Wednesday, 2 December 2015

Imam al-Baghawi (d.561AH) and Ibn Kathir on Khawarij

Imam al-Baghawi (d. 516H) in his book “Sharh as-Sunnah” while commenting on the hadith about the Khawarij: 

قَوْلُهُ: «لَا يُجَاوِزُ تَرَاقِيَهُمْ» أَيْ: لَا يُقْبَلُ وَلا يُرْفَعُ فِي الأَعْمَالِ الصَّالِحَةِ.
وَقَوْلُهُ: «يَمْرُقُونَ مِنَ الدِّينِ» أَيْ: يَخْرُجُونَ مِنَ الدِّينِ، أَيْ مِنَ طَاعَةِ الأَئِمَّةِ، وَالدِّينُ: الطَّاعَةُ، وَهَذَا نَعْتُ الْخَوَارِجِ الَّذِينَ لَا يَدِينُونَ لِلأَئِمَّةِ، وَيَسْتَعْرِضُونَ النَّاسَ بِالسَّيْفِ،
Here he explains the trait mentioned in the hadith about the Khawarij  that they read the Qur’an but “do not go beyond their throats” that it means “Neither accepted nor raised are their good deeds."
In other words, even if the Khawarij read the Qur’an, pray tahajjud, fast every week, fight their self declared “jihad”, or assume about themselves that “at least they have good intentions and calling to Tawhid and Shariah”, it does not matter in light of the religion that Allah has sent down and their deeds are deemed worthless.

And with regards to the description that the Khawarij “pass through the religion”, Imam al-Baghawi explains that “this attribute of the Khawarij is because they denounce the Imams and view people with the sword”.



قال ابن كثير إِذْ لَوْ قَوُوا هَؤُلَاءِ لَأَفْسَدُوا الْأَرْضَ كُلَّهَا عِرَاقًا وَشَامًا وَلَمْ يَتْرُكُوا طِفْلًا وَلَا طِفْلَةَ وَلَا رَجُلًاوَلَا امْرَأَةً لِأَنَّ النَّاسَ عِنْدَهُمْ قَدْ فَسَدُوا فَسَادًا لَا يُصْلِحُهُمْ إِلَّا الْقَتْلُ جُمْلَةً
[10/584 البداية والنهاية]


Posted by  ADHM

Tuesday, 1 December 2015

Root Cause

Update: May 2017

Wahhabism/Salafism that is the root cause of extremism and terrorism


Dr Zamihan says the Wahhabi/Salafist way is extremely rigid and rather extreme. It can split Muslim society, he warns, because its followers view Muslims who do not follow their way – as well as non-Muslims – as apostates so it is halal (permissible) to spill their blood.

He points out that apart from IS, a number of radical Islamist militant groups like Jemaah Islamiyah, Abu Sayyaf, Al Qaeda, Jabhat al-Nusra, Boko Haram and Al Shabaab all draw on the teachings of Wahhabism/Salafism to justify their brutal acts, claiming it as part of a jihad (holy war).

Dr Zamihan – who has a doctorate in Aqidah (faith) and Philosophy and is pursuing another PhD with a thesis on “Managing Conflict: A Study of IS” – says these extremists feel that only they are truly Islamic and right.

“They don’t accept the views or the religious authority of others, including the fatwa council or religious departments. They want an Islamic state but they don’t accept democracy and elections.

“They would kill, rob, kidnap, hijack, confiscate assets and property, steal weapons, carry out suicide attacks, buy material to make bombs, then make and use them because they want to destroy the current system of government, which to them is ‘unIslamic’ and is ‘astray’, so that they can set up an Islamic state according to their mould.’’

He says while extremist groups are not new to Malaysia, the present trend is really worrying because there is no structure, so attacks can happen anywhere; also, the extremists are hardcore.

Dr Zamihan is the president of Aswaja, short for Pertubuhan Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah Malaysia, a group that is trying to roll back the Wahhabi/Salafist influence in the country.

But this can be a quite challenge when Saudi Arabia, with its huge coffers, is a major donor to many institutions, NGOs and charity organisations here.

Then there are also people in Malaysia in influential positions who speak in defence of Wahhabism/Salafism. They say Wahhabism/Salafism is part of Sunni Islam – which is something that some here refute – and deny that it is fuelling radicalism and extremism in the country and making people join IS.

A few months ago, National Fatwa Council chairman Tan Sri Dr Shukor Husin weighed in on the issue. He was quoted in a news report as saying that while Wahhabism is not haram (prohibited) here, it has no place in the country because its followers are fond of labelling Muslims who do not adhere to Wahhabism teaching as apostates.

But since religion is a state matter, he said, it would be up to the respective states to decide whether to restrict or allow it.

Johor, Kedah, Negri Sembilan, Pahang, Perak and Selangor are states that have banned Wahhabism/Salafism.

Senior fellow at the Institute of Islamic Strategic Research Malaysia (Iksim) Dr Engku Ahmad Fadzil Engku Ali says there is no single factor that motivates people to join IS. He feels that it is significant that most who join are from the younger generation – this could indicate immaturity.

Dr Engku Ahmad says data from the police, based on their interrogation of IS detainees locally and overseas, point to the conclusion that almost all subscribe at one point or other of their struggle to the Wahhabi/Salafist ideology. 
He also says that it is no secret that the Saudis have been giving scholarships to Malaysian Muslims for many years and many have graduated and come back and are holding important and strategic positions in Islamic agencies here; some are also lecturers at local universities.

“They are given free access to the young, the less experienced and easily charged minds of hundreds of students year after year. I am not saying all of them are radicalising these students but some surely do sow the seeds of extremism in these young minds.”

So Dr Engku Ahmad is calling for a serious overhaul of the education syllabus for Islamic subjects. To stop or minimise young people from being radicalised, it is important to give them the needed educational content from the early stage “nurtured in the correct way and conveyed in terms they can easily understand’’, he says.

Interestingly, Dr Engku Ahmad also urged political parties to have the “strong will to reject entrance into their parties of these elements, however enticing their support seems to be to their political struggles’’.

Malaysia enjoys very close ties with Saudi Arabia so won’t coming down hard against Wahhabism/Salafism affect relations between the two countries, we wonder?

“We have the right, or rather obligation, to reject such a rigid and harsh understanding of Islam that eventually leads to extremism and terrorism. It is totally unacceptable to say that we are going to tolerate such a school of thought, or rather a systematic indoctrination, on the pretext that we do not want to strain our relationship with the Saudi Kingdom – or worse, giving the lame excuse that such a rejection will cause us to lose our quota for the annual hajj!” says Dr Engku Ahmad.

He says Malaysia rejects the Syiah interpretation of Islam but this does not affect its ties with Iran even though Syiah is the mainstream doctrine there.

“Similarly, rejecting Wahhabism/Salafism should not be seen as going against the Saudi Kingdom or government. We can even accept monetary assistance from the Saudis but we should not enslave ourselves to a dangerous doctrine like Wahhabism/Salafism as if we have sold our souls once we accept the Saudis’ assistance.”

He points out that Malaysia accepts assistance from the West but that does not mean it has to accept Christianity, the mainstream religion in the West.

“Similarly, it is very naive to say that we must accept Wahhabism/Salafism once we accept assistance from the Saudis. Even prominent figures in Saudi Arabia have started to admit frankly it is Wahhabism/Salafism that is the root cause of extremism and terrorism.’’ Here


Saudi Arabia is playing an increasingly destabilising role in the Middle East, German intelligence warns

'The cautious diplomatic stance of the older leading members of the royal family is being replaced by an impulsive policy of intervention' Here

‘Time of looking away over’: Germany warns Saudi Arabia to stop funding radical Islamists Here

The extremist behaviour of the criminal Bloodthirsty Wahhabi regime in Saudi Arabia will no longer be tolerated, not even by their own allies

The Al Saud have brought nothing but Evil misery and  bloodshed  to the Arab world, and instead of using oil revenues for the betterment of Islam the wahhabi regime is using it's vast fortunes to cause havoc and destruction upon the poorer and less fortunate Arab and Muslim countries, who refuse to submit to their radical Wahhabi Ideology!

In Brief

General Muslims and non muslims of the world have now woken up to realise that they want to get rid of this vile creature (ISIS/ISIL) which has bitten their newborns with a highly toxic and extremely venomous poison.

This particular evil species is called Wahhabiyyah and has been kept alive by the Snake Charmers in the West.
The Snake Charmer let loose this Evil  upon the Muslims in 1924, which has now grown into quite a large out of control vile Monster with its many Ugly Heads!

The Snake Charmer keeps breeding this Evil Snake upon the Muslim World due to its own Evil Dajjalic Agenda... 

Evil House of Saud, which has had intimate ties to the Pentagon, U.S. intelligence agencies, and American defense companies since 1943, when Franklin Delano Roosevelt declared, “The defense of Saudi Arabia is vital to the defense of the United States.” During the past seventy years, the Saudi monarchy has struck many, many arms deals with the U.S., including a $60.5 billion agreement with the Obama Administration, in 2010.
Trump administration approved a $110 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia.

 "This deal has President Trump throwing gasoline on a house fire and locking the door on his way out." [Eric Ferrero, Amnesty International USA communications director]


In 2013, $1.75 Trillion was spent on the military worldwide; with the top 100 arms companies selling over $402 Billion in weapons, but they still insisted to show us on TV Adverts: "How you can help the poor impoverished countries like Africa with food and clean water!"

But Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Lebanon have all been bombed by The Snake Charmer and its pungi  since 9/11, with the apparent objective of destroying Radical Islamic Terrorism.

Yet whether it's in the form of The Taliban, Al-Qaeda, or ISIS/ISIL...etc, the ideology behind all them  is the same vile species known as Wahhabism which is Hypnotized  by USA,UK,FRANCE,ISRAEL...etc.

Interview with John Pilger:
USA, UK and France gave birth to ISIS monster



It is an Extremely Venomous Species known to the Muslim world  as Wahhabi Not Sunni as the Snake Charmer led us to believe, The Snake Charmer like its Master Dajjal will confuse and mesmerise us and our Parents, so that they will not able to use the right Vaccine against its Extremely Toxic and very Poisonous venom !

The original breed (Khawarij) of this species raised its ugly head around the year 1740CE in Najd to spread its highly poisonous venom across the Muslim world. For the past 270 years or so, its highly poisonous venom has been spreading across the Muslim world from within Saudi Arabia! (More info here)

Most of the Wahhabiyyah  call themselves:  “Salafi/Ahlehadith” (Inland Taipan) and not to forget their (Eastern Brown) who call themselves Deobandi /Tablighis…etc, have been breeding this venomous species for quite some time and they are now quite desperate to find a vaccine for its poisonous venom, which they wholeheartedly kept breeding until  their newborns became extremely Toxic with its poison.

Those Muslims living in the west for the past 50 years or so who adopted this species of the Wahhabiyyah "Salafi/Ahlehadith” and the Deobandi /Tablighi cults have also affected their newborns through the venomous teachings of  Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn abdul Wahhab Najd's Ideology  due to their own Evil misguided Self Hatred of the Orthodox Sunni/Sufi Muslims!

 The Snakes Head?

The Egyptian Ministry of Religious Endowments have launched a campaign to remove the books of scholars that belong to the Salafi movement from all mosques in Egypt.

Names of scholars whose books are to be removed or confiscated:-
– Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab
– Imam Ibn Taymiyyah
– Sheikh Ibn Baz
– Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen
– Sheikh Abu Ishaq al-Huweini
– Sheikh Mohamed Hussein Yacoub
– Sheikh Mohammed Hassan
They have already confiscated 7000 books and CDs from mosque libraries in Cairo, Alexandria and Giza. The authors of these materials include:
– Sheikh Wagdi al-Ghoneim
– Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi
– Sheikh Muhammad al-Maqsood
– Yasser al-Burhami
– Sheikh Abu Ishaq al-Huweini
– Sheikh Mohamed Hussein Yacoub
– Sheikh Mohammed Hassan
The ministry’s department is currently launching an inspection campaign on mosques and libraries in all provinces, to make sure they are free of any books and media calling for “militancy and extremism”.Source

Most of the Sunni World is sound asleep after having a delicious Biryani !

Over 100 Sunni scholars declare Wahhabis to be outside mainstream Sunni Islam – Chechnya
An International conference of Sunni scholars was held in Grozny, Chechnya, attended by more than 100 renowned Islamic scholars and Sufi shaykhs who came from Russia, Syria, Turkey, India, Egypt, Jordan, South Africa, United Kingdom and other countries.Shaykh Ahmed El-Tayeb, Grand Imam of al-Azhar, Egypt, defined the mainstream Sunni Islam and excluded Wahhabis from it.
He stated: “Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah are the Ash’arites and Muturidis (adherents of the theological systems of Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi and Imam Abul-Hasan al-Ash’ari). 
In matters of belief, they are followers of any of the four schools of thought (Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki or Hanbali) and are also the followers of the Sufism of Imam Junaid al-Baghdadi in doctrines, manners and [spiritual] purification.”
This statement implies that Salafists, also called Wahhabis, are not part of the mainstream Ahl as-Sunnah or Sunni Muslims, despite the fact that they are trying to hijack the term Sunni by labeling themselves as Sunni Muslims.

Shaykh Ahmed El-Tayeb also said: “Terrorists and Islam have no relation whatsoever, instead these terrorists are inclined towards spreading a radical ideology among Muslims, so that Islam is misunderstood world over.”
The conference was held on 25-27 August 2016 in the city of Grozny, organized by the president of the Chechen Republic Ramzan Kadyrov.
Wahhabi clerics of the Saudi Kingdom are furious over this conference.
Wahhabis of other countries have also been angered over it.
Some of the renowned shaykhs attending the conference include:

Shaykh Ahmed El-Tayeb, president and grand Imam of the prestigious Islamic seminary Al-Azhar University of Cairo, Egypt
Shaikh Muhammad Saad al-Azhari, professor of Al-Azhar University
Shaykh Abu Bakr Ahmad, head of the largest Islamic seminary in Kerala, South India
Shaykh Anwar Ahmed al-Baghdadi, teacher at a large North Indian seminary Jamia Aleemiya
Habib Umar bin Hafiz, the leading Sufi shaykh of the Ba-Alawiyah Sufi Order and head of the International Islamic seminary in Tarim, Yemen
Habib Ali al-Jifri, renowned Sunni scholar of UAE and one of the leading Sufi shaykhs of the Ba-Alawiyah Sufi Order
Shaykh Ali Gomaa, ex Grand Mufti of Egypt

Kamil Samigullin, the chief Mufti of Tatarstan


Where do they keep this Snake?

The Ugly Heads of this Evil breed are safely kept alive in Saudi Arabia in a hell hole called Najd
Where most of  its radicalised extreme evil teachings are produced and  bred daily
This vile creatures venom has been spread all around the world through Radical Wahhabi Preachers called: "Tawhid" , "Bidah" and "Shirk"!

Recently a few Muslim countries as you already know above vowed to exterminate all of Ibn Taymiyyah's deadly venom but they forgot that this ugly monster has more than one head and the vaccine they were using was from Saudi Arabia which  had no effect on its newborns!

Note: Don't just cut off one head (al sheikh) cut off all its heads period!

For those who are  infected by its deadly venom there is a  vaccine available... 

Imam Al-Daarmi in his Musnad has recorded that two misguided men came to Imam Ibn Seereen and said: “We shall recite a Hadith to you.”
Imam Ibn Seereen said: “No (you shall not).”
They said: “We shall recite a verse from the book of Allah to you.”
He again, replied: “No, either you both stand and leave otherwise I shall stand and leave.”

The narrator said: “They both left and one (or some) of the people said: “O Abu Bakr, what harm would come to you, if they recited a verse from the book of Allah?”

The Imam replied: “Indeed, I feared that if they recited a verse and interpreted it incorrectly, then that (incorrect interpretation) could have become established in my heart.”
Imam Al-Daarmi also recorded in his Musnad that a man from the deviated people asked Sayyiduna Ayyub Sakhtiyaani regarding (the meaning of) a word.
The narrator says: “He (Sayyiduna Ayyub Sakhtiyaani) turned away and gestured with his finger- not even half a word.”
Imam Al-Daarmi also recorded regarding Sayyiduna Sa’eed Bin Jubayr that a man asked him a question and he did not reply. Someone asked why he did not answer so he replied: “He is from amongst them (the deviants).”
Imam Badr Al-Deen Al-Ayni writes in his ‘sharah’ of Bukhari Sahreef:
“Abd-Allah Bin Amr,
Ibn Abbaas,
Ibn Abi Awfaa,
Jaabir, Anas Bin Maalik,
Abu Hurayrah,
Uqbah Bin Aamir and their peers (Allah is pleased with them all) used to advise their forthcoming generation that they must not do salaam to the Qadriyyah (a group of nominal Muslims in their time who were deviants), they must not visit them (when they are unwell), they must not perform Salah behind them and they must not perform Salah of Janazah on them when they die.”
Imam al Ghazali said: “The Salaf of the Ummah of Sayyiduna Muhammad (sallallahu alaihe-e-wa-sallam) agreed to condemn people with deviant ideas, and to abandon them, and to cut relations with them, and be hard in rebuking them, but to be mild in disagreements of juristic details” [Mustasfa, page,350]
Shaykh Abdal Qadir al-Jilani (d. 561AH) stated in his commentary to the above Hadith in Ghunyat at-Talibin (page, 90):
"The Believer should adapt himself to the Sunnah and to the Jama'ah. The Sunnah is the way shown by Rasulullah (Peace be upon him). The Jama'ah is composed of the things done unanimously by the Sahaba al-Kiram who lived in the time of the four caliphs called Khulafa' ar-Rashidin (and others in their path). A Muslim must prevent the multiplication of the men of bid'ah and keep away from them, and should not greet them (as given in many Hadith on this issue). Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah), the Imam of our Madhhab, said that greeting a man of bid'ah meant loving him since it had been declared in a Hadith, 'Disseminate (your) greeting (salaam)! Love one another in this way!" He also said (pg. 143): "The title, Ahl as-Sunnah, which the innovators have expressed for themselves is not appropriate for them."  [Ghunyat at-Talibin]

Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari: "The Prophet informed us that towards the end of times, there will be Harj!

I (Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari) asked: "And what is Harj?" He(s) said: "Lies (deceit) and killings!"
We said: "Even more than now?"
He(s) said: "It will not be the kuffaar killing you, rather, you will be killing each other, until a person kills his neighbor, and his uncle and his cousin and his relatives!"
We said: "And while the book of Allah (Qur'an) will be still with us?!" He(s) said: "While the book of Allah will be still with you."
We said: "Subhan'Allaah!! And while our intellects will be conscious?!" 

He(s) said: "No, no, the intellects of the general masses at that time will be deceived! They will be following fools that have no intellects themselves. Most of them will be assuming they have a (legitimate) cause, but they will not have a (legitimate) cause."
[Ahmad, 19492, Ibn Majah, 3959, Ibn Hibban, 1870 - Silsilah Sahihah, 1682 - Authentic]
Anas Ibn Malik said: The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said: 
There is no town that Dajjal will not enter except Makkah and Madinah. There is no entrance of its entrances that is not guarded by angels in rows. Dajjal will camp at a salty barren area, then Madinah will shake three times, and then every kafir and munafiq (hypocrite) will come out of it to join him. In a similar narration with the same final chain of transmission, he says instead: He shall come to the barren salty area of Juruf and set up his camp. And he also said: And then every male and female hypocrite will come out to join him. [Sahih Muslim]

The Blessed Prophet(s)(peace and blessings be upon him) advised: “The man is on the religion of his friend. So each one of you must take care in selecting who he befriends.” (Sunan Abu Dawood)



Chapter: The obligation of staying with the Jama'ah (main body) of the Muslims when Fitn (tribulations) appear, and in all circumstances. The prohibition of refusing to obey and on splitting away from the Jama'ah

باب الأَمْرِ بِلُزُومِ الْجَمَاعَةِ عِنْدَ ظُهُورِ الْفِتَنِ وَتَحْذِيرِ الدُّعَاةِ إِلَى الْكُفْرِ ‏‏

It has been narrated on the authority of
Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وصحبه وسلم) said:
One who defected from obedience (to the Amir) and separated from the main body of the Muslims - if he died in that state-would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya (i.e. would not die as a Muslim).
One who fights under the banner of a people who are blind (to the cause for which they are fighting, i.e. do not know whether their cause is just or otherwise), who gets flared up with family pride, calls (people) to fight for their family honour, and supports his kith and kin (i.e. fights not for the cause of Allah but for the sake of this family or tribe) - if he is killed (in this fight), he dies as one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya.
Whoso attacks my Ummah (indiscriminately) killing the righteous and the wicked of them, sparing not (even) those staunch in faith and fulfilling not his promise made with those who have been given a pledge of security - he has nothing to do with me and I have nothing to do with him.

حَدَّثَنَا شَيْبَانُ بْنُ فَرُّوخَ، حَدَّثَنَا جَرِيرٌ، - يَعْنِي ابْنَ حَازِمٍ - حَدَّثَنَا غَيْلاَنُ بْنُ، جَرِيرٍ عَنْ أَبِي قَيْسِ بْنِ رِيَاحٍ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنَّهُ قَالَ ‏ "‏ مَنْ خَرَجَ مِنَ الطَّاعَةِ وَفَارَقَ الْجَمَاعَةَ فَمَاتَ مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةً وَمَنْ قَاتَلَ تَحْتَ رَايَةٍ عُمِّيَّةٍ يَغْضَبُ لِعَصَبَةٍ أَوْ يَدْعُو إِلَى عَصَبَةٍ أَوْ يَنْصُرُ عَصَبَةً فَقُتِلَ فَقِتْلَةٌ جَاهِلِيَّةٌ وَمَنْ خَرَجَ عَلَى أُمَّتِي يَضْرِبُ بَرَّهَا وَفَاجِرَهَا وَلاَ يَتَحَاشَ مِنْ مُؤْمِنِهَا وَلاَ يَفِي لِذِي عَهْدٍ عَهْدَهُ فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَلَسْتُ مِنْهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

Sahih Muslim 1848 a
Book/Ref : Book 33, Hadith 83
English/Ref: Book 20, Hadith 4555


37 The Book of Fighting [The Prohibition of Bloodshed]

Chapter: Seriousness of Fighting for a Cause that is Not Clear

باب التَّغْلِيظِ فِيمَنْ قَاتَلَ تَحْتَ رَايَةٍ عُمِّيَّةٍ

It was narrated that Abu Hurairah (RA) said:
"The Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وصحبه وسلم) said:
'Whoever parts from obedience, and splits away from the Jama'ah and dies, then he has died a death of Jahiliyyah.
Whoever rebels against my Ummah, killing good and evil people alike, and does not try to avoid killing the believers, and does not pay attention to those who are under a covenant, then he is not of me.
Whoever fights for a cause that is not clear, advocating tribalism, getting angry for the sake of tribalism, and he is killed, then he has died a death of Jahiliyyah.'"

أَخْبَرَنَا بِشْرُ بْنُ هِلاَلٍ الصَّوَّافُ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَارِثِ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا أَيُّوبُ، عَنْ غَيْلاَنَ بْنِ جَرِيرٍ، عَنْ زِيَادِ بْنِ رَبَاحٍ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ مَنْ خَرَجَ مِنَ الطَّاعَةِ وَفَارَقَ الْجَمَاعَةَ فَمَاتَ مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةً وَمَنْ خَرَجَ عَلَى أُمَّتِي يَضْرِبُ بَرَّهَا وَفَاجِرَهَا لاَ يَتَحَاشَى مِنْ مُؤْمِنِهَا وَلاَ يَفِي لِذِي عَهْدِهَا فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَمَنْ قَاتَلَ تَحْتَ رَايَةٍ عُمِّيَّةٍ يَدْعُو إِلَى عَصَبِيَّةٍ أَوْ يَغْضَبُ لِعَصَبِيَّةٍ فَقُتِلَ فَقِتْلَةٌ جَاهِلِيَّةٌ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

Grade    : Sahih (Darussalam)        
Sunan an-Nasa'i 4114
In-book reference              : Book 37, Hadith 149

English translation: Vol. 5, Book 37, Hadith 4119

Edited by ADHM


Wednesday, 4 November 2015

Hifzul Imaan 1319AH (1901CE)

In 1319 AH (1901CE)
Mawlānā Ashraf Ali Thanvi (d.1943)
 Answered a question regarding 
and published it as
Hifzul Iman

In this book, he has compared the knowledge of Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam or to show its size or smallness to madmen and animals and has said there is nothing unique to Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam regarding this knowledge:

Click Here to read Large Scan

“And then, if it is correct to attribute the knowledge of the unseen (ilm ghayb) to be possessed by Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam, as Zayd says, then it remains to be asked, which one he ( the questioner) refers to.?Is it only a ‘part’ of it (baáĎ) or ‘complete'; if he refers to’part’, then what is extraordinary about Rasulullah in possessing it? Such knowledge of unseen is also possessed by all and sundry (Zayd, Amr); even infants, lunatics and all the animals and quadrupeds.
phir yê ke âp kî dhât muqaddasa par `ilm-e-ghayb kâ hukm kiyâ jânâ agar be qawl zayd sahîh hô tô daryâfat talab amri yê hê ke us ghayb se murâd ba`z [ba`D] ghayb hê yâ kul ghayb agar ba`z `ulûm ghaybiyya murâd hê tô is mê Huzûr hi ki kyâ takhsîs hê AYSÂ `ilm-e-ghayb tô zayd-o-`amr-o-balke har sabî-o-majnûn balke jamî`Haywânât-o-bahâhum ke liye bhi Hâsil hê kayûn kê har shakhs kô kisî ne kisî aysî bât kâ `ilm hôtâ hê jô dusrê shakhs se makhfi hê)

Read the Original Large Scans: Here  

(Also here: Refuting Deobandi Mufti: Part 3  )

The Deobandi author in an attempt to justify this writing says that 

“This statement should not be taken as interpreted by Imam Ahmed Raza Khan”.

Who on this earth needs any interpretation of this statement? 

It is clear like sun shining in the sky. This is such an ugly statement that no Muslim would like to read this statement, forget about talking about those people who have this belief or those who try to justify this.

The Deobandi author says that to make the meaning clear Mawlana Asharf ali Thanvi made changes in the text!

This is another lie.

He made changes when Muslim population read this and started abusing him!
He never did tawba and all he did was to change the word ‘aysa’ (this sort of).

For this ugly statement in which Ashraf Ali Thanvi has compared the prophetic knowledge of the unseen with the knowledge possessed by infants, lunatics, sundry, animals and quadrupeds ( four legged animals).

Two hundred and sixty eight (268) scholars of Ahlus sunnah from Indian subcontinent and thirty three (33) scholars from Makkah al mukarramh and Medina al munawwara issued fatwa of kufr upon Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi.

1. The fatwa of Kufr which was issued upon Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi by Imam Ahmed Raza al Barelwi (Rahimullah) and 33 scholars of Makkah and Medina , was due to Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi comparing the prophetic knowledge of the unseen (Ghayb) with the knowledge possessed by Zayd and `Amr, ( that is any tom and harry) in fact, every person and mad man, in fact, all animals and sundry.
2.  The Fatwa which was issued upon Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi has nothing to do with denial of ilm e ghayb (knowledge of the unseen) which prophet had. The blasphemous comment was used to degrade our beloved Prophet (sal allahu alaihi wa sallam) Best of Creation.

They say Ahmed Raza Khan  made an interpretation of that text of Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and if the interpretation was not made, it will not amount to Kufr.

To Refute this confusion we need to know Two basic Facts:
1) Imam Ahmed Raza Khan DID NOT make any interpretation of the text. He translated it word by word into Arabic and presented it to the scholars of Makkah and Medina. The original Urdu text of fatwa and its Arabic translation, both are online. If anyone says Imam Ahmed Raza Khan made interpretation he should bring evidence in support of such a claim.
2) 268 leading muftis of Indian subcontinent, from Sindh (present Pakistan), Firangmahal , Lucknow , Hyderabad , Rampur etc, issued the fatwa against Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi. They also did not make any interpretation.

It is very important to Refute this confusion being created

Please read this and show me where is Imam Ahmed Raza involved in this?

The paternal grandson of Hazrat Sayyid Muhammad Jilani Qadri Hyderabadi, Sayyid Nazeeruddin son of Sayyid Moinuddin, expresses his disgust at this statement: [of Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi]

“Some people brought the book, Hifzul Iman by Ashraf Ali Thanwi to my grandfather (Sayyid Muhammad Jilani Qadri) and asked about it. He read the book and said, “Molvi Ashraf Ali has written an utmost disrespectful thing about ‘Ilm-e-Ghayb”.

A few days after this, Molvi Ashraf Ali was sitting in Makkah Masjid in Hyderabad. My grandfather stood and expressed his disgust at the book and said,

This paragraph stinks of Kufr.

A few days later, there was gathering of Ulema at the house of Mawlānā Hafiz Muhammad Ahmad (son of Mawlānā Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi). Since he had great affection for my grandfather he invited him too. At the gathering, the Ulema expressed their views on the paragraph in Hifzul Iman. My grandfather mentioned the disgust he felt and presented a fatwa against the book.

“ Then, some days after this, my grandfather saw Sayyidina Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam in a dream. The dear Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam expressed his happiness that my grandfather had refuted the book and had labelled it “Aqbah” (the most repugnant).
Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam said, “I am happy with you. What do you wish for?

My grandfather replied that he wished that his remaining life would be spent in Madina and that he be buried in Madina. His wish was granted and he migrated to Madina thereafter. He spent ten years there and passed away there in 1364 AH.”

Hazrat Mawlānā Abul Khair Naqshbandi Mujaddidi Dihlawi was once resident in Kothi Ilahi Bakhsh, Meerut. During his stay, Hafiz Muhammad Ahmad, son of Mawlānā Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi, and Mawlānā Ashraf Ali Thanwi came to one of his gatherings.

A supporter of Mawlānā Ghulam Dastagir Qasuri read out the passage of Hifzul Iman.

Hazrat Shah Abul Khair Dihlawi found it utterly displeasing and said:“Is this service to the religion? Your elders were upon our path. Why did you oppose this?”

Molvi Ashraf Ali Thanwi replied, “I have clarified this passage in another book of mine”.

Shah Abul Khair answered, “So many people have diverged from the truth due to your book, what need remains of your clarification?”

[Maqamat-e-Khair, page, 616, Shah Abul Khair Academy, Dehli]
[Bazm-e-Khair az-Zayd, page, 11, Shah Abul Khair Academy, Dehli]


Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi said:

“phir yê ke âp kî dhât muqaddasa par `ilm-e-ghayb kâ hukm kiyâ jânâ agar be qawl zayd sahîh hô tô daryâfat talab amri yê hê ke us ghayb se murâd ba`z [ba`D] ghayb hê yâ kul ghayb agar ba`z `ulûm ghaybiyya murâd hê tô is mê Huzûr hi ki kyâ takhsîs hê AYSÂ `ilm-e-ghayb tô zayd-o-`amr-o-balke har sabî-o-majnûn balke jamî`Haywânât-o-bahâhum ke liye bhi Hâsil hê kayûn kê har shakhs kô kisî ne kisî aysî bât kâ `ilm hôtâ hê jô dusrê shakhs se makhfi hê”

“Then, about his blessed person having the unseen knowledge ordered upon him, if the words of Zayd are to be correct; with regard to it; that ghayb can mean some of the unseen or everything of the unseen. 
If some of the unseen (ba`z `ulûm ghaybiyya) is meant, how is it a specialty for him (saw)? 
That sort of (aysâ) unseen knowledge has also been possessed by Zayd and `Amr, in fact, every person and mad man, in fact, all animals and sundry.
The reason being is that every person has the knowledge of certain matters which are hidden to others.”
( Hifzul-Imân,page:7-8, (8, Muharram, 1319AH, Matbû’a: Maktaba Thanvi, Karachi)

Aûdhubillâh min dhâlik!

Note :  this, it is clear that Ashraf ali Thanvi does not consider the ghaybi (unseen) knowledge given to the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam) as one of his (s) specialties or unique qualities.

That is false as it is, but then to write that this sort of knowledge is also possessed by the various creatures he mentioned, is extreme disrespect against our Master (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam).

Murtazâ Hasan Darbhangi actually wrote a whole booklet called: "Tawdîhul-bayân fî Hifzul-Îmân" on this passage alone and writes on pages 8 and 17 that the word:
 "aysâ (Urdu: this sort of)" is not only used as a "mithl" (to show similitude) but can also mean, "itnâ (Urdu: this much)" and " is qadar (something like this)."

Manzûr Ahmad Sanbhalî followed in the line of Darbhangi and in his book: "Fath Bareylî kâ dil kash nazârah" wrote:"Hifzul-Îmân ki is ibârat me bhi 'aysâ' 'tashbîha' ke liye nahi balke woh yahâ bad tashbîh ke 'itnâ' ke ma`ne me hey."
"In this passage of Hifzul-Imân, the word 'aysâ' is not being used as a tashbîh (comparison). This [word] here is not a comparison but is being used in the meaning of 'itnâ'." (Manzûr Sanbhali, Fath Bareylî kâ dil Kash nazârah, p. 32)

He also stresses the same idea on pages 40 and 48.

He also writes: "agar ba farz is ibârat kâ wôh matlab hô jô Mawlawî Sardâr Ahmad Sâhib bayân kar rahêhê jab to hamârî nazdîk bhi muwajab kufr hey!"

"If this text has the meaning which is stated by Mawlawî Sardâr Ahmad Sâhib, then that to us is ALSO KUFR." (Manzûr Sanbhali, Fath Bareylî kâ dil Kash nazârah, p. 35)

Manzûr Ahmad Sanbhalî and Shaykh al-Hadîth Hadrat  Allama Sardâr Ahmad (r) had a debate in Bareili Sharîf.

In the Debate:

Mawlana Sardar Ahmad was arguing that the word "aysâ" (this sort of) in Urdu is used for a comparison (tashbîh) between things.
Manzur Ahmad on the other hand, was arguing that "aysâ" in the text of Hifzul-Imân was being used in the sense of "itnâ" (this much) or "is qadar" (something like this) in Urdu and not as a tashbîh which would also be kufr even according to him.

 [Note: The truth is that "itnâ" (this much) and "is qadar" (something like this) in Urdu are also used for comparisons!]

So to recap, both Manzur Sanbhalî and Murtazâ Hasan Darbhangî stress in more than one place in their works that:

1. The word "aysâ" in the text of Hifzul-Imân has been used in the sense of "itnâ" (this much) or "is qadar" (something like this) in Urdu
2. to take the word "aysâ" to be a "tashbîh" (comparison) would make the sentence one of KUFR!

Now let’s have a look at what “ The Shaykh al-Islam” of the Deobandi's in his time, Maulana Sayyid Husayn Ahmad al-Madani wrote in his very work, "Shihâbuth-Thâqib":
"Hadrat Mawlânâ Thanvî ibârat me lafz 'aysâ' far mâ rahêhê lafz 'itnâ' to nahî farmâ rahehê - agar lafz 'itnâ' hôtâ to us waqat aybtiya ihtimâl hôtâ ke ma`âdhallâh huzûr `alayhis-salâm ke `ilm ko or chîzô ke `ilm ki barâbar kardiyâ!"

"Hadrat Mawlana Thanvi in his text used the word 'aysâ' and NOT 'itnâ.' Had it been 'itnâ', this would have been finding a SHORTCOMING ma`âdhallâh and making his `alayhis-salâm's knowledge like the knowledge of things!"
[Husayn Ahmad Tandwî (who later changed to Madanî), Shihâbuth-Thqqib, p. 102]

 Further on, he writes:
"is se bhi agar qati nazar kar liyê to lafz 'aysâ' tô kalema TASHBÎH ka hê!"

"If we look at this clearly, the word, 'aysâ' is clearly a TASHBÎH (comparison)!"
[Husayn Ahmad Tandwî, Shihâbuth-Thiqâb, p. 102]

So according to Manzur Ahmad Sanbhilî's and Murtazâ Hasan Darbhangî's understanding of Thanvi's text, "aysâ" means, "itnâ" and "is qadar" and the one who says that the word, "aysâ" is a "tashbîh" becomes a KÂFIR.

On the other hand, according to Husayn Ahmad's understanding, the word, "aysâ" IS a "tashbîh" and whoever says that it means, "itnâ" commits KUFR, {as they would be finding a shortcoming in the Messenger (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam)}.

So who is right?

Hence, if I were to become a Deobandi and believe that all three of these scholars were correct, then I would have to believe that using the word "aysâ" with either meaning is going to be kufr!

They bent head over heels to try to defend Thanvi’s statement.

As for Thanvî Sâhib himself, he didn't even bother to defend his text at all and changed it altogether.

One of his sincere murîds spoke truthfully and advised him to do this.
 It also looks as though Thanvi concedes that the text desrespects the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam).

His murîd said as quoted by Mawlana Thanvi himself:

“aysâ lafz jin mê mamsalat `ilmiyyat ghaybiyyat Muhammadiyya kô `ulûm majânîn-o-bahâ’im se tashbîh dî ga’î hê jô bâdî an-nazr mê sakht sô adabî kô mash`ar hê kyû aysî `ibârat se rujû na kar liya jâ’ê jis mê mukhlisîn hâmi’în janâb-e-wâlâ kô Haqq bajânib jawâbe dî mê sakht dashwârî hôtîhê wôh `ibârat âsmânî or ilhâmî `ibârat nahî ke jis kî masdarah sûrat or hamiyyat `ibârat kâ bâlio yâ lafzî bâqî raknâ zurûri hey.”

“Those sort of words in which the Muhammadan Unseen Knowledge is compared to that of madmen and sundry, after pondering over it, is of extreme desrespect.
Why shouldn’t one come back (make rujû`) over such a text in which the righteous and ordinary people like us are being given answers the truth of which is being shown with such difficulty?
That text is not from the heavens, nor is it inspiration, like the sort whose beauty and respect has to be preserved by keeping every single word.”  (Thanvi, Taghyîrul-`Unwân, p. 1)

So, Thanvi changed the text from:

"…agar be qawl zayd sahîh hô tô daryâfat talab amri yê hê ke us ghayb se murâd ba`z [ba`D] ghayb hê yâ kul ghayb agar ba`z `ulûm ghaybiyya murâd hê tô is mê Huzûr hi ki kyâ takhsîs hê AYSÂ `ilm-e- ghayb tô zayd-o-`amr-o-balke har sabî-o-majnûn balke jamî` Haywânât-o-bahâhum ke liye bhi Hâsil hê…”

“…if the words of Zayd are to be correct; with regard to it; that ghayb can mean some of the unseen or everything of the unseen. If some of the unseen (ba`z `ulûm ghaybiyya) is meant, how is it a speciality for him (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam)? That sort of (aysâ) unseen knowledge has also been possessed by Zayd and `Amr, in fact, every person and mad man, in fact, all animals and sundry…” (Thanvi, Hifzul-Iman, p. 7)

Changed the text to:

"agar baz `ulûm ghaybiyya murâd hey to is me Huzûr Sallallâhu `alayhi wa sallam kî kya takhsîs hey - mutlaq baz `ulûm-e- ghaybiyya to ghayr anbiyâ `alayhimus-salâm ko bi hâsil hey."

“…if it is to mean some unseen knowledge, then how is this, his Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam’s speciality - absolutely, some knowledge of the unseen is also possessed by non-Prophets `alayhimus-salâm.”
(Thanvi, Taghyîrul-`Unwân, p. 3)

Hence, he removed the word, “aysâ altogether and changed the context and meaning of the sentence altogether. In fact, I think this is the only sentence in the whole book that was changed.

Anyway, the sentence shows that he believes non-Prophet’s can also have ghaybi knowledge upon them.

( In the later edition the wordings were changed)

 Just for the record, the following is the meaning given for the word, “aysâ” in the huge Urdu dictionery, “Firawzul-Lughât” by al- Hâjj Mawlawî Firawzuddîn:
“aysâ: is qisam kâ, is dahng kâ, is tarah kâ, is qadar.”
“this sort of: of the like of this, of this sort, like this, something like this.”


Imam Ahmed Raza issued the fatwa upon Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi nearly 1 year after Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi’s book was in market.

The rumour which is spread by Deobandis is that Imam Ahmed Raza Khan made tawil (interpretation) of Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi’s work and that is how the disrespect towards prophet becomes evident.

This rumour does not make any sense as Imam Ahmed Raza® made no tawil. We have seen in my earlier post that many notable scholars (who had no affiliation with Imam Ahmed Raza khan ® said that these wordings of Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi was indeed Kufr.

Before Imam Ahmed Raza Khan issued the fatwa; there was already Fatwa by other scholars and mass rally against this work of Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi.

(Please see news paper of 1920)

1) Murtazâ Hasan Darbhangi al Deobandi (principal, Darul Uloom Deoband) writes that the word “aysâ (Urdu: this sort of)”is not only used as a “mithl” (to show similitude) but can also mean, “itnâ (Urdu: this much)” and “is qadar (something like this).”

2 Manzûr Ahmad Sanbhalî al Deobandi followed in the line of Darbhangi and wrote
“In this passage of Hifzul-Îmân, the word ‘aysâ’ is not being used as a tashbîh (comparison). This [word] here is not a comparison but is being used in the meaning of ‘itnâ'”

He continues:

“If this text has the meaning which is stated by Mawlawî Sardâr Ahmad Sâhib,
 then that to us is ALSO KUFR.”

Note: Manzûr Ahmad Sanbhalî and Shaykh al-Hadîth Hadrat `Allama Sardâr Ahmad ® did have a debate in Bareili Sharîf. In the debate, Mawlana Sardar Ahmad was arguing that the word “aysâ” (this sort of) in Urdu is used for a comparison (tashbîh) between things.Manzur Ahmad on the other hand, was arguing that “aysâ” in the text of Hifzul-Îmân was being used in the sence of “itnâ” (thismuch) or “is qadar” (something like this) in Urdu and not as a tashbîh which would also be kufr even according to him.

[Note: The truth is that “itnâ” (this much) and “is qadar” (something like this) in Urdu are also used for comparisons!]

To sum up:

Manzur Sanbhalî and Murtazâ Hasan Darbhangî stress in more than one place in their works that:

1. The word “aysâ” in the text of Hifzul-Îmân has been used in the sence of “itnâ” (this much) or “is qadar” (something like this) in Urdu
2. To take the word “aysâ” to be a “tashbîh” (comparison) would make the sentance one of KUFR!

I ask Deobandisi, do they agree with this “tawil” (interpretation) given by 2 Deobandi scholars?

If Deobandis don’t agree with these two Deobandi scholars and accept the meaning of Aysa=tashbih , comparison, then as per above two Deobandi scholars , Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi’s statement is KUFR.

If Deobandi  answer is yes , it means they  agree to accept the meaning of AYSA as “ itna” ( this much) , then there is NO KUFR in mawlana Thanvi’s statement as per these two deobandi scholars.

So Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi’s sentence will now MEAN (as per above two Deobandi scholars):

“ That sort of (aysâ= itna= this much ) unseen knowledge has also been possessed by Zayd and `Amr, in fact, every person and mad man, in fact, all animals and sundry.”

Everything is fine, if deobandis have accepted the meaning of ‘AYSA” as given by these two top deobandi ‘akabir.This TAWIL (interpretation) saved Mawlana Ashraf ali Thanvi from the charge of Kufr.

The other side of story:

But what did the Shaykh al-Islam of the Deobandi’s in his time, Maulana Husayn Ahmad Tandvee write in his very work:  “Shihâbuth-Thâqib”?

He wrote: “Hadrat Mawlana Thanvi in his text used the word ‘aysâ’ and NOT ‘itnâ.’
Had it been ‘itnâ’, this would have been finding a SHORTCOMING ma`âdhallâh and making his `alayhis-salâm’s knowledge like the knowledge of things!”
Further on, he writes:
“If we look at this clearly, the word, ‘aysâ’ is clearly a TASHBÎH (comparison)!”
[Husayn Ahmad Tandwî, Shihâbuth-Thiqâb, p. 102]


So according to Manzur Ahmad Sanbhilî’s and Murtazâ Hasan Darbhangî’s ( Two TOP DEOBANDI scholars) understanding of Thanvi’s text, “aysâ” means, “itnâ” and “is qadar” and the one who says that the word, “aysâ” is a “tashbîh” becomes a KÂFIR.

On the other hand, according to Husayn Ahmad’s ( Top deobandi scholar)understanding, the word, “aysâ” IS a “tashbîh” and whoever says that it means, “itnâ” commits KUFR (, as they wouldbe finding a shortcoming in the Messenger (sal allahu alahi wa sallam)

It is matter of choice upon deobandis that whose fatwa of kufr they want to accept?
1) Murtaza Darbhangee?
2) Huseein Tandvee?

This is a catch 22 situation through which NO DEOBANDI can ever come out.

There is no more beating around the bush, when I have brought the explanations by deobandi akabirs who knew what Mawlana Thanvi wrote and meant!.


Below is couple of Fatwa from Deobandi scholars on the issue of Disrespect to Prophet.

The following fatwâ’ has been translated from the original Urdû book: Fatâwâ’ Rashîdiyyah, Page 71-72, printed by Muhammad Saeed and Sons, Karâchî, Pâkistân.

The fatwâ’ was written by Rashîd Ahmad Gangohî, co-founder of Dâr ul-‘ulûm Deoband and Spiritual Shaykh of many senior Deobandî scholars.

Rashid Ahmad is one amongst those whom the Imâm of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah, Imâm Muftî ash-Shâh Ahmad Ridâ Khân of Baraylî Sharîf, ‘alayhi al-rahmah w’al-ridwân, charged with kufr & which the ‘Ulamâ’ & Mashâ’ikh of Haramayn Sharîfayn; the Two Sacred Sanctuaries, endorsed in Husâm al-Haramayn [Sword of the Two Sanctuaries].


Rashîd Ahmad Gangohî, in reply to a question writes:

Question No: 30  A poet who in his poetry uses words as idol or statue or calamity of Turks tragedy of Arabia in his compositions of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, what is the legal [shar’îy] ruling on this? Elaborate and be rewarded!
Answer: The person expressing these ill words although does not intend the actual real apparent meanings rather intends the metaphorical and figurative meaning, nevertheless, [such words] are not void of inference of insolence, blasphemy and offence of the Unblemished Self of Allâh, Most Exalted and the Messenger of Allâh, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. For this very reason, Allâh, the Exalted, prohibited the [Prophetic] Companions from uttering Râ’inâ and instructed the usage of the [substitute] word of Unzurnâ. When in actual fact the purpose of the Companions, Allâh be well pleased with them all, was not by any means to intend the meaning which the Jews [deliberately mockingly] intended but since it was a means of pleasing the Jews and carried implications of hurting and offending the Messenger [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam] thus, the ruling communicated:
“Say not [to the Messenger, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam] Râ’inâ but say Unzurnâ [Do make us understand]” al-Qur’ân 2:104
…… and likewise the speaking of the eminent Companions [Allâh be well pleased with them all] in the presence of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam, with a raised voice was not, ma’âdh Allâh, intended to harm or offend, on the contrary it was merely due to their nature and character. However, since it carried implications of offending and disregard of honour and respect the ruling was thus given:
“O you who believe! Raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam], nor speak aloud to him in talk as you speak loud to one another, lest your deeds may be rendered fruitless while you perceive not.” Al-Qur’ân 49:2
What an unambiguous ruling that though your intention was not to disparage however by doing so your deeds would become wasted and you wouldn’t even be aware of it. Also the same is in a Hadîth: “Kunya [nomen] yourself with the kunya Abî’l Qâsim” which was [later] prohibited during the Noble lifetime [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam] for offending the person of the Master of the World, in that if someone was to call someone [with the same kunya] then thy will assuming thyself to be addressed confer attention even though the caller did not whatsoever intend to offend the Messenger of Allâh, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam. And, Ibn Mâjah reports that when Ash’ath bin Qays Kundî arrived he enquired, “O Messenger of Allâh, are you not from us?” And this enquiry, and knowledge of ghayb is with Allâh, was simply because all ‘Arabs from Quraysh till Kunda are from the Banû Ismâ’îl. So thee replied, “Do not accuse our uncles of adultery and do not negate our lineage from our fathers, we are the progeny of Nadar.” Behold! This word merely carrying a far reaching implication – to what extent the Prophet [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam] rejected and prohibited and insisted on good manners of speech. ….. In sum, these words carried apparent insolence and offence hence to utter such words will be kufr:
“Verily those who annoy Allâh and His Messenger [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam] – Allâh has cursed them in this world, and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating torment.”
al-Qur’ân 33:57
… It is said in Shifâ’: “That, when a person has uttered something when speaking of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, without intending to insult, neither to offend and nor does he believe it to be but has uttered for the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, words which constitute kufr [like] from cursing him or insulting him or falsifying him or associating that which is unlawful upon him or negating that which is indispensable upon him which for his status are [considered] blemishes, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, like associating a major sin …. or uttered something disrespectful out of sheer ignorance which is construed as a kind of verbal abuse even if his circumstances apparently illustrate that he did not intend to demean the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, nor did he rely on it or he uttered it merely through ignorance or due to distress and depression or due to influence of intoxication or due to lack of thought or by his tongue running away from him or uttered it in the heat of the moment. Then the legal ruling concerning such a person without hesitation is death.”
[Qâdî ‘Iyâd bin Mûsâ Mâlikî D544H ash-Shifâ’ Vol 2 Page 203-204 Published by ‘Abd at-Tawwâb Academy, Multân]
Hence, it is required that the writer of such kufr [entailing] words be severely reprimanded and if possible [to do so], if he does not stop then he should be killed because he is the harmer and offender of the Grandeur of the Exalted and His Messenger and Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
And Allâh, the Exalted is Most Knowledgeable.
Servant Rashîd Ahmad Gangohî

Other Fatwa:

“Uttering of words which may be thought to belittle the prince of the universe (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) even where the intention of the person uttering those words is not to do so is liable to make such a person a polytheist”.
(Lataaif-i-Rasheediyah, Page 22, by Janab Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi and Ash-Shahaab-us-Saaqib, Page 57, Husain Ahmad Tandvi Madani.)

* “He who utters a single polytheistic word is, in the eyes of all, a polytheist”.
(Al-lfaazaat-ul-Yaumiyah, Vol. 7, Page 234, by Janab Ashraf Ali Thanvi).

* “With all his claim to adhering to Islam and faith and striving his best in this regard, a person who is insolent towards the Prophet and rejects the essentials of Deen is, without doubt, an apostate and a polytheist in the eyes of all Muslims”..
(Ashaddul-‘Azaab, Page 5, by Janab Murtaza Hasan Darbhangi.)

* “He (Gangohi) also mentioned utterances which could be said to cause hurt to the holy Prophet (Alaihis Salaam), and declared that a person uttering polytheistic words should be deterred from doing so by all possible means, and if such a person does not refrain from doing so he should be killed because he has been insolent to Almighty Allah and His trustworthy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam)”.
(Ash-Shahaabus Saaqib, Page 50 by Husain Ahmad Tandvi Madni and Lataa’if-i-Rasheediyah, Page 22 by Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi.)

* “All ulama are unanimous in holding that he who is insolent to, and belittles, the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) is a polytheist and he who doubts the polytheism of such a person is himself a polytheist. . . The verdict of polytheism is passed on the basis of things, which are obvious, not wilful, or intended or deduced. . . The ulama have said that to show annoyance with the Prophets (Alaihimus Salaam) is polytheism even if insolence is not intended”.
(Al-lifaar-ul-Mulhideen, Pages 51, 83 and 86, by Janab Anwar Shah Kashmiri, a teacher at Deoband.)

* “He who believes that the holy Prophet (Alaihis Salaam) is only as much distinguished from us as an elder brother is from the younger one goes, in our view, out of the pale of Imam.
(Al-Muhannad Page 28, by ulama of Deoband.)

* “Certain harsh words which have occurred in Taqwiyat-ul-Imaan (written by Isma’iel Dehlvi Phulti Balakoti) were intended to cure the ignorance prevalent in those days. . . The words used by Isma’iel Dehlvi are, of course, disrespectful and insolent. These words may never be used”.
(Imadaad-ul-Fataawa, Vol. 4, Page 115, by Thanvi.)


Post Edited by ADHM