped from the fire; a group intended to enter into it. When the Prophet (saw) was informed about it, he said “Had they entered into it, they would have remained into it. There is no obedience in matters involving disobedience to Allah. Obedience is in matters which are good and universally recognized.

Source: https://sunnah.com/abudawud:2625

It was narrated from ‘Ali that the Prophet (saw) said:

`There is no obedience to any human being if it involves disobedience to Allah.`

Source: https://sunnah.com/ahmad:1065

It was narrated from Ali that the Prophet (saw) said:

`There is no obedience to any created being if it involves disobedience to Allah, may He be glorified and exalted.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/ahmad:1095

So all of those three hadith are not saying that you do not obey the leader if he slips up or makes mistakes or sins. Those hadith are saying that we, the people do not have to obey the leaders if they order us to do something against the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

This is a very important point to keep in mind.

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

“It is obligatory for you to listen to the ruler and obey him in adversity and prosperity, in pleasure and displeasure, and even when another person is given (rather undue) preference over you.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1836)

More contradictory hadith?

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “Whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, and whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah, and whoever obeys the ruler I appoint, obeys me, and whoever disobeys him, disobeys me.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7137

Narrated Ibn Umar (ra)

The Prophet (saw) said:

“It is obligatory for one to listen to and obey (the ruler’s orders) unless these orders involve one disobedience (to Allah); but if an act of disobedience (to Allah) is imposed, he should not listen to or obey it.”

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2955

Now when the two hadith are combined the apparent contradiction is removed. We are to obey the ruler as long as the ruler does not ask one to disobey Allah (swt) or his Messenger (saw).

The hadith on not over throwing the ruler as long as he does his prayer among you.

More contradictory hadith?

It has been narrated on the authority of ‘Auf b. Malik that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

“The best of your rulers are those whom you love and who love you, who invoke Allah’s blessings upon you and you invoke His blessings upon them. And the worst of your rulers are those whom you hate and who hate you and whom you curse and who curse you. It was asked (by those present): Shouldn’t we overthrow them with the help of the sword? He said: No, as long as they establish prayer among you. If you then find anything detestable in them. You should hate their administration, but do not withdraw yourselves from their obedience.”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/muslim:1855b)

How to reconcile the apparent contradiction?

In other words if they do not establish prayer among us and if they stop ruling according to the book of Allah than obedience is forfeit.

How do we know that our understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah is the correct one?

Because this is how the companions of the Blessed Messenger (saw) understood it.

“O people, whoever among you sees any crookedness in me in my character, my deals, my action, then let him straighten out that crookedness.” A man from the audience called out, “By Allah, were we to see any crookedness in you, we would have straightened it out with our swords.’ Umar then said, “All praise is for Allah, who has placed in this nation someone who will straighten the crookedness of Umar with his sword.’”

Source: (Akhbar Umar (pg. 231,232) and Ar-Riyadh an Nadirah)

Subhan’Allah is there a Muslim leader alive today who claims to be greater than Umar (ra)?

Secondly after Caliph Uthman was admonished again and again by the Muslims he was overthrown. By the Khawarij they will tell you. Well….about that.


So now you are in a pickle.
If Amr b. al-Hamiq al-Khuza’i is to be damned (there goes the doctrine of the companions being all adala). Amr b. al-Hamiq al-Khuza’i is a khariji who dies the death of jahiliyah (according to them)
or sacrifice this concept that there comes a point in which the believers may find it necessary to forcibly remove the Amir.

What has happened is that some of them so bewildered by these undeniable facts of history than go on to say that the sahabah did not know the books of aqidah (written with a sectarian milieu in mind long after the fact. Or even better yet, that these sahabah did familiar with the Qur’an and hadith on these matters!

All that has been written has shown this is not the case at all.

If only Muslims were upon the proper manhaj, had proper aqidah and proper knowledge of tawheed none of this would be happening!

Where have we heard this before?

“Everything will be alright once we get to Tir Asleen.”

Likewise some Muslims will say well, we just need to focus on obedience to Allah (swt) and Tawheed and the proper aqidah.

Look! The very essence of Islam is submission to the will of Allah (swt). Yet, the very fact that the companions who had proper aqidah and proper tawheed and yet had massive fitna is a prove that one can have can be hyper fixated on these things and still not save one from strife. Just like the idea of the Muslims having a Caliph did not stop the expulsion of Muslims from Andalusia.

This does not mean we do not strive to establish rule by the Qur’an and the Sunnah. It does not mean that we do not strive to worship Allah (swt) properly and be upon the proper aqidah. It simply means that human ego and the frailty of men will last until the day of judgement.

The hypocrisy of the Madhkali Salafiyah.

This whole mantra of obey the leader seems very specific to a particular group of leaders they feel approximate their idea of the correct aqidah and or manhaj. It doesn’t seem to apply to Ergodan or Mubarak, or the Muslim brotherhood, or Qatar, or Assad (who certainly deserved rebellion) and a litany of others.

One big elephant in the room. What is actually meant by ‘The Leader’ or ‘The Ruler’

Last I checked the agreed upon leaders of the Muslim Ummah (according to the Sunni and the Ibadi) were Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali. Than after Ali, the Ibadi and Sunni have different narratives. The Shi’a have a totally different narrative altogether, The Blessed Messenger (saw) and his family.

I mean I don’t remember the Muslim ummah holding shura for pretty much any of these guys. Who said they get the wealth of the land? Who said they get to buy football teams and sports cars with the money from the land? Is this from the Qur’an and the Sunnah?

Realistic expectations of Muslim rulers and governments and signs of the hypocrites.

Now I want to say I have seen allot of disdain for Arabs online over the issue of Palestine. First of all, I think love of the Arabs is a good thing because the Blessed Messenger (saw) was from among them. Secondly, you cannot blame Arabs as a whole. Blame their leaders! Lastly, many of you simply know better. Many of you know Arabs as your brothers and sisters who are generous and kind. They have shown you some of the best hospitality and certainly Saudi Arabia is to be commended for the logistics feat of hosting 3 million people for Hajj annually.

However, when it comes to the majority Muslim countries, it has to be said. If it quacks like a duck and moves like a duck it’s a duck! The geopolitical rivalries and alliances do not necessarily benefit the Ummah of Muhammed (saw).

“And Allah will surely make evident those who believe, and He will surely make evident the hypocrites.(Qur’an 29:11)

“O Prophet, strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination.” (Qur’an 66:9)

They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time’ I will kill them as the people of ‘Ad were killed (i.e. I will kill all of them)”

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3344

Let me list countries with a Muslim majority (if I have missed any or you feel there are those who should be included and are left out please do let me know).

When we look at this list we need to ask ourselves some questions: What are their capabilities (militarily speaking) (economically speaking) and/or other. What are the current challenges that they are facing?

Malaysia
Brunei
Indonesia
Bangladesh
Comoros Islands
Maldives Islands
Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan
Uzbekistan
Turkmenistan
Tajikistan
Azerbaijan- currently in conflict with Armenia/ backed by Iran
Afghanistan-Taliban trying to rebuild the country after nearly 4 decades of war with foreign powers.
Pakistan-currently in political turmoil
Iran-currently backing Armenia against Turkey/Azerbaijan/Israel
Iraq-still reeling from the U.S Invasions.
Turkey-currently a part of NATO, backing Azerbaijan against Armenia/Iran.
Albania
Bosnia Herzegovina
Syria-still reeling after a civil war.
Lebanon-dealing with 1. 5 million refugees from Syria.
Jordan
Kuwait
U.A.E
Saudi Arabia
Oman
Yemen -still reeling after civil war.
Egypt
Somalia-civil war.
Djibouti
Sudan-currently in a civil war.
Libya-currently in a civil war.
Tunisia
Chad -dealing with close to 500,000 refugees that came in from Sudan.
Niger-forming new government after kicking out French colonialist.
Mali -civil unrest.
Burkina Faso-forming new government after kicking out French colonialist.
Algeria-tensions with Morocco over Western Sahara.
Morocco-tensions with Algeria over Western Sahara.
Senegal
Mauritania
Guinea
Sierra Leone
Nigeria

Dagestan, Ingushetia/Chechnya (as part of the Russian Federation) are bogged down in conflict in Ukraine

So we need to be realistic about who can help and how they can help. This is why these protest, and boycotts are very very effective and something that I hope leads to greater things among the wider Muslim community namely economic cooperation and buying Muslim owned products. Insh’Allah. In my next article I will cover this.

I will leave the readers with this. I feel that this doctrine that Madhkali Salafiyyah is problematic and it is a manipulation of the text of the Qur’an and the Sunnah and a re-reading into the history of the early Muslims. It makes a great ideology for despots and tyrants. If anyone has an issue with it. We have our scholars who can debate your scholars on this matter. Insh’Allah it will be of benefit and we will certainly be waiting.

Think about how you as a Muslim. As a Sunni/Shi’i/Ibadi as Salafi/Sufi would feel if you woke up one day and saw the Kab’a absolutely destroyed? Mecca was in ruins? How would you feel knowing it was not from a flood or natural disaster but the enemies of the Muslims destroyed it. Now hold that feeling and read the following:

It was narrated that ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr said:

“I saw the Messenger of Allah (saw) circumambulating the Ka’bah and saying: ‘How good you are and how good your fragrance; how great you are and how great your sanctity. By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammed, the sanctity of the believer is greater before Allah than your sanctity, his blood and his wealth, and to think anything but good of him.’”

Source: (https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah:3932)

It is said that this hadith is Sahih li ghayrihi (authentic due to external evidence) according to Al-Albani

May Allah (swt) grant victory to our brothers and sisters in Palestine! May Allah (swt) grant this ummah good leaders, bridge builders, those who fear Allah (swt), and love his Messenger (saw) and love the ummah of Islam. Those who are wise and have bold vision. Those who stand firm upon the truth. Amin!

If you would like to learn more about the Madhkali I would suggest the following articles:

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The claim that Allah (swt) was riding a whale made of light before creation

“There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

﷽ 

The super bizarre claim that Allah (swt) was riding a whale made of light before the Creation. These people liken the Creator to Aquaman.

This is in Ibtaal At-Tawilaat Li Akhbaar As-Sifaat: From Al Qadi Abu Ya’la

It is said about this book and the author:

https://www.sifatusafwa.com/en/salaf-books-on-sunnah/ibtaal-at-tawilaat-li-akhbaar-as-sifaat-al-qadi-abu-ya-la-458h.html

“This is the book of Shayk of Hanabila of his time, Al-Qadi Abi Ya’la, who was very opposed to Jahmiyya and Ashar’i. This book is intended as a rebuttal of the wrong interpretation and distorings about the names and attributes of Allah. However, the author has several weak or invented hadith, making it a controversial book from the people of knowledge.”

“But, Alhamdulillah we present this heritage of one of the Imams of the Salaf in a checked version, authenticated, and annotated. This allows the reader to distinguish the authenticate & the weak in the hadiths cited. And also to have the authentic position (words of imams of the Sunnah in support) on the weak chapters contained in this book.”

This narration attempts to answer the following question:

“Where is Allah is before creating sky and earth? It is answered by stating that He (Allah Most High) was riding on a whale that was made out of light... and the hadith continues and he says about it: “Even this is a strange hadith it finds support with other hadith!”

Christians must feel some form of poetic justice or vindication. All those years where Shaykh Ahmed Deedat was turned loose upon Christendom and jeering at anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Bible and now the chickens have come home to roost.

May Allah (swt) forgive us. May Allah (swt) guide us.

You may also be interested in reading:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/ahmed-deedat-roasting-athari-aqeedah/

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Shaykh Juma commentary on Seeing the Lord as you see the moon

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

May Allah (swt) bless our teacher, Shaykh Juma Muhammed Rashid Al-Mazrui.

These are notes I have taken from our Aqidah class on the subject: On the visibility of Allah (swt).

In the class we look at the proofs that other schools give to prove the visibility of Allah (swt). We go through each ayat of the Qur’an that is used. We go through the ahadith that are used. We than go through our proofs and evidences to show that Allah (swt) will not be seen in the life to come.

The hadith in question:

Narrated Jarir:

We were sitting with the Prophet (saw) and he looked at the moon on the night of the full-moon and said, “You people will see your Lord as you see this full moon, and you will have no trouble in seeing Him, so if you can avoid missing (through sleep or business, etc.) a prayer before sunrise (Fajr) and a prayer before sunset (`Asr) you must do so.” (See Hadith No. 529, Vol. 1)

Source: https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7434

Shaykh Juma was going to show the weakness in the chain of the transmitters in the sanad as well as problems with the matn. However, in this class there was a change of pace.

Of course we reject the hadith “That we shall see our Lord in the like manner as we see the full moon.”

So Shaykh Juma mentioned that next time (which has already passed and that lesson was recent) that there are many contradictions in the matn and the hadith is not logical and it is not acceptable.

HOWEVER…

For the sake of argument let us agree with those who say it is authentic.
What is our interpretation of this hadith?

In the science and fundamentals -we have a principle -reconciliation between the text are apparently in conflict or contradictory to one another.


A verse that apparently contradicts another verse for example.

What is really intended by this verse. An example:

“Wherever you may be, death will overcome you—even if you were in fortified towers.” When something good befalls them, they say, “This is from Allah,” but when something evil befalls them, they say, “This is from you.” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Both have been destined by Allah.” So what is the matter with these people? They can hardly comprehend anything!” (Qur’an 4:78)

Then immediately verse 79:

Whatever good befalls you is from Allah and whatever evil befalls you is from yourself. We have sent you ˹O Prophet˺ as a messenger to ˹all˺ people. And Allah is sufficient as a Witness.” (Qu’ran 4:79)

“Good is from Allah and what ever misfortunes is from yourself.” or the “Good and the misfortunate are both from Allah”

So, apparently this looks like a conflict.

So what is the interpretaton here? Here we apply the principle of reconcilation.

When Allah says everything is from Allah, he determines everything from his limitless, eternal knowledge. The second verse that says only good is from Allah and the bad from ourselves, that we are the real cause of those bad things.

The best thing to use to understand the Qur’an is the Qur’an itself.

“And if not that a disaster should strike them for what their hands put forth [of sins] and they would say, “Our Lord, why did You not send us a messenger so we could have followed Your verses and been among the believers?” (Qur’an 28:47)

“If We give people a taste of mercy, they become prideful ˹because˺ of it. But if they are afflicted with an evil for what their hands have done, they instantly fall into despair.” (Qur’an 30:36)

Something inflicts them because of their own actions and their own sins

Now when we read the same chapter:

“Corruption has spread on land and sea as a result of what people’s hands have done, so that Allah may cause them to taste ˹the consequences of˺ some of their deeds and perhaps they might return ˹to the Right Path˺.” (Qur’an 30:41)

So we have seen how this principle works.

Now to the subject: Is Allah visible? Will Allah be seen in the hereafter or not?

We reject it based upon the matn, but we say for the sake of the argument for those who say it is authentic, what is interpretation. Rueya is the word used.


You see or you will see, rueya , it also means to know or knowledge.

In other words you will have certainty of Allah (swt). That we will know Allah (swt).

Where do we get this interpretation of seeing to mean knowing?

“Have you not seen ˹O Prophet˺ how your Lord dealt with the Army of the Elephant?” (Qur’an 105:1)

So it is logical to ask someone this question if he did not see those people. That is if you interpret and understand optical seeing. This means that Allah (swt) would ask the Prophet (saw) about something that is not logical.

Have not those who are ungrateful disbelievers seen how Heaven and Earth were once one solid mass which We ripped apart? ” (Qur’an 21:30)

Have not they seen?


“Have you not seen what your Lord did deal with ‘Aad?” (Qur’an 89:6)

So we use this method to understand and reconcile text.

Did they not see how many generations we destroyed before them.” (Qur’an 36:31)


Did they not see: This means to know. They are aware about something to some degree or another.

“The heart did not lie about what it saw.” (Qur’an 53:11)

(The Prophet’s) heart did not deny what he (Muhammed) saw. His heart did not lie about what he saw. His (the prophet’s) heart/mind did not deny what he saw. His heart didn’t deny what he saw.

The poet says, “I have seen Allah is greater than anything in power and he has most soldiers.”

The Poet saw Allah (swt) ?

Another poet says: “I have seen Allah destroyed the people of aad, thamud and Noah as well.”

So we need to use methodological principles that are also acceptable to the other schools so that they can see the point.

So the hadith about seeing Allah like the moon.

We have to interpret it since the Qur’an is clear.

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

That no eyes will see Allah (swt), no optical vision.

Next week we will look at the sanads (chains of transmission)

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

For further articles on this subject kindly read the following:

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Is Allah every where?

“Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

Above credit is to Kennst du schon die Umkreisel photo taken from: pexels.com

﷽ 

This entry is to educate and enlighten those Muslims who hold the view that Allah (swt) is everywhere.

They may rely upon the following proof text:

“It is He who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne. He knows what penetrates into the earth and what emerges from it and what descends from the heaven and what ascends therein, and He is with you wherever you are. And Allah, of what you do, is Seeing.” (Qur’an 57:4)

“Have you not considered that Allah knows what is in the heavens and what is on the earth? There is in no private conversation three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them – and no less than that and no more except that He is with them wherever they are. Then He will inform them of what they did, on the Day of Resurrection. Indeed Allah is, of all things, Knowing.” (Qur’an 58:7)

“And to Allah belongs the east and the west. So wherever you turn, there is the Face of Allah. Indeed, Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.” (Qur’an 2:115)

In the Ibadi school, we understand that Allah (swt) has full power and knowledge of all things. We do not believe that Allah (swt) is omnipresent.

A text that seemingly conflicts with the belief that Allah (swt) is everywhere is the following:

“Nay, when the earth has been pounded with a great pounding and your Lord and the angels come row upon row.” (Qur’an 89:21-22)

If Allah (swt) is everywhere it would make little sense to believe that our Allah (swt) would ‘come‘ to a place he already ‘is‘.

“It is He who created for you all that the earth contains: then He turned to the heavens and made them seven skies-and He is the Knower of All Things.” (Qur’an 2:29)

If Allah (swt) is everywhere it would make little sense to believe that Allah (swt) would ‘turn‘ anywhere, for he is already ‘there‘.

“Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

The verses above demolishes any concept of Allah (swt) resembling the creations. This shows that Allah (swt) exists without a place because whatever exists in a place is by nature composed of particles, body, occupying space. Allah (swt) is clear of occupying space.

This means Allah (swt) does not occupy one place (the throne) or (every place). After all space is a creation and one would need to ask who created spatiality? If it has always co-existed with Allah (swt) it cannot said to be created by our Lord.

The very idea of ‘where‘ is Allah (swt) is inappropriate. Just as the very idea of ‘when‘ is Allah (swt) is inappropriate.

All the above verses that quote Allah (swt) being ‘with you wherever you are’, or Allah (swt) ‘turning’ or Allah (swt) ‘coming’ are all interpreted using the sound principles embedded in the Arabic language in a way that conforms to Qur’an 42:11.

We also have two very important pieces of information. One from Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib and the other from the Blessed Messenger (saw).

The saying “Allah existed eternally without a place, and He is now as He ever was” is related – without chain – from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib

Sources: (Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah al-Sakandari (d. 709) cites it as one of his Hikam (#34). As cited by ‘Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429) in his al-Farq Bayn al-Firaq page. 256)

We also have from the Blessed Messenger (saw) who is reported to have said:

Allah was when there was nothing else than Him, and His Throne was upon the water, and He wrote in the Reminder (al-dhikr) all things, and he created the heavens and the earth.”

Source: (Narrated from ‘Imran ibn Husayn by al-Bukhari, in the Book of the Beginning of Creation: https://sunnah.com/bukhari/59/2 )

Some people especially perennialist may like to argue that Allah (swt) is everywhere because it will end up supporting concepts like pantheism or pan-deism. Everywhere is basically pantheism or pan-deism. Allah (swt) exist as he was before all Creation (time/space).

Some questions for those who believe in the omnipresence of Allah (swt) is to ask them:

Is Allah (swt) fully present or partially present? What proof text would be offered to show ‘fully‘ or ‘partially‘?

Why not fully present? If fully present than why is it wrong to worship idols, Jesus, Iblis, Demons, or anything for that matter? Authubillah min dhalik!

If Allah (swt) is only partially present where is the other part that isn’t there?

The belief of Muslims is that Allah (swt) is not present in all of his Creation nor that Allah (swt) is his creation or that Allah (swt) became the universe.

“All will perish except His face.” (Qur’an 28:88)

If This verse is taken by its apparent meaning, it would indicate that that the Creator would increase or decrease. If the universe or reality ‘expands‘ or ‘retreats‘ it entails that the Creator ‘expands‘ or ‘retreats‘.

The only challenge to Allah as a “being” that I am aware of is Process Theology (or Process Theism) in Christianity where they state: “God is becoming” not being.

The irony is that the one opening for process theology in Islam is the following hadith Qudsi:

“Abu Huraira(ra) reported:

The Messenger of Allah, (saw), said, “Allah Almighty said: The son of Adam abuses me. He curses time and I am time. In my hand are the night and day.”

Sources: (Al Bukhari 4549, and Muslim 2246)

The irony here is that this one opening also defeats process theology of becoming a reality among Muslims. It defeats the whole idea of ‘becoming‘ if you are omnipresent or time itself. Glory be to Allah!!

“And when Musa came at Our appointed time and his Lord spoke to him, he said: My Lord! Show me (Yourself), so that I may look upon You. He said: You will not see Me but look at the mountain if it remains firm in its place, then will you see Me; but when his Lord manifested His glory to the mountain He made it crumble and Musa fell down in a swoon; then when he recovered, he said: Glory be to You, I turn to Thee, and I am the first of the believers.” (Qur’an 7:143)

Know that the creation cannot contain the Creator nor is the Creator present in the Creation.

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

For those who are interested you may wish to read the following:

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

When is Allah / Where is Allah ? Careful of traps

“And he is with you wherever you are.” (Qur’an 57:4)

﷽ 

*There is no place for him* Just as there is *No when for him*

Be careful of the tricky questions the slicksters use. These people are the real Ahl Kalam, though they deny it for themselves. When the text clear text no longer support them they run to their kalam arguments.

The choice between two false proposition. They may ask you:

“Is Allah inside the creation or outside the creation?”

In reality the one who is asking this question believes that Allah (swt) is inside his creation. Because he believes that Allah (swt) occupies place.

This is a graphical representation of the thought process behind this trap.

And we know that there is nothing like unto Allah (swt).

They want you to say “Outside of the Creation” so that you posit for Allah (swt) a place.

Inside/Outside/Up/Down/Left/Right all relate to spatial location.

The response to that question is: Allah exist without a place.

Realizing you didn’t take the bait they will try and follow up with a second tricky question they will ask you is as follows:

When Allah (swt) created the creation did he create the creation inside himself or outside of himself?

Answer them by saying: “Mash’Allah! What an excellent question! When Allah (swt) created space and location where/when was Allah (swt)?”

That will give them their answer.

At this point your objective is to bring the Salafi/Athari away from their kalam and back to the revelation.

“Allah is Creator of all things, and He is Guardian over all things.” (Qur’an 39:62)

Like if you ask me can I comprehend the idea of my Creator w/o spatiality?

I can

Do I have a visual or a model?

I do not.

What I DO KNOW is that to say Allah co exist with something that he did not create is problematic.

Ibn Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “Reflect deeply upon the creation, but do not reflect upon the essence of the Creator. Verily, His essence cannot be known other than to believe in it.”

Source: (Musnad al-Rabī’ 742 عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ تَفَكَّرُوا فِي الْخَلْقِ وَلا تَتَفَكَّرُوا فِي الْخَالِقِ فَإِنَّهُ لا يُدْرَكُ إِلا بِتَصْدِيقِهِ 742 مسند الربيع بن حبيب 2976 المحدث الألباني خلاصة حكم المحدث حسن في صحيح الجامع)

* *وجود الله لا افتتاح له* *كما أن بقاءه لا انتهاء له* *كما أن وجوده لا مكان له* *فكما أنه سبحانه كان ولا إبتداء له وهو باقٍ ولا إنتهاء له كذلك هو موجود ولا مكان له* *فمن جادلك وحاجك في المكان، وقال لك : كيف لي أن أتصور موجودا لا مكان له، وكيف لي أصدق بموجود لا مكان له* *قل له : كما صدقت بموجود لا ابتداء له* *كيف تعقلت وتصورت وصدقت بموجود لا افتتاح لوجوده، بأي عقل صدقت، موجود ليس لوجوده نقطة بداية* *صدقت بذلك لأنه المقام اللائق بهذا الرب الذي ليس كمثله شيء* *فقط، هذا الذي دعاك للتسليم بأنه موجود بلا إبتداء ، لا عادتك التي اعتدتها ، أنت لم تعتد لوجود لا إفتتاح له* *لكن لما كان الكلام متعلقا برب ليس كمثله شيء، صدقت وأذعنت وسلمت وأمنت أن هذا الرب لا افتتاح لوجوده، ولا نهاية لبقائه* *فكذلك قل في مكانه لا مكان له؛ لأنه الرب الذي تعالى عن ظروف الازمنة وكذلك يتعالى عن ظروف الامكنة* *المتعالي عن ظروف الازمنة متعالي عن ظروف الأمكنة*

Some may also believe that Allah (swt) is omni present. Meaning that Allah (swt) is located every where (omni) all present. This is also an error.

May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) protect this Ummah from those who believe that Allah (swt) is inside of his creation and than provide the caveat: “In a way that befits him.”

You might be interested to read the following:

May Allah Guide the Ummah.

May Allah Forgive the Ummah.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

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

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

“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, rancor (or sense of injury) against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful.” (Quran 59:10)

﷽ 

So some of those who claim they are upon the way of the Salafiyyah go rampaging through the books and works of our scholars. They will find among them those who disavow Uthman or those who disavow Muaviya or those who disavow Ali. We will bring evidence from the books of the scholars from our brothers from among the Ahl Sunnah to show you the double standards of their claims.

“Look you see these Ibadites! They disavow certain ones from among the companions! They were all loved by each other and we love them all too! We would never say such things about the companions!”

About that…

It is from the Sunnah to disavow any Muslim (including a companion) when they commit a sin.

First and foremost to disavow any Muslim when they commit a sin is from the Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (saw). This includes the companions.

Narrated Salim’s father:

The Prophet (saw) sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, “Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam),” but they started saying “Saba’na! Saba’na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another).” Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive, I said, “By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive.” When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet (saw) raised both his hands and said twice, O Allah, I disavow before You what Khalid has done.” ‏ اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَبْرَأُ إِلَيْكَ مِمَّا صَنَعَ خَالِدٌ

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4339)

‏ اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَبْرَأُ إِلَيْكَ مِمَّا صَنَعَ خَالِدٌ- allahuma ‘iiniy ‘abra ‘iilayk mimaa sanae khalid

Remember you cannot unsee what you are about to see and you will be held accountable.

Narrated Jarir:

The Prophet (saw) said to me during Hajjat-al-Wida`: Let the people keep quiet and listen. Then he said (addressing the people), “Do not (become infidels) revert to disbelief after me by striking the necks (cutting the throats) of one another (killing each other).

Source: (https://sunnah.com/bukhari:121)

Salih Al-Sheikh, in his explanation of the Tahawi creed, said that the fighting companions fell into minor disbelief, and they entered into the characteristics of disbelief!

Al-Albani says that the fighting companions after the Messenger of Allah have no refuge from calling them infidels!

In the statement of Al-Tahawi: (And their hatred is disbelief and hypocrisy and slander):
Firstly: It includes the disbelief of the Companions:

  • A) If the hatred is due to religion or anger, as we have detailed, then the disbelief here is major disbelief.
    • B) If the hatred is for worldly reasons—as may occur due to fierce rivalry or hatred for worldly matters—then this is minor disbelief and does not reach the level of major disbelief. For this reason, the Prophet said:
    • “Do not revert to disbelief after me by hating one another?!”

(1) Narrated by Al-Bukhari (17), Muslim (74), Al-Nasa’i (5019), and others (30/134), from Anas bin Malik, may Allah be pleased with him.
(2) Narrated by Al-Bukhari (1116), Muslim (66), Abu Dawood (4186), Al-Nasa’i (4216), and Ibn Majah.

Sheikh Saleh Al-Sheikh

The fighting among the Companions after the Prophet (peace be upon him) is minor disbelief, not major disbelief.
And now, whoever declares the Companions to be disbelievers, even if it is minor disbelief.

Explanation of the Theological Punishment

The fact that some Companions fought one another involves characteristics of disbelievers, which is why he said: “Do not revert to disbelief after me.” There is no doubt that the motive behind this may be hatred.

In Al-Sharh al-Wafī ‘alā ‘Aqīdat al-Tahāwiyyah” (الشرح الوافي على عقيدة الطحاوية), a well-known commentary on “Al-‘Aqīdah al-Tahāwiyyah”—a foundational text on Sunni creed attributed to Imam Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi (d. 321 AH)

It states that the Companions fight each other. It may be lesser kufr, or it may be greater kufr (i.e. polytheism) and that depends on the level of hatred!

Shaykh ‘Ubayd bin ‘Abdullah al-Jabri (عُبَيْد بن عبد الله الجابري), a contemporary Salafi scholar from Saudi Arabia, and his book “Imdād al-Qārī bi Sharḥ al-Bukhārī” (إمداد القاري بشرح البخاري), which is a commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari states that the fighting companions fell into blasphemy!

Then it is said, “and we consider it good,” because it indicates that love for them (the Companions) is sound in religion and is a means of drawing closer to Allah through adherence to sincerity and truthfulness in faith. Naturally, “and we declare them free from blame,” and “we consider it good”—all these are not the same. The methodology in loving the Companions is refined, and their status is measured by their sound companionship, righteousness, and understanding of their elevated rank.

Similarly, it is stated, “and we declare them disbelievers”—an additional clarification: “and we affirm.” Hatred toward the Companions is firmly established—whether the hatred is due to religion or personal malice, in which case it constitutes major disbelief. If the hatred is for worldly reasons, as may arise from fierce rivalry or worldly motives, then it is minor disbelief and does not reach the level of major disbelief. Hence, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Do not revert to disbelief after me by striking one another’s necks!”

The fact that some Companions fought one another involves falling into the traits of disbelievers, which is why he said: “Do not revert to disbelief after me.” It is most accurate to say that the motive behind this was hatred and disbelief, because fighting is accompanied by elements of hatred. However, given the mutual relations among the Companions (where some may not have loved others until death, and hatred may exist without clear justification), this disbelief may be minor or may vary based on the nature of the hatred (with further elaboration).

Because the intent is to derive from this the preservation of the religion, the safeguarding of Islam among the people, and striving in the Sunnah with true jihad—as the Companions did under the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Yet, some later turned into opponents of the Companions and aligned with the disbelievers. Allah described them: “The hypocrite men and hypocrite women are of one another…” (Surah At-Tawbah: 67).

The intent may be major ideological hatred, depending on the condition of the heart, or practical hatred, based on the type of love or its absence, or the type of hatred and its cause. “And we affirm,” and regarding their transgression—this is specific to the one who harbors it and the gravity of the matter. For Allah (Exalted and Majestic) commanded some of them (or the lesser among them) to “be patient,” meaning He commanded some to endure and restrain themselves from those who wronged them, even if they had the power to retaliate. This indicates that whoever swore allegiance (to the truth) had knowledge and insight in this matter.

Shaykh Ibn al-Qayyim Yusri al-Sayyid Muhammad and his work “Jāmi’ al-Fiqh” (جامع الفقه) by Lisr al-Sayyid: States that the fighting companions had fallen into disbelief by their actions.

The Disbelief of Denial and Stubbornness

The disbelief of denial (كفر الجحود)-kufr al juhud occurs when someone knowingly rejects what the Messenger (peace be upon him) brought from Allah—whether it pertains to Allah’s Lordship, His attributes, His actions, or His rulings—out of sheer arrogance and obstinacy. This type of disbelief completely contradicts faith in every aspect.

As for practical disbelief by actions (كفر العمل), kufr al amal it is divided into two categories:

  1. That which contradicts faith entirely—such as prostrating to idols, disrespecting the Quran, or killing a prophet.
  2. That which does not entirely negate faith—such as ruling by other than what Allah has revealed or abandoning prayer.

However, ruling by other than what Allah has revealed and abandoning prayer are undoubtedly forms of practical disbelief. It cannot be denied that these carry the label of “disbelief” (كفر) after Allah and His Messenger have explicitly applied it. Thus:

  • “Whoever rules by other than what Allah has revealed is a disbeliever.”
  • “Whoever abandons prayer is a disbeliever,” as stated in the explicit texts of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

The Disbelief of Denial and Belief, and His Saying:

“Do not revert to disbelief after me, striking one another’s necks…”
This refers to practical disbelief (كفر عمل). Similarly, his saying:
“Whoever does so intentionally has disbelieved in what was revealed to Muhammad.”
And his saying: “If one of them has indeed earned it…”

This detailed classification is the position of the Companions regarding the relationship between Islam and disbelief. Do not think that they did not understand the implications—rather, they divided into two groups:

  1. A group that considered such people to be eternally in Hellfire.
  2. A group that regarded them as sinful believers (not complete disbelievers).

Allah has guided Ahl al-Sunnah to the moderate path, where:

  • There is disbelief (كفر) that does not reach polytheism (شرك).
  • There is sin (فسق) that does not amount to disbelief.
  • There is oppression (ظلم) that does not constitute apostasy.

(Page: 5)

“Whoever rules by other than what Allah has revealed is a disbeliever.” It is on this basis that many of the salaf had broke ranks with Ali’s decision for arbitration. As the text is explicit fight until. In that sense Ali would have committed  (كفر العمل), kufr al amal.

Shaykh Muṣṭafā bin al-ʿAdawī (مصطفى العدوي ) mentioned that the fighting companions are falling into kufr al-Amal!

“Fatḥ al-Bārī bi Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī” (فتح الباري بشرح صحيح البخاري), the legendary commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī by Imam Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī (d. 852 AH) that the companions are considered to be upon blasphemy And that the misfortune of disobedience may lead to greater sins, and it is feared that he will not be sealed with the seal of Islam!

One will note that the warning of the Blessed Messenger (saw) was do not revert to disbelief.

Shaykh Ibn al-Uthaymeen says that the Companions fighting each other is considered kufr, but it does not expel one out of the religion!

Ibn Taymiyyah says that the companions who fought each other are called infidels, and it is a restricted designation!

It was stated in the book, The Masa’il of Imam Ahmad (مسائل الإمام أحمد)  that the Sunni hadith scholar: Ali bin Al-Jaad says that Muawiyah died upon other than Islam!!!

The Salafiyah will end up declaring all the Companions to be unbelievers altogether, according to their claim that whoever rejects the Hadith of Ahad is an infidel! Shaykh Al-Ghazali says that none of the companions accept this!

Salafiyah have declared one of the companions who rebelled against Caliph Uthman to be an infidel!

Muhammed bin Abd al-Wahhab describes a group of the Companions as ignorant, evil and rebellious!

Ibn Taymiyya in his book Kitaab Al-‘Arsh (كتاب العرش), says that the Companions did takfir upon one another and this is well known!

Ibn Taymiyya, in his book Iqtidaa al-Sirat al-Mustaqeem Mukhaalafat Ashaab al-Jaheem (اقتضاء الصراط المستقيم مخالفة أصحاب الجحيم) criticizes the honorable companion Abdullah bin Umar (ra), who is one of the strongest people in following the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah! That Abdullah bin Umar (ra) committed bid’ah!

Muhammed bin Abd al-Wahhab had strong criticism for a number of the companions!

“Sharh Al-‘Aqeedah Al-Wasitiyyah” (شرح العقيدة الواسطية), the explanation of Ibn Taymiyyah’s famous creedal work, authored by Shaykh Muhammed ibn Salih al-Uthaymeen.

Uthaymeen states:

“Undoubtedly, some of them committed theft, drank alcohol, engaged in slander, or even committed adultery (whether punishable by hadd or not). Yet, all these misdeeds are overshadowed by their overwhelming virtues and merits. Some of these sins were met with legal punishments (hudud), serving as expiation (kaffarah).”

The misdeeds committed by a few among them are exceedingly few and negligible, which is why the author states: “They are drowned out by the virtues and merits of these people.”

However, if they committed adultery, or theft then they committed acts of kufr ni’mah or what others say is: kufr al amal

If Uthaymeen says the companions committed acts of kufr no one bats an eye. A scholar from the Ibadi schools it and suddenly the emotions overcome the senses.

What about this? It was mentioned in the book Akhbār al-Madīnah al-Munawwarah (أخبار المدينة المنورة) that the blood of Uthman is divided into three. A third on the mother of the believers Aisha (ra), and a third on Talha, and a third on Ali bin Abi Talib! That darkness was over each of them!

Ibn Baz responds to Ibn Hajar and claims that the act of the companion Abdullah bin Umar in seeking blessing from the relics of the saints (tabarruk) leads to polytheism. And here Ibn Baz declared himself more knowledgeable than the great companion Abdullah bin Umar!

Shaykh Ibn Al-Uthaymeen once again says that the Companions are not all just, so whoever is known for an insult is not just! Some of them committed theft, drank wine, committed fornication while married and some outside of marriage!

An explicit accusation and takfir without hinting that Ali did not kill Uthman except that he considered him an infidel!

Narration 1:

Narrated by Al-Humaidi:
Abdullah ibn Wahb reported from Sa’id ibn Abi Ayyub, from Abi Sakhr, from Abi Mu’awiyah al-Bahili, from Abi al-Sahba’ al-Mukabbar (1), who said:
“We discussed the killing of Uthman, and some of us said: ‘I believe Ali killed him only because he considered Uthman a disbeliever.’ I said: ‘Should we ask Ali about this?’ So they asked him, and he replied: ‘By Allah, Uthman was not the worst among us. But he ruled, became arrogant, and we acted poorly in our impatience. Matters escalated until judgment was passed between us.'”

Narration 2:

Narrated by Ali ibn Muhammad, from Abi Mukhtalif, from Abdulmalik ibn Nawfal ibn Musahiq, from his father, who said:
“Ali entered upon Uthman after the people of Egypt found a letter with his servant. Uthman denied writing it, so Ali asked: ‘Whom do you accuse?’ Uthman replied: ‘I accuse you and my scribe.’ Ali became angry, left, and said: ‘By Allah, if he did not write it—or if it was falsely attributed to him—then he bears no blame for the Ummah’s turmoil. But if he did write it, he has brought this upon himself. Yet, I will not abandon him despite his accusation.’ Many people then withdrew their support .”

Narration 3:

Narrated by Amr ibn Mansur, from ibn Sulayman al-Dab’i, from Awf, who said:
“Among the Companions, Talhah ibn Ubaydullah was the most severe against Uthman, but he later regretted his stance due to delays in justice.”

Ibn Taymiyya in Majmū’ al-Fatāwā (مجموع الفتاوى)  mentioned that the Companions fought and cursed each other and declared each other infidels, and their statements concerning this is well known!

“Moreover, the early predecessors (Salaf) erred in some of these matters—major figures among them—yet they were not excessively criticized for it.” For example:

  • Some Companions denied that the Blessed Prophet (saw) could hear the call of the dead (e.g., at Badr).
  • Others denied that a woman could have a ghayrah (rightful jealousy) over her husband.
  • Some disputed whether the Blessed Prophet (saw) saw his Lord (during the Mi’raj).
  • There were disagreements among them about the caliphate and the superiority of certain individuals—well-known debates.
  • Some engaged in fighting one another, while others cursed certain figures—explicit statements are documented.

Similarly, the judge once mentioned a recitation of the Quranic verse ‘Bal ‘Īdu’ (بل عيد) [instead of ‘Bal ‘Īdu’ (بل عيد)] and claimed, ‘Allah does not cause hardship.’ When this reached Ibrahim al-Nakha’i, he said: ‘He has innovated! ‘Abdullah [ibn Mas’ud] was more knowledgeable than him and recited it correctly.’ Here, a confirmed recitation was denied, and an attribute affirmed by the Quran and Sunnah was rejected—yet the Ummah still regards him as one of its imams.

Some criticized Ibn Taymiyya for affirming that certain Companions cursed others—explicitly referring to Mu’awiyah, ‘Amr ibn al-‘As, and those like them who cursed Ali from the pulpits.

This is documented in Tarikh al-Tabari and Al-Sunnah by Ibn Abi ‘Asim.

Accusing The Mother of the Believers Aisha (ra) of killing Caliph Uthman; and that she was responsible for inciting people to kill him! Saying, “Kill Nathla, for he has disbelieved!” (Nathla was a Jew). Accused of likening Uthman to a Jew named Nathla.

In a commentary explaining the aqidah of Tahawi. Muawiyah bin Abi Sufyan is blamed for approving the insult of Imam Ali, and by approving it he insulted Ali in Iraq and the Levant!

“The first king in Islam was Mu‘awiyah, and he was the best and most virtuous of their kings because he was righteous, the son of a righteous man, and because his lineage was noble. However, he is criticized because he allowed… due to his stance toward ‘Ali. As a result of his policy, the cursing of ‘Ali became widespread during his rule in Iraq and Syria, leading to this abominable practice, which gave rise to lies about the cursing of the Companions and exaggeration in the praise of ‘Ali.”

“Because of this, the Rafidah (a sect of extremists) harbor intense hatred toward Mu‘awiyah and all of Banu Umayyah, except for ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz (may Allah be pleased with him). This is because the cursing of ‘Ali continued in Iraq and Syria—though not in all places, only in some mosques—throughout the reign of Banu Marwan, until ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz came to power and abolished this practice, putting an end to it.”

Do you know who encouraged ‘Umar Ibn ‘Abd Al-‘Aziz to stop the cursing of ‘Ali from the pulpits?

Muawiyah used to curse Ali and ordered him to be cursed on the pulpits and continued to curse him even after the death of Ali!

We have seen and reliably transmitted that Mu’awiyah’s cursing of Ali is recorded in authentic sources—specifically on page 45 of Volume 2 of Al-Fikr al-Sa’bi. Historians like Ibn Jarir al-Tabari and others have unanimously confirmed this.

They would not give anything except after disavowing Imam Ali and testifying against him with hypocrisy!

Al-Awza’i (a renowned scholar) said:
“They did not grant us stipends until we testified that Ali was a hypocrite—and I am innocent of such a claim! They forced us into this by threatening to withhold salaries, divorce our wives, and take our children. When I realized the gravity of the matter, I consulted Mak’hul, Yahya ibn Abi Kathir, ‘Ata ibn Abi Rabah, and Abdullah ibn ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr. They all said: ‘You are under duress; there is no sin upon you.’ Yet my conscience remained unsettled until I divorced my wives, freed my slaves, relinquished my wealth, and repented for what I had done under coercion.”

Al-Hakim recorded this narration through Ali al-Hafiz, who cited Mak’hul of Beirut, from Abu Farwah.

It is proven that Mu’awiyah was ordering Sa’d to insult Imam Ali and he explained that in detail and you will find among the Salafiyah those who defend Mu’awiyah and those trying to abuse the text!

Mu’awiyah’s Demand for Cursing ‘Ali

Context:

  • Mu’awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan pressured Sa’d to curse ‘Ali.
  • Sa’d had remained neutral during the Fitna (civil strife) but was known to defend ‘Ali.

The Dialogue:

  • Mu’awiyah“What prevents you from cursing him?”
  • Sa’d“What prevents me? [I refuse.]”

It was stated in the book Sunan Ibn Majah that Muawiyah used to insult and curse Imam Ali, and the reason was due to worldly matters between them!

It was stated in the book on the explanation of Sahih Muslim that Muawiyah ordered Saad to insult Imam Ali! And with all this, you find the Salafiyyah defending and fighting for Muawiya, and it was safer for them to desist from that period in its entirety. But no, not them! One standard for them and one standard for others. They use double standards in sedition and make the common people think that they are the lovers of the Companions!

Banu Umayyah used to insult and curse Imam Ali on their platforms! And the Salafiyyah defend the injustice of the Umayyads and cursing of Imam Ali!

According to Imam Al-Qurtubi’s testimony Muawiyah insults Imam Ali and commands people to insult him! And guess who is defending those who curse and insult the Companions?

The great Companions used to curse the other great Companions, and many are the Salafi who conceal this and pretend to love the Companions, while in reality Companions are innocent of them.

Read below:

“The people of Sham (Syria) departed to Mu’awiyah and pledged their allegiance to him, forsaking and exposing him (a reference to a disputed event). Ibn ‘Abbas and Sharhabeel ibn Hanī’ returned to Ali with the news. Thereafter, whenever Ali would pray the morning prayer (Fajr), he would invoke curses (Qunoot) and say: ‘O Allah, curse Mu’awiyah, ‘Amr (ibn al-‘As), Abū al-A’war, Habīb ibn Maslamah, ‘Abd al-Rahmān ibn Khālid ibn al-Walīd, al-Fasaḷ ibn Qays, and al-Walīd ibn ‘Uqbah.’

This reached Mu’awiyah, so he, in turn, began to curse Ali, al-Ashtar, Qays ibn Sa’d, al-Hasan, al-Husayn, Ibn ‘Abbas, and ‘Abdullāh ibn Ja’far, may Allah the Exalted be pleased with them all.

In the text Imam Ali is cursed, yet the one who curses him he is considered trustworthy and honest! Yet look how they assault the Ibadi school. Where is the balance? Where do we insult any of the companions and worse yet where do we call any of them dogs of hellfire?!

Raja’ bin Haywah , considered a man of trust with those who attack us. (Those who attack the Ibadi). He (Raja’ bin Haywah) denounced the just caliph Umar bin Abdul Aziz for leaving cursing and cursing of Imam Ali on the pulpits!

Which by the way this was at the urging of the Ibadi delegation. (Thank you Muslim majority for conveniently leaving that tid bit out)

Harir bin ‘Uthman, he is one of the men of Bukhari. This man was cursing and cursing Imam Ali, and despite all this, he is proven trustworthy and has the trust of Ibn Mu’in and Ahmad bin Hanbal!

In Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb, Volume 2, page 409-410, Entry No. 852

وَرَوَى الْعَقِيلِيُّ عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ مَعِينٍ أَنَّهُ كَانَ يَسُبُّ عَلِيًّا رضي الله عنه كُلَّ يَوْمٍ مِائَةً وَأَرْبَعِينَ مَرَّةً.

“And al-‘Uqaylī narrated from Yaḥyā bin Ma‘īn that he [Ḥarīr] would curse Ali one hundred and forty times every day.”

Ahmad bin ‘Abdullah al-‘Ijli said: “Harir bin ‘Uthman was a Syrian, reliable (thiqah), and he used to bear hostility (yahmil) against ‘Ali.”

Yahya bin Ma’in said: “It was mentioned that Harir used to revile (yashnum) ‘Ali from the pulpit (al-minbar).”

It was narrated from Yazid bin Harun that he said: “I saw the Lord of Might (Rabb al-‘Izzah) in a dream, and He said to me: ‘O Yazid! Do not write from him’—meaning from Harir bin ‘Uthman. I said: ‘O Lord, I have not known anything from him except good.’ He said to me: ‘O Yazid! Do not write from him, for he reviles (‘sabb‘) ‘Ali.'”

‘Ali bin ‘Ayyash narrated, saying: “I heard Harir bin ‘Uthman say to a man: ‘Woe to you! Do you not fear God? You have reported from me that I revile (‘asubbu‘) ‘Ali. By Allah, I do not revile him, and I have never reviled him.'”

Shababah said: “I heard Harir bin ‘Uthman, and a man said to him: ‘O Abu ‘Amr, it has reached me that you do not show mercy upon ‘Ali?’ He said to him: ‘Be quiet! What business is this of yours?’ Then he turned to me and said: ‘May Allah have mercy on him (‘Ali)’ a hundred times.”

Ahmad bin Hanbal and Yahya bin Ma’in considered his narrations to be stopped (waqafuhu – a term in hadith criticism, possibly meaning they did not use his narrations as evidence due to this issue).

Al-Hajjaj beats people who do not curse Imam Ali and punishes them with flogging!

Ibn Abi Layla, and Ibn al-Zubayr, and Al-Mukhtar:

Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah narrated from Abu Mu’awiyah from Al-A’mash, who said: “I saw ‘Abd al-Rahman bin Abi Layla. Al-Hajjaj had him beaten and made him stand at the door of the mosque. They began saying to him: ‘Who are the liars?'”
He said: “So who are the liars of Allah?” Then he said: “‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, ‘Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr, and Al-Mukhtar bin Abi ‘Ubayd.” – [he said it] quietly. So I knew when he fell silent, then he started again and raised his voice, that he did not mean them.

Harir bin ‘Uthman, it was known about him that he insulted Imam Ali, and he was famous for that. However, when Ahmed bin Hanbal was asked about him, he said about him: trustworthy, trustworthy, trustworthy!

A question to the Salafiyyah, On what consistent basis do you attack the Ibadi when some of our past scholars put Ali in Barā’ah, and some practice Wuqoof, while others hold him in Walāyah and yet you keep defending the Umayyads whose Sunnah was to curse Imam Ali in the streets and on the pulpits?!

Now imagine dear readers that we take a time machine back to the Umayyad period. We have those among the companions, the early salaaf who disavow Ali for arbitration and killing the believers at Nahrawan. Meanwhile what will be going on in the Umayyad territories? Cursing Imam Ali on the pulpits as a necessary Sunnah.

Who is reviling who?

Who is disavowing who?

Ibn al-Qayyim criticizes the Companions for masturbating during their battles, and criticizes their women! Certainly these are the ethics of the downward road!

Marwan bin Al-Hakam used to insult and curse Ali as well as his two sons Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein on the pulpits! Marwan would claim that Hassan smelled of donkey urine!

…Narrated by Ishaq bin Rahawayh (1) and Abu ‘Ubayd (2).

[Narration 7566] And from ‘Umayr bin Ishaq who said: “Marwan was our governor for a year, and he would curse [‘Ali] – – for us from the pulpit.” He would address the people, then Marwan was deposed, and Sa’id bin al-‘As was appointed for a year, and he did not curse. Then Sa’id was deposed, and Marwan was reinstated, and he resumed cursing. So it was said to Al-Hasan bin ‘Ali: “Do you not hear what Marwan is saying?” But he would not respond at all.
He would prepare on Friday, then enter the pulpit of the Prophet (saw)and it would be there. When the pulpit was brought forward, he would enter the mosque and not prepare, then return to his family. Marwan was not satisfied with that until he sent a message to him in his house, so that when he sat with him, he would address the people. So he sent for him, and he entered. He said: “Your proximity is part of the sultan’s might, and your proximity is a resolution.” He [Al-Hasan] said: “[Say] what you want.” He said: “Marwan has sent me to you with so-and-so and so-and-so, and I have not found anyone like you except the urine of a female mule.

Caliph Uthman begged Ali bin Abi Talib and Talha to defend him when his house was besieged. However, he was not as supported as it should have been. And Marwan was cursing the people and antagonizing them more! Why didn’t the companions support Uthman?!

The Salafiyyah spread lies among the people that Muawiyah loves Ali and takes care of him, to the extent that if the two groups fight, it is because of the excessive longing between the brothers, so if the night comes, they congregate until the morning, then they shed crocodile tears to deceive the common people! Here, their lies are exposed!

The Salaafiyah are deceiving the common people by saying that Muawiyah did not order Sa`d to insult Mu`awiyah, and that his purpose was not to insult, but rather he wanted to test Sa‘d, Yet the deception is clear!

Muawiya used to send his agents to interrogate people and disavow Ali and curse him, and if they did not respond to his request, they would be sentenced to death!

Muawiyah orders Hajr and his companions to disavow Ali and curse him, but they refuse to do so and are killed! This is Muawiyah the one we are supposed to say (May Allah be pleased with his deeds) after his name!

A torrent of insults and cursing of Imam Ali, and this insult remained the Sunna of the Umayyads, and Muawiyah swore that their young ones would grow old and their old ones would grow older (they would be granted prolonged life) because of cursing Imam Ali!

And the Salafiyyah want it to be remained concealing from the common people and defend the Umayyads of the Nawasib! The truth has appeared and revealed the hidden!

 Here is is mentioned the killing of Hujr bin Adi al-Kindi and his companions by Muawiyah Al-Baghy and his army of miscreants!

 

Al-Hajjaj orders the muezzin of Ali to disavow Ali, but he refuses and thus is killed!

Abdullah Al-Jabreen admits that the Umayyads insulted and cursed Ali on the pulpits until the era of Umar bin Abdul Aziz. Then he said that people began to mention the virtues of Ali, but even than he was upset that they alienated the people from the Umayyads!!!

Hence the split that last until today between the Abbasid Sunnis (those who incorporated Ali as the fourth “rightly guided”) and their antagonist, the Umayyad Sunnis (those who have real hate towards Ali).

Shaykh `Abdullah ibn `Abdur-Rahman al-Jibreen was a prominent Saudi Islamic scholar who served on the Council of Senior Scholars and the Permanent Committee for Islamic Research and Issuing Fatwas. Here is what he had to say.

“During the era of the Umayyads, and specifically after the caliphate of Mu’awiyah until the end of the [first] century—from the year sixty-one until the year ninety-nine—some of the Umayyad caliphs would curse Ali from the pulpits and in his absence, and they would accuse him of participating in the killing of Uthman. This continued until the time of Umar ibn
Abd al-Aziz, who put an end to this heinous practice.”

“And there were in Kufa individuals who extreme in their devotion to Ali (yaghulūn fī ‘Alī), from among his ministers and students in Kufa. They were harmed and enraged by what they saw of the public cursing from the pulpits, and it became excessive. So they began to gather in private places for themselves and they would console each other. Then there joined them whoever wished to secede (from the community), so then people began to join them and they became numerous. They would exaggerate in his virtue, inventing many fabricated hadiths about his merits, and they claimed by doing this that they were endearing the people to him and turning the people away from the Umayyads.”

Muawiya’s first act after the death of Al-Hassan bin Ali was to perform Hajj and ascend to the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah in Medina to curse Imam Ali! Imagine the minbar of light and barakah being used to pour out vomit and hate!

The following is from: Al-‘Iqd al-Farid by Ahmad ibn Muhammed ibn Abd Rabbih. A book about adab! Imagine!

“And when Al-Hasan bin Ali died, Mu’awiyah performed Hajj and entered Medina. He wanted to curse Ali from the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah (saw). It was said to him: “Among us is Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas, and we do not think he will be pleased with this at all. So send for him and seek his opinion.” So he sent for him and mentioned that to him. Sa’d said: “If you do that, I will leave the mosque and never return to it!”

So Mu’awiyah refrained from cursing him until Sa’d died. After he (Sa’d) died, he (Mu’awiyah) cursed him (Ali) from the pulpit.

And he wrote to his governors to curse him on the pulpits, and they did so.

The Banu Umayyah, they had the vile practice that if they heard that someone had named his son Ali, they killed him!

Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Aqri said:

“The Banu Umayyah, whenever they heard of a newborn named ‘Ali, they would kill him. This reached Rabah, so he changed his son’s name.”

Source: (“Siyar A’lam al-Nubala” (سير أعلام النبلاء) by Imam Shams ad-Din adh-Dhahabi

By the way dear reader many of you may not be aware but a revival of the Umayyad spirit is happening among the Sunni Muslims, in particular Salafist types. They wear the title nawasib as a badge of honour. As an indication of one’s loyalty to Sunnism they will name their kids as Yazid or Mu’awiyah. The fighting in Syria accelerated this movement. Insh’Allah have an article on this coming.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah al-Harrani states about Ali that many of the companions and followers hated him, insulted him and fought him!

Ahl al-Sunnah excused some of those who killed Ali. And them themselves openly insulted and cursed him!

Ibn Al-Qayyim recounts the story of Al-Hajjaj in cursing Imam Ali and ordering people to curse him in the markets in front of the shops!

Ibn Taymiyyah proves the infighting and killing among the companions, and each group despising the other!

“As for what he mentioned regarding mutual cursing, the cursing was done by both groups, just as the fighting took place. One group would curse the leaders of the other in their supplications, and the other would curse the leaders of the first in their supplications. It is said that each faction would invoke curses upon the other in their prayer (qunut).”

“Fighting with the hand is greater [in sin] than cursing with the tongue. All of this—whether it was a sin, an effort of independent legal judgment (ijtihad), an error, or a correct opinion—is encompassed by the forgiveness and mercy of God through repentance, the erasing of sins by good deeds, great calamities that expiate sin, and other means.”

Source: (“Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah” (منهاج السنة النبوية)

The Salafiyah tell us that the mother of the believers Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her) swears by Allah that Abu Huraira lied! Is this the amount of respect for the Companions have for each other according to the Salafiyah?

In the books of Ahl Sunnah a sahabah is accused of adultery!

A Companion eats the head of another Companion!

Salafiyah claim that what Ahmed bin Hanbal did for Islam was not done by anyone other than him not even Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq! (May Allah be pleased with him!) Are these words said in truth about the best companion of the Blessed Messenger (saw)?!

The sahaba used to drink wine! (After becoming Muslims)

A Companion Drinks Alcohol!(After embracing Islam)

A companion leads the people in the morning prayer, four units while in a state of sloppy drunkenness, and says to the crowd of worshipers, “Shall I add more for you?”

Umar bin Al-Khattab appoints a companion who drinks alcohol in Bahrain and asks the companions to testify to his drunkenness’. This is how the Salafiyah convey to us about the companions challenging and calling each other out like this!

They say the companions were cheaters and that Abu Hurarira was the chief of them in cheating! Imagine! And there are among the Ahl Sunnah who have the audacity to call the People of Truth and Straightness as Non Muslims?!

What does it mean by calling a noble companion a thief?

See what is said about the companions here:

Who were those who persisted in their ignorance and evil, then Muawiyah banished them from the Levant? ! Muhammed bin Abdul Wahhab answers you!

Shaykh Ibn Baz accuses the companions of polytheism!

Shaykh Ibn Baz’s ruling on cursing some of the companions! Surprise Surprise!

Ahl Sunnah say that Abu Hurairah was known for taking bribes! Who attacks the companions?

Shaykh Ibn Al-Uthaymeen, states that not all the Companions are not all just! In them there is rank debauchery!

Ibn Al-Atheer describes the companion Abu Musa as a fool! Who respects the companions?

Yahya Ibn Mu’een insults the companion Ammar bin Yasir and follows up his insults with curses! Who respects the companions?

Umar ibn al-Khattab, May Allah be pleased with him, called the People of the Book al-Faruq. Is this true, ya Salafiyah?

Ahl Sunnah defaming Umar Ibn Al-Khattab! (May Allah be pleased with him), by saying that he was distracted by clapping in the markets!! Who respects the companions? Only the people who have no haya insult Umar (ra)

They imagine that the companions of the Messenger of Allah are flirting with a beautiful woman while they are praying! Is this the state of the companions of the Messenger of Allah with you?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah accuses Imam Ali that his war was not for Allah and His Messenger, and if it was for Allah and His Messenger, victory would have been for him! One of the positions of the Ibadi is that Ali came short for going against the hukm of Allah (swt) and later slaughtered the Muslims of Nahrawan. Allah knows best his ending. The other is that Ali had realized his wrong, was overwhelmed with grief and turned in repentance to Allah (swt) and met with a good ending. husnal khatimah

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that Ali deems the blood of Muslims lawful, and thus he is out and out a Kafir.

Al-Waleed bin Juma’ is from the narrators of Sahih Muslim and Ibn Hazm says his hadeeth is defective and Al-Waleed is a doomed man!

Here they are defaming the Prophet of Allah (saw), his honorable companions, and his pure wives!

Another wretched statement!

If Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave girl, where would he place his hand?! Who honors the companions?

Defaming the great companion Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him).

They claim the Companion Abdullah bin Umar called Abu Hurairah a flat liar!

Among the terms of the reconciliation between Muawiyah and Al-Hassan, after he was betrayed and almost killed, is that Muawiya stop cursing Imam Ali in Al-Hassan’s presence!

Shi’a tend to think Al Hassan’s reconciliation with Muawiya was wrong but that Ali’s arbitration with Muawiya was fine and dandy!

One of Ahl Sunnah says that the faith of Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (ra) and the faith of Iblees are one! No one says this except for someone who has left the fold of Islam. And the Sunnis excused those who killed Imam Ali and openly insulted and cursed him!

The claim that Fatima Al-Zahraa was a lying woman and lied to Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq, and his narration was received, then she deserted him until she died!

None other than Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah criticizes the “Rightly Guided Caliphs”!

According to the testimony of Ibn Katheer!

More from Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that Ali fought and killed many Muslims who perform the prayers and pay the zakat, and the matter of blood is more severe! Why is if it an Ibadi scholar says it it is an offense but if Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says it is fine?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that in Ali’s caliphate there was no mercy, rather people were killed and they curse each other, and they did not have a sword against the infidels, but rather the infidels coveted them and took a country from them and their money.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that the time of Ali is a time of sedition, and there was no general imam!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that the Companions who fought Ali, vilified him and cursed him were more knowledgeable than those who supported Ali and cursed Uthman. Who is disavowing who here?

The predecessors of the Salafiyah are those who did not consider Imam Ali to be the caliph of the Muslims until the time of Ahmed bin Hanbal! Think about that! Do not get it twisted. The Imami Shi’i never accepted the first three Caliphs. The Ahl Sunnah the fourth until Imam Ahmed rehabilitated the image of Ali among them. Where as the Ibadi are the one’s who recognized all four from the beginning! Learn the truth!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah defines the Sunnis as the ones who established the succession of the three caliphs! Where is Ali?

The jurists of the Hejaz and Iraq from the two groups of theologians and the people of opinion, including Malik, Al-Shafi’i, Al-Awzai, and the majority of Muslims and theologians, agreed that Ali was right in his war in Siffin and in the Battle of the Camel, and that those who fought him were unjust oppressors ! (i.e. Muawiyah and his army, Our Mother Aisha (ra), Talha and Al-Zubayr)

Muawiyah tempts the child killer Ibn Arta’ah to kill Ali bin Abi Talib and promises him the best of this world and the Hereafter! But remember Ahl Sunnah will tell you they loved each other as brothers! Of course they did!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that Umar is less mistaken than Ali, and they found the weakness in Ali’s sayings more, and they found contradiction in Ali’s sayings more than the contradictory sayings of Umar!

Ibn Asakir The Syrian Sunni Islamic scholar says that Marwan Ibn Al-Hakam used to curse Imam Ali on the pulpit every Friday for six years, then he was dismissed and reinstated again, and he did not stop insulting him!

Muawiyah mobilizes the people of Basra to fight Imam Ali.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah says that many of the Companions were known to have slandered Ali!

Ibn Hajar Al Asqalni openly quotes the things Ibn Taymiyyah has said about the companions that Ibn Taymiyyah and his supporters want to hide from people.

Look what the Hanbali Imam Ibn Qudama said about Ibn Muljim killing Imam Ali!

Al-Dhahabi: The Messenger of Muawiyah offers Hajr and his companions the innocence of a man! And the man is Imam Ali However, why amputate and hide the texts?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah is skeptical whether Imam Ali memorized the Qur’an or not?

Al-Tabari: The Messenger of Muawiyah asks Hujr and his companions to disavow Ali and curse him, and tells them that we have been commanded to do so!

Imam Ali stayed in the caliphate for five years or more, so people ate and drank the blood of the innocent, lived off the sweat of the weak, and the tears of the bereaved, as well as the suffering of the orphans and the miserable!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah’s opinion laid bare regarding the leadership of Imam Ali and those who fought Imam Ali and those who did not fight with him!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, the three caliphs agreed upon by the Muslims, and the sword was unsheathed against the infidels and kept from the people of Islam. Ali, the Muslims did not agree to pledge allegiance to him, but rather sedition occurred during his reign, and the sword was kept from the infidels and unleashed on the people of Islam! In fact I (Prima-Qur’an) being non-partisan am inclined to agree with Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah here. It is a point against the Shi’i as the reign of Ali was not one of barakah, but of blood shed of believers and deep divisions that have lasted until this very day. If I say it as an Ibadi I will be called Kharijite where as Ibn Taymiyyah makes a good observation and gets a free pass.

Al-Abbas describes Ali as a treacherous sinner and a traitor; and ask Umar to judge between them? ! Hey Ahl Sunnah what is the ruling on the treacherous, the sinner, the traitor? Where is the love of the Companions?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah: Hating Ali does not harm faith one bit!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah: The preachers of Morocco mention Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, and they mention Muawiyah, but they do not mention Ali. It is clear that they hated him and cursed him!

The whole of Banu Umayyah, are a clan of Ali haters, all except for Umar bin Abdul Aziz, the just!

Al-Awza’i: We did not accept the giving until we witnessed Ali’s hypocrisy and disavowed him! Is this the love of the Companions?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah: Imam Ali did not show the religion of Islam during his caliphate, and their enemies among the infidels and Christians coveted them! If the religion of Islam did not appear during Ali’s caliphate, then what religion did appear during his caliphate?

The Salafi Shaykh Abdel Moneim Al-Shahat states: “The reason for Ali’s defeat was caused by his greed for the caliphate and his love for leadership!”

How does he know what is in Ali ibn Abu Talib’s heart? Rather the reason for Ali’s defeat was going against the Amr of Allah (swt) in the Qur’an and in all my encounters with the Shi’i they Shi’i flee from this point!

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah expresses what is in his heart towards Imam Ali here:

Ibn Hajar in Al-Durar Al-Kamina transmits from Ibn Taymiyyah his visciousness towards Imam Ali!

Here they are – slandering the Mothers of the Believers, the Messenger of Allah, and Umar ibn al-Khattab!!!

The book of Musnad Imam Ahmad: Caliph Uthman directs his words to his companions while he is besieged and says to them: “Why are you killing me?!” A question for the Sunnis, why do you spread rumors among the people that the one who killed Uthman were rabble and bandits who came from Egypt?!

And why are you basically exposing the sedition of the Companions?! These books expose your lies!

They have admitted to fabricating false hadiths about Uthman!

Marwan killed Talha, one of the so called ten promised paradise, and because of him, events unfolded to lead to what what happened to Uthman, and he was severely cursing and abusing Imam Ali. Despite all that the Ahl Sunnah praise him.

Amr Ibn Al-Aas once stabbed the caliph Uthman and once demanded the blood of Uthman. The books of Ahl Sunnah expose their lies!

In The Book of The Comprehensive Explanations on the Tahawi Creed: They Criticize Uthman and Deplore His Killers!

Imam Al-Shafi’i says Imam Ali that he did not take revenge on blood or money! That is, those who participated in the killing of the caliph Uthman, Imam Ali did not take revenge on them because they were not in the wrong! Is this correct?

Ibn Qutayba criticizes Caliph Uthman so is he a kharijite?

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah at it again! This time he slanders both Uthman and Ali!!

The companions in Kufa slander Uthman, some of whom witnessed Badr! Obviously they did not believe the Qur’an teaches that all companions go to paradise.

The companion Abd al-Rahman bin Udays was among those who pledged allegiance under the tree. He was the commander of those coming from Egypt to besiege Uthman! And many are those among the Sunni who enjoy sedition and lie to the people that those coming from Egypt are nothing but rabble and deviants!

Remember the Salafi preacher who went on air and cursed the companion  Amr b. al-Hamiq al-Khuzāʿī  for stabbing Uthman in the chest 9 times! Even after he found out the man really was a companion he did a 180 but still maintained all the companions are just. Then the conclusion can only be that Uthman was killed with justice. Or the companion killed Uthman without justice with is a major major sin. It is a difficulty no doubt about it.

The Ahl Sunnah scholar says about the companion Al-Walid bin Uqba, Uthman’s brother to his mother, that his beard drips with wine!

Al-Kamil fi at-Tarikh edited to hide the truth from people!!

A complete chapter titled: “Why people denounced Uthman!” Imagine if Ibadi’s wrote a book like that with a title like this!

In the Sunni books the mother of the believers, Aisha (r.a) is stated to have said: “Kill Nathla, for he has committed blasphemy,” Nathla meaning Uthman!

Uthman spoiled the innermost secret of the divorced (freed-slaves)!

With in the book of Ibn Qutayba we find more censures against Caliph Uthman by a number of companions!

Aisha (r.a) the mother of the believers orders the killing of the companion Uthman bin Hanif!

Accusations of the murder of Caliph Uthman distributed among three: Aisha, Talha and Imam Ali!

The honorable companion Abd al-Rahman bin Udays al-Balawi who was among those who witnessed the conquest and was among those who pledged allegiance under the tree, and we see clearly his role in relation to Caliph Uthman!

The Sahabah themselves participated in the revolt against Caliph Uthman, as well as the sons of the Companions! Enough of your one sided views of history and delving into sedition and saying that that the Muslims were so stupid, so unaware, so aloof that Caliph Uthman was taken by surprise by unknown revolutionaries and unknown people!! All the while laughing at the common people and praising Muawiya and the Umayyads and telling the events to fit your lies to serve your agenda!

Al-Dhahabi, himself one of the predecessors of Al-Wahalia, mentions how Muslims resented Uthman! Where is the respect for the Companions and the shedding of crocodile tears to serve your malicious agenda?

A companion of the people of the allegiance of Al-Radwan and the leader of the revolutionaries was against Uthman!

In the Kitab al-Futuh: Aisha calls for the death of Uthman!

Umm Habiba appeals to Ali bin Abi Talib to protect Uthman and respond to her, unless he is dishonorable and miserable, meaning Uthman! And what is the greatest and most grievous attack against the Companions, other than that?

It was asked of the mother of the believers Aisha, “Do you not like a man from among the divorced men who disputes with Muhammed’s companions regarding the caliphate?” So what did Aisha say? !

Musannaf bin Abi Shaybah: Their are kings from the evil of kings, and the first of these kings is Muawiyah!

“Jaafar died in the midst of the caliphate of Muawiyah, may Allah curse him!”

“Yazid bin Muawiyah, may Allah curse them both!” More cursing and curses! Why all this cursing? Wasn’t Mu’awiyah one of the Companions?!

These books expose your hypocrisy!

The books of Ahl Sunnah are filled with it. May Allah (swt) curse so and so.

The Sunnis praise Muawiya and that he is the best of kings, then they add to this by saying that he approves of insulting Imam Ali! Have you gone mad?! Imam Ali is cursed and the one who curses him is said to be the best of kings!? WoW!

Let Imam Al-Suyuti quotes the words of Aisha (r.a) telling us what she really thinks about Muawiyah!

Imam Al-Shafi’i: list four sahabah whose testimony is not accepted! Testimony is taken from the truthful so what is the state of those four sahabah? These books expose their lies.

Marwan bin Al-Hakam, the first man with the caliph Uthman, hits the companion Talha bin Obaidullah with an arrow, and he kills him!

Shocker! Muawiyah bin Abi Sufyan and wine! Your books expose your hypocrisy.

Two companions insulted Muawiyah, and Imam Ali declared Muawiyah is upon misguidance!

The cause of the death of Imam al-Nisa’i, May Allah have mercy on him, at the hands of the fanatical Banu Umayyah!

How did Imam Al-Nisa’i die!? The word of truth may cost you your life, but Allah’s promise is true! The curse of hatred, hypocrisy and criminality!

The position of Sunni scholars towards Muawiya!!

The books of the Salafiyah declare Muawiya to be an infidel.

The Insulting and cursing of Muawiya and Uthman in Sunni books.,The Muhajireen and the Ansar did not support Uthman.

Ali bin Al-Jaad swears that Muawiyah died in a state other than Islam! Ali bin Al Ja’ad is a narrator in Bukhari and Imam Bukhari has taken some 13 narrations from him in his Sahih.

A fatal statement that afflicts Muawiya and which breaks those who glorify him!

The ignorant who fabricate hadiths in favour of Muawiya!!

The Companion Hajr bin Uday who witnessed such battles such as the pivotal conflict of Al-Qadisiyah, Al-Jamal, and Siffin, and he was a Shiite of Ali, who was killed by Muawiyah’s order in Damascus!

If Ali Ibn Abu Talib had his hands drenched with the blood of the Muslims there is no doubt that Muawiyah bathed in it!

Muhammed bin Abi Bakr Al-Siddiq was killed on the orders of Muawiya. He was inserted into the stomach of a donkey and then burned! Shall we say “May Allah be pleased with such a man” and expect people to enter into Islam?!

Muawiyah was kind to some of the servants of Al-Hassan, and thus, Al-Hassan died of poisoned! Your books expose your hypocrisy!

The killing of the companion Hajar bin Uday and his companions was mentioned with glee by Muawiya and his army!

Muawiya was the uncle of the believers!? With family like that who needs family!

Question for your Sunni friends: Lil game of trivia. Was Muawiya truthful in accusing Imam Ali?! If so Ali is a brigand that usurps rule without right. If not Muawiya is a bold face liar.

Al-Hassan Al-Basri states: Four qualities were in Muawiyah, if he had only one of them, he would have been disastrous!

Muawiyah drank what? “Then my father handed it to him and he said, “I have not drunk it since the Messenger of Allah (saw) prohibited it!” Drink what? Do not deceive people and say that he used to drink milk, because milk was not prohibited by the Messenger of Allah (saw), so what is the forbidden drink that Muawiyah indulged in according to your books?

Ibn Abbas (r.a) replies to Muawiya after an exchange that your cousin, i.e. Uthman bin Affan, was rebuked by the Muslims, so they killed him! Notice that Ibn Abbas (r.a) doesn’t say rebels or some unknowns killed Uthman but that he was killed by the Muslims!

Who killed Ammar bin Yassir? What did the Blessed Messenger (saw) say about those who would kill Ammar (r.a)?

Muawiyah and the novels of wine! In Sunni books.

Muawiyah was a scribe between the Prophet and the Arabs, not as Sunni’s claim that he was a scribe of the revelation!!

And it came in the book Musnad of Imam Ahmad that he was ordering them to consume money between them unjustly and to kill themselves, confirming the verses “do not consume one another’s wealth unjustly”

When Al-Hassan died, Muawiya said the Takbir and everyone in his council said Takbir! These are your books, so see how you are? Look what your books say!

Muawiya was busy waiting for Al-Hassan’s death, so when the news reached him, he said “Allahu Akbar” and “Allah is the Greatest” for the people of Sham!

Abd al-Razzaq, who has nearly 300 hadiths in al-Sahihayn, says that mentioning Muawiya in gatherings is filthy! Why all this great hatred?

When Al-Hassan bin Ali died, Muawiya went on pilgrimage and wanted to insult Imam Ali on the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah (saw), and wrote to his workers to curse Ali on the pulpits! Imagine! On the Blessed minbar of the Blessed Messenger (saw) cursing the companions!

Ahmed bin Hanbal narrates that Shaykh Al-Bukhari swears that Muawiyah died in a state other than Islam, and he did not narrate from him, and he forbade his son Abdullah to mention him or write about him!

None other than the mountain of knowledge Ishaq bin Rahawayh states: “Nothing narrated from the Prophet (saw) regarding the merits of Muawiyah is authentic!”

Muawiyah removes Saeed bin Al-Aas from the mandate of Medina and appoints Marwan bin Al-Hakam in his place, so what is the reason?

According to the testimony of al-Dhahabi, Muawiyah curses Ali; and al-Hasan stipulated that he should not curse him while he was listening.

The hadith that states Muawiyah is one of the people of Hell, and al-Tabarani hides the name of Muawiyah and puts the word man! These books show your hypocrisy and deceit!

Muawiyah commands batil (falsehood and consumes it). Sunni books.

Muawiya and the novels of wine!

Abdullah bin Umar deeply regretted not fighting the oppressive faction Muawiya and his companions!

Muhammed ibn Abi Bakr’s neck was cut off by order of Mu’awiya, and he was the first head to be cut off in Islam!

The mother of the believers, Aisha (r.a) threatens Muawiya with death for killing her brother. The companions were one big happy family? So we are told.

Amr bin Al-Aas, a well-known companion, was one of the instigators against Uthman!

Insulting the great Companions and defaming an honorable person in the books of the Sunnis.

Defaming the great companion Umar Ibn Al-Khattab! with words that are never befitting of a man like Umar (r.a). Is there no fear of Allah’s wrath in your hearts?!

The noble and honourable Khadija(r.a) made her father drink wine to marry her to the Messenger of Allah (saw), and when her father got drunk, he accepted her marriage!

May Allah suffice you! May Allah guide this ummah!

May Allah guide us! What disaster!

Mujaddid Al-Salafiyah Muhammed bin Abd Al-Wahhab lied and claimed that the Companions unanimously agreed that the Companion Qudama bin Madhu’un had been declared an unbeliever!

Accusing the companion Anas bin Malik of drinking paint, i.e. alcohol! The impression they give of the companions is of people who huff paint and absue whippets!

A companion accused of adultery!

We can lead the horse to the troph but you cannot make it drink.

So what will it be dear Muslim Ummah?

Will your Imam be hiding in occultation waiting to come out…. one day?

Will your Imam be a playboy who goes boating with scantly clad women and tells us the obligation of prayer and fasting has been lifted?

Will you be a Crypto-Sunni (An Abbasid) that holds disdain for Yazid, a little bit for Muaviya when your feeling edgy and none for Uthman because it’s a step too far?

Or do we go with the majority simply because it is convenient and we embrace the Islam of the Imperium and say (May Allah be pleased with the tyrants)? To rebel against the ruler is to be a kharijite?

Or do you just go your own way do it yourself Islam?

In conclusion what we do know is that no matter what happened between they did their job. Islam is here. There has been nothing left out of this deen. Some people want to keep going back and revisiting the past and digging up the graves and create fitna for the Ummah. The rest of us are content with moving on.

Even, I myself do not find benefit in delving into these matters other than it is necessary to get the record straight. What we as Muslims should truly focus on is our relationship with Allah (swt). To do our level best to obey His commands and avoid His prohibitions. To follow, the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).

You may also wish to read:

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/ibadi-stance-on-sahaba-according-to-the-quran/

https://primaquran.com/2023/02/11/the-genius-of-mufti-abu-layth-can-we-criticize-the-companions/

https://primaquran.com/2022/10/04/are-all-the-companions-just/

https://primaquran.com/2025/02/11/adalat-al-sahaba-a-doctrine-of-murjiism/

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

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah. May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah.

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Salafiyyah using mantiq (logic) and aql (reasoning) to deny attributes of Allah?

“Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)

﷽ 

Why does Allah not call Himself al-Mutakallim (the Speaker)?

This was a question that was sent to a Salafi Q & A and the response was quite shocking. Not only do the Salafi use logic and reasoning to reject attributes of Allah (swt) they use flawed logic and reasoning to do so.

You may find this article very eye opening: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/99624/why-does-allaah-not-call-himself-al-mutakallim-the-speaker

Praise be to Allah.

In order to make it clearer, we could word the question differently and say: 

Is it permissible to derive from the attributes and actions of Allaah that He has confirmed for Himself names for Him by which He may be called and by which His slaves may call upon Him, and which may be added to the list of His names so as to attain the reward mentioned in the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) “Allaah has ninety-nine names. Whoever memorizes them will enter Paradise” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2736) and Muslim (2677), or are there guidelines concerning the derivation of His names from His attributes and actions? 

It is essential first of all to ascribe wisdom to Allaah, may He be exalted, for He is absolutely perfect, and He is to be named and described in a manner that is befitting to Him. People should be guided by that which He has told them in His Book of His perfection, majesty and might; to Him all things return and He has great wisdom. 

But we shall try to understand His names and attributes based on what is mentioned in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and ponder that so that we might derive some guidelines for defining His most beautiful names. 

The scholars differed concerning that which the brother asked about, which let them to differ concerning the number of the beautiful names of Allaah and definition of guidelines concerning them. Some of them regarded it as the matter of worship only, in which there is no room for ijtihaad and qiyaas (analogy), as was the view of Ibn Hazm. Some of them were very lenient about this matter and allowed calling Allaah by names such as al-Mutakallim (the Speaker), al-Mureed (the Willer) and every other word by which Allaah is described in the Qur’aan and Sunnah. This was the view of Ibn al-‘Arabi al-Maaliki and others. 

Some scholars took a middle approach; they studied the reports of the divine names and found that if an attribute implied a sense of praise only and could not be taken as implying imperfection or fault in any way, such as hearing and sight, then in the texts names were derived from it, so Allaah called Himself al-Samee’ (the All-Hearing) and al-Baseer (the All-Seeing). 

But if an attribute could be taken as implying imperfection in some way, such as speaking, for example, as speaking may include lying, wrongdoing and other bad meanings, in which case it is a shortcoming and silence is preferable to it, so we do not find a divine name that is derived from this attribute, so we do not find that one of the names of Allaah is al-Mutakallim (the Speaker). 

This was the view of the great scholar Ibn Taymiyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim, and it is the view of most of our contemporary scholars. 

Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Sharh al-‘Aqeedah al-Isfahaaniyyah (1/19-20): 

As for calling Allaah, may He be exalted, Mureed (Willer) and Mutakallim (Speaker),  

These two names are not mentioned in the Qur’aan, or among the well known divine names. Their meanings are true, but the well known divine names are those by which Allaah may be called upon, and are mentioned in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and which imply perfection and praise in and of themselves. 

Knowledge, power, mercy and so on are in and of themselves praiseworthy attributes, and the names which point to them are praiseworthy names.  

As for speech and will, they may be divided into praiseworthy types such as truthfulness and justice, and blameworthy types such as wrongdoing and lying. Allaah can only be described in praiseworthy terms, not blameworthy ones, hence His names do not include al-Mutakallim (the Speaker) or al-Mureed (the Willer). End quote. 

He also (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Bayaan Talbees al-Jahamiyyah (2/10-11): 

Allaah has the most beautiful names, by which He has called Himself, and has revealed them in His Book and taught to whomever He willed among His creation, such as al-Haqq (the Truth), al-‘Aleem (the All-Knowing), al-Raheem (the Most Merciful), al-Hakeem (the Most Wise), al-Awwaal (the First), al-Aakhir (the last), al-‘Aliy (the Most High), al-‘Azeem (the Almighty), al-Kabeer (the Most Great) and so on. 

All of these names are names of praise which indicate praiseworthy meaning, and have no blameworthy meaning. To Allaah belong the most beautiful names, and He is perfect in all ways. Names which are more general in meaning and may be applied to both good and bad things are not found among the beautiful names of Allaah. End quote. 

 

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Mukhtasar al-Sawaa’iq (2/34):

The names of Allaah does not include al-Mureed (the Willer), al-Mutakallim (the speaker), al-Faa’il (the Doer) or al-Saani’ (the Manufacturer), because these names may apply to both good and bad. Rather He is described by praiseworthy names such as al-Haleem (the Forbearing), al-Hakeem (the Most Wise), al-‘Azeez (the Almighty), the One Who does what He wills. End quote. 

He also (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Madaarij al-Saalikeen (3/415-416): 

That which may carry meanings of both perfection and imperfection is not included among the divine names, such as al-shay’ (thing) and ma’loom (known). Hence He is not called al-Mureed (the Willer) or al-Mutakallim (the Speaker), because these names may carry good and bad meanings. This is based on subtle understanding of the divine names and attributes, so think about it. And Allaah is the Source of strength. End quote. 

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Sharh al-Waasitiyyah (1/86): 

Hence Allaah did not call Himself al-Mutakallim (the Speaker), although He speaks, because speech may be good or bad, and it may be neither good nor bad. Evil cannot be attributed to Allaah, and idle speech cannot be attributed to Him either, because it is foolishness; only good can be attributed to Him. Hence He did not call Himself al-Mutakallim (the Speaker), because the names are as Allaah has ascribed to Himself. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And (all) the Most Beautiful Names belong to Allaah” [al-‘A’raaf 7:180]. They do not include anything that suggests imperfection. End quote.  

See also the answer to question no. 39803 and 48964. 

For more information please see the book Mu’taqad Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah fi Asma’ Allaah al-Husna by Dr Muhammad ibn Khaleefah al-Tameemi (50-59). 

And Allaah knows best.

PRIMA QUR’AN COMMENTS:

Well, can you imagine the Athari/ Salafiyyah making a big fuss about the Qur’an being the speech of Allah (swt) and than claiming that speech is an attribute of Allah (swt) and than turning around and admitting that Allah (swt) never called Himself “Al-Mutakallim”.

Then, saying that this is not appropriate to call Allah (swt) as Al-Mutakallim because speech may be good or bad! Yet they claim evil cannot be attributed to Allah (swt).

Pardon me for being more Athari than the Athari, but if your basic principle is that Allah (swt) cannot lie and that Allah (swt) does no evil than attributing the name of Al Mutakallim to Allah (swt) based upon that alone is not problematic.

Likewise simple logic. If the basic principle is that Allah (swt) cannot lie and that Allah (swt) does no evil and wills no evil than there is no harm in attributing the name of Al-Mureed. How can it be imagined that Allah (swt) wills evil?

In fact by the logic and the reasoning that the Athari/Salafi use in the above article you could reject the names of All Seeing and All Hearing.

Why? Because it is possible to hear gossip, and vile things. It is possible to witness and see vile and evil things.

Certainly Allah (swt) hears (perceives) and sees (knows) that which we as believers are forbidden to listen to and see. Allah (swt) has full grasp of all knowledge.

So the reasoning and logic given by the Athari/Salafi for rejecting the names of Al-Mureed or Al Mutakallim are not sound nor consistent.

That which may carry meanings of both perfection and imperfection is not included among the divine names, such as al-shay’ (thing) and ma’loom (known)

Notice that they do not believe it is appropriate to call Allah (swt) al-shay (The Thing). Not a thing (one among many) but The Thing.

Things brings them directly in conformity with Mu’tazilite/Ashari/Māturīdī theology.

Why?

Qur’an 42:11 the verse quoted in the beginning of the article the Arabic text states:

“laysa kamith’lihi shayon” (There is not like Him anything).

So, there is even a textual evidence that someone could come along and say, “We say Allah (swt) is a thing unlike other things.” Yet, this is not a good descriptor of The Divine.

There are no two things alike. Even things we deem identical have different properties and/or attributes.

Look what they quote from Ibn Al Qayyim above:

“That which may carry meanings of both perfection and imperfection is not included among the divine names, such as al-shay’ (thing) and ma’loom (known). Hence He is not called al-Mureed (the Willer) or al-Mutakallim (the Speaker), because these names may carry good and bad meanings. This is based on subtle understanding of the divine names and attributes, so think about it.”

This is based on subtle understanding of the divine names and attributes, so think about it“-Ibn Al Qayyim

Mash’Allah now only if our Athari/Salafi friends would think about it!

May Allah (swt) guide the to the haqq!

May Allah (swt) Forgive the Ummah! May Allah (swt) Guide the Ummah!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized