Thursday, 31 May 2018

Responding to Ayat of Quran

Isma’il bin Umayya said that he heard a bedouin narrate from Abu Huraira, that the Messenger of Allah said: “If one of you recited: ‘the fig and the olive’ [Sura al-Tin] then when he reaches its ending: ‘Is not Allah the Most Wise of all Judges?’ let him say: Bala wa ana ‘ala dhalika minash-shahidin ‘Yes, and I am of those who bear witness to this.’ (Sunan Abi Dawud #887)
The Muhaddithin consider this Hadith weak because the bedouin who narrated from Abu HurairaRA is unknown. Nevertheless, it is fine to act upon this narration and respond to the Ayah:

أَلَيْسَ اللَّـهُ بِأَحْكَمِ الْحَاكِمِينَ۞

with the words:

بَلَى وَأَنَا عَلَى ذَلِكَ مِنَ الشَّاهِدِينَ

Similarly, another Hadith states:
عَنْ مُوسَى بْنِ أَبِي عَائِشَةَ، قَالَ كَانَ رَجُلٌ يُصَلِّي فَوْقَ بَيْتِهِ وَكَانَ إِذَا قَرَأَ ‏{‏ أَلَيْسَ ذَلِكَ بِقَادِرٍ عَلَى أَنْ يُحْيِيَ الْمَوْتَى ‏}‏ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ فَبَلَى فَسَأَلُوهُ عَنْ ذَلِكَ فَقَالَ سَمِعْتُهُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ قَالَ أَحْمَدُ يُعْجِبُنِي فِي الْفَرِيضَةِ أَنْ يَدْعُوَ بِمَا فِي الْقُرْآنِ
Musa b. Abi A’ishah said: A man used to pray on the roof of his house. When he recited the verse “Is not He able to bring the dead to life?” [Surah al-Qiyamah: 42] he would say: “Glory be to You, then, why not?” They asked him about it, and he replied: “I heard it from the Messenger of Allah ”. Abu Dawud said: Ahmad (b. Hanbal) said: It is pleasing to me that one should recite in the obligatory prayer those supplications which have occurred in the Quran. (Sunan Abi Dawud #884)
The muhaddith al-Albani declared this Hadith authentic. Hence, one should respond to the recitation of the Ayah:

أَلَيْسَ ذَٰلِكَ بِقَادِرٍ عَلَىٰ أَن يُحْيِيَ الْمَوْتَىٰ۞

Is not He able to quicken the dead?

with the words:

سُبْحَانَكَ فَبَلَى

Likewise, when the Ayah is recited:

سَبِّحِ اسْمَ رَبِّكَ الْأَعْلَى۞

One should respond with the following glorification:

سبحان ربي الأعلى

“Holy is my Lord, the Most High”
وكان بعضهم إذا قرأ ذلك قال سبحان ربي الأعلى. ذكر من قال ذلك حدثني يعقوب بن إبراهيم، قال ثنا هشيم، قال أخبرنا أبو بشر، عن سعيد بن جُبير، عن ابن عمر أنه كان يقرأ { سَبِّحِ اسْمَ رَبِّكَ الأعْلىَ } سبحان ربي الأعلى { الَّذِي خَلَقَ فَسَوَّى } قال وهي في قراءة أُبيّ بن كعب كذلك. حدثنا ابن بشار، قال ثنا عبد الرحمن، قال ثنا سفيان، عن السُّديّ، عن عبد خير، قال سمعت علياً رضي الله عنه قرأ { سَبِّحِ اسْمَ رَبِّكَ الأعْلَى } فقال سبحان ربي الأعلى. حدثنا ابن حميد، قال ثنا حكام، عن عنبسة، عن أبي إسحاق الهمْداني، أن ابن عباس كان إذا قرأ { سَبِّحِ اسْمَ رَبِّكَ الأعْلَى } يقول سبحان ربي الأعلى، وإذا قرأ
{ لا أُقْسِمُ بِيَوْمِ الْقِيامَةِ }
فأتى على آخرها
{ ألَيْسَ ذَلك بِقادِرٍ عَلى أنْ يُحْيِي المَوْتَى }
؟ يقول سبحانك اللهمّ وبَلَى. حدثنا بشر، قال ثنا يزيد، قال ثنا سعيد، عن قتادة { سَبِّحِ اسْمَ رَبِّكَ الأعْلَى } ذُكر لنا أن نبيّ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كان إذا قرأها قال سبحان ربيَ الأعلَى. حدثنا ابن حميد، قال ثنا مهران، عن خارجة، عن داود، عن زياد بن عبد الله، قال سمعت ابن عباس يقرأ في صلاة المغرب { سَبِّحِ اسْمَ رَبِّكَ الأعْلَى } سبحان ربي الأعلَى
(Tafsir Ibn Jarir)
And it is correct to respond to these Ayat with these responses in both obligatory and optional prayers, and also outside of prayers when the Qur’an is recited.

Reality of Tarawih Prayer

This being the sacred month of Ramadan, one of the controversies which is inevitably raised is regarding the special prayer of Tarawih. The dispute over the number of raka'at (cycles) in the Tarawih is coupled with another issue, raised by the Shi'a and others, that the offering of Tarawih by the Sunnis is an innovation. The Shi'a claim that the Tarawih prayer is an innovation introduced by the second caliph, sayyidina Umar b. al-KhattabRA, and cite the latter's words to that effect:
نِعْمَ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ
“A good innovation this is!” (Sahih al-Bukhari #2010)
The truth is that sayyidina UmarRA used the word bid'a “innovation” in an ordinary linguistic sense, and not in the technical sense which would indicate an innovation of religious practice that has no precedent from the Sunna of the Prophet Muhammad . The proof for this is the fact that the Prophet Muhammad did in fact lead the special prayer which we refer to as “Tarawih” in his lifetime. Sayyidina UmarRA only referred to it as a “good innovation” during his caliphate because it had not been practiced for a duration of time until he facilitated its revival. It should be noted that the term “Tarawih” was adapted later to describe the offering of the night prayer, Qiyam al-Lail, in the month of Ramadan in congregation. Otherwise, it is not a new or separate prayer, but simply the offering of the night prayer, also known as Tahajjud, in the month of Ramadan in congregation. The Prophet Muhammad led the night prayer in the month of Ramadan in congregation for three nights:
أَنَّ عَائِشَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ أَخْبَرَتْهُ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم خَرَجَ لَيْلَةً مِنْ جَوْفِ اللَّيْلِ، فَصَلَّى فِي الْمَسْجِدِ، وَصَلَّى رِجَالٌ بِصَلاَتِهِ، فَأَصْبَحَ النَّاسُ فَتَحَدَّثُوا، فَاجْتَمَعَ أَكْثَرُ مِنْهُمْ، فَصَلَّوْا مَعَهُ، فَأَصْبَحَ النَّاسُ فَتَحَدَّثُوا، فَكَثُرَ أَهْلُ الْمَسْجِدِ مِنَ اللَّيْلَةِ الثَّالِثَةِ، فَخَرَجَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَصَلَّى، فَصَلَّوْا بِصَلاَتِهِ، فَلَمَّا كَانَتِ اللَّيْلَةُ الرَّابِعَةُ عَجَزَ الْمَسْجِدُ عَنْ أَهْلِهِ، حَتَّى خَرَجَ لِصَلاَةِ الصُّبْحِ، فَلَمَّا قَضَى الْفَجْرَ أَقْبَلَ عَلَى النَّاسِ، فَتَشَهَّدَ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏ "‏ أَمَّا بَعْدُ، فَإِنَّهُ لَمْ يَخْفَ عَلَىَّ مَكَانُكُمْ، وَلَكِنِّي خَشِيتُ أَنْ تُفْتَرَضَ عَلَيْكُمْ فَتَعْجِزُوا عَنْهَا ‏"‏‏.‏ فَتُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَالأَمْرُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ
A'ishaRA narrated that Allah's Apostle went out in the middle of the night and prayed in the mosque and some men prayed behind him. In the morning, the people spoke about it and then a large number of them gathered and prayed behind him (on the second night). In the next morning the people again talked about it and on the third night the mosque was full with a large number of people. Allah's Messenger came out and the people prayed behind him. On the fourth night the Mosque was overwhelmed with people and could not accommodate them, but the Prophet came out (only) for the morning prayer. When the morning prayer was finished he recited Tashah-hud and (addressing the people) said, "Amma ba'du, your presence was not hidden from me but I was afraid lest the night prayer (Qiyam) should be enjoined on you and you might not be able to carry it on." So, Allah's Apostle died and the situation remained like that. (Sahih al-Bukhari #2012)
It would be wrong to conclude from this Hadith that the offering of Qiyam al-Lail in the month of Ramadan in congregation was abrogated. The Prophet was simply fearful that the Qiyam al-Lail would be mandated upon his Umma, something which they would not be able to handle, so he was not present in the mosque on the fourth night, and the people reverted to praying the night prayer individually. In fact, up to the caliphate of sayyidina UmarRA, not only were the people praying the night prayer in the mosque individually, they were also praying it in a number of small congregations. Sayyidina UmarRA then organized this prayer in the mosque under a single imam, single congregation. The decision of sayyidina UmarRA does not mean that praying the night prayer in the mosque individually, or in multiple small congregations, is incorrect. Sayyidina UmarRA simply revived the situation of those three nights in which the Prophet led the Qiyam al-Lail in the mosque during Ramadan, a single congregation. Until then, the Muslims of Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jama'a have been offering the Qiyam al-Lail in the month of Ramadan in the mosque as a single congregation, which has come to be known as Tarawih.
Nevertheless, the reader should bear in mind that while Tarawih is offered in the early part of the night, usually immediately after the Isha prayer, it is superior to pray the Qiyam al-Lail in the latter part of the night, even if one will offer it individually and at one's own dwelling instead of the mosque, as sayyidina UmarRA himself noted:
وَالَّتِي يَنَامُونَ عَنْهَا أَفْضَلُ مِنَ الَّتِي يَقُومُونَ‏.‏ يُرِيدُ آخِرَ اللَّيْلِ، وَكَانَ النَّاسُ يَقُومُونَ أَوَّلَهُ
“But the prayer which they do not perform, instead they sleep at its time, is more excellent than the one they are offering.” He meant the prayer in the last part of the night, while the people used to offer it in the first part of the night. (Sahih al-Bukhari #2010)
Incidentally, this narration disproves the Hanafi position that the Tarawih prayer is distinct from Tahajjud or Qiyam al-Lail, because the people were not praying at both times (early and last part of night), rather, they were praying at one of those times and sleeping at the other.
As for the assertion of the Shi'a that it is an innovation to offer the Tarawih, because optional prayers cannot be offered in congregation, this is disproven from the Sunna. There are many examples from the Sunna in which the Prophet's companions prayed behind him in an optional prayer. However, offering optional prayers, such as the Qiyam al-Lail outside of Ramadan, in congregation should not become a regular practice, as the Prophet only led some of his companions in optional prayers occassionally and not regularly. This of course does not apply to optional prayers which are meant to be offered in congregation, such as the eclipse and rain prayers.
As for the number of raka'at in Tarawih, this is another controversy. The Hanafis insist that it consists of 20+3 raka'at, (23 including Witr), while the Ahl al-Hadith sect assert that it consists of 8+3 raka'at (11 including Witr). The Ahl al-Hadith position appears to be the strongest, as it is reported from Umm al-Mu'minin A'ishaRA when she was asked by Abi Salama b. AbdirRahman about the Prophet's prayer during Ramadan:
مَا كَانَ يَزِيدُ فِي رَمَضَانَ، وَلاَ فِي غَيْرِهَا عَلَى إِحْدَى عَشْرَةَ رَكْعَةً
“He did not pray more than eleven raka'at in Ramadan or other than (Ramadan).” (Sahih al-Bukhari #2013)
يُصَلِّي أَرْبَعًا فَلاَ تَسَلْ عَنْ حُسْنِهِنَّ وَطُولِهِنَّ، ثُمَّ يُصَلِّي أَرْبَعًا فَلاَ تَسَلْ عَنْ حُسْنِهِنَّ وَطُولِهِنَّ، ثُمَّ يُصَلِّي ثَلاَثًا‏
“He used to pray four rak`at ---- let alone their beauty and length----and then he would pray four ----let alone their beauty and length ---- and then he would pray three rak`at” (ibid)
The term “Tarawih” was derived from this, as it is from the Sunna to take a rest after offering four Raka'at (in two units of prayer).
Interestingly, a classical Hanafi text admits that the Sunna of the Prophet (peace be upon him & his family) with regard to Tarawih is to offer it in eleven rakaat. Those who claim that the Tarawih prayer consists of 20+3 raka'at claim that this was the practice since the time of the caliphate of sayyidina UmarRA. They cite a narration in the Muwatta of Imam Malik to that effect:
عَنْ يَزِيدَ بْنِ رُومَانَ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ كَانَ النَّاسُ يَقُومُونَ فِي زَمَانِ عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ فِي رَمَضَانَ بِثَلاَثٍ وَعِشْرِينَ رَكْعَةً
Yazid b. Ruman said: “The people used to offer, in the time of Umar b. al-Khattab, in Ramadan, twenty-three raka'at.”
However, this narration cannot be used as a proof because it is disconnected, as the narrator Yazid b. Ruman was not in the time of sayyidina Umar's caliphate.
On the contrary, the narration preceding this one is authentic and proves that the Tarawih prayer consists of 8+3 raka'at:
أَمَرَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ أُبَىَّ بْنَ كَعْبٍ وَتَمِيمًا الدَّارِيَّ أَنْ يَقُومَا، لِلنَّاسِ بِإِحْدَى عَشْرَةَ رَكْعَةً
Umar b. al-Khattab ordered Ubayy b. Ka'b and Tamim al-Dari to lead the people in prayer with eleven raka'at. (al-Muwatta of Malik: Kitab Salat Fi Ramadan)


Prophet's Soul Does not Return to His Body After Death

It is impossible for the soul upon which death has been decreed to return to this world:

فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَىٰ عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ

Then He withholds the one whom He has decreed death for

(Sura 39:42)

Despite the crystal clear verdict of the Qur’an al-Karim, the idea that the soul of the Prophet Muhammad is returned to his body in this world is widespread among the Muslims. It is based on a Hadith of questionable authenticity:
عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏  مَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ يُسَلِّمُ عَلَىَّ إِلاَّ رَدَّ اللَّهُ عَلَىَّ رُوحِي حَتَّى أَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمَ
Narrated Abi Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said: “None of you greets me with Salam except that Allah returns my spirit to me until I return to him the Salam.” (Sunan Abi Dawud #2041)
Although the muhaddith, al-Albani, declared this Hadith hasan, the truth is that it is doubtful in its authenticity due to the fact that the narrator Yazid b. Abdillah b. Qusait having heard directly from Abi Huraira is not firmly established. More importantly, this narration clashes with the holy Qur’an, which, as has preceded, declares that Allah Most High “withholds” the soul upon which death has been decreed from returning.

Wednesday, 16 May 2018

Rawandiyya: "Prophet was Succeeded by Abbas"

سُبُّوحٌ قُدُّوسٌ رَبُّ الْمَلاَئِكَةِ وَالرُّوحِ

Holy, Holy, Lord of the Angels and the Spirit


The Imamiyya Shi’a, who insist that the Prophet Muhammad was meant to be succeeded by someone from his Ahl al-Bayt or family, namely Ali b. Abi Talib ؓ should consider the Rawandiyya and Abbasiyya sects which claimed that the Prophet was succeeded by his closest male relative, his paternal uncle al-Abbas ؓ. Like the Rawafid who disassociate from and anathemize the Prophet’s first three caliphs (successors) recognized by normative, Sunni Islam, namely, Abi Bakr ؓ, Umar ؓ and Uthman ؓ the Rawandiyya likewise believed: “the community fell into unbelief after Muhammad, the messenger of God, may God bless him and his family, by preventing al-Abbas from assuming the imamate and they repudiate Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and the rest of the companions who supported these men in what they did.” (Madelung, Wilferd and Walker, Paul E. An Ismaili Heresiography p.99)
According to this theory, the Imamate passed from al-Abbas ؓ to his son, Abd Allah b. Abbas ؓ, then Ali b. Abd Allah, then Muhammad b. Ali, then Ibrahim b. Muhammad, then the Abbasid “caliphs” al-Saffah and al-Mansur (ibid).
The Rawandiyya are attributed to al-Qasim b. Rawand, who formulated this theory. However, it was also promulgated by the third Abbasid caliph: “al-Mahdi, for his part, put forth the claim that al-Abbas has been the Prophet’s successor in more than the formal or legal sense: al-Abbas, in fact, was the imam – the legatee of the Prophet and his successor as the community’s guide. With such a position, the Shi’ite world view – stressing ideas of wasiyya and imama – was not immediately renounced, only the Alid dramatis personae were replaced by Abbasid ones: the imamate no longer had to be derived from Ali through Ibn al-Hanafiyya and Abu Hashim, but could directly be traced back to al-Abbas himself. The question once again arises: if al-Abbas and his successors were the imams all along, would not the ’rightly-guided’ caliphs who actually succeeded Muhammad have been illegitimate? A group of the Abbasid Shi’a of al-Mahdi’s time are in fact reported to have regarded the patriarchal caliphs as usurpers, though they apparently found it politic to keep this opinion of theirs secret.” (Religion and Politics under the Early Abbasids p.46)
The Rawandiyya cite the Ayah of the Qur’an as proof that al-Abbas ؓ was the rightful heir of the Prophet :
وَأُولُو الْأَرْحَامِ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلَىٰ بِبَعْضٍ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ
But those of blood relationship, some of them are nearer to another in the Book of Allah
(Sura 8:75)
They also cite a Hadith attributed to the Prophet in which he said to al-Abbas ؓ:
وَأَنْتَ عَمِّي ، وَصِنْوُ أَبِي ، وَبَقِيَّةُ آبَائِي ، وَوَارِثِي ، وَخَيْرُ مَنْ أَخْلِفُ مِنْ بَعْدِي مِنْ أَهْلِي
“You are my paternal uncle, my father’s twin brother, the remnant of my fathers, my heir and the best of those after me of my family.” (Mu’jam al-Awsat of al-Tabarani)
The Rawandiyya believe that the promised Mahdi will come from the progeny of al-Abbas.

Abu Isa the Antichrist of Isfahan

سُبُّوحٌ قُدُّوسٌ رَبُّ الْمَلاَئِكَةِ وَالرُّوحِ
Holy, Holy, Lord of the Angels and the Spirit

Before the emergence of the false messiah, al-masih al-Dajjal, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family) warned us that there shall appear some thirty minor “dajjals” who pave the way for him. These will be great liars, false prophets and deceivers that emerge from the Umma itself but seek to misguide the Muslims from the Straight Path. Some of them, such as Ibn Sayyad, were so protypical of the one-eyed Dajjal, that some of the Prophet’s companions, the likes of Umar b. al-KhattabRA his son Ibn UmarRA, and Jabir b. Abd AllahRA, really believed that he was the one-eyed Dajjal, making solemn oaths to that effect. Like the one-eyed Dajjal prophesied to come in the latter days, Ibn Sayyad was of Jewish origin. Although he outwardly acknowledged the Risala of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family), it is reported that he claimed apostolic authority for himself, that he was a soothsayer, and even stated that if he were offered the position of being the Dajjal he would not be displeased with it:
وَقِيلَ لَهُ أَيَسُرُّكَ أَنَّكَ ذَاكَ الرَّجُلُ قَالَ فَقَالَ لَوْ عُرِضَ عَلَىَّ مَا كَرِهْتُ
It was said to him (Ibn Sayyad): “Won’t you be pleased if you were that man (Dajjal)?” He said: “If this offer is made to me I would not be displeased with it.” (Sahih Muslim)
Another prototypical figure of the Dajjal was the false prophet and false messiah Abu Isa al-Isfahani, an 8th century Jewish figure who led a failed revolt against the Abbasids. That latter defeated them under the leadership of al-Mansur. Abu Isa’s followers and those who believed in him were known as the Isawiya. According to Abu Isa and the Isawiya sect, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them both) were genuine prophets, but only to their own communities (Wasserstrom, Steven M. The Isawiyya Revisited), i.e., they were not sent to the Jewish people. Being based in Isfahan was no coincidence, as the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family) stated:
يَتْبَعُ الدَّجَّالَ مِنْ يَهُودِ أَصْبَهَانَ سَبْعُونَ أَلْفًا عَلَيْهِمُ الطَّيَالِسَةُ
“The Dajjal will be followed by seventy thousand Jews of Isbahan wearing tayalisa (tallit, shawls)” (Sahih Muslim)

Interestingly, regarding Abu Isa, the Karaite scholar Qirqisani wrote: “among his adherents there were people who maintained that he had not been killed, but had merely entered a ridge in the mountains, so that nothing further was heard of him.” (Friedlaender, Israel. Shiitic Elements in Jewish Sectarianism) Furthermore, it is written in Encyclopedia Iranica: “Abū ʿĪsā allegedly gathered 10,000 partisans whom he commanded in battle as the forerunner of the Messiah. He was ultimately killed along with his men by the caliph Manṣūr near Ray. His followers believed that his death was an illusion and that in reality he had miraculously disappeared, an escape characteristic of other messianic pretenders whose return was eagerly awaited.”

Salihiya Sect (Salih Qubba): "All Visions are Reality"

اللَّهُمَّ صَلِّ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ ، وَعَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِ وَذُرِّيَّتِهِ ، كَمَا صَلَّيْتَ عَلَى آلِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، وَبَارِكْ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ وَعَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِ وَذُرِّيَّتِهِ ، كَمَا بَارَكْتَ عَلَى آلِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، إِنَّكَ حَمِيدٌ مَجِيدٌ


The Salihiya sect are attributed to the theologian Salih b. Abd Allah known as “Qubba”. Among the examples of the absurdity of kalam theology is to be found in the conclusions and doctrines of this sect: “They hold also that dreams are true and that they are in the category of the wakeful state. Should a man see in a dream that he is in the west while he is in the east, God would have spontaneously created him in the west at that very moment. The proof is that we may witness in the dream state the like of that in the wakeful state. If that were false, vision would be false. What one sees in the mirror is, according to them, merely another man like oneself that God spontaneously creates. The proof is that we may see two things, and if it were possible that one of the two is false, it would equally be possible that the other is false.” (Bab al-Shaytan of Abu Tamam p.83)

Ibn Hazm writes about Salih Qubba: The student of al-Nizam, Salih Qubba, believed that “whatever visions we see are true as seen, so if one sees that he is in China, when he is actually in Andalusia, then at that point Allah has created him to be in China.” (al-Fisl fil-Milal v.5 p.123)

And this doctrine is refuted rationally, but also by the Hadith of the Prophet in which he said:
وَمَنْ رَآنِي فِي الْمَنَامِ فَقَدْ رَآنِي، فَإِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ لاَ يَتَمَثَّلُ فِي صُورَتِي
“Whoever sees me in a dream has (in fact) seen me, for Satan cannot imitate my form.” (Bukhari & Muslim)
In this Hadith is implied that Satan is able to imitate forms and show falsehoods to people in dreams, but there is an exception when it comes to the Prophet whose form Satan cannot imitate. Hence, if a person sees the Prophet in a dream while sleeping, he has in fact seen the Prophet truly and in reality.

Mughiriya and Jarudiya Sect Believe Nafs al-Zakiya is Alive

اللَّهُمَّ صَلِّ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ ، وَعَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِ وَذُرِّيَّتِهِ ، كَمَا صَلَّيْتَ عَلَى آلِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، وَبَارِكْ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ وَعَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِ وَذُرِّيَّتِهِ ، كَمَا بَارَكْتَ عَلَى آلِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، إِنَّكَ حَمِيدٌ مَجِيدٌ


I have mentioned in passing previously on this blog the great Imam of the Prophet Muhammad’s blessed progeny, sayyidina Muhammad b. Abd Allah known as “Nafs al-Zakiya” (radi Allahu anh), and his armed uprising against the hated Abbasid ruler “al-Mansur” in Medina, 762 CE, in which the Imam was tragically martyred. Yet there were extremist Shi’ites who refused to believe that the Imam Nafs al-Zakiya was killed, and asserted that he had gone into occultation and would return (raj’a) before Judgment Day. Interestingly, this claim of an occultation for Imam Nafs al-Zakiya preceded the Twelver Shi’ite assertion that their fictional “Twelfth Imam” went into occultation a little over a century afterwards, in 874 CE. The heresiographer, Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi, mentions a faction of the Jarudiya Zaydiya who “awaited Muhammad ibn-‘Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-‘Ali ibn-abi-Talib. They would not believe that he had been slain, or that he died, but claimed that he was the expected Mahdi who would come to reign over the world. This group joined with the Muhammadiyah from the Imamiyah in looking for Muhammad ibn-‘Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-‘Ali as the expected Imam.” (Moslem Schisms and Sects p.44)
Regarding this sect, the Muhammadiya, he explains later that they are attributed to the heretic al-Mughira b. Sa’id al-Ijli, the mawla of Khalid b. Abd Allah al-Qasri. They believe that the Imam, Nafs al-Zakiya, was not killed but is at Mt. Hajir in the district of Najd until he is commanded to return, and that he is the expected Mahdi. (ibid p.62-63)
Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari likewise wrote about this sect, the Mughiriya, and how they believe that the Imam, Nafs al-Zakiya, is the Mahdi, and that he is alive, stationed on the mountain of al-Hajir (Maqalat al-Islamiyin p.96).

The Shi’ite heresiographer, al-Nawbakhti, mentions these doctrines of this sect too, whom he says were a faction of the companions of Imam Abu Ja’far (Muhammad al-Baqir). (Firaq al-Shi’a p.74)

Thursday, 10 May 2018

Validity of Wiping Over Ordinary Socks

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم
والعاقبة للمتقين
The bigoted mullas of the Hanafi madhhab in the Indian subcontinent and elsewhere assert the invalidity of masah (wiping) over ordinary socks for Wudu. They claim that masah is only valid over khuffayn meaning leather socks, and not over jawrabayn, which are ordinary socks of cotton or wool. Al-Mughira b. Shu’baRA narrates:
أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم تَوَضَّأَ وَمَسَحَ عَلَى الْجَوْرَبَيْنِ وَالنَّعْلَيْنِ
Allah’s Apostle performed Wudu and wiped over the socks and shoes. (Abi Dawud; Tirmidhi; Ibn Maja)
Admittedly, this Hadith is slightly weak, nevertheless, Imam Abi Dawud al-Sijistani mentions several of the Prophet’s companions (Allah be pleased with them) who acted upon this and would wipe over non-leather socks:
قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ وَمَسَحَ عَلَى الْجَوْرَبَيْنِ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ وَابْنُ مَسْعُودٍ وَالْبَرَاءُ بْنُ عَازِبٍ وَأَنَسُ بْنُ مَالِكٍ وَأَبُو أُمَامَةَ وَسَهْلُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ وَعَمْرُو بْنُ حُرَيْثٍ وَرُوِيَ ذَلِكَ عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ وَابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ
Ali b. Abi Talib, Ibn Mas’ud, Baraa b. Azib, Anas b. Malik, Abu Umama, Sahl b. Sa’d and Amro b. Huraith would all wipe over the socks. And this has also been related from Umar b. al-Khattab and Ibn Abbas. (Sunan Abi Dawud #159)
In fact, since no one dissented among the companions, it is safe to conclude that there is an Ijma (concensus) among them with regard to the validity of wiping over ordinary socks. The jurists have stipulated that the validity of wiping over ordinary socks is subject to them being sufficiently thick. In other words, they should not be so thin so as to reveal the color of the feet inside them, as may be the case in certain nylon socks and stockings that people wear. Some Ulama say, in addition to this, that the socks should be so thick so that water is unable to seep into them and other conditions which are baseless, and Allah knows best.

Sayyidatuna Aishah (RA): Say He is Seal of Prophets But Don't Say 'No Prophet After Him'

  باسمك اللهم اللهم صلى على سيدنا محمد The Mother of Believers, sayyidatuna A’ishah سلام الله عليها reportedly said: قُولُوا خَاتَمُ الن...