Sunday, 31 January 2021

Warning Against False Prophets (Part 2)

 ‌بِاسْمِكَ ‌اللَّهُمَّ وَفِي سَبِيلِكَ وَعَلَى مِلَّةِ رَسُولِكَ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

Allah جلّ جلاله says:

وَ مَنۡ اَظۡلَمُ مِمَّنِ افۡتَرٰی عَلَی اللّٰہِ کَذِبًا اَوۡ قَالَ اُوۡحِیَ اِلَیَّ وَ لَمۡ یُوۡحَ اِلَیۡہِ شَیۡءٌ وَّ مَنۡ قَالَ سَاُنۡزِلُ مِثۡلَ مَاۤ اَنۡزَلَ اللّٰہُ

And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah, or says, ‘It has been revealed to me,’ while nothing has been revealed to him; and who says, ‘I will send down the like of that which Allah has sent down?’

(Surah 6:93)

The mufassirīn say that the words “one who says ‘it has been revealed to me’ while nothing has been revealed to him” were revealed concerning the pretender Musaylimah bin Habīb al-Hanafī; and the words “one who says ‘I will send down the like of that which Allah has sent down’” were revealed concerning the apostate and hypocrite Abd Allāh bin Sa’d bin Abī Sarh.

But it should be borne in mind that the knowledge of asbāb al-nuzūl does not mean the āyāt of the Qurān don’t have a broader and general application beyond the original objects for the cause of their revelation from Heaven. In other words, this āyah is not restricted in applying to the antichrist Musaylimah but to all false prophets and individuals who falsely claim to have received revelation from Allāh سبحانه وتعالى

The Prophet Muhammad صلوات الله والسلام عليه prophesied:

وَوَلاَ تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ حَتَّى يُبْعَثَ دَجَّالُونَ كَذَّابُونَ قَرِيبًا

مِنْ ثَلاَثِينَ، كُلُّهُمْ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ رَسُولُ اللَّه

The Hour shall not be established until there appear nearly thirty dajjāls [deceivers] and liars. Each of them will claim ‘I am an Apostle of Allah’

(Sahīh al-Bukhārī & Sahīh Muslim)

In another version, it is reported that he صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

وَإِنَّهُ سَيَكُونُ فِي أُمَّتِي كَذَّابُونَ ثَلاَثُونَ كُلُّهُمْ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ نَبِيٌّ وَأَنَا خَاتَمُ النَّبِيِّينَ لاَ نَبِيَّ بَعْدِي

And there shall come in my Ummah thirty liars; each of them will claim ‘I am a prophet’.

But I am the Seal of the Prophets, there is no prophet after me

(Sunan Abī Dāwud)

This latter narration clarifies that the thirty false prophets will in fact come out from the Ummah of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

Therefore, this prophecy does not apply to the false prophets of other religions like Judaism and Christianity who arose after the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

There is unanimous agreement within the world of Islām that among these thirty false prophets are the first two such liars, namely, al-Aswad al-Ansī whose real name was Abhalah bin Ka’b, and the aforementioned Musaylimah bin Habīb لعنة الله عليهما

Although the prophecy undoubtedly speaks of thirty or nearly thirty pretenders, that doesn’t mean there won’t be considerable more such false prophets who originate from this Ummah. The prophecy is therefore referring to thirty or nearly thirty specific major false prophets, and not every lunatic who gets up one day without washing his face and claims he is a prophet.

The prophecy should probably also not apply to those false prophets who repented, like Tulayhah bin Khuwaylid al-Asadī رضى الله عنه and the false prophetess who later repented, namely, Sajāh bint al-Hārith.

Regarding sayyidinā Tulayhah, it is narrated that sayyidinā Umar al-Fārūq once addressed him after his repentance:

يَا خُدَعُ، مَا بَقِيَ مِنْ كَهَانَتِكَ

You imposter, what is left of your soothsaying?”

نَفْخَةٌ أَوْ نَفْخَتَانِ بِالْكِيرِ

He replied, “A puff or two in the bellows.” (Tārīkh al-Tabarī)

Tulayhah’s enigmatic response could possibly be interpreted to mean that he viewed himself as some kind of mulham who receives the kind of divine inspiration spoken of in the Qurān known as nafkh

وَ مَرۡیَمَ ابۡنَتَ عِمۡرٰنَ الَّتِیۡۤ اَحۡصَنَتۡ فَرۡجَہَا فَنَفَخۡنَا فِیۡہِ مِنۡ رُّوۡحِنَا وَ صَدَّقَتۡ بِکَلِمٰتِ رَبِّہَا وَ کُتُبِہٖ وَ کَانَتۡ مِنَ الۡقٰنِتِیۡنَ

And Mary, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her private parts — so We breathed into him of Our Spirit — and she fulfilled in her person the words of her Lord and His Books and was one of the obedient.

(Surah 66:12)

And perhaps it was this initial spiritual connection which sayyidinā Tulayhah al-Asadī had with Allāh تعالى in the form of inspiration which made him imagine he was actually a prophet, but he soon came to his senses and repented from such misguidance.

So if we were to numerate the sum of false prophets who had risen from the Muslim Ummah throughout history, from the time of Prophet Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه وسلم last days till present, it would surely be greater than thirty. Hence it is stated in another version of this prophecy, or perhaps it is a separate prophecy:

لَا تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ حَتَّى ‌يَخْرُجَ ‌سَبْعُونَ ‌كَذَّابًا

The Hour shall not be established until there come seventy liars

(al-Mu’jam al-Kabīr)

it is said this narration is weak due to the narrator Yahyā bin Abd al-Hamīd al-Himmānī. And in another version, with this wording:

يَكُونُ قَبْلَ خُرُوجِ الدَّجَّالِ ‌نَيِّفٌ ‌عَلَى ‌سَبْعِينَ ‌دَجَّالًا

Prior to the coming of the Dajjāl there shall be a little over seventy dajjāls

(Musnad Abi Ya’la; v.7, p.108, #4055):




However, this narration is weak due to the narrator Layth bin Abī Sulaym.

And if we were to accept this prophecy of seventy antichrists and liars who shall come forth before the Antichrist (False Messiah or the Dajjāl), then perhaps we can count among them the infamous pretender of the Thaqīf, namely, al-Mukhtār bin Abī Ubayd.

And after him, al-Hārith bin Sa’īd of Damascus during the tenure of the Umayyad ruler Abd al-Malik bin Marwān.

Then there was a false prophet by the name of Hāshim, but better known as al-Muqanna “the veiled”. It is said he was a chemist who veiled his face to conceal the disfigurement caused by a chemical explosion from one of his experiments.

Other false prophets and pretenders who arose from the Ummah in modern times were Mirzā Husayn Alī Nūrī, so-called Bahā Ullāh of Iran revered by the Bahai religion, Elijah Poole who was the leader of the so-called Nation of Islam, a racist Black cult, and Rashād Khalīfa the infamous Sunnah and Hadīth rejecter who founded the United Submitters International.

It is often argued that prophesy has ceased absolutely, in every sense of the word, after Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم on the basis that he predicted there would arise nearly thirty false prophets after him from the Ummah. But then how would Muslims respond to certain cessationist Christians who argue along the same lines that Jesus Christ is the last prophet, and that Prophet Muhammad cannot be a true prophet since Jesus said:

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves (Matthew 7:15)

And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many (Matthew 24:11)

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect (Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22)

But as Muslims answer that even if Jesus warned against the rising of false prophets after him doesn’t logically prove that the coming of a truthful prophet after him is impossible, likewise, it must be pointed out that the Prophet Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم prophecy concerning nearly thirty false prophets is not a proof that prophesy has been discontinued after him in absolute terms.

Barelawi Says Mirzais Don't Deny Khatm an-Nubuwwah

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله تعالى على خاتم النبيين

In his polemical work against the Deobandis and so-called ‘Wahhabis’, the Barelawi polemicist Sufi Muhammad Allah Ditta Naqshbandi wrote:

مرزائی ایک آیت کا مفہوم بگاڑ کر پیش کریں یعنی خاتم النبیین کی آیت کے منکر نہیں۔ کوئی مرزائی یہ نہیں کہتا کہ میں آنحضرت صلی اللہ تعالی علیہ وسلم کو خاتم النبیین نہیں مانتا صرف مفہوم کو بگاڑ تے ہیں ان کے پیچے تو لٹھ لیے پھرتے ہو۔

"Mirzais [derogatory term for followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] distort the meaning of a single Ayah, that is, the Ayah of Khātam an-Nabiyyīn. No Mirzai says ‘I don’t believe Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is Khātam an-Nabiyyīn’. They only distort the meaning, and for that you chase them around with a stick" (Bher Numa Bheriay, p.12):


According to this Barelawi polemicist, the Deobandis make a big hue and cry about the Ahmadis/Qadianis being deniers of the finality of prophesy, although in fact Ahmadis/Qadianis don’t deny khatm an-Nubuwwah they only differ as to its correct interpretation, whereas the Deobandis themselves are guilty of much greater rejection of the Quran and the true reality of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

Ibn Khaldun and the Mahdi

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الكريم

There is a growing trend among a section of Muslims, affected by the poison of modernism and materialism, who are skeptical about the prophecy of the advent of the promised Mahdi عليه السلام

It is argued that Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406 CE) was a denier of the concept of the Mahdi, and that he cast doubt on the authenticity of each and every Hadith concerning the Mahdi. However, this claim is misleading. In reality, Ibn Khaldun never explicitly stated that he rejected belief in the Mahdi. On the contrary he admitted that this belief is the belief of the masses of the people of Islam throughout the ages:

اعلم أنّ في المشهور بين الكافّة من أهل الإسلام على ممرّ الأعصار أنّه لا بدّ في آخر الزّمان من ظهور رجل من أهل البيت يؤيّد الدّين ويظهر العدل ويتبعه المسلمون ويستولي على الممالك الإسلاميّة ويسمّى بالمهديّ

"Know that it has been commonly accepted among the masses of the people of Islam throughout the ages that there must be at the end of time the appearance of a man from the People of the House who will help the Din and make justice triumphant and whom the Muslims will follow and who will gain control over the Islamic lands, and who will be called the Mahdi." (Muqaddimah; v.1, ch.53, p.514)

However, it is true that Ibn Khaldun criticized and regarded as weak or fabricated the vast majority of narrations concerning the Fatimid Mahdi:

ونحن الآن نذكر هنا الأحاديث الواردة في هذا الشّأن وما للمنكرين فيها من المطاعن وما لهم في إنكارهم من المستند

"Here we will now mention the hadith which are narrated about this matter and what matters those who deny them have which would invalidate them, and what hadiths with isnads they have with which to oppose them"

بأسانيد ربّما يعرّض لها المنكرون كما نذكره إلّا أنّ المعروف عند أهل الحديث أنّ الجرح مقدّم على التّعديل فإذا وجدنا طعنا في بعض رجال الأسانيد بغفلة أو بسوء حفظ أو ضعف أو سوء رأي تطرّق ذلك إلى صحّة الحديث وأوهن منها

"with isnads which those who deny (the Mahdi) object to, as we shall mention, except that it is well known to the people of hadith that (the factors which cause the) invalidation (of a hadith narrator) take precedence over the (the factors which result in the) attribution of veracity (to him), so that when we find a flaw in some of the men in the isnads because of carelessness, bad memory, weakness or a bad view that will find a way (to affect) the soundness of the hadith and will weaken it." (ibid):



After a lengthy examination on the narrations about the Mahdi, Ibn Khaldun concludes by saying:

فهذه جملة الأحاديث الّتي خرّجها الأئمّة في شأن المهديّ وخروجه آخر الزّمان. وهي كما رأيت لم يخلص منها من النّقد إلّا القليل والأقلّ منه

"This is the sum total of the hadith which the Imams related concerning the Mahdi and his appearance at the end of time. As you see they are not free of criticism except for a few which are the very least of them." (ibid, p.532):


Friday, 29 January 2021

Had Ibrahim Lived He Would Have Been a Prophet

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

يَا ‌إِلَهَ ‌الْآلِهَةِ

The last son to be born to the beloved Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم was sayyidina Ibrahim عليه السلام who died in infancy. It is reported that upon his death the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

لَوْ عَاشَ لَكَانَ صِدِّيقًا نَبِيًّا

Had he lived he would have been a truthful prophet”

(Sunan Ibn Majah)

However, this particular narration is weak due to the narrator Ibrahim b. Uthman al-’Absi who is matrūk al-hadīth ‘abandoned in Hadith’.

But Ibn Abi Awfa رضى الله عنه who saw the Prophet’s son Ibrahim عليهما السلام said about him:

وَلَوْ قُضِيَ أَنْ يَكُونَ بَعْدَ مُحَمَّدٍ صلى الله عليه وسلم نَبِيٌّ عَاشَ ابْنُهُ، وَلَكِنْ لاَ نَبِيَّ بَعْدَهُ

Had it been decreed that there be after Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم a prophet, his son would have lived, but there is no prophet after him” (Sahih al-Bukhari)

This is also the view of sayyidina Anas bin Malik رضى الله عنه who said:

لَوْ عَاشَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ ابْنُ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، ‌لَكَانَ ‌صِدِّيقًا ‌نَبِيًّا

Had Ibrahim son of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم lived he would have been a siddīq, a prophet” (Musnad Ahmad)

Both Shuaib Arnaut and Hamza Ahmad al-Zayn have declared this narration hasan (sound) in their checking of the Musnad:





Ibn Asakir brings out another narration in which it is reported that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم placed his blessed hand in the grave of his son Ibrahim عليه السلام and said:

أَمَا وَاللَّهِ إِنَّهُ لِنَبِيٌّ ابْنُ نَبِيٍّ

by Allah, he is a prophet, son of a Prophet”

(Tarikh Dimashq v.4 p.615):



However, Ibn Asakir has mentioned that one of the narrators, a certain Isa who is actually a direct descendant of Amir al-Mu’minin, Ali bin Abi Talib كرم الله وجهه namely, Ibn Abd Allah b. Muhammad b. Umar b. Ali b. Abi Talib, is ليس بالقوى not strong’ a mild criticism to be sure.

I earlier quoted the explanation of Mulla Ali al-Qari رحمه الله of the narrations ‘had Ibrahim lived he would have been a prophet’ and ‘if there was a prophet after me it would be Umar’ in which he says that they would have been prophets while remaining under the obedience to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

And if we accept the narration “by Allah he [Ibrahim] is a prophet, son of a Prophet” then we believe he was an Ummati prophet. He had the potential of receiving revelation from Allah and prophesying while still being subject to the Shari’ah of his blessed father صلى الله عليهما وسلم

Thursday, 28 January 2021

Hadith: There is no Prophesy after me except if Allah wills

 باسمك اللهم

سبحان ذى الجبروت والملكوت والكبرياء والعظمة

Previously I quoted the statement of the great imam Ibn Abd al-Barr regarding the Hadith:

لَا ‌نُبُوَّةَ ‌بَعْدِي ‌إِلَّا ‌مَا ‌شَاءَ ‌اللَّهُ

"There is no prophesy after me except if Allah wills”

Although this Hadith is considered a fabrication by some, Ibn Abd al-Barr was cautious enough not to dismiss it out of hand, but to explain the exception as referring to the truthful visions that are one of the parts of prophesy, the occurrence of which is affirmed by the Muslims of virtually all schools of thought.

Along with Ibn Abd al-Barr, the great imam and exegete, al-Qurtubi (1214-1273 CE), mentioned this Hadith in connection with his explanation of the Ayah of Khatm an-Nubuwwah:

قُلْتُ: وَقَدْ رُوِيَ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: (‌لَا ‌نُبُوَّةَ ‌بَعْدِي ‌إِلَّا ‌مَا ‌شَاءَ ‌اللَّهُ). قَالَ أَبُو عُمَرَ: يَعْنِي الرُّؤْيَا- وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ- الَّتِي هِيَ جُزْءٌ مِنْهَا، كَمَا قَالَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ: (لَيْسَ يَبْقَى بَعْدِي مِنَ النُّبُوَّةِ إِلَّا الرُّؤْيَا الصَّالِحَةُ)

I say: It has been narrated from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم that: “there is no Prophesy after me except if Allah wills”. Abu Umar said: “meaning the Visions – and Allah knows better – which a part of it [Prophesy], as he عليه السلام said: “nothing remains after from Prophesy except pious Visions” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi v.17 p.166):


Therefore, while the Hadith may not be established as a saying of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم its meaning, as explained by Ibn Abd al-Barr is certainly correct.

Hypocrisy of Deoband: Taking Sweets from Pagan Festivals

 باسمك اللهم

سبحان ذى الجبروت والملكوت والكبرياء والعظمة

The festival known as Giyarhwin is supposedly the Urs of the great Islamic saint shaikh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani رضى الله عنه. In the Indian subcontinent it is generally held on the eleventh day of every month. Not only is it a reprehensible innovation, something which the corrupt Muslims have added to the pure religion of Islam, it involves activity which is often bordering on polytheism to say the least. Specifically, the eating of food and sweets that are offered in the name of the saint. In no less than four separate verses in the holy Quran, Allah Most High forbids Believers from eating

مَاۤ اُہِلَّ لِغَیۡرِ اللّٰہِ بِہٖ

that on which is invoked the name of one other than Allah

Those Believers who are monotheists and will never compromise on the Oneness of Allah in worship must be very careful and cautious in avoiding any participation whatsoever in these pagan festivals.

The Deobandi sect, which feigns attachment to monotheism and the pure Islamic teachings, often trivializes this activity and innovations that are bordering on polytheism. They are well aware that such practices are contrary to the monotheistic spirit of Islam. Nevertheless, the guru of the Deobandi sect, Ashraf Ali Thanwi, reportedly encouraged Muslims to take the sweets that are offered on the occasion of Giyarhwin so as not to provoke the public who are deeply attached to this pagan festival:

ایک صاحب نے سوال کیا کہ اگر گیارھویں کی مٹھائی آئے تو اس کو کیا کرے فرمایا لیکرکہیں دفن کردے اور رد کرنے میں عوام کے اندر اشتعال کا اندیشہ ہے۔ جہلا عوام الناس کو مشتعل کرنا ٹھیک نہیں۔

Someone asked what to do if one is given sweets on the occasion of giyarhwin. [Ashraf Ali Thanwi] said ‘take it and dispose of it somewhere, because rejecting it has the potential of provoking the public. To provoke the ignorant public is not right.’” (Kamalat-e-Ashrafia pp.142-143, #628):




The reader should know that the vast majority of Deobandis belong to what is known as the Hayati sect. The Hayatis believe the Prophets are literally, bodily alive in their earthen graves, and that they and everyone else who is deceased can actually hear that which is in the vicinity of their graves. They are quite close to the pagan Barelawis. They also validate tawassul (intercession) through the dead and the practice of hanging amulets for protection. The opposing subsection of the Deobandis, known as Mamatis, are far superior to them, but are quite insignificant, as they are primarily concentrated in parts of western Punjab and the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan. But generally speaking the Deobandis, who are spread throughout the Indian subcontinent and among the South Asian Muslim diaspora, are Hayatis, including their missionary wing Tablighi Jama’at.

Thursday, 21 January 2021

False Prophets of Christianity Said Trump Would Be Re-Elected

 


باسمك اللهم

سبحان ذى الجبروت والملكوت والكبرياء والعظمة

If Christianity is the truth, why are their so-called prophets of our time nothing but a bunch of liars and pretenders? Last year a large number of so-called Christian “prophets” prophesied that Donald Trump would be re-elected in the 2020 election. But yesterday’s inauguration of President Joe Biden has decisively put to shame these liars. The list of these evil false prophets includes Pat Robertson, Kenneth Copeland, Jeremiah Johnson, Kris Valloton, Albert Milton, and Paula White. The latter also served as Trump’s spiritual advisor. Some of these false prophets were forced to apologize for their false prediction, while still shamelessly claiming that they are true prophets of God. This despite the fact that it is written in the Torah: “But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.” (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)

These Christian so-called “prophets” may be likened to the “prophets”, or more accurately, soothsayers, of the Cult of Baal that was patronized by the cursed Jezebel. That these shameless individuals claim to be spokespeople of God while associating themselves closely with the American presidency is itself a sufficient indication of their falsehood. True Prophets of God are dissident, they rebuke the evils and wickedness of the government of their day. They do not at all preach the so-called prosperity gospel nor do they amass fortunes and estates through their ministry. The Christian Evangelical movement is in general an extremely Satanic and evil pagan movement that is quite reminiscent of the old pagan cults that employed oracles to bless the activity of their evil rulers and society.

Tuesday, 12 January 2021

Prohibition of Concealing Face in Salah

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

نحمده ونصلى ونسلم على رسوله الكريم

Citing the coronavirus pandemic as an excuse, many if not most mosques in the world have mandated worshippers wear a mask while praying. They have even gone to the extent of making the wearing of the mask a condition for entering the mosque. This is undoubtedly a severe tribulation, and yet another example of the corruption that has become so pervasive in our Ummah. As I narrated in a previous entry, I myself was expelled from my local mosque simply for refusing to wear a mask.

The truth is that it is expressly forbidden in our Religion for worshippers to cover their face while offering the obligatory Salah. Sayyidina Abi Hurairah رضى الله عنه narrates:

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم نَهَى عَنِ السَّدْلِ فِي الصَّلاَةِ وَأَنْ يُغَطِّيَ الرَّجُلُ فَاهُ

The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم forbade trailing garments during prayer and that a man should cover his mouth” (Sunan Abi Dawud #643)

It is narrated that sayyidina Salim b. Abd Allah b. Umar رضى الله عنهم

إِذَا رَأَى الإِنْسَانَ يُغَطِّي فَاهُ وَهُوَ يُصَلِّي جَبَذَ الثَّوْبَ عَنْ فِيهِ جَبْذًا شَدِيدًا حَتَّى يَنْزِعَهُ عَنْ فِيهِ

when he saw a man covering his mouth while he was praying would fiercely pull away the cloth from him” (Muwatta of Imam Malik)

These days many Ulama, who have either been purchased or else lack the moral courage to teach the correct ordinances of the Shari’ah, have issued fatāwa legitimizing the act of worshippers wearing masks while praying as a precaution against the spread of Covid-19.

Others, who are ghair muqallidīn (non-comformists) and so-called ahl al-Hadīth argue that there is nothing authentically established from the Sunnah which indicates that covering the face is prohibited in the Salah. They claim that the Hadith I quoted from Abi Hurairah رضى الله عنه in which the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibited men from covering their mouths in prayer is weak. Incidentally, one of their most esteemed scholars of Hadith of the 20th century, al-Albani, declared the Hadith in question to be sound:

But the fact of the matter is that it is not necessary that every single teaching connected with the Salah, and other acts of worship in our Religion, have a proof from the Ahādīth. The original source for these teachings, before the Hadith narrations were even compiled, was the mass-practise of the early Muslims, which is known as amal al-Tawātur. This is something the literalist so-called ahl al-Hadith sect utterly fails to realize.

The Hanafi madhhab, which I personally adhere to, and which Allah Most High has evidently favored by allowing to attain acceptance among the majority of the Muslim Ummah till the present time, teaches that covering the face, specifically the mouth and the nose in Salah is makrūh tahrīmī (legally prohibited), and that the Salah must be repeated – wājib al-’iyādah:


Although Ibn Abidin al-Shami has explained that the rationale behind this prohibition is that covering the face in worship is the way of the fire-worshipping Magians, in my understanding, the reason why worshippers are meant to bare their faces in the Salah is that it is not befitting to conceal one’s face while standing before Allah, just as it is not befitting to look straight toward the Qiblah, and we are taught to keep our gaze fixed at the place of prostration. The spirit of the Salah is that one is standing with utmost humility and reverence before the Lord. The literalist ahl al-Hadith have failed to understand this basic thing, which they oppose when they pray bare-headed, with their legs spread far apart, their arms folded high upon their chest, in a pose that reeks of arrogance and is certainly not befitting for one who is standing before his or her Lord.

Monday, 11 January 2021

'Seal of Prophets' Connotes Virtue, Excellence (33:40)


بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

سبوحٌ قدوسٌ رب الملائكة والروح

My master the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is the Seal of the Prophets – Khātam an-Nabiyyīn – and this is one of his virtues. The prevalent interpretation of this ascription, that it means only that he is the last prophet of God in a strictly chronological sense, cannot be correct for logically there is no virtue or excellence in simply being the last chronologically. The fact that being ‘Seal of the Prophets’ is a virtue for Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is proven from the context of the Ayah in the Quran in which he has been characterized with this ascription:

مَا کَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ اَبَاۤ اَحَدٍ مِّنۡ رِّجَالِکُمۡ وَ لٰکِنۡ رَّسُوۡلَ اللّٰہِ وَ خَاتَمَ النَّبِیّٖنَ

Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets

(Surah 33:40)

The word lākin (but) is, in Arabic grammar, harf istidrāk – an amendment particle. Its purpose is to compensate for what has preceded. The Ayah begins by announcing that Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is not the father of any adult man among the people. It is well known that all of his biological sons died in infancy. This is an apparent defect or imperfection, at least in the understanding of the pagan Arabs, and so Allah subsequently declares that despite this apparent defect, Prophet Muhammad is nevertheless His Apostle and also ‘Seal of the Prophets’. This is obviously meant to compensate for the apparent defect of not being the father of any adult man. But if ‘Seal of the Prophets’ is interpreted to mean that he is merely the last prophet in the chronological sense, it’s placement here is meaningless for there is no virtue or excellence in being at the beginning, middle or end of the chain of prophesy in the chronological sense, thus there is no compensation for the apparent defect.

That ‘Seal of the Prophets’ is necessarily an ascription that signifies some virtue or excellence is explicitly highlighted in the following Hadith of the Prophet:

فُضِّلْتُ عَلَى الأَنْبِيَاءِ بِسِتٍّ أُعْطِيتُ جَوَامِعَ الْكَلِمِ وَنُصِرْتُ بِالرُّعْبِ وَأُحِلَّتْ لِيَ الْغَنَائِمُ وَجُعِلَتْ لِيَ الأَرْضُ طَهُورًا وَمَسْجِدًا وَأُرْسِلْتُ إِلَى الْخَلْقِ كَافَّةً وَخُتِمَ بِيَ النَّبِيُّونَ

I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the prophets are sealed by me. (Sahih Muslim)

Incidentally, this Hadith is a proof that the great Prophet Noah على نبينا وعليه الصلاة والسلام was not a universal Messenger of God sent to all humanity, contrary to popular belief, for that is the exclusive quality of our Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. This is a strong indication that Noah’s Flood was not a global phenomenon.

Did Ghulam Ahmad Claim Prophesy (Part 14): Partial Excellence Over Jesus

 

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

سبوحٌ قدوسٌ رب الملائكة والروح

One of the notable allegations made against Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, founder of the Ahmadiyya movement, is that he considered himself superior to some of the Prophets of God, particularly Jesus of Nazareth على نبينا وعليه الصلاة والسلام and that this is a proof that he was claiming to be a prophet himself. In answer to this allegation, I shall quote the statements of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in which he clarifies that any indication he may have made about possessing superiority and excellence over Jesus of Nazareth is in fact partial and not absolute:

تم تو قائل ہو کہ جزئی فضیلت ایک ادنی شہید کو ایک بڑے نبی پر ہوسکتی ہے۔ اور یہ سچ ہے کہ میں خدا کا فضل اپنے پر مسیح سے کم نہیں دیکھتا۔

"It is even conceded by you that an ordinary martyr may have partial [juz’i] superiority over a great prophet. Verily, I do not see myself less favoured with divine grace than the Messiah” (Siraje Munir, p.4):

اس مسیح کو اسرائیلی مسیح پر ایک جزئی فضیلت حاصل ہے کیونکہ اس کی دعوت عام ہےاور اس کی خاص تھی

"this Messiah has a partial superiority [fazilat] over the Israelite Messiah because the call of the former is universal whereas that of the latter is endemic” (Izalah Auham, p.647):

اس جگہ کسی کو یہ وہم نہ گذرے کہ اس تقریر میں اپنے نفس کو حضرت مسیح پر فضیلت دی ہے کیونکہ یہ ایک جزئی فضیلت ہے جو غیر نبی کو نبی پر ہوسکتی ہے

"Let not the reader take it that in this discourse I have placed myself superior to the Messiah. It is in fact a partial superiority [juz'i fadilat] which a non-prophet may have over a prophet” (Tiryaq ul-Qulub, p.157):

This last statement I have quoted is particularly important in proving that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad not only considered himself inferior in rank to Jesus of Nazareth, an actual prophet, but also that Ghulam Ahmad explicitly called himself ‘non-prophet’.

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...