Ten Points for the First Ten Days of Dhul-Hijjah

1. The first ten days are actually nine days with the addition of the day of Eid. It is called the first ten days of Dhul-Hijjah, but only nine of it is for fasting as the tenth day is the beginning of Eid. It is impermissible to fast on the day of Eid, this is a consensus amongst the people of knowledge.

2. It is permissible to fast the first nine days of Dhul-Hijjah with the last day being the day of Arafah for those not doing Hajj. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said in a hadith narrated by ibn Abbas رضي الله عنهما (in at-Tirimidhi): “There are not any days that good deeds are more beloved to Allah than those done in these ten days.”

3. In these days, it is recommended that there is a lot of remembrance of Allah سبحان و تعالى – this is for all of the ten days.

4. In these days, it is recommended that one makes takbir of Allah (saying Allahu akbar) – this is for all of the ten days.

5. In these days, it is recommended to read the Qur’an as much as possible and give charity – this is for all of the ten days.

6. The ninth day is the day of Arafah. The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه  وسلم said in an authentic narration: “Verily on the day of Arafah there is expiation of sins for the year before and the year after” (narrated by Abi Qatada رضي الله عنه, reported in Sahih Muslim and At-Tirmidhi). So therefore it is a great day, so it is recommended to fast that day for those not doing Hajj. Fasting is only permissible for the first nine days as the tenth day is the day of Eid.

7. Allah تعالى said: “That they may witness things that are of benefit to them (i.e. reward of Hajj in the Hereafter, and also some worldly gain from trade), and mention the name of Allah on appointed days (i.e. 10th, 11th, 12th, and 13th of Dhul-Hijjah), over the beast of cattle that He has provided for them (for sacrifice). (Surah al-Hajj: 28). Ibn Abbas رضي الله عنهما said: “The appointed days are the days of Arafah (9th), an-Nahr (10th) and the days of Tashreeq (11th, 12th and 13th ).

8. Whoever wishes to slaughter in these days it is not allowed to cut or remove any hair from his body or his nails, but this does not apply to his family, only the head of the family who is doing the slaughtering.

9. The ruling regards to slaughtering:

a. An individual who slaughters from his own wealth on behalf of himself and his family – It is not permissible for this individual to shave any hair from his body, remove any part of his skin or cut his nails.

b. An individual who slaughters from his own wealth for others e.g. he wishes to slaughter for his father or his mother – He too must not cut his hair, take from his skin or cut his nails.

c. Anybody who wishes to slaughter with someone else’s wealth, for somebody else .e.g. He has been entrusted by someone else to slaughter cattle for him – This individual is allowed to cut his hair, nails and skin etc.

10. Eid Al-Adha is four days in total: the tenth (the day of Eid prayer) and the days of tashreeq (the eleventh, twelve and thirteenth days of Dhul-Hijjah). It is impermissible to fast in these days for those not performing the Hajj. The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “The days of Tashreeq are days for eating, drinking and remembering Allah عز وجل” (narrated by Abi al-Maleeh رضي الله عنه, reported in Sahih Al-Muslim). Allah سبحان وتعالى said: “And remember Allah during the appointed Days.” (Surah Al-Baqarah: 203).

والحمد لله رب العالمين

Taken from the works of Al-Imam Al-Baghawee, Al-Alaamah bin Baz and Al-Alaamah Ibn Uthaymeen, may Allah have mercy on them all and all the scholars of the Sunnah.

Refuting Murjia on Obey the Ruler issue Part 2

Via ilmseeker twitter

THREAD

1) Refuting the claim that there is a legitimate consensus that rebelling against an unjust ruler is haram

2) Reiterating that the correct position is to be patient with unjust MUSLIM rulers – view of the Majority

3) Merely seeing Kufr Akbar is enough to remove a ruler

The purpose of this thread is to highlight the following points:

• The consensus quoted is incorrect due to several, well known scholars, clearly stating the opposite.

• Quoting consensus in an era whereby a difference preceded it, opposes the view of the Majority.

• Quoting consensus even though one or two individuals differed, isn’t a consensus.

• Showing how some scholars were known to be lenient when claiming consensus, like Nawawi, as claimed by Shawkani

• Affirming that rebelling against unjust MUSLIM rulers is a matter of dispute, whilst agreeing the majority of Ahlus Sunnah deemed it to be impermissible due to the greater harm due to the idea that Removing oppression will lead to mass murder which is a greater form of oppression

• Proving that these statements only apply to unjust MUSLIM rulers and not apostate rulers, original kafir rulers, or a ruler that has fallen into major kufr whether or not takfir has been made on him.

• Merely witnessing major kufr from a ruler is sufficient to remove him from his post

• Examples of major kufr that are committed today by many rulers and their associates. Whilst confirming the opinion that there are guidelines and preventers in place before applying the ruling of takfir on any perpetrator of major kufr.

• Accepting that if one is oppressed by a ruler, it is RECOMMENDED for him to be patient, but it is PERMISSIBLE for him to defend himself, and may, in certain circumstances, become OBLIGATORY.

• Proving the claimed consensus by Ibn Munthir that the rulers are exempt from ‎the principle “دفع العدو الصائل”

‎And what was really intended from his statement.

‎• Ibn Hazm statement regarding defending oneself and family from a tyrant MUSLIM ruler

Refuting the claim that there is a legitimate consensus that rebelling against an unjust ruler is haram

What is a consensus?

It is an agreement of all the Muslim scholars in one era, after the death of the prophet SAW, in a matter pertaining to religious affairs.

قال ابن قدامة:

‏ومعنى الإجماع في الشرع: اتفاق علماء العصر من أمة محمد -صلى الله عليه وسلم- على أمر من أمور الدين

‏روضة الناظر – ج١ ص ٣٧٦

‏قال الغزالي:

‏”والمعتمد عندنا: أن العصمة إنما تثبت للأمة بكليتها، وليس هذا إجماع الجميع، بل هو مختلف فيه،

‏المستصفى “٢/ ٣٤١”.

By us stating an agreement of ALL the muslim scholars in one era, shows that the differing of one and two scholars invokes the consensus.

This is the view of the majority, that a consensus has to be from all of the scholars in one era. From those that opposed this was:

Ibn Jareer At Tabari

Ibn khuwayz

Ar Razi

Abul Husayn Al Khayaat

Al Qadi Abdul Wahab

The vast majority of the scholars opposed this view.

قال ابن قدامة:

‏”ولا ينعقد الإجماع بقول الأكثرين من أهل العصر في قول الجمهور.

‏وقال محمد بن جرير، وأبو بكر الرازي: ينعقد.”

‏روضة الناظر ج ١ ص ٤٠٢

From the intellectual evidences to prove this opinion as being invalid, we can say, as they claim the view of the vast majority as being A consensus, and the differing of a few, doesn’t invalidate that consensus, then according to their principles, there’s a consensus, that the differing of a few individuals, invalidates the consensus. As that ‘consensus’ is in reality the vast majority!

After affirming that the differing of one or two invalidates a consensus, we now have to quote a few individuals from the early salaf that permitted rebelling against an unjust Muslim ruler, to show that the consensus is invalid according to the majority.

The following are the names Ibn Hazm quoted that permitted rebelling

‏علي بن أبي طالب

‏أم المؤمنين عائشة

‏طلحة

‏الزبير

‏معاوية

‏عمرو

‏النعمان بن بشير

‏عبد الله بن الزبير

‏محمد والحسن بن علي

‏أنس بن مالك

‏عبد الرحمن ابن أبي ليلى

‏وسعيد بن جبير

وابن البحتري الطائي

‏وعطاء السلمي الأزدي

‏والحسن البصري

‏ومالك بن دينار

‏ومسلم بن بشار

‏وأبي الحوراء

‏والشعبي

‏وعبد الله بن غالب

‏وعقبة بن عبد الغافر

‏وعقبة بن صهبان

‏وماهان

‏والمطرف بن المغيرة ابن شعبة

‏وأبي المعد وحنظلة بن عبد الله

‏وأبي سح الهنائي

‏وطلق بن حبيب

والمطرف بن عبد الله ابن الشخير

‏ والنصر بن أنس

‏وعطاء بن السائب

‏وإبراهيم بن يزيد التيمي

‏وأبي الحوساء

‏وجبلة بن زحر

‏عبد الله بن عبد العزيز بن عبد الله بن عمر

‏ عبد الله بن عمر

‏ومحمد بن عجلان

‏محمد بن عبد الله بن الحسن

‏وهاشم بن بشر

‏ومطر

‏ إبراهيم بن عبد الله

أبو حنيفة

‎ والحسن بن حيي

‎ وشريك

‎ومالك

‎والشافعي

‎ وداود وأصحابه

‎We have over 45 names of those that explicitly permitted rebelling against unjust rulers, or they themselves rebelled.

‎So, if the differing of one or two invalidates a consensus, how about 45+?

For more information regarding those that rebelled and those that quoted this, refer back to previous post.

So this clearly shows it wasn’t a few that held onto this opinion, but rather many, especially from the most senior of them, such as 3 out of the 4 Imams

If we were to then say, that this was an erroneous mistake, how can so many well established scholars oppose clear Hadith?

Perhaps the matter wasn’t as clear as many assume it to be. Perhaps it wasn’t an unambiguous matter, but rather a matter that needed thought, combination of different narrations, and thus extracting a verdict based on the above, and the benefits & harms ie Ijtihaad.

So like Ibn Hajr quotes in his Fath Al Bari, that Dawudi said, that the position of the scholars regarding oppressive rulers is that if you’re able to remove them without any fitnah or oppression, then it’s a must.

قال الداودي : الذي عليه العلماء في أمراء الجور أنه إن قُدِر على خلعه بغير فتنة ولا ظلم وجب..

‏فتح الباري ج ١٣ ص ٨

Now the question comes, if the Sahaba and the Tabieen differed in a matter, can those that come after them have a consensus on one of the two opinions, and is that consensus binding?

We find the likes of An-Nawawi that quoted a consensus that it’s impermissible to rebel when after a dispute existed, the scholars then agreed that its impermissible to rebel.

Is such consensus correct?

Is An Nawawi lenient when quoting a consensus?

The view of the Hanbalis, the majority of the Shafiees and Asharis is that, if there existed a difference of opinion in an early era, then a later era can not have a consensus on one of the two previous opinions.

Those that opposed this and saw it as a legitimate opinion were the Hanafis, no specific ruling was mentioned by Imam Abu hanifa, but due to the Fatawa of the early Hanafi scholars, the later scholars made it their opinion. It was also claimed to be the opinion of the Malikis

قال ابن النجار الحنبلي

‏واتفاق مجتهدي عصر ثان على أحد قولي مجتهدي العصر الأول وقد استقر الخلاف في العصر الأول لا يرفعه اي لا يرفع الخلاف ولا يكون اتفاق العصر الثاني إجماعا لأن موت المخالف في العصر الأول لا يكون مسقطا لقوله فيبقى

‏قال أبو إسحاق هو قول عامة أصحابنا

قال سليم الرازي هو قول أكثرهم وأكثر الاشعرية

‏قال ابو المعالي واليه ميل الشافعي ومن عباراته الرشيدة المذاهب لا تموت بموت أربابها

‏ونقله ابن الباقلاني عن جمهور المتكلمين واختاره

‏مختصر التحرير شرح الكوكب المنير

‏ج ٢ ص ٢٧٢

Imam shafiees famous statement that he said regarding this

‎المذاهب لا تموت بموت أربابها

‎The Views of scholars doesn’t end due to their deaths

قال الآمدي

‏قال : ذهب ابو بكر الصيرفي من اصحاب الشافعي واحمد وأبو الحسن الأشعري وامام الحرمين والغزالي وجماعة من الأصوليين الى امتناعه

‏الأحكام للامدي ١/٢٧٥

وذلك لأن الأمة إذا اختلفت على القولين واستقر خلافهم في ذلك بعد تمام النظر والاجتهاد فقد انعقد إجماعهم على تسويغ الأخذ بكل واحد من القولين باجتهاد او تقليد وهم معصومون من الخطأ فيما اجمعوا عليه على ما سبق من الأدلة السمعية

‏ ١/٢٧٥ الأحكام للآمدي

قال مجد الدين بن تيمية

‏اذا اختلف الصحابة على قولين ثم اجمع التابعون على احدهما لم يرتفع الخلاف عندنا قال ابن عقيل نص عليه وهو ظاهر كلامه وبه قال أبو الحسن الأشعري وابن الباقلاني وأبو بكر الابهري قال ابن برهان هو المذهب عندنا

وحكاه ابو طيب عن ابن علي الطبري وابن ابي هريرة وابي بكر الصيرفي وابي حامد المروذي واختاره الجويني

‏المسودة في أصول الفقه لمجد الدين بن تيمية

‏ج ١ ص ٣٢٥

قال أبو يعلى الحنبلي

‏اذا اختلف الصحابة على قولين ثم اجمع التابعون على احد القولين لم يرتفع الخلاف وجاز الرجوع الى القول الآخر والأخذ به وهذا ظاهر كلام الامام احمد

‏العدة في أصول الفقه

‏ج ٤ ص ١١٠٥

These statements clearly show that the consensus of a later generation doesn’t remove or invalidate the difference of opinion that existed in the previous generations.

This was the view of Imam Ahmed

Imam Ash Shawkani said when discussing the leniency of many of those that claimed consensus,

As for the four schools, the later scholars started to quote a consensus due to the 4 schools agreeing like An Nawawi and others.

قال الشوكاني في السيل الجرار (4/130):

‏(…ولم يعولوا إلا على دعوى الإجماع, ولا أدري كيف هذه الدعوى؟, فقد حصل التساهل البالغ في نقل الإجماعات, وصار من لا بحث له عن مذاهب أهل العلم يظن أن ما اتفق عليه أهل مذهبه وأهل قطره هو إجماع, وهذه مفسدة عظيمة فإن الجمهور قائلون بحجية الإجماع

فيأتي هذا الناقل بمجرد الدعوى بما تعم به البلوى ذاهلاً عن لزوم الخطر العظيم على عباد الله من النقل الذي لم يكن على طريق التثبت والورع, وأما أهل المذاهب الأربعة فقد صاروا يعدون ما اتفق عليه بينهم مجمعاً عليه ولا سيما المتأخر عصره منهم كالنووي ومن فعل كفعله,

وليس هذا هو الإجماع الذي تكلم العلماء في حجيته فإن خير القرون ثم الذين يلونهم ثم الذين يلونهم كانوا قبل ظهور هذه المذاهب ثم كان في عصر كل واحد من الأئمة الأربعة من أكابر أهل العلم الناهضين بالاجتهاد من لا يأتي عليه الحصر وهكذا جاء بعد عصرهم إلى هذه الغاية وهذا يعرفه كل عارف منصف

ولكن الإنصاف عقبة كئود لا يجوزها إلا من فتح الله له أبواب الحق وسهل عليه الدخول منها)

Refuting Murjia on Obey the Ruler issue Part 1

Originally posted by ilmseeker from twitter.

It was a common view amongst the early salaf that it was permissible to rebel against unjust rulers.

In this thread I would try to highlight some of those that permitted. The purpose of this is to show how this is a matter of ijtihaad, and that there is no consensus.

Ibn Hajar here affirms in his book, that the early Salaf, viewed it permissible to rebel against unjust rulers, even though the later salaf said not to, due to the harms that come from it

قال الحافظ ابن حجر العسقلاني في ترجمة الحسن بن حي:

‏ “وقولهم: كان يرى السيف يعني كان يرى الخروج بالسيف على أئمة الجور وهذا مذهب للسلف قديم لكن استقر الأمر على ترك ذلك لما رأوه قد أفضى إلى أشد منه”

‏ [تهذيب التهذيب 2/250

‏ط دار الفكر – بيروت 1404ه].

Ibn Hajar also quotes Ibn At-Teen that Dawudi said,

“That which the scholars are upon with regards to unjust rulers, is that if they have the ability to remove them, they must do so, otherwise they must be patient.”

Fath Al-Bari

ونقل ابن التين عن الداودي قال: الذي عليه العلماء في أمراء الجور أنه إن قُدِر على خلعه بغير فتنة ولا ظلم وجب، والا فالواجب الصبر وعن بعضهم لا يجوز عقد الولاية لفاسق ابتداء فان أحدث جورا بعد أن كان عدلًا فاختلفوا في جواز الخروج عليه l

والصحيح المنع إلا أن يكفر فيجب الخروج عليه” [فتح الباري ج13/ص8 ط دار المعرفة -بيروت].

Al-Mardawi Al-Hanbali said,

“Ibn Aqil and Ibn Jawzi (Senior hanbali jurists), permitted rebelling against an unjust ruler, then they mentioned how Al-Husayn rebelled against Yazeed to establish the truth, this is the apparent view of Ibn Razeen.”

Al-Insaaf

‏قال المرداوي الحنبلي،

‏”وَجَوَّزَ ابن عَقِيلٍ وابن الْجَوْزِيِّ الْخُرُوجَ على إمَامٍ غَيْرِ عَادِلٍ وَذَكَرَا خُرُوجَ الْحُسَيْنِ على يَزِيدَ لِإِقَامَةِ الْحَقِّ وهو ظَاهِرُ كَلَامِ بن رَزِينٍ على ما تَقَدَّمَ”

‏ [الإنصاف في مسائل الخلاف 10/310-311].

‏Ibn Hazm mentions the following names of those that permitted rebelling against an unjust Muslim ruler:

‏علي بن أبي طالب

‏أم المؤمنين عائشة

‏وطلحة

‏والزبير

‏معاوية

‏وعمرو

‏والنعمان بن بشير

‏عبد الله بن الزبير

‏ومحمد والحسن بن علي

‏أنس بن مالك

‏عبد الرحمن ابن أبي ليلى

‏وسعيد بن جبير

وابن البحتري الطائي

‏وعطاء السلمي الأزدي

‏والحسن البصري

‏ومالك بن دينار

‏ومسلم بن بشار

‏وأبي الحوراء

‏والشعبي

‏وعبد الله بن غالب

‏وعقبة بن عبد الغافر

‏وعقبة بن صهبان

‏وماهان

‏والمطرف بن المغيرة ابن شعبة

‏وأبي المعد وحنظلة بن عبد الله

‏وأبي سح الهنائي

‏وطلق بن حبيب

والمطرف بن عبد الله ابن الشخير

‏ والنصر بن أنس

‏وعطاء بن السائب

‏وإبراهيم بن يزيد التيمي

‏وأبي الحوساء

‏وجبلة بن زحر

‏عبد الله بن عبد العزيز بن عبد الله بن عمر

‏ عبد الله بن عمر

‏ومحمد بن عجلان

‏محمد بن عبد الله بن الحسن

‏وهاشم بن بشر

‏ومطر

‏ إبراهيم بن عبد الله

أبو حنيفة

‎ والحسن بن حيي

‎ وشريك

‎ومالك

‎والشافعي

‎ وداود وأصحابه

‎These are all the people Ibn Hazm said, either explicitly permitted rebelling against an unjust Muslim ruler in their fatwas, or they themselves actually rebelled.

وقال ابن حزم الأندلسي الظاهري: “وذهبت طوائف من أهل السنة وجميع المعتزلة وجميع الخوارج والزيدية إلى أن سل السيوف في الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر واجب إذا لم يمكن دفع المنكر إلا بذلك، قالوا: فإذا كان أهل الحق في عصابة يمكنهم الدفع ولا ييأسون من الظفر ففرض عليهم ذلك، وإن كانوا

وإن كانوا في عدد لا يرجون لقلتهم وضعفهم بظفر كانوا في سعة من ترك التغيير باليد.

‏وهذا قول علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه وكل من معه من الصحابة وقول أم المؤمنين عائشة رضي الله عنها وطلحة والزبير وكل من كان معهم من الصحابة وقول معاوية وعمرو والنعمان بن بشير وغيرهم ممن معهم من الصحابة

رضي الله عنهم أجمعين وهو قول عبد الله بن الزبير ومحمد والحسن بن علي وبقية الصحابة من المهاجرين والأنصار والقائمين يوم الحرة رضي الله عن جميعهم أجمعين وقول كل من أقام على الفاسق الحجاج ومن والاه من الصحابة رضي الله عنهم جميعهم كأنس بن مالك وكل من كان ممن ذكرنا من أفاضل التابعين

كعبد الرحمن ابن أبي ليلى وسعيد بن جبير وابن البحتري الطائي وعطاء السلمي الأزدي والحسن البصري ومالك بن دينار ومسلم بن بشار وأبي الحوراء والشعبي وعبد الله بن غالب وعقبة بن عبد الغافر وعقبة بن صهبان وماهان والمطرف بن المغيرة ابن شعبة وأبي المعد وحنظلة بن عبد الله وأبي سح الهنائي

وطلق بن حبيب والمطرف بن عبد الله ابن الشخير والنصر بن أنس وعطاء بن السائب وإبراهيم بن يزيد التيمي وأبي الحوساء وجبلة بن زحر وغيرهم، ثم من بعد هؤلاء من تابعي التابعين ومن بعدهم كعبد الله بن عبد العزيز بن عبد الله بن عمر وكعبد الله بن عمر ومحمد بن عجلان ومن خرج مع محمد بن عبد الله

بن الحسن وهاشم بن بشر ومطر ومن خرج مع إبراهيم بن عبد الله وهو الذي تدل عليه أقوال الفقهاء كأبي حنيفة والحسن بن حيي وشريك ومالك والشافعي وداود وأصحابهم فإن كل من ذكرنا من قديم وحديث إما ناطق بذلك في فتواه وأما فاعل لذلك بسل سيفه في إنكار ما رآه منكرا.”

‏[الفِصَل في الملل والنحل 4/132].

Abu bakr Al-Jassas said,

“And his madhab (Abu hanifa) is well known in fighting the oppressors and unjust rulers.”

Ahkam Al Quran

وقال العلامة أبو بكر الجصَّاص من الحنفية: “وكان مذهبه [أي: أبو حنيفة] مشهورًا في قتال الظلمة وأئمة الجور

‏أحكام القرآن للجصَّاص 1/86

Shaykh Abdullah, the son of Imam Muhammad Ibn Abdul WahaAl-Najdi said the scholars differed with regards to rebelling against an unjust Muslim ruler, he quotes that the view of Ahmed Ibn Hanbal and several others from the scholars of Hadith that commanding the good and Forbidding the evil against the rulers should only be by the tongue if one is able to do so, otherwise to hate it in ones heart.

He then mentions the second opinion which was that commanding the good and forbidding the evil against unjust Muslim rulers can be done by the sword But rather it’s an obligation to do If that is the only way to remove such oppression and sin.

From those that saw this view were;

علي بن أبي طالب

‏عمار بن ياسر

‏ابن عباس

‏أبو سعيد الخدري

‏أم المؤمنين عائشة

‏عمرو بن العاص

‏النعمان بن بشير

‏وأبو العادية السلمي

‏عبد الله بن الزبير

‏والحسين بن علي

‏عبد الرحمن بن أبي ليلى

‏وسعيد بن جبير

‏ وأبو البختري الطائي

‏وعطاء السلمي

‏والحسن البصري

‏والشعبي

عبد الله بن عبد العزيز بن عبد الله بن عمر

‏ وعبيد الله بن حفص بن عاصم

‏حمد بن عبد الله بن الحسين بن الحسن بن علي بن أبي طالب

‏إبراهيم بن عبد الله

‏وهشيم بن بشير والوراق

‏وغيرهم

‏These are all the names Shaykh Abdullah brought, and he said there are more

These clearly show, that there isn’t a consensus from the salaf in regards to rebelling against an unjust Muslim ruler, and it clearly shows this isn’t a matter of Aqeedah but a matter of ijtihaad pertaining to benefits and harms, even though many mentioned it within their Aqeedah books. Just like how they mentioned other matters of fiqh in those same books

‏قال الشيخ عبد الله بن محمد بن عبد الوهاب النجدي الحنبلي: ” وقد اختلف أهل السنة والجماعة في هذه المسألة وكذلك أهل البيت، فذهبت طائفة من أهل السنة –رضي الله عنهم- من الصحابة فمن بعدهم كسعد بن أبي وقاص وأسامة بن زيد ومحمد بن مسلمة وعبد الله بن عمر –رضي الله عنهم- وغيرهم،

وهو قول أحمد بن حنبل وجماعة من أصحاب الحديث إلى أن الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر باللسان إن قدر على ذلك، وإلا فبالقلب فقط، ولا يكون باليد وسل السيوف والخروج على الأئمة وإن كانوا أئمة جور.

وذهبت طائفة أخرى من الصحابة –رضي الله عنهم- ومن بعدهم من التابعين ثم الأئمة بعدهم إلى أن سل السيوف في الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر واجب إذا لم يقدر على إزالة المنكر إلا بذلك، وهو قول علي بن أبي طالب وكل من معه من الصحابة –رضي الله عنهم- كعمار بن ياسر وابن عباس

وأبي سعيد الخدري وغيرهم، وهو قول أم المؤمنين ومن معها من الصحابة كعمرو بن العاص والنعمان بن بشير وأبي العادية السلمي وغيرهم، وهو قول عبد الله بن الزبير والحسين بن علي، وهو قول كل من قام على الفاسق الحجاج كعبد الرحمن بن أبي ليلى وسعيد بن جبير وأبي البختري الطائي وعطاء السلمي

والحسن البصري والشعبي ومن بعدهم كالناسك الفاضل عبد الله بن عبد العزيز بن عبد الله بن عمر وعبيد الله بن حفص بن عاصم وسائر من خرج مع محمد بن عبد الله بن الحسين بن الحسن بن علي بن أبي طالب ومع أخيه إبراهيم بن عبد الله وهشيم بن بشير والوراق وغيرهم ”

‏ [جواب أهل السنة ص70-71]

And perhaps we can add to this one question,

How did king Faisal become the king of Saudi Arabia?

And who from the scholars helped and supported him in overthrowing his alcoholic brother?

Some examples of matters pertaining to fiqh which were included in the books of Aqeedah by some of the salaf:

‎• The permissibility of praying Salah in trousers – Al Barbahari

‎قال البربهاري: (ولا بأس بالصلاة في السراويل)

‎شرح السنة ص ٢٧

Reciting the Basmalah quietly in Salah – Sufyan Ath-Thawri and Ibn Batta

‏قال سفيان الثوري: (وإخفاء البسملة أفضل من الجهر)

‏أخرجه اللالكائي في أصول السنة ١/١٥٢

‏وقال ابن بطة: (من السنة ألا تجهر ببسم الله الرحمن الرحيم)

‏الإبانة الصغرى ص ٢٨٨

‏• Hasting to pray Maghrib as soon as it enters – Ibn Batta

‏قال ابن بطة: (ومن السنة المبادرة بصلاة المغرب إذا غاب حاجب الشمس قبل ظهور النجوم)

‏الإبانة الصغرى ص ٢٨٧

‏• Performing taraweeh in Ramadan is a Sunnah – Abu Hanifa and Muhammad Ibn khafeef

‏قال الإمام أبو حنيفة في كتابه الفقه الأكبر: (والتراويح في ليالي شهر رمضان سنة)

‏شرح الفقه الأكبر ص ١٠٦

‏قال أبو عبد الله محمد بن خفيف في (عقيدته): (والتراويح سنة)

‏الفتوى الحموية ص ٤٤٤

Shortening of prayers when one is travelling – Al-Muzani

‏قال الإمام المزني: (وإقصار الصلاة في الأسفار)

‏شرح السنة للمزني ص ٨٩

Dialogue between a Sunni and a Shia

::Copied::

Dialogue between a Sunni and a Shia (Abdullah and Abdul Hussain)😂

😂

Sunni: Excuse me are you Muslim ?

Shia: Yes, and why do ask?

Sunni: Because I noticed you didn’t pray with us today.

Shia : ok, well, I am a Shia.

Sunni: Right! Well what is your belief about Ali again?

Shia: He is one of the Infallible Imams.

Sunni: Interesting, so that means he was flawless then. Ali had many children and in particular a daughter named, “ Um Kulthum” ,who was her first Husband?

Shia: You know the answer to that!

Sunni: I need you to tell me though

Shia: Her first husband was Umar.

Sunni: Exactly, and was Umar a Kafir or a Muslim?

Shia: Kafir.

Sunni: I seek refuge in Allah. How is it possible that Ali was infallible, yet married his precious daughter off to a non-Muslim? Therefore either Ali wasn’t infallible or Umar was a Muslim and I believed both are correct.

Shia: Whatever!

Sunni: Ali was pleased and honored to have Umar as his son-in –law.

Shia: Still Ali was infallible!

Sunni: Well , Abu Bakr and Umar were the 2 caliphs after the Prophet(ﷺ) and Ali gave the pledge of allegiance to them both , didn’t rebel , and was pleased with them as the Khalifah’s; and an infallible Imam wouldn’t support oppression.

Shia: Those people were Ali’s enemies

Sunni: Huh! Ok, after Fatimah’s death Ali married several times and from those marriages he had a lot of children. For example married Umm Al-Baneen bint Hazim and they had 4 boys and one of them named : “ Uthman “, Ali (Radi Allahu anhu) also married, “ Layla bint Mas’ud “ and they had 2 children and one of them he named ,” Abu Bakr”. Also, Ali married Um Habeeb bint Rabee’ah and together they had a son named, “ Umar “. So am I right?

Shia: You are.

Sunni: Cmon, ! Let me ask you this. Name one of your enemies.

Shia: George Bush.

Sunni: LOL . Would you name any of your children George.

Shia: Emphatically not! No way!

Sunni: Then if those people were Ali’s enemies how could he name his boys after them? Would anyone in his right mind name his children after his enemies? Not to mention he named 3 of his boys as; Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman.!

Shia: Yeah, yeah, well you know what caused Fatimah’s death?

Sunni: Tell me .

Shia: Her house was stormed and she was punched in the stomach by Umar, which caused her to have a miscarriage.

Sunni: Where was Ali during of all of this? There is nothing authentically reported that Ali took his rights and I can’t accept Ali would just let that slide and you acknowledge that Ali was BRAVE!

Shia: He was brave!

Sunni: You believe there was a speech given by Muhammad on 18th of Dhu al-Hijjah on the 10 AH at Ghadir Khumm and thousands attended this speech and you are certain that Ali was chosen that day to the Prophet’s Heir Apparent.

Shia: Yes and this narration is sahih!

Sunni: Then why wouldn’t a single one present come to Abu Bakr and remind him what was said at Ghadir Khumm? And if Ali knew he was supposed to be the Caliph after the Prophet based on revelation, why would he give Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman the pledge?

Shia: Ali was supposed to come after the PROPHET as CALIPH!

Sunni: Really!! Then how come Ali didn’t lead a single prayer during the last days of the Prophet (ﷺ) while he was sick?

Shia: There is a narration from Sahih Al-Bukhari: That the Prophet (ﷺ) said to ‘Ali, “Will you not be pleased from this that you are to me like Aaron was to Moses?” This proves that Ali was the Caliph after Muhammad

Sunni: Harun wasn’t the Caliph after Musa, and Yusha bin nun (Joshua) was.

Shia: Everything will be fixed when the Mahdi comes. Just wait and see.

Sunni: No thanks, I don’t have to. When the Mahdi comes what will he rule by?

Shia: He will rule by the law of Dawud. He is hiding now in a tunnel waiting for the right moment to appear.

Sunni: Where is the law of Muhammad (ﷺ) ? It’s abrogated by a previous law! Iran has a population 70 million living in their country, why can’t the Mahdi come out now and live in Iran under the protection of the government?

Shia: There’s no rush for the Mahdi to come out from hiding now because Allah has granted him 100’s of years of extended life to establish the proof against his creation.

Sunni: Well, Nuh live 950 and Ibrahim had a long life as well and if there was anyone from the Son-of Adam more deserving of an extended lifespan to establish the proof on creation I think it would be Muhammad. He’s the last one to receive revelation from Jibril.

Shia: Well there is a mistake with that understanding of yours. Muhammad’s mission was to explain the Quran to Ali only.

Sunni: SubhanAllah! Allah said, “And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad ) the reminder and the advice (the Qur’an), that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought.[An-Nahl :44]

Shia: The Quran you are quoting Mr Sunni has been distorted. Abu Bakr and Umar removed some verses from it and changed others.

Sunni: Quote a few verses for me please.

Shia: I can quote 100’s but time doesn’t allow me to do so, therefore, I’ll only give you a couple.

1: “ If have any doubt about what we sent down on our slave about Ali then produce one verse like it.”

2: Whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger about the rule of Allah is among the successful .”

Sunni: These are some of the changed and distorted verses from the Quran?

Shia: Yes there are.

Sunni: Okay when Ali became the Calipha why didn’t he put those verses back in the Quran or at least explain this to the people?! Can you read some other Ayah that were changed?

Shia: Yes, here’s two more and listen carefully.

: Baqarah verse 90 should read: How bad is that for which they have sold their own-selves, that they should disbelieve in that which Allah has revealed about Ali.

2: In Al-Muarij it’s supposed to read: A questioner asked concerning a torment about to befall. Upon the disbelievers, which none can avert Ali’s Caliphaship

Sunni: The verses you quoted and believe were changed actually prove that Ali wasn’t supposed to be the Imam after the Prophet(ﷺ) and they are referring the Jews. By the way what’s your name again?

Shia: Abdul Hussain

Sunni: Do you have any children?

Shia: I do, Abdul Ali and Abdul Zahra

Sunni: Allah said: But worship Allah (Alone and none else), and be among the grateful.[Az-Zumar :66] Why did you choose those names and none of your Imams named their children with similar names?

Shia: See, you Wahabbis all think alike the word Abdul doesn’t always mean slave it can mean servant, and this in known in the Arabic Language.

Sunni: Okay, then Abdul Hussain means servant of Hussain after he was martyred ! Is it logical that he’s given his drinks, his food and water is poured for him while he’s in his grave? That’s what a servant does for his master.

Shia: Abdullah you are a Sunni Wahabbi and confused and I am a Shia following what’s correct!

Sunni : The companions of the Prophet were they Shia before the prophet’s death then became Ahlus Sunnah or were they Ahlus Sunnah then became Shia?

Shia: They are apostates!

Sunni: well, to apostate means to go from one state of belief to another!

Shia: They apostated that’s it. Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman were not Muslims.

Sunni: Allah said: Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave their Bai’a (pledge) to you (O Muhammad ) under the tree, He knew what was in their hearts, and He sent down As-Sakinah (calmness and tranquillity) upon them, and He rewarded them with a near victory. [ Al-Fath :18] Didn’t those three companions you just mentioned give their pledge?

Shia: They did and what’s your point?

Sunni:Allah mentioned that he was and is pleased with them and knows what’s in their hearts,yet you are telling they apostate because of the Caliphaship of Ali, so in other words you’re saying, “ Allah doesn’t know but the Shia do!” I seek refuge in Allah.

Shia: Aisha as well .

Sunni: Aisha(Radi Allahu anha) what?

Shia: she was a hypocrite and an apostate.

Sunni: I seek refuge in Allah! Where was the Prophet buried?

Shia: In Madinah.

Sunni: Can you be more specific. Where at in Madinah is he buried?

Shia: In the Masjid.

Sunni: I seek refuge in Allah. Ahlus Sunnah doesn’t pray in Masjids where graves are. At any rate , a special trait for all the Prophet is they are buried where they die and He(ﷺ) died in Aisha’s bedroom. Isn’t this enough proof that he loved her and was pleased with her!

Shia: Abu Bakr and Umar might have something to with that.

Sunni: They are both buried next him. A Muslim isn’t buried between disbelievers. How is it possible that Allah wouldn’t protect Prophet Muhammad from having non-Muslims buried next to him. And where was Ali at with all of this ? He didn’t dispute those actions?!

Shia: Aisha wasn’t a Muslim bottom line!

Sunni: Then why didn’t the Prophet(ﷺ)divorce her? A Muslim cant remain married to a non-Muslim. Unless the Shia know her condition better than the one who received revelation.- I seek refuge in Allah!

Shia: Look, I am telling you! Aisha wasn’t a Muslim and plus she did some despicable things! Things I can’t mention right now since we are in the Masjid.

Sunni: Allah’s refuge is sought! You are referring to the hadith Ifk(The great slander) Allah vindicated Aisha of this false tale and besides The Prophet (ﷺ)said : If my daughter Fatimah stole something I’d cut her hand.” Our Prophet never feared the blame of the blamers, so why didn’t carry out the capital punishment for Aisha’s crimes if what you are saying is true?!. Allahu Musta’an.

Shia: They are about to call the Athan and even the wording is incorrect!

Sunni: What’s missing from this Athan?

Shia: The Athan should be said with 3 testimonies : ASH-HADO ANNA ALIYAN WALI-YULLAH (2 times):I bear witness that Ali is the representative of Allah.

Sunni: This contradicts your narrations from your books, The Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Instruct your dying to say “LAA ILAAHA-ILLALLAAH” and anyone whose last words are LAA ILAAHA-ILLALLAAH will enter Janna.” Where is the testimony of Ali those narrations?

Shia: Having love and belief that Ali is the Imam is a condition for faith.

Sunni: That’s it!

Shia: Yes, there is a hadith, “Loving Ali is piety which isn’t harmed by sins”,

Sunni: That’s Irja’. If bad deeds don’t affect a person’s faith as long as he loves Ali, then there’s absolutely no need for the Infallible Imam! Allahu Akbar.

Shia: Can we continue this another time. You guys are about to pray Jumu’ah and I’m delaying Jumu’ah until the Mahdi appears.

Sunni: There’s a clear directive from Allah in Al-Jumu’ah 9. How many Shia have died without offering this prayer!

Shia: anyway gotta run. We’ll pick this up again🤪

🤪

😂

😂

Copied from Facebook.

Avengers Vs Messengers

“So I went to see Avengers:Endgame with my husband today. It was 3 hours of pure escapism and fantasy and I remember a conversation we had with our children about which superhero we wish we could be. It dawned on me that we can plant a seed for our kids for a love of real life heroes rather than a sad disappointment for ones we’ll never be…

Avengers Vs Messengers

Let’s teach our children ;

Before Iron-Man, there was Dawood Alayhis Salaam, the one who could bend iron and metal with his bare hands.

[Qur’aan 34:10].

Before Superman, there was Sulaymaan Alayhis Salaam, the one who could fly by controlling the winds.

[Qur’aan 38:36]

Before Ant-Man – the one who enlarges to 60 feet tall, there was Aadam Alayhis Salaam who was created 60 feet tall.

[al-Bukhaari, 3336; Muslim, 7092]

Before Wolverine – the one who cures himself instantly, there was Esaa Alayhis Salaam, the one who could do one better and cure others instantly by the will of Allaah.

[Qur’aan 3:49]

Before Aquaman – the one who communicates with sea-creatures, there was Sulaymaan Alayhis Salaam who could communicate with ALL creatures.

[Qur’aan 27:16]

It’s human nature to want a hero, albeit a super one. And if we fail to provide our children with the correct one, they will naturally fill that void with an imaginary one.

Alhamdulillah for a religion that has granted us real-life superheroes who not only serve as timeless and practical role-models we can follow, but also provide abundant guidance in regards to this world and the next, sufficing us the need to look elsewhere.

Author unknown

This got to me to thinking. Mums are exactly like superheroes. We have hidden super strengths, we keep going, we wear masks and disguises to hide our true selves and we try to save the world one child at a time. ..” –Copied

She lived by this Ayah…

A female Qur’aan teacher always advised her students to live by this Ayah:

وَعَجِلْتُ إِلَيْكَ رَبِّ لِتَرْضَىٰ

“And I hurried to You, my Lord, so that You’ll be pleased.”

[Taahaa, [20]: 84]

She told them, “This Ayah is what moves me. When I hear the Adhaan and I’m occupied and in the middle of something, I remind myself of this Ayah and so I get up to pray.”

“When my alarm goes off at 2am and I want to go back to sleep I remember: ‘And I hurried to You, my Lord, so you’ll be pleased’, and so I get up and stand before Allah.”

Her husband had the following arrangement with her: On his way home from a long day at work he’d call her so she’ll get the food hot & ready, so he can come home and eat & rest.

One day he asked her to make Mahshi (stuffed grape leaves) – a very time consuming dish. The process involves wrapping many of them and then putting them in a pot to cook. She had 3 more to wrap; but the Adhaan was called.

So she left the 3 remaining grape-leaves (which would have taken her 5 more minutes) and went to pray.

Her husband came home and found that the food was not ready and she was in sujood. He noticed there were only 3 grape-leaves left.

A bit upset, he uttered, “You could have just finished them & put the pot to cook then pray!” But she wasn’t responding.

He went to her to discover that she had died in her Sujood!

SubhaanAllaah! Had she waited like any of us to “finish whats in her hand” she would have died in the kitchen! Indeed, the way we live our life is how we will die.

Be careful of the supplication of the one you oppressed!

Allah warns you to be aware and be careful of the supplication of the one you oppressed!

A true story which took place in Baghdad, it was narrated about Ibn Furaat Al Abbasi.

An old lady, she had a garden next to a minister, this minister’s name was Ibn Furaat. Ibn Furaat confiscated the lady’s garden, he was a minister, he confiscated her garden so she went to him and said, this is my garden that you have confiscated. I have no brother or father to help me, I depend on my garden!

Ibn Furaat replied, the garden is mine – just go away!

She said to him, I swear by Allah I’m going to make duah against you.

The minister responded and told her, go and make duah at the last third part of the night! He was mocking her!

There was a scholar there who heard the conversation, he started shaking when he heard Ibn Furaat say that, because that’s not an easy matter, it’s not easy to say. This is very serious.
Ibn Furaat is not worried, he’s mocking Allah!!

The lady told him, may Allah reward you good and then she left.

The lady went away, a whole month she was making duah, the whole month she was making duah against him! Then one day Ibn Furaat did something wrong, the Khalifa was not pleased with him and he ordered for one of his hands to be cut off one week and his neck the following week.

One day she passed by him when he was awaiting his execution. She told him, may Allah reward you good, you guided me to the right way.

Ibn Furaat was shocked, he asked her, why are you telling me this here?
The lady said, you directed me to make duah at the last third part of the night.

The following week Ibn Furaat’s head was decapitated.

Allah answers the oppressed and persecuted – there is nothing between them and Allah. Duah is effective, make a lot of duah and remain patient. Indeed the fruits of duah are the sweetest!

There’s a hadith which mentions the power of the supplication of the oppressed. Allah swore by His honor and grandeur, He said by My honor, grandeur and majesty I will grant you a victory even if it’s after a while! This is hadith.

In another hadith it states that the supplication of the oppressed – there is no barricade, no veil between the supplication of the oppressed and Allah!

A story of a man of jannah, something to soften your heart

Before I begin, this story played a massive role in my life as a teenager, my love for Islam grew a lot and I gained interest in learning more about it, so I hope it has the same effect on others as well!

There was an orphan child in Madinah who owned a small meadow, after his father’s death he wanted to make a wall around it so he could keep it protected.

The only issue was, his neighbour’s date tree was coming in the way of his wall, and if he was to build it he would have to go around the tree, which would make his wall weaker and less stable.

So he asks his neighbour to give the tree for free, as he does not have a father and he doesn’t have sufficient money to purchase it from him. The man bluntly refused.

So this child went to the prophet Muhammad SAW, and he complained about his situation to him. And the prophet SAW obviously, was able to relate to him, not only because he was a prophet, but because he was also raised an orphan!

So he called this neighbour, Abu Lubabah, and he brought both of these people at one spot and asked Abu Lubabah to give the tree to this orphan. Abu Lubabah started to make excuses, saying his kids love the dates that grow from it, and said that if it was another tree, he’d agree

The prophet SAW said, “give this child the tree, and Allah will plant for you a tree in jannah”… and guess what, the man refused. He said he didn’t want jannah.

He was so angry, he could not believe that this kid actually took the matter to the prophet!

And obviously the prophet SAW could not use his authority as the messenger of Allah over him because after all it is the man’s property, and what more can you do after you’ve enticed a man with jannah, in exchange of a tree?!

Tears started flowing down the cheeks of this orphan child who had no father or parental figure to fight for him.

But among the sahabah sitting, there was Abu Dahdah, and he was famous for one thing and one thing only, at least at that time.

He was famous for his enormous garden which was filled with date trees, some narrations mention there were over 500 trees, and his house was a beautiful house which was built inside it.

Abu Dahdah said to the prophet, “If I manage to give this child that tree, is there a tree for me in jannah ya rasulullaah”, and the prophet promised that if he did so, he’d have a tree in jannah.

So he went to Abu Lubabah and asked him if he was aware of his massive garden in the city, Abu Lubabah replied “who doesn’t know it”.

Abu Dahdah said, give me that tree, and the garden is yours.

Abu Lubabah was stunned! I mean an entire meadow, one of the biggest meadows in the city (with a house in it), for some useless tree?

But Abu Dahdah said he was serious, and so Abu Lubabah made everyone witness as the transaction was performed. After the purchase, Abu Dahdah gave the tree to the orphan for free so he could build his wall around it as he wished.

Abu Dahdah ran to the prophet SAW, and informed him about what had occurred, and the prophet SAW said “how many dates for you in jannah, oh Abu Dahdah!”, and he kept repeating it until Abu Dahdah left the gathering.

Then Abu Dahdah raced home, and narrations mention that he did not enter his garden, he called his wife from outside, why did he not enter? Because he did not want his heart to be reminded of all his memories, and how beautiful it was, so much so that he’d back off from the deal.

His wife came out, and she asked why she was called, so Abu Dahdah told her he sold everything. “Sold to who?” she asked, “To Allah”, he said.

What was her reaction to this? Keep in mind, this entire family can go homeless, Abu Dahdah has no other possessions! So how does she respond?
Instead of being frustrated or anxious she said “what a great deal, oh Abu Dahdah!”

Fast forward to the time of the battle of Uhud…

And I want you to imagine this, what emotions would this trigger in you if you had witnessed this?
The prophet SAW has been surrounded, and Utbah Ibn Abi Waqaas throws a rock at rasulullah and injures his face…

As he SAW tries to regain his strength and get back up, Abdullah bin Qamia came from behind and struck our beloved prophet with his sword on his shoulder…

Then Abdullah Ibn Shihab struck rasulullah again in the face, injuring him badly, so much so that he lost a tooth and his lip cut open and bled… he was covered in blood…

Every single time rasulullah tried to get up he was struck down by the enemy, so he called out and said “whoever stops these people, will be my neighbour in jannah”

And the sahabah saw this as a prime opportunity!

Among them was Abu Dahdah RA, who threw himself into the mix to become a neighbour of the prophet SAW.

As the battle came to an end, the prophet SAW was passing by the bodies of the martyrs, and praying for them as he passed, until he reached the body of Abu Dahdah RA, and he crouched down near his face and said…

“how many TREES now, oh Abu Dahdah, for you in jannah”.

My dear brothers and sisters, these are the type of people who will have gardens of date trees in jannah, these are the people who will neighbour the prophet SAW in jannah, these are the people who will pass without questioning in the hereafter, are we like them?

Including myself, the most struggle we face is lifting a blanket at the time of fajr, these men and women were carrying the burden and the future of the ummah on their backs…

Every time you sin, think to yourself before you do, those who gave their lives in Badr, in Uhud, in the battle of the trench, those who sacrificed all of what they had, did they do it so one day I can sit in so and so place and commit such and such sin?

Let us not be among the people in the hereafter, that when rasulullah sees us he says, “O my Lord, indeed my people have taken this Qur’an as [a thing] abandoned.” Surah Furqan, Ayah 30. May Allah protect us from such shame.

Side note: Something to think about is their belief in Allah and his messenger! Solid as rock! He knew for a fact he would have a tree in jannah, he didn’t doubt it!

#Copied

The Final Meeting of Asmaa bint Abu Bakr & Her Son Abdullah.

Asma bint Abu Bakr ra’s final meeting with her son, Abdullah, must remain one of the most unforgettable moments in early Muslim history. At that meeting she demonstrated the keenness of her intelligence, her resoluteness and the strength of her faith.

Abdullah was in the running for the Caliphate after the death of Yazid ibn Mu’awiyah. The Hijaz, Egypt, Iraq, Khurasan and much of Syria were favourable to him and acknowledged him as the Caliph. The Ummayyads however continued to contest the Caliphate and to field a massive army under the command of Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf ath-Thaqafi. Relentless battles were fought between the two sides during which Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr displayed great acts of courage and heroism. Many of his supporters however could not withstand the continuous strain of battle and gradually began to desert him. Finally he sought refuge in the Sacred Mosque at Makkah. It was then that he went to his mother, now an old blind woman, and said:

“Peace be on you, Mother, and the mercy and blessings of God.”

“Unto you be peace, Abdullah,” she replied. “What is it that brings you here at this hour while boulders from Hajjaj’s catapults are raining down on your soldiers in the Haram and shaking the houses of Makkah?” “I came to seek your advice,” he said.

“To seek my advice?” she asked in astonishment. “About what?”

“The people have deserted me out of fear of Hajjaj or being tempted by what he has to offer. Even my children and my family have left me. There is only a small group of men with me now and however strong and steadfast they are they can only resist for an hour or two more. Messengers of the Banu Umayyah (the Umayyads) are now negotiating with me, offering to give me whatever wordly possessions I want, should I lay down my arms and swear allegiance to Abdul Malik ibn Marwan. What do you think?”

Raising her voice, she replied:

“It’s your affair, Abdullah, and you know yourself better. If however you think that you are right and that you are standing up for the Truth, then persevere and fight on as your companions who were killed under your flag had shown perseverance. If however you desire the world, what a miserable wretch you are. You would have destroyed yourself and you would have destroyed your men.”

“But I will be killed today, there is no doubt about it.”

“That is better for you than that you should surrender yourself to Hajjaj voluntarily and that some minions of Banu Umayyah should play with your head.”

“I do not fear death. I am only afraid that they will mutilate me.”

“There is nothing after death that man should be afraid of. Skinning does not cause any pain to the slaughtered sheep.”

Abdullah’s face beamed as he said:

“What a blessed mother! Blessed be your noble qualities! I have come to you at this hour to hear what I have heard. God knows that I have not weakened or despaired. He is witness over me that I have not stood up for what I have out of love for this world and its attractions but only out of anger for the sake of God. His limits have been transgressed. Here am I, going to what is pleasing to you. So if I am killed, do not grieve for me and commend me to God.”

“I shall grieve for you,” said the ageing but resolute Asmaa, “only if you are killed in a vain and unjust cause.”

“Be assured that your son has not supported an unjust cause, nor committed any detestable deed, nor done any injustice to a Muslim or a Dhimmi and that there is nothing better in his sight than the pleasure of God, the Mighty, the Great. I do not say this to exonerate myself. God knows that I have only said it to make your heart firm and steadfast. ” “Praise be to God who has made you act according to what He likes and according fo what I like. Come close to me, my son, that I may smell and feel your body for this might be the last meeting with you.” Abdullah knelt before her. She hugged him and smothered his head, his face and his neck with kisses.

Her hands began to squeeze his body when suddenly she withdrew them and asked:

“What is this you are wearing, Abdullah?” “This is my armour plate.”

“This, my son, ls not the dress of one who desires martyrdom. Take it off. That will make your movements lighter and quicker. Wear instead the sirwal (a long under garment) so that if you are killed your ‘awrah will not be exposed.

Abdullah took off his armour plate and put on the sirwal. As he left for the Haram to join the fighting he said:

“My mother, don’t deprive me of your dada (prayer).”

Raising her hands to heaven, she prayed:

“O Lord, have mercy on his staying up for long hours and his loud crying in the darkness of the night while people slept . . .

“O Lord, have mercy on his hunger and his thirst on his journeys from Madinah and Makkah while he fasted . . .

“O Lord, bless his righteousness to his mother and his father . . .

“O Lord, I commend him to Your cause and I am pleased with whatever You decree for him. And grant me for his sake the reward of those who are patient and who persevere.”

By sunset, Abdullah was dead. Just over ten days later, his mother joined him. She was a hundred years old. Age had not made her infirm nor blunted the keenness of her mind.

Scanned from: “Companions of The Prophet”, Vol.1, By: Abdul Wahid Hamid.

Fitrah

Fitra, or fitrah (Arabic فطرة), is an Arabic word meaning ‘disposition’, ‘nature’, ‘constitution’, or ‘instinct’. The word fitrah comes from the Arabic radicals fa ta ra. The root action means, he clove, split, slit, rent or cracked it. The term fitrah literally means, creation; the causing a thing to exist for the first time; and the natural constitution with which a child is created in his mother’s womb. It is for this reason that Muslims prefer to refer to those who embrace Islam as reverts rather than converts, as it is believed they are returning to a perceived pure state.

“[Iblees said] ‘…and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by Allah.’”

[al-Nisa’ 4:119] Tafseer Ibn Katheer

Islam is also called deen al-fitrah, the religion of human nature, because its laws and its teachings are in full harmony with the normal and the natural inclination of the human fitrah to believe in and submit to the Creator.

According to Muhammad sws said that Allah swt said,

“I created My servants in the right religion, but the devils made them go astray.” (Sahih Muslim.)

Since Almighty God made all human beings swear to His Unique Divinity and Lordship when He created Adam (7:172), this oath is printed on the human soul even before it enters the mother’s fetus. So when a child is born, it has with it a natural belief in God. This natural belief is called in Arabic the “fitrah”. If a child were left alone, it would grow up aware of Almighty God in His Unity, but all children are affected by the pressures of their environment. The acts of fitrah are specific features which God has created in man and found within his natural tendency to like as well as to dislike what contradicts these acts.

Islamic scholar al-Sayyuti said:

“The best explanation of fitrah is that it is the Sunnah (way) of all of the Prophets which is in agreement with (all of) the revealed Laws, indicating that it is a response to naturally created inclinations.

Fitra has a physical component as well as a spiritual one. The fitra of the human body is its beauty and perfection as created by God. Although created perfectly by God, humans are permitted to enhance their appearance through means approved by God, such as clothes, bathing and perfumes. However, radical changes to one’s body to suit personal taste or social fashion are condemned as unlawful changes to fitra.

“The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: ‘Five things are part of the fitrah: removing the pubic hair, circumcision, trimming the moustache, plucking the armpit hairs, and trimming the nails.”

[Saheeh Bukhari]

What is meant by these five things being part of the fitrah is that when they are done, this is in accordance with the natural pattern on which Allaah made mankind and urged them to follow, so that they will be better and more perfect.This is the ancient sunnah (way) which was followed by all the Prophets and which was enjoined by all the laws they brought. It is a natural and innate way.

Courage and Fear

• Ibn Nuhaas (D. 814 H / 1393 AD) – Courage and Fear:

Abu Hurairah narrated: “The strong believer is more beloved to Allah than the weak believer” (Muslim)

The Messenger of Allah used to say: “O Allah I seek refuge in you from gloom and sorrow; from inaction and laziness; and from cowardice, stinginess and old age, and I seek refuge in you from the punishment of the grave” (Bukhari – Muslim)

Notice that the Messenger of Allah combined between seeking refuge in Allah from gloom and sorrow. For gloom is the fear of what is coming while sorrow is sadness on what has already passed. So the Muslim should not feel sorry for the past nor fear the future. And he combined between inaction and laziness for inaction is the state of the heart while laziness is the state of the body. He combined between stinginess and cowardice for stinginess is the unwillingness to give wealth for Allah while cowardice is the unwillingness to give the soul for Allah.

How to overcome fear:

Cowardice is the opposite of courage. Courage is the firmness of the heart. The heart is the essence of every good deed. The heart cannot be firm if the mind isn’t sound. If the heart is weak it leads to cowardice, and if the heart is too strong it leads to recklessness.

The coward needs to cure cowardice by eliminating its cause. If it is caused by ignorance then ignorance is cured by learning. The cause could be fear of the unknown and that is cured by experiencing situations. We find that the beginner in public speaking experiences fear in the beginning but after experience this fear is overcome. We find that when a person first meets a king they might fear the occasion and their tongue would be tied and their posture would change.

That is due to the anxiety of facing a new experience. But if that occasion is repeated many times the fear is eliminated. Original nature can be changed. It is sufficient as proof to see a Hawa child (children trained to care for snakes) grabbing a large snake that would make a brave man tremble while this same child could fear a frog because he is not exposed to frogs. Taming animals is a process of changing their original nature and it is done through training. A wolf could play with a sheep, a cat with a mouse, and a dog with a cat if they are conditioned to do so even though that is contrary to their original nature. Now if animals can change their characteristics can’t humans do the same?

Having a strong heart leads to victory. Ali was asked: “How do you defeat your enemies?” He said: “When I would meet my enemy I would believe with firm conviction that I would defeat him while he believes that I would defeat him so both myself and his self support me against him”.

Some have advised: “Believe in victory, you will be victorious”

Others say: “If you fear your enemy you have allowed an army to be sent against your heart”

We have found that the ones who died because of their fear are more than the ones who died due to their courage.

Al Tartooshi says: Courage is of three types:

1. A man who stands in front of the army asking for a challenger from the enemy to come out and face him.

2. A man who remains calm, concentrating, tranquil while the battle is ragging. And when others are succumbing to fear he has not lost his orientation and is not confused and acts in a way that proves he has control over himself.

3. A man when everyone else is defeated and is retreating remains firm calling them, and encouraging them to continue the fight.

Al Tartooshi says that the third man possesses the greatest form of courage.

• Amongst the Courageous of this Ummah:

The most courageous of all mankind is the Messenger of Allah. He had the strongest heart of all. He faced the toughest of situations. Heroes would scatter from around him while he is firm. The Messenger of Allah never turned his back in battle.

In Bukhari and Muslim Anas bin Malik narrates: “The Messenger of Allah was the best of people, he was the most generous and the most courageous.”

Ali said: “When the ferocity of combat would reach its limit and the eyes would turn red we would seek refuge next to the Messenger of Allah. He would be the closest of us to the enemy.” (Muslim)

A man asked al Baraa bin Aazib: “Did you run away during the life of the Messenger of Allah?” He said: “We did. But he didn’t.” (Bukhari – Muslim)

In Uhud Ubayy bin Khalaf, riding his horse, charged towards the Messenger of Allah. Some Muslims wanted to get in the way to protect the Messenger of Allah but he told them to move aside. The Messenger of Allah picked up a spear and threw it at Ubayy who was covered in iron armor from head to toe. Nothing appeared from him except his eyes and a small opening in his neck. The spear hit him right in the neck and he fell off his horse. Even though the spear only caused a minor bruise in his neck due to the protection of the armor, Ubayy rushed back screaming: “Muhammad has killed me!” The people of Quraish checked him and said we don’t find any major injury. You are fine! He said: “Muhammad claimed he would kill me, therefore it must come to happen!” Ubayy latter died on his way back to Makkah.

The courageous of this Ummah are too many to count. On top of the list are the Sahabah whom Allah praised in Quran:
“Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves.” (Al Fath 29)

0000000001) Abu Bakr:

The courage of Abu Bakr was witnessed by the hero of the Ummah Ali bin Abi Talib.

When he was the Khalifah Ali asked: “Who is the bravest of men?” They said: “You are,” He said: “I have never dueled anyone and lost. But the bravest man is Abu Bakr. During the battle of Badr we built a shed for the Messenger of Allah and we asked who would be the bodyguard of the Messenger of Allah therein. Abu Bakr came carrying his sword and defended the Messenger of Allah for the entire day. In Makkah the disbelievers attacked the Messenger of Allah: One would pull him, the other would beat him and they would say: “Have you made the gods one God?” No one dared to go near the Messenger of Allah save Abu Bakr. He went and started fighting them and would say: “Are you going to kill a man just because he says: “Allah is my Lord!”““ Then Ali asked: “Who is better Abu Bakr or the believer of the family of Pharaoh? (His story is mentioned and praised in Quran)” The people remained quite. He said: “Why don’t you answer? In the name of Allah, one moment in the life of Abu Bakr is greater than the entire earth full of the likes of the believer of the family of Pharaoh! The believer of the family of Pharaoh was a man who concealed his faith while Abu Bakr was a man who proclaimed his faith”

Abu Bakr is the bravest man of this Ummah after the Messenger of Allah. One can note the strength of his heart during the battle of Badr, Uhud, the trench, al Hudaybiah, and Hunain. It is enough to note his steadfastness, firmness, and strengthening of the entire Ummah when the greatest disaster of all befell us: The death of Muhammad (saaws). That was when the hearts deviated, and the nation was shaken. When all the hearts where trembling the heart of the Siddeeq was firm. If the heart of Abu Bakr were placed on one side of the scale and the hearts of all the Ummah on the other, his heart would outweigh them all. The courage of Abu Bakr in his decision to fight the apostates if distributed over the hearts of the cowards on the entire face of the earth, it would be sufficient to make them brave.

0000000002) Umar bin al-Khattaab:

It is sufficient to point out that the courage of Umar was sufficient enough to make Shaytaan avoid him.

The Messenger of Allah told Umar: “O son of Khattaab: In the name of whom my soul is in His hands whenever Shaytaan sees you taking a route, he would take another” (Bukhari – Muslim)

His Islam brought strength to the Muslims. Abdullah bin Masood said: “We used to not be able to pray next to al Kaabah publicly until Umar became Muslim.

0000000003) Ali bin Abi Talib:

He was the lion of this Ummah. He never missed a battle with the Messenger of Allah except Tabook because the Messenger of Allah appointed him over Madinah in his absence. During the battle of Khaibar the Messenger of Allah said: “Tomorrow I will give the banner to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger, and Allah and His Messenger love him. He does not turn his back away in battle and Allah will make opening occur on his hands” All of the Sahabah desired that honor. The next day the Messenger of Allah called Ali and gave him the banner.

Musaab al Zubairi said: “Ali was very cautious in battle. He was swerve terrifically from his enemy and whenever he charges his enemy he would protect all his sides and when he retreats back from his charge he would be even more protective of himself. No one could get to him.

His shield was one sided. It only protected him from the front. When asked: “Don’t you fear an attack from behind?” He replied: “I never give my enemy the chance to attack me from my back”

0000000004) Talhah bin Ubaidillah:

He is one of the ten given the glad tidings of Paradise. During Uhud he shielded the Messenger of Allah with his own body causing over 70 injuries in his body. Whenever the Messenger of Allah wanted to look at the disbelievers Talhah would plead with him not to do so and would shield him with his body.

0000000005) Al Zubair bin al Awwaam:

He is also one of the ten given the glad tidings of Paradise. He was the first Muslim to draw out a sword. During the early days of Islam in Makkah a rumor spread that the Messenger of Allah was kidnapped. Al Zubair drew out his sword and went looking for him. He ran into the Messenger of Allah who asked him: “What’s wrong with you Zubair?” He said: “I heard that you were kidnapped so I came out to fight them!” The Messenger of Allah prayed for him.

The secret plots of west in Egypt.

To understand the imperial project in the Muslim world, one needs to revisit the British colonization of Egypt.

Everlyn Baring, better known as Lord Cromer, was the British Proconsul-General in occupied Egypt between 1877 and 1907. He wrote about his tenure in his book “Modern Egypt” (1916). Here are some conclusions from his book:

1. The West will not tolerate an Islamic government.

On page 565, he said that it would be “absurd” to assume that Europe would tolerate a “government based on purely Mohammedan principles and obsolete Oriental ideas.”

2. Muslims must be forced to adopt the principles of Western civilization.

On page 538, he said that Egypt had to be “forced into imbibing the true spirit of Western civilization.”

3. Westernization must be introduced under the guise of women’s rights.

Lord Cromer says that the “position of women” in Muslim countries was a “fatal obstacle” in the introduction of colonial values. (page 539)

4. The West must educate a class of young secular Muslims to be the rulers.

Cromer’s hope was that a Europeanized education system would cause an Egyptian to “lose his Islamism”, cause him to “no longer believe that he is always in the presence of his Creator”, and only hang onto “the least worthy portions of his nominal religion” for the sake of convenience. (page 230)

5. The West must reform Islam.

Cromer says that the goal should be to create “de-moslemized Moslems”, where people are Muslims-by-name, but in actuality, are “agnostic”. After all, Cromer says, “Islam cannot be reformed … reformed Islam is Islam no longer.” (pages 228-229)

6. The Muslim reformer would hate Muslim scholarship more than Europeans do.

The Westernized Muslim would consider the `alim to be a “social derelict”, use him in matters of convenience, but otherwise disrespect him. On the other hand, a European Christian intellectual would at least look at the `alim with sympathy and respect, as a “representative of an ancient faith”. (page 299-30)

7. Modernized Muslims will become Deists.

“It is conceivable that, as time goes on, the Moslems will develop a religion, possibly a pure Deism, which will not be altogether the Islamism of the past and of the present, and which will cast aside much of the teaching of Mohammed, but which will establish a moral code sufficient to hold society together by bonds other than those of unalloyed self-interest.” (page 234)

———–

We can see therefore that Islamic reform started as a colonial project. A project that has been devilishly designed by European intellectuals to undermine the clerics, introduce secular humanist institutions, and gradually and inconspicuously lead Muslims away from the central tenets of their tradition. They knew that this reformed, liberal Muslim would not be a Muslim at all, but just a Europeanized invertebrate (i.e. a spineless being) who would maneuver the religion to his needs.

This seven-step process is *exactly* what is happening to Muslim youth all over the world. They volunteer themselves to secular academia and pop culture, and are led away from a truly Islamic worldview and epistemology. And while they fool themselves into calling themselves “Muslim reformers”, or “moderate Muslims”, or “liberal Muslims”, their puppet masters know that these are all contradictions in terms.

Times change, but right remains right, and wrong remains wrong.

Read the book for yourself: https://archive.org/details/modernegypt00crom

The Tartars/Mongols and the Americans

When it comes to fighting a war in Iraq, the United States and its most famous predecessors — the Mongols of the 13th century — have a lot in common. Both the Mongols and the Bushes, for instance, attacked Iraq twice.

Saddam Hussein vilified the Americans who attacked his country as the “new Mongols.” And it was not the first time the Iraqi leader had compared U.S. invaders to the Mongol hordes. In 1991, he likened former President George Bush to Hulegu Khan, the warlord grandson of Genghis Khan, who sacked Baghdad in 1258.

But in some ways, the American-led attack doesn’t hold a candle to the Mongols’ assault.

The Mongolian version of “shock and awe” so devastated Baghdad that the city was left unrecognizable. Homes and mosques were razed and between 200,000 and 800,000 people were killed. The war’s chroniclers said the Tigris River ran red with blood and then black from ink after the barbarians threw the Caliph of Baghdad’s library into the river.

The Mongolian generals struck such terror into the hearts of the Iraqis that the caliph not only agreed to hand over all his riches but 700 princesses as well, in exchange for his life. The Mongols, however, ignored the offer, rolling the ruler of Baghdad into a carpet and trampling him to death with horses.

After their military victory, the Mongols spent 17 days looting Baghdad. Now the city is being looted again, but this time it is not the conquerors but the conquered who are doing the pillaging.

Still, there are some obvious similarities in the two campaigns. Both invading forces used superior military technology to their advantage. The Americans, of course, have smart bombs and bunker busters. For the Mongols, it was a skilled cavalry and catapults that hurled rocks and burning oil.

In 1258, news of the capital’s destruction led to the easy capture of towns and villages such as Hilla, Kufa and Basra, just as Baghdad’s fall led to the rapid capitulation of forces defending Kirkuk and Mosul.

Both war machines also relied on allies, though the Mongols put together a more impressive coalition, with Uzbeks, Kazaks, Georgians and other groups joining in the assault.

Mongolian historian Shagdaryn Bira suggests that ideological differences helped fuel both wars.

“Mongolia’s nomadic and shamanic culture came into conflict with the values of Islamic peoples. The U.S. is a product of Christian and European values that also found conflict in Iraq,” he said. “I am not saying that the Mongols or the U.S. purposely pursued a holy war, but the lack of common values led to war rather than compromise.”

Bira also contends that both superpowers were attracted by Iraq’s riches.

“Of course, the Mongols had an economic interest. They were nomadic and produced little, so the treasures of Persia were tempting,” he said, “just as the lure of oil tempts the United States.”

Yet Bira and other academics agree that there are some stark differences between the campaigns.

The Mongols captured Baghdad in a mere four days, for instance, while it took U.S. forces three weeks.

Perhaps the most striking difference in the two conflicts is that the Mongols not only brought down the Arab culture’s most prosperous city but destroyed a 500-year-old dynasty. At its peak, the Abbasid caliphs, who ruled from 750 to 1258, claimed lands stretching from Central Asia in the east to North Africa and Spain in the west. That far eclipsed the territory ruled by Hussein’s Baath Party, which came to power 40 years ago and has suffered two failed wars in Iran and Kuwait.

On the other hand, both the invading Mongol and U.S. armies were warmly welcomed by Iraqis who had been abused by their rulers. While Muslims saw the Mongols as invaders, Iraqi Christians considered Hulegu Khan to be a liberator, just as the Kurds and Shiites see U.S. and British troops.

“Throughout its supremacy, like an insatiable leech, (Baghdad) had swallowed up the entire world,” wrote the Armenian chronicler, Kirakos of Ganja. “Now it restored all that had been taken. It was punished for the blood it had shed and the evil it had done.”

Yet the beneficence shown to the Christians did little to change the world’s impression of the Mongols. Like the Americans, they were loathed in the Arab world.

And what do modern Mongols think of the war in Iraq?

The Mongolian government supports Washington and has joined the “coalition of the willing.” It has even offered to send troops to help protect mosques and historical places when the conflict ends.

And though Mongolia’s army has greatly fallen from its Genghis Khan glory days, the country still prides itself on its medieval legacy of conquest. Each summer, nomads on horseback ride to the steppes to compete in wrestling, horse racing and archery.

“I would fight Saddam Hussein to free the Iraqi people,” said Togmid-Shirim, in the Mongolian capital of Ulan Bator. “We Mongols have a long history of warfare and are known for our skilled archers. We are educated and precise. We could help.”

Copied from

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/First-came-Khan-now-Bush-Mongols-Americans-2622504.php

Do not enter the Ruins of the Punished People for mere Sightseeing

Sufyaan [ibn ‘Uyayanah] narrated to us from ‘Abdullaah ibn Deenaar from ‘Abdullaah ibn ‘Umar (radhiAllaahu anhu) that the Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) said,

“Do not enter the ruins of the people who were previously punished unless you are weeping. If you are not weeping, then do not enter their ruins, for I fear that what has befallen them may also befall you.” [Musnad Ahmad, Vol. 2, p. 9. The isnaad of this hadeeth is saheeh according to the conditions set by al-Bukhari and Muslim.]

The Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) said this to his companions when he led them, in 9 AH, in an expedition to Tabook (about 400 miles north of Madinah) against the Roman forces on a reported invasion from Syria and reached al-Hijr, one of the archaeological remains of the Thamood, to whom Allah sent Prophet Saalih (alayhis salaam). The arrogant Thamood people were severely punished by Allah when He sent to them thunderbolts, followed by terrible earthquakes which destroyed their homes and buried them: “So the mighty blast took the wrong-doers unawares, and they lay prostrate in their homes before the morning.” [Surah Hud, 11:67]

According to Sheikh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him), it is not permissible to visit the ruins of the people who were punished by Allah if the purpose of the visit is mere sightseeing. [Permanent Committee fatwa no. 26/394]

Even the Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) hurried as he passed by Waadi Muhassar between Mina and Muzdalifah, the very place where Allah destroyed Abrahah and his forces that came with a mighty army and elephants to destroy the Kaabah. If one happens to pass by such ruins, one must contemplate the punishment that Allah inflicted on the sinners who disobeyed Him blatantly and feel the awe of the situation to the point of weeping, otherwise one should hurry and leave.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said, whilst listing the lessons and rulings learned from the campaign to Tabook:

One who passes by the places of those who were subjected to divine wrath or who were punished should not enter them or stay among them, rather he should hasten to move on and should cover his head with his garment until he has passed them, and he should not enter upon them unless he is weeping and willing to learn a lesson. An example of this is when the Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) hastened to move on in the valley of Muhassar, between Mina and Muzdalifah, because it was the place where Allah destroyed the elephant and its companions.

[Zaad al-Ma’aad (3/560)]

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said, commenting on the hadeeth quoted above:

This applies to the dwellings of Thamood and others like them, though the reason was given concerning them.

[Fath al-Baari (6/380)]

It was narrated from Naafi’ that ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (radhiAllaahu anhum) told him that the people stopped at al-Hijr, the land of Thamood, with the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam), and they drew water from its wells and made dough with it. The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) told them to throw away the water they had drawn from its wells.

[Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3199]

Ibn al-‘Arabi al-Maaliki (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) instructed them to throw away the water from the land of Thamood, and to throw away the dough they had made with it, because it was water that was subjected to divine wrath, so it was not permissible to make use of it, so as to avoid the wrath of Allah. And he said: “Feed it to the camels.” This also indicates that with regard to food and drink that it is not permissible to use, it is permissible to feed it to camels and other animals, because they are not accountable. For that reason, Maalik said concerning impure honey, that it may be fed to bees. Similarly, it is not permissible to pray in those lands, because they are lands that were subject to divine wrath and anger. The Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) said: “Do not enter them unless you are weeping.” And it was narrated that he covered his head with his rida’ (upper garment) and made his mount move faster until he came out of that place.

[Ahkaam al-Qur’an, 5/152]

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu alayhi wassallam) forbade entering upon the places of those who were subjected to divine punishment, unless one is weeping, lest there befall the one who enters the same as befell them. He also forbade making use of their water, to such an extent that despite their need for it during that campaign –the campaign of hardship (the campaign to Tabook), which was the hardest campaign for the Muslims – he instructed them to feed the dough made with that water to their camels.

[Iqtida’ as-Siraat al-Mustaqeem, p. 80]

And Allah knows best.

“THE ONLY SHELTER IN THE STORM”

***Copied***

“It’s never easy to stand when the storm hits. As soon as it starts raining, lightening shortly follows. Dark clouds replace the sun and all you can see are the waves of an ocean, once calm, surrounding you. No longer able to find your way, you reach out for help.

You begin by calling the coast guard. No reply. You try again to redirect the boat. No use. You look for the lifeboat. It’s gone. You reach for a life jacket. Torn. Finally after you’ve exhausted every means, you turn your face upward.

And ask God.

However, there’s something completely unique about this moment. At this instant, you experience something you otherwise could only theorize about: true tawheed. Oneness. See, on shore, you may have called on God. But you called on Him along with so many others. You may have depended on God. But you depended on Him along with so many other handholds. But for this singular moment, everything else is closed. Everything. There is nothing left to call on. Nothing left to depend on. But Him.

And that’s the point.

“Do you ever wonder why when you’re most in need, every door you seek of the creation remains closed? You knock on one, but it’s slammed shut. So you go to another. It’s also shut. You go from door to door, knocking, pounding on each one, but nothing opens. And even those doors you had once depended on, suddenly shut. Why? Why does that happen?

See, we humans have certain qualities which God knows well. We are constantly in a state of need. We are weak. But, we are also hasty and impatient. When we are in trouble, we will be pushed to seek assistance. And that’s the design. Why would we seek shelter if it’s sunny and the weather is nice? When does one seek refuge? It is when the storm hits. So Allah subahanahu wa ta`ala (exlated is He) sends the storm; He makes the need through a created situation, so that we will be driven to seek shelter.”

“But when we do seek assistance, because of our impatience, we seek it in what is near and what seems easy. We seek it in what we can see and hear and touch. We look for shortcuts. We seek help in the creation, including our own selves. We look for help in what seems closest. And isn’t that exactly what dunya (worldly life) is? What seems near. The word ‘dunya’ itself means ‘that which is lower’. Dunya is what seems closest. But, this is only an illusion.

There is something closer.

Think for a moment about what’s nearest to you. If asked this question, many would say it is the heart and the self that are nearest. But, Allah (swt) says:”

“It was We Who created man, and We know what dark suggestions his nafs (self) makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein.” (Qur’an, 50:16)

In this verse, Allah (swt) begins by showing us that He knows our struggles. There is comfort in knowing that someone sees our struggles. He knows what our own self calls us to. But He is closer. He is closer than our own self and what it calls for. He is closer than our jugular vein. Why the jugular? What is so striking about this part of us? The jugular vein is the most important vein that brings blood to the heart. If severed, we die almost immediately. It is literally our lifeline. But Allah (swt) is closer. Allah (swt) is closer than our own life, than our own Self, than our own nafs. And He is closer than the most important pathway to our heart.

In another verse, Allah (swt) says:”

“O ye who believe! give your response to Allah and His Messenger, when He calleth you to that which will give you life; and know that Allah cometh in between a man and his heart, and that it is He to Whom ye shall (all) be gathered.” (Qur’an, 8:24)

Allah (swt) knows we have a nafs. Allah knows we have a heart. Allah knows that these things drive us. However Allah tells us that He is closer to us than even these. So when we reach for other than Him, we are not only reaching for what is weaker, we are also reaching past what is closer, for what is further and more distant. Subhan Allah (Glory be to God).

So since this is our nature, as Allah (swt) knows best, He protects and redirects us by keeping all other doors of refuge closed during the storm. He knows that behind each false door is a drop. And if we enter it, we will fall. In His mercy, He keeps those false doors closed.”

“In His mercy, He sent the storm itself to make us seek help. And then knowing that we’re likely to get the wrong answer, He gives us a multiple choice exam with only one option to choose from: the correct answer. The hardship itself is ease. By taking away all other hand-holds, all other multiple choice options, He has made the test simple.

It’s never easy to stand when the storm hits. And that’s exactly the point. By sending the wind, He brings us to our knees: the perfect position to pray.”

Can we close our eyes while praying salaah?

Praise be to Allaah.

The scholars are agreed that it is makrooh to close the eyes for no reason when praying. The author of al-Rawd stated that it is makrooh because this is what the Jews do.[1]

The author of al-Iqnaa’ stated that it is makrooh unless there is a reason for doing so, such as fear of seeing something one should not be looking at whilst praying, such as seeing one’s concubine or wife, or a non-mahram woman, naked.[2] The author of al-Mughni said likewise. 

Al-Kaasaani said: it is makrooh because it goes against the Sunnah, which is to focus the gaze on the place of prostration, and because all of a person’s faculties have a role to play in worship, including the eyes.[3]

Imaam al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salaam said in his fatwas that it is permissible when necessary, if that helps the worshipper to focus more fully on his prayer.

Ibn al-Qayyim said in Zaad al-Ma’aad that if a man can focus more fully on his prayer by opening his eyes, then it is better to do so. If he can focus more fully by closing his eyes because there are things that may distract him from his prayer, such as adornments and decorations, then it is not makrooh at all and the view that in this case it is mustahabb for him to close his eyes is closer to the aims and principles of sharee’ah than saying that it is makrooh.[4]

[1] (al-Rawd al-Murabba’, 1/95).

[2] (al-Iqnaa’, 1/127; al-Mughni, 2/30).

[3] (Badaa’i’ al-Sanaa’i’, 1/503)

[4] (Zaad al-Ma’aad, 1/283).

Sincerity

O students of knowledge have you ever asked yourself, why are many Muslims still ignorant of the basic principles of Islam despite the multitude of those who speak about Islam ? Why has the blessing in our speech decreased ? Why do our sermons not have the desired effect on the people ? The answer is simple:

It was said to Hamdun Al-Qassar: “why are the statements of the salaf more beneficial than our statements”, he replied: “Because they spoke for the honour of Islam, the salvation of the people and the pleasure of Al-Rahman, and we speak for our own honour, seeking the dunya and the pleasure of the people” (Narrated by Al-Bayhaqi in Shu’ab Al -imaan)

If the intended purpose of a statement is evil, its blessing will decrease or vanish completely even if the statement is good, this is why Ali bin Abi Taalib (May Allah be pleased with him) said to the khawaarij when they used the verse: “Rulership belongs to Allah” (yusuf/40) he said: “This is a true statement with an evil intention”. (Narrated by Muslim in the book of Zakat)

Sincerity is an obligation upon you so do not be deceived by the praise of the foolish or the dispraise of the ignorant. Speak if you know that speech is more beneficial than silence and remain silent if you notice that your intention is seeking fame and self honour for indeed our salaf, with knowledge they spoke and with wisdom they remained silent. Pay attention to your heart and know that whatever is done for the sake of Allah remains and whatever is done for other than him disappears.

‎يا معشر الدعاة، يا طلبة العلم

‎يا معشر الدعاة، يا طلبة العلم، هل تساءلت يوما، لماذا يجهل كثير من المسلمين أمور دينهم مع كثرة من يتكلم في الإسلام ؟ لماذا قل تأثير كلامنا على الناس ؟ لماذا قلت البركة ؟ إليكم جواب دلك:

‎قيل لحمدون القصار: ما بال كلام السلف أنفع من كلامنا فقال: “لأنهم تكلموا لعز الإسلام ونجاة النفوس ورضى الرحمن، ونحن نتكلم لعزة النفس وطلب الدنيا ورضى الخلق” (رواه البيهقي في شعب الإيمان)

‎إذا كان المقصد من الكلام سيأ قلت البركة أو انعدمت بالكلية وإن كان الكلام حسنا، ولذا قال علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه للخوارج لما استدلوا بقوله تعالى: (ان الحكم إلا لله) قال: “كلمة حق أريد بها باطل” ( رواه مسلم في كتاب الزكاة) .

‎فعليكم بالإخلاص ولا تغتر بمدح الجهال ولا بذم المتجاهلين. تكلم ان رأيت الكلام أنفع من السكوت واسكت إن رأيت أن مقصدك من الكلام عزة النفس، فإن السلف بعلم تكلموا وببصر نافذ سكتوا. تفقد قلبك واعلم أن ما كان لله يبقى وما كان لغيره يفنى.

Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman – His life and his encounter with hypocrites Part 2 (Final)

Hudhayfah’s special qualities were made use of by the Prophet, peace be on him, at various times. One of the most testing of such occasions, which required the use of Hudhayfah’s intelligence and his presence of mind, was during the Battle of the Ditch. The Muslims on that occasion were surrounded by enemies. The seige they had been placed under had dragged on. The Muslims were undergoing severe hardship and difficulties. They had expended practically all their effort and were utterly exhausted. So intense was the strain that some even began to despair.

The Quraysh and their allies, meanwhile, were not much better off. Their strength and determination had been sapped. A violent wind overturned their tents, extinguished their fires and pelted their faces and eyes with gusts of sand and dust.

In such decisive moments in the history of warfare, the side that loses is the one that despairs first and the one that wins is the one that holds out longer. The role of army intelligence in such situations often proves to be a crucial factor in determining the outcome of the battle.

At this stage of the confrontation the Prophet, peace be on him, felt he could use the special talents and experience of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman. He decided to send Hudhayfah into the midst of the enemy’s positions under cover of darkness to bring him the latest information on their situation and morale before he decided on his next move.

Let us now leave Hudhayfah to relate what happened on this mission fraught with danger and even death.

“That night, we were all seated in rows. Abu Sufyan and his men – the mushrikun of Makkah – were in front of us. The Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayzah were at our rear and we were afraid of them because of our wives and children. The night was stygian dark. Never before was there a darker night nor a wind so strong. So dark was the night that no one could see his fingers and the blast of the wind was like the peel of thunder.

“The hypocrites began to ask the Prophet for permission to leave, saying, ‘Our houses are exposed to the enemy.’ Anyone who asked the Prophet’s permission to leave was allowed to go. Many thus sneaked away until we were left with about three hundred men.

“The Prophet then began a round of inspection passing us one by one until he reached me. I had nothing to protect me from the cold except a blanket belonging to my wife which scarcely reached my knees. He came nearer to me as I lay crouching on the ground and asked: ‘Who is this?’ ‘Hudhayfah,’ replied. ‘Hudhayfah?’ he queried as I huddled myself closer to the ground too afraid to stand up because of the intense hunger and cold. ‘Yes, O Messenger of God,’ I replied. ‘Some thing is happening among the people (meaning the forces of Abu Sufyan). Infiltrate their encampment and bring me news of what’s happening,’ instructed the Prophet.

“I set out. At that moment I was the most terrified person of all and felt terribly cold. The Prophet, peace be on him, prayed: ‘O Lord, protect him from in front and from behind, from his right and from his left, from above and from below.’

“By God, no sooner had the Prophet, peace be on him, completed his supplication than God removed from my stomach all traces of fear and from my body all the punishing cold. As I turned to go, the Prophet called me back to him and said: ‘Hudhayfah, on no account do anything among the people (of the opposing forces) until you come back to me.’

“‘Yes,’ I replied.

“I went on, inching my way under cover of darkness until I penetrated deep into the mushrikin camp and became just like one of them. Shortly afterwards, Abu Sufyan got up and began to address his men:

“‘O people of the Quraysh, I am about to make a statement to you which I fear would reach Muhammad. Therefore, let every man among you look and make sure who is sitting next to him … ‘

“On hearing this, I immediately grasped the hand of the man next to me and asked, ‘Who are you?’ (thus putting him on the defensive and clearing myself). Abu Sufyan went on:

“‘O people of the Quraysh, by God, you are not in a safe and secure place. Our horses and camels have perished. The Banu Qurayzah have deserted us and we have had unpleasant news about them. We are buffered by this bitterly cold wind. Our fires do not light and our uprooted tents offer no protection. So get moving. For myself, I am leaving.’

“He went to his camel, untethered and mounted it. He struck it and it stood upright. If the Messenger of God, peace be on him, had not instructed me to do nothing until I returned to him, I would have killed Abu Sufyan then and there with an arrow.

“I returned to the Prophet and found him standing on a blanket performing Salat. When he recognized me, he drew me close to his legs and threw one end of the blanket over me. I informed him of what had happened. He was extremely happy and joyful and gave thanks and praise to Hudhayfah lived in constant dread of evil and corrupting influences. He felt that goodness and the sources of good in this life were easy to recognize for those who desired good. But it was evil that was deceptive and often difficult to perceive and combat.”

He became something of a great moral philosopher. He always warned people to struggle against evil with all their faculties, with their heart, hands and tongue. Those who stood against evil only with their hearts and tongues, and not with their hands, he considered as having abandoned a part of truth. Those who hated evil only in their hearts but did not combat it with their tongues and hands forsook two parts of truth and those who neither detested nor confronted evil with their hearts, tongues or hands he considered as physically alive but morally dead.

Speaking about ‘hearts’ and their relationship to guidance and error, he once said:

“There are four kinds of hearts. The heart that is encased or atrophied. That is the heart of the kafir or ungrateful disbeliever. The heart that is shaped into thin layers. That is the heart of the munafiq or hypocrite. The heart that is open and bare and on which shines a radiant light. That is the heart of the mu’min or the believer.

Finally there is the heart in which there is both hypocrisy and faith. Faith is like a tree which thrives with good water and hypocrisy is like an abscess which thrives on pus and blood. Whichever flourishes more, be it the tree of faith or the abscess of hypocrisy, wins control of the heart.”

Hudhayfah’s experience with hypocrisy and his efforts to combat it gave a touch of sharpness and severity to his tongue. He himself realized this and admitted it with a noble courage: “I went to the Prophet, peace be on him and said: ‘O Messenger of God, I have a tongue which is sharp and cutting against my family and I fear that this would lead me to Hellfire.’ And the Prophet, peace be upon him, said to me: ‘Where do you stand with regard to istighfar – asking forgiveness from Allah? I ask Allah for forgiveness a hundred times during the day.’ ”

A pensive man like Hudhayfah, one devoted to thought, knowledge and reflection may not have been expected to perform feats of heroism in battlefields. Yet Hudhayfah was to prove himself one of the foremost Muslim military commanders in the expansion of Islam into Iraq. He distinguished himself at Hamadan, ar-Rayy, ad-Daynawar, and at the famous Battle of Nihawand.

For the encounter at Nihawand against the Persian forces, Hudhayfah was placed second in command by ‘Umar over the entire Muslim forces which numbered some thirty thousand. The Persian forces outnumbered them by five to one being some one hundred and fifty thousand strong. The first commander of the Muslim army, an-Numan ibn Maqran, fell early in the battle. The second in command, Hudhayfah, immediately took charge of the situation, giving instructions that the death of the commander should not be broadcast. Under Hudhayfah’s daring and inspiring leadership, the Muslims won a decisive victory despite tremendous odds.

Hudhayfah was made governor of important places like Kufa and Ctesiphon (al-Mada’in). When the news of his appointment as governor of Ctesiphon reached its inhabitants, crowds went out to meet and greet this famous companion of the Prophet of whose piety and righteousness they had heard so much. His great role in the conquests of Persia was already a legend.

As the welcoming party waited, a lean, somewhat scrawny man with dangling feet astride a donkey approached. In his hand he held a loaf of bread and some salt and he ate as he went along. When the rider was already in their midst they realized that he was Hudhayfah, the governor for whom they were waiting. They could not contain their surprise. What manner of man was this! They could however be excused for not recognizing him for they were used to the style, the pomp and the grandeur of Persian rulers.

Hudhayfah carried on and people crowded around him. He saw they were expecting him to speak and he cast a searching look at their faces. Eventually, he said: “Beware of places of fitnah and intrigue.” “And what,” they asked, “are places of intrigue?” He replied: “The doors of rulers where some people go and try to make the ruler or governor believe lies and praise him for (qualities) he does not possess.”

With these words, the people were prepared for what to expect from their new governor. They knew at once that there was nothing in the world that he despised more than hypocrisy.

(s) Companions of the Prophet Volume 2, MELS

Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman – His life and his encounter with hypocrites Part 1

“If you wish you may consider yourself among the Muhajirin (those who emigrated from Makkah to Madinah) or, if you wish, you may consider yourself one of the Ansar (those whom were already living in Madinah). Choose whichever is dearer to you.”

With these words, the Prophet, peace be upon him, addressed Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman when he met him for the first time in Makkah. How did Hudhayfah come to have this choice?

His father, Al-Yaman was a Makkan from the tribe of Abs. He had killed someone and had been forced to leave Makkah. He had settled down in Yathrib, becoming an ally (halif) of the Banu al-Ash’hal and marrying into the tribe. A son named Hudhayfah was born to him. The restrictions on his returning to Makkah were eventually lifted and he divided his time between Makkah and Yathrib but stayed more in Yathrib and was more attached to it.

This was how Hudhayfah had a Makkan origin but a Yathribite upbringing. When the rays of Islam began to radiate over the Arabian Peninsula, a delegation from the Abs tribe, which included Al-Yaman, went to the Prophet and announced their acceptance of Islam. That was before the Prophet migrated to Yathrib.

Hudhayfah grew up in a Muslim household and was taught by both his mother and father who were among the first persons from Yathrib to enter the religion of God. He therefore became a Muslim before meeting the Prophet, peace be upon him.

Hudhayfah longed to meet the Prophet. From an early age, he was keen on following whatever news there was about him. The more he heard, the more his affection for the Prophet grew and the more he longed to meet him.

He eventually journeyed to Makkah, met the Prophet and put the question to him, “Am I a Muhajir or am I an Ansari, O Rasulullah (Messenger of Allah)?”

“If you wish you may consider yourself among the Muhajirin, or if you wish you may consider yourself one of the Ansar. Choose whichever is dearer to you,” replied the Prophet. “Well, I am an Ansari O Rasulullah,” decided Hudhayfah.

At Madinah, after the Hijrah, Hudhayfah became closely attached to the Prophet. He participated in all the military engagements except Badr. Explaining why he missed the Battle of Badr, he said:

“I would not have missed Badr if my father and I had not been outside Madinah. The disbelieving Quraysh met us and asked where we were going. We told them we were going to Madinah and they asked whether we intended to meet Muhammad. We insisted that we only wanted to go to Madinah. They allowed us to go only after they extracted from us an undertaking not to help Muhammad against them and not to fight along with them.

“When we came to the Prophet we told him about our undertaking to the Quraysh and asked him what should we do. He said that we should ignore the undertaking and seek God’s help against them.”

Hudhayfah participated in the Battle of ‘Uhud with his father. The pressure on Hudhayfah during the battle was great but he acquitted himself well and emerged safe and sound. A rather different fate, however, awaited his father.

Before the battle, the Prophet, peace be on him, left Al-Yaman, Hudhayfah’s father, and Thabit ibn Waqsh with the other non-combatants including women and children. This was because they were both quite old. As the fighting grew fiercer, Al-Yaman said to his friend: “You have no father (meaning you have no cares). What are we waiting for? We both have only a short time to live. Why don’t we take our swords and join the Messenger of God, peace be on him? Maybe, God will bless us with martyrdom beside His Prophet.”

They quickly prepared for battle and were soon in the thick of the fighting. Thabit ibn Waqsh was blessed with shahadah at the hands of the mushrikin. The father of Hudhayfah, however was set upon by some Muslims who did not recognize who he was. As they slayed him, Hudhayfah cried out: “My father! My father! It’s my father!”

No one heard him. The old man fell, killed in error by the swords of his own brothers in faith. They were filled with pain and remorse. Grieved as he was, Hudhayfah said to them: “May God forgive you for He is the most Merciful of those who show mercy.”

The Prophet, peace be on him, wanted diyah (compensation) to be paid to Hudhayfah for the death of his father but Hudhayfah said: “He was simply seeking shahadah and he attained it. O Lord, bear witness that I donate the compensation for him to the Muslims.”

Because of this attitude, Hudhayfah’s stature grew in the eyes of the Prophet, peace be on him. Hudhayfah had three qualities which particularly impressed the Prophet: his unique intelligence which he employed in dealing with difficult situations; his quick wittedness and spontaneous response to the call of action, and his ability to keep a secret even under persistent questioning.

A noticeable policy of the Prophet was to bring out and use the special qualities and strengths of each individual companion of his. In deploying his companions, he was careful to choose the right man for the right task. This he did to excellent advantage in the case of Hudhayfah.

One of the gravest problems the Muslims of Madinah had to face was the existence in their midst of hypocrites (munafiqun) particularly from among the Jews and their allies. Although many of them had declared their acceptance of Islam, the change was only superficial and they continued to plot and intrigue against the Prophet and the Muslims.

Because of Hudhayfah’s ability to keep a secret, the Prophet, peace be on him, confided in him the names of the munafiqin. It was a weighty secret which the Prophet did not disclose to any other off his Companions. He gave Hudhayfah the task of watching the movements of the munafiqin, following their activities, and shielding the Muslims from the sinister danger they represented. It was a tremendous responsibility. The munafiqin, because they acted in secrecy and because they knew all the developments and plans of the Muslims from within presented a greater threat to the community than the outright hostility of the kuffar.

From this time onwards. Hudhayfah was called “The Keeper of the Secret of the Messenger of Allah”. Throughout his life he remained faithful to his pledge not to disclose the names of the hypocrites. After the death of the Prophet, the Khalifah often came – to him to seek his advice concerning their movements and activities but he remained tight-lipped and cautious.

‘Umar was only able to find out indirectly who the hypocrites were. If anyone among the Muslims died, ‘Umar would ask:

“Has Hudhayfah attended his funeral prayer?”

If the reply was ‘yes’, he would perform the prayer. If the reply was ‘no’, he became doubtful about the person and refrained from performing the funeral prayer for him.

Once ‘Umar asked Hudhayfah: “Is any of my governors a munafiq?” “One,” replied Hudhayfah. “Point him out to me,” ordered ‘Umar. “That I shall not do,” insisted Hudhayfah who later said that shortly after their conversation ‘Umar dismissed the person just as if he had been guided to him.

Five Heads Of Taghut

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhāb rahimahullāh said:

The word Tāghūt is general. So everything that is worshipped besides Allāh تعالى, while being pleased with this worship, whether it is something worshipped, someone followed, or someone obeyed in the absence of obedience to Allāh تعالى and His Messenger, then that is considered Tāghūt. The Tawāghīt are many, but their heads are five:

• The First: The Devil who calls the people to worship other than Allāh تعالى. The proof for this is Allāh تعالى’s saying:

“Did I not command you O children of Aadam, that you should not worship the Devil. Verily, he is a plain enemy to you.” [Sūrah Yā’Sīn āya 60]

• The Second: The tyrannical and oppressive ruler who changes Allāh تعالى’s rulings. The proof for this is Allāh تعالى’s saying:

“Have you not seen those (hypocrites) who claim to believe in that which has been revealed to you, and that which was revealed before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Tāghūt, when they have been ordered to reject them? But the Devil wishes to lead them far astray.” [Sūrah An-Nisā āya 60]

• The Third: The one who judges by other than what Allāh تعالى has revealed, and the proof for this is Allāh تعالى’s saying:

“And whoever does not judge by what Allāh تعالى has revealed, then they are the disbelievers.” [Sūrah Al-Mā’idah āya 44]

• The Fourth: The one who claims to have knowledge of the Unseen, apart from Allāh تعالى. The proof for this is Allāh تعالى’s saying:

“He alone is the All-Knower of the Unseen, and He does not disclose His Unseen matters to anyone.” [Sūrah Al-Jinn āyat 26-27]

And He says: “And with Him lie the keys to the Unseen, no one knows them but He. And He knows whatever there is in the land and in the sea; not a leaf falls except that He knows about it. There is not a grain in the darkness of the earth, nor anything fresh or dry, but that it is written in a Clear Record.” [Sūrah Al-Ana’ām āya 59]

• The Fifth: The one who is worshipped apart from Allāh تعالى, while being pleased with being worshipped. The proof for this is Allāh تعالى’s saying:

“And whoever amongst them says: ‘Verily, I am a God besides Him (Allāh تعالى)’, then this person’s recompense will be the Hellfire. That is the way we recompense the wrongdoers.” [Sūrah Al-Anbiyā āya 29]

And know that man will never become a believer in Allāh تعالى unless he rejects and disbelieves in the Tāghūt. The proof for this is Allāh تعالى’s saying:

“There is no compulsion in the Religion. Verily, the right path has become distinct from the wrong path. So whoever disbelieves in the Tāghūt and believes in Allāh تعالى, then he has taken hold of the firmest handhold, that will never break. And Allāh تعالى is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.” [Sūrah Al-Baqarah āya 256]

The “right path” here refers to the Religion of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم ), while the “wrong path” refers to the Religion of Abu Jahl. The “firmest handhold” refers to the testimony that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allāh تعالى (Lā Ilāha Illa Lāh). This testimony consists of a negation and an affirmation. It negates all types of worship from those worshipped besides Allāh تعالى, while affirming all types of worship done for Allāh تعالى alone, free from any partner.

[Ma’anā at-Tāghūt wa Ru’ūs Anwā’ihi]