Celoteh PakNik

An almost 50 years old guy, thinking aloud!

Archive for November, 2006

Translation of A’lahadrat Shaykh Ahmad Barelwi’s al-Dawlah al-Makkiyyah

Posted by PakNik on November 22, 2006

The Prophet’s knowledge of the unseen (‘Ilm al-Ghayb)

THE FIRST ARGUMENT

Muckraking By The Opponents:

Besides the stunts, the ill-blabbers on the Glorious and Most High Allah and His Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) endeavoured to ascribe deceitfully to me something that may render me (Allah protect me) liable to sacrilege or perversion. For this purpose they began muckraking me on the issue of the Knowledge of the Unknown. In this respect some of the lies they have fabricated against me are as follows:
1) That I regard the knowledge of Allah’s Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) as being personal, without the Divine Conference upon him;
2) That I consider the knowledge of His Sacred Presence (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) encompassing all the Divine information’s except for the Divine Self and His Attributes;
3) That I believe that the knowledge of His Illuminated Presence (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) comprises, in complete details, the knowledge of the actual infinite things.

And the One Almighty Allah knows that all this is nothing but muckraking by these ill-fated crooks. If they are truthful tell me which of these sentences is found in any of my booklets or verdict or writing;
Say “Come up with your evidence if you are truthful. And when they cannot produce witnesses, then to Allah they themselves are liars. Undoubtedly those who do not believe fabricate lies.”
They embarrass people by relating to them these very aspersions. And the people’s discomfort is justifiable. On this if some scholar opposes me he is certainly upright and appropriate. If these mendacious fabricators had sought my own legal opinion on these statements I myself would have been the first to refute them. The book “Addaula-tul-Makkiyya Bil Madda-til-Ghaibiyya” that this Faqeer wrote in Makka Muazzama in this respect and whose numerous copies were achieved by the respectable scholars of Makka contains all that refutes obviously such baloney. Opposing or refuting these untruths whatever a scholar writes, reverts, in fact, to these cursed fabricators, not to me who am as innocent of these lies as these mendacious fabricators are destitute of the belief and modesty.
“And now the unjust will soon know as to which side they shall return.”

Allah confer on Your Highness perfect and immediate health. If Your Highness, by way of your old generosity and universal benevolence, elevates this servant of yours by coming here I’ll show you the original book that bears reviews along with stamp-signatures by the two muftis of Madeena Munawwara, Taj-ud-Din Ilyas and Maulana Uthman bin Abd-us-Salam. Presently, I produce some extracts from the book so as to illustrate to what extent the muckraking of the fabricators is false. It is equal to saying that religion of Ahl-us-Sunna is nothing more than repudiating Siddique-e-Akbar (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) and calumniating the Chaste Siddiqua, and I seek protection from all this by Allah, the Sustainer, Lord of the Worlds.

(1) The first section of the book contains.
The private knowledge is particular to the Lord (subhanuhu wa ta’ala) and is impossible for anyone else. And whosoever proves even the smallest amount of it to be for anyone else in all worlds commits undoubtedly denial of Allah and polytheism.
(2) The Infinite-quantitative is peculiar to the Knowledge of Allah Ta’ala only.
(3) Both legally and rationally it is impossible for anyone among the creatures to encompass Allah Ta’ala’s information so far as its full details are concerned. Even if knowledge’s of all creatures from the first to the last is summed up it would never, in comparison with the knowledge of Allah, even so much as one part out of one million parts of a drop is in comparison with one million seas.

The revision of the same book bears:
(4) It is crystal clear from what has been proven that Muslims cannot even think of the equation of the knowledge’s of all the creatures to the knowledge of our Sustainer-Lord, God of all worlds.
(5) We have established through convincing arguments that the encompassing of whole Divine information by the Knowledge of the creature is definitively impossible.

The third revision of the same book bears.
(6) The Personal-Absolute, All- inclusive and Exhaustive knowledge is particular to Allah Ta’ala, and men cannot have the absolute knowledge but through the Divine Bestowal. It’s fifth revision bears.

(7) We neither acknowledge the equation of the knowledge of Allah Ta’ala and obtaining of it in itself independently nor proclaim that Allah Ta’ala confers all the knowledge by grant, except for some of it.
My Fatwa (legal decision), “Amba-ul-Mustafa” has been published thrice in thousands from Muradabad Since 1718 Hijra. I am sending your honour its copy published along with the treatise “Al-Kalima-tul-Ulya.” Anyone who ascribes to me a belief other than that expressed in it is a mendacious muckraker and Allah take him for accountability.

THE SECOND ARGUMENT

Ayahs Authority On The Conferment Of The Knowledge Of The Unknown On Men And The Import Of The Ayahs Negating It.

It is evident from the very extracts that being of the knowledge of the Unknown peculiar to His Great Honour Allah Ta’ala is undoubtedly right, and why not be so? The Sustainer-Lord ((subhanuhu wa ta’ala)) himself says:
Say: “None in the Heavens and the Earth knows the Unknown but Allah.”
And this means the same private all-inclusive knowledge proven for and particular only to the Glorious, the Most High Creator, while bestowed knowledge granted by someone else, non-Inclusive knowledge familiar with some things and unfamiliar with others can never be for Allah (subhanuhu wa ta’ala), not to speak of its being particular to him. And the non-inclusive knowledge of the Unknown conferred on the Prophets (‘alaihimus salam) by the glorious the most high Allah is also proven decidedly. The sustainer-Lord (subhanuhu wa ta’ala) himself says:

(1) It does not become of Allah to inform you of the Unknown, Allah, however, chooses out of his Prophets one whom he likes.
(2) The Knower of the Unknown reveals not His secret to anyone except His Chosen Prophets.
(3) And this Prophet is not niggardly as to the disclosing of the Unknown.
(4) These are some tidings of the Unknown which we reveal to you.
(5) He even describes Muslims as those: Who believe in the Unknown.
Faith is verification and verification is knowledge.
(6) It’s impossible to believe a thing of which there is no knowledge absolutely. “At-Tafseer-ul-Kabeer” says:
It is not forbidden to say that we know something out of the Unknown of which we have no proof.
(7) Naseem-ur-Riyaz of Allama Khafaji says: “Allah has charged us to believe the Unknown only when he has opened the door of His Unknown on us.
I, (Ahmad Raza) the Faqeer, claimed the Unknown for the Prophet only, but these leader-scholars claim it for themselves also. I don’t know what Fatwa these people will stick on them.
(8,9) In Kitab-ul-Yairaqeteti-wal-Jawahir, Imam Sha’rani relates through Hazrat Sheikh-e-Akbar: “The mujtahids have firm footing in the knowledge of the Unknown.
(10,11) Maulana Ali Qari (whose authority the opponents mistakenly quote with reference to this issue), in Mirqat the exegesis of the Dignified Mishkat cites form Kitab-ul-Aqaid by Hazrat Sheikh Abu Abdullah Shirazi:
We believe that man is so much transported with “States” that he attains to the spiritual qualification and then he is blessed with the knowledge of the Unknown.
(12) The very Ali Qari quotes from the same book in his Mirqat: “Man comes to know of the realities of things and the Unknown, even the Unknown of the Unknown is revealed to him.
(13) The same Ali Qari in the same Mirqat pronounces:
People are of two types: the sagacious who perceive the non-present as testimony, and such are the Prophets” and those who are overwhelmed by the pursuance of the sense and imagination only, such are the most of the masses. They require a teacher to reveal the Unknown to them, and that teacher cannot be other than the Prophet who is sent for this purpose.
(14, 15) Again the same Ali Qari, in the exegesis of Fiqh-e-Akbar, quotes from Hadrat Abu Suleiman Darani, (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu):
The acumen (of the Muslim) is the revelation of the soul and the observation of the Unknown: it pertains to the scales of the Imam (Faith).
(16, 17) Imam ibn-e-Hajar Makki in his Kitab-ul-Aalam and then Allama Shami in his Sull-ul-Hisam proclaim.
it is permissible that the chosen come to know the Unknown about an issue or issues as it dawned upon many of them and got known.
(18, 19) In the tafseers Muaalim and Khazin, it has been annotated under the word of Allah Ta’ala.
Allah Ta’ala asserts that the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) knows the Unknown, hence he is never niggardly but imparts it to you.
(20) The tafseer Baidawi comments on Allah’s word: i.e. From what is peculiar to us and he (Hadrat Khidar) knows it only by our sweet favour and that is the knowledge of the Unknown.
(21) The tafseer Ibn-e-Jareer relates by Hadrat Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Abbas (radiyallahu ta’ala anhuma):
Hadrat Khidar (upon him salam) said to Moses (upon him salam): “you can never keep to patience along with me” and he (Hadrat Khidar) was a person who knew the Unknown. The knowledge of the Unknown had been imparted to him.
(22) In the same commentary, Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas tells that Khidar (upon him salam) said: “You do not encompass what I know of the Unknown.”
(23) In the Honourable Mawahib-ul-Ladunya, Imam Qastalani asserts:
“The prophethood means to be briefed on the Unknown.”
(24) Elucidating the blessed appellation of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) as “Nabi” (Prophet) in the same book the Imam has asserted:
The word “Nabuwwat” has been derived from “An-Naba” that means particular news i.e. Allah Ta’ala has briefed the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) upon His Unknown.
(25) The same book continues: “It was undoubtedly known and published among the companions that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) had known the Unknown.”
(26) The exegesis Zarqani explains the same text as: “The companions of the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) decisively assured of his being informed on the Unknown.
(27) In his exposition of the honourable Encomium “Burdah”, Ali Qari writes: “The Knowledge of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) comprises all branches of knowledge; and one of these branches is his knowledge of the things of the Unknown.
(28) The Tafseer by Imam Tabari and the Tafseer Durr-e-Mansoor relate by Abu Bakr bin Abi Sheiba – the teacher of the Chief Muhadditheen like Imam Bukhari and Muslim and Imam Mujahid and the chosen pupil to Sayyiduna Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu): “He said about the Word of Allah Ta’ala “One of the Hypocrites said”: Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) informs us that the she-camel of so-and-so is in such-and-such camel of so-and-so is in such-and-such valley, and what does he know of the Unknown?”
i.e. someone lost his she-camel. The Prophet of Allah (upon him Salat and Salam) said: “It is in such-and-such valley”. A hypocrite spoke out. “What does Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) know of the Unknown? On this, Allah Ta’ala sent down the above-mentioned dignified Ayah, asking the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) to warn the hypocrites: “you (the hypocrites deride Allah, his Prophet and His Ayahs. Don’t make pretences; you have re-engaged after that you had faith.”
Your Honour yourself can note what a great bane to the opponents of this Ayah is.

MULTIPLICITY OF WRATH ON THE WAHHABIA

(1) The first type of wrath on the Wahhabia are the statements of the Imam’s, out of which only a few have been quoted, for in accordance with the credence of these antagonists of the Religion, all these Imams of the Religion will stand (Allah protect us) Kafir and Mushrik.
(2) Greater ruin to them is ibn-e-Abbas Hadith that by informing us of Hadrat Khidar’s (upon him salam) knowledge of the Unknown he (Radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) stands (Allah protect us) Kafir.
(3) Still more abominable curse on the Wahhabia are the passages quoted above from the Honourable Mawahib of Imam Qastalani and the Zarqani that not only Abdullah bin-e-Abbas but all the venerable Companions believed in the Prophet of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) as being blessed with the Unknown. According to the creed of Wahhabia all of them stand Kafirs.
(4) The fourth terribly severer anathema for them is in the second Hadith of ibn-e-Abbas (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) in which Sayyiduna Khidar (‘alaihis salam) who himself was a prophet stands (Allah protect us) Kafir in accordance with the Wahhabian Creed when he himself informs of his being blessed with the knowledge of the Unknown.
(5) The grossest of the curses is the fifth one: How can Sayyiduna Musa Kaleemullah who is unanimously, certainly, confirmedly one of the most resolute Prophets and a “Nabi” escape from the Wahhabian charge of unbelief (Takfeer: call someone Kafir).

Khidar (‘alaihis salam) himself told to Moses (‘alaihis salam) that he enshrined the knowledge of the Unknown that he (Moses) did not have, and Moses (‘alaihis salam) did not deny it. At this won’t a Wahhabi say: “Alas! He could not keep patience at the breaking of the board of the boat or the straightening-up of the falling wall”? And then having uttered a mouthful of words of kufr (unbelief) he has to relapse into silence.
Anyhow the Wahhabia could have explained away all these curses above-mentioned by these three cliches:

(a) When Moses (‘alaihis salam) professed the Unknown for Hadrat Khidar the Wahhabia might say: “Moses conforms to his religion and we conform to ours”
(b) When Hadrat Khidar (‘alaihis salam) declared himself to have the knowledge of the Unknown, they might take the cover of the clich¿: “Who did drown the boat? Khawaja Khidar!”
(c) And when ibn-e-Abbas and the Noble Companions acknowledged the Unknown for the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam), what would have been to a foul-mouthed Wahhabi if he had said: “Pirs (The Spiritual guides) don’t fly; The “mureeds” (The spiritually guided) make them fly”. Allah’s curse be upon transgressors!.
(6) But the sixth doom has been hurled on the Wahhabia by the one Powerful Allah Himself and the condemnation has been consummated by the honourable above mentioned Ayah and the cause of its Dissension. Here the Almighty, the most high Allah Himself promulgates the commandment that anyone who denies The Prophet’s (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) knowledge of the Unknown is a Kafir, derides Allah and His Rasool and has gone apostate after having pronounced Kalima. Alas! Here is left no choice but for this forth saying.
“We expected friendship of the friends;
The fact was that whatever we thought was wrong.”

Lo and behold! Allah for Whom “Tauheed” (Oneness of Allah) is, for Whom they have poisoned their relationship with the Prophets, for Whom they have spurned the knowledge of all authorities, even that Allah not only renounces the Wahhabia and sides with the Prophets but rather hurls curse on them! True, Creed of friendship is nowhere these days! I don’t know whether the opponents now accept the Fatwa of their ringleaders or that of the Only One Almighty Allah.

THE THIRD ARGUMENT

DIVISIONS OF KNOWLEDGE INTO PRIVATE AND CONFERMENTAL AND THE EXPLANATIONS GIVEN BY SCHOLARS

The opponents have been blinded and deafened by their opposition to the noble excellencies of Allah’s Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam); they are unable to discern the truth, but even a man of a little wisdom can understand that the point offers no difficulty. Knowledge is certainly one of those virtues that can be attained through the Divine Bestowal. Its division into the private and the bestowed is undoubtedly confirmed. Likewise, its classification is obvious. Of these two, only the first order i.e. The private or personal and the Real Comprehensive knowledge is peculiar to the Most High Allah. Accordingly those Ayahs and ahadith and the utterances of the scholars that negate the Unknown for others pertain definitively to this order only. The Fuqaha (The Muslim Jurists) mean this very order when they pass their verdict on blasphemy because the basis for blasphemy is only to ascribe to others an Attribute peculiar to Allah Ta’ala as it is. Now you yourself can perceive whether the private and personal knowledge or the bestowed one is peculiar to Allah Ta’ala. Allah forbid! The bestowed knowledge for Allah Ta’ala is a definitive impossible, not to speak of its being peculiar to Him. Again, whether the Real-Comprehensive knowledge is peculiar to the Most High Allah or the non-comprehensive one. Allah forbid! A non-comprehensive knowledge some of whose information’s remain anonymous is a definitive impossible for Allah Ta’ala. Consequently how can the proving of the bestowed-really non-comprehensive knowledge for any other than Allah Ta’ala be ascribing the special attribute of the Magnificent Allah to him? IF the Fuqaha’s Verdict on blasphemy tends towards this idea it will mean: “Lo and behold! You prove for one other than Allah Ta’ala an Attribute that can never be Allah’s so you are Kafir! i.e. you should have proved for the other an Attribute that is peculiar to Allah Ta’ala! Can there be any dunderhead to pocket such a malevolent crazy daredevilry?
“But the Najdi’s are people who don’t understand.”

(20,30) Imam ibn Hajar Makki proclaims in The Fatawa Hadeethiyya:
“Expounding the Ayah mentioned by us Imam Nawawi (Allah bless him) says in his Fatawa: “The Ayah means that he does not possess the Unknown absolutely by himself; Allah Ta’ala only has such absolute knowledge as is comprehensive of all information’s.”
(31) Again he says in his exposition of The Hamziyya:
“The Unknown is peculiar to Allah Ta’ala but in the sense of its comprehensiveness. Consequently it does not negate Allah Ta’ala’s intimating some of His choice with many of the Unknown Secrets even some of the Five of which the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) has said that none but Allah knows them.”
(32) It is said in At-Tafseer-ul-Kabeer of Imam Raazi: “The Ayah “I don’t know the Unknown” means that His (The Prophet’s) knowledge does not encompass all the Divine Information’s.
(33,34) Imam Qadi Iyad in his Ash-Shifa and Allama Khafaji in its exposition Naseem-ur-Riyadh proclaim:
The miracle of the Prophet’s (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) being informed of the Unknown is such an established fact as none of the wise can deny or waver in it for its being substantiated by a host of relaters, and unanimity on its meanings about His information on the Unknown. And this does not negate the Ayahs indicating that none but Allah Ta’ala knows the Unknown, and the Ayah “If I had known the Unknown I would have accumulated the abundance of the excellent”, but repudiates that He (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) possesses knowledge without the Divine Means. But as far his information on the Unknown by Allah Ta’ala it is a proven fact established by the Ayah: “Allah does not manifest His Unknown to anyone but a prophet whom He chooses“.
(35) The Tafseer Neeshapuri says:
The Ayah “I do not know the Unknown” denotes that none but Allah Ta’ala knows the Unknown absolutely by himself.”
(36) The Tafseer “An-Namooz-ul-Jaleel” carries on:
The Ayah means that none but Allah Ta’ala knows the Unknown without any guide or instruction or more but the Exalted Allah knows the All-Absolute Unknown.
(37) The Jame-ul-Fooleen” declares: “The question that the Fuqaha have adjudicated one’s claim on the Unknown to be blasphemy while the ahadith and the books by authentic Imams contain undeniable tidings about the Unknown has been answered by the adaptation that what is repudiated is one’s claim to the Unknown absolutely by oneself, not that by the Divine Instruction; or it is the negation of the absolute Unknown, not the supposed one, and this is confirmed by the Ayah: “The angels said, ‘do you make a caliph of him who will indulge in perversity there?’ “This is an item from the Unknown, and the angels reported it either by supposition or by instruction by the Almighty Allah. So the charge of blasphemy should be levelled against him who claims to have the Unknown absolutely by himself, not against him who claims to enshrine it by the Divine Instruction while sleeping or waking by way of afflatus. Such a knowledge of the Unknown is not contradictory to the Ayah.
(38,39) The Raddul-Mukhtar narrates from The Mukhtarat-un-Nawazil by the Imam who compiled Hidaya
If anyone claims to achieve the Unknown by himself is Kafir.
(40,41,42,43,44)
The same book reports: “It is written in At-Tatarkhania, Al-Hujja and Al-Multaqat that he who marries invoking Allah and His prophet as witness does not commit Kufr because things are undoubtedly presented to the Spirit of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) and certainly the Prophets know some of the Unknown. Allah Ta’ala has said: “He is Knower of the Unknown; So he does not reveal his Unknown to anybody but one whom He selects from among the Prophets” I (Allama Shami) say that the Imams of Ahl-us-Sunna have mentioned in the books on Beliefs that to be informed on some of the Unknown pertains to the prodigies of the Auliya (The Muslim Saints) and have rebuffed the Mutazala who have inferred negation of the Unknown for the Auliya from this Ayah.
(45) The Tafseer Gharaaib-ul-Quran says: “The Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) denied the knowing of the Unknown by his own self but not by the Revelation.

(46,47) The Tafseer Al-Jamal, an exposition of Jalalain and the Tafseer Al-Khazin affirm: The Ayah “I do know the Unknown” means: “I do not know it unless the Almighty Allah informs me on it.
(48) The Tafseer “Enayah-ul-Qadi” says:
The Ayah means: “I do not know the Unknown unless it is revealed to me or evidence for it is established“.
(49) The same Tafseer continues:
And the Ayah that he Ta’ala has the keys to the Unknown” refers to its specificity to Him Ta’ala. And the reason for this specificity is that none but He Ta’ala knows them primitively as they are.
(50) In the Tafseer Neeshapuri it says: “The Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) was asked: “O Prophet! Say; “I don’t possess the treasures of Allah Ta’ala” so that it be known that the Treasures of Allah Ta’ala which is the knowledge of things are with Him (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) for His prayer: “Show us things as they are”. But He (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) speaks to people in accordance with their understanding. And “I do not know the Unknown” means: “I do not know the Unknown” means: “I don’t say this to you” in spite of the fact that sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) said: “I briefly know what was and what will be”

Gratitude to Allah! One exegesis of the Ayah, “Say: I do not know the Unknown” is what the Tafseer Al-Kabeer has offered that the Ayah repudiates the encompassing of the whole of the Unknown and not the knowledge of the Unknown itself. The other exposition presented by many books is that the Ayah negates the knowledge of the Unknown for someone without the Divine Instruction and not by the Divine Instruction. And now, thank Allah, is the third and most delicate interpretation: “I do not say to you that I have the knowledge of the Unknown; for O Unbelievers! You are not capable of such things; otherwise I have been, in actual, gifted with the knowledge of what was and what is to be.”

THE FOURTH ARGUMENT

Unanimous Verdict on The Knowledge of the Unknown.
Hitherto what has been presented is agreed upon by the majority of the Imams of Deen.
(1) Anyone other than Allah Ta’ala undoubtedly does not possess an iota of the Private-Personal knowledge of the Unknown. This belief is one of the essentials of the Deen, and he who denies it is Kafir.
(2) Undoubtedly anyone other than Allah Ta’ala cannot encompass the Divine Information. Not to speak of equality, the cumulative knowledge of the first and the last, the Prophets, the Messengers and the most favourite angels, compared with that of Allah Ta’ala, cannot be even in such a proportion as is the ten millionth of a drop to millions of seas, for both all these seas and this ten-millionth of a drop are limited and the limited has certainly a relation to the limited. Conversely the knowledge of Allah Ta’ala is unlimitedly unlimited, and hence cannot be compared with the knowledge of the Creation. The Knowledge the Creation stands limited even if it be spanning the Arsh (The Divine Throne) and the Farsh (The earth as compared to the Arsh), the east and the west, and all the creatures from the first day to the last day, for the Arsh and the Farsh are two limits; the east and the west are two extremes; the first day and the last day are two bounds, and whatever falls within them is limited. In actual it is impossible for the Creation to have the particular knowledge of the limited. Consequently bearing the very relation of all the knowledge of the Creation to the knowledge of Allah Ta’ala is primarily an absolute impossible, not to speak of its equality to the Divine knowledge, Allah Protect!
(3) Likewise it is the consensus belief that the Great, Almighty Allah has granted the Esteemed Prophets (upon them Salat and Salam) abundant and ample knowledge out of the Unknown. This is also one of the essentials of the Deen, and anyone who denies it is a Kafir (non-believer), for he out-rightly denies the Prophethood.
(4) It is also unanimous that out of this magnificent abundance, the lot of Allah’s Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) is more perfect and greater than that of all the Prophets and all the Creation. By the grant of Allah (Azza wa Jalla), the Exalted Beloved (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) enshrines so much knowledge of the Unknown as can be calculated only by the Creator Almighty Allah Himself. Muslims have reached the Consensus to this extent.
But how can the Wahhabia endure the greatness of Muhammad, Rasoolullah – (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam)? So they have blatantly proclaimed:
(1) His Honour (upon him salat and salam) does not know even what is behind a wall;
(2) He (upon him salat and salam) did not know even the state of his own end, not to speak of his knowing that of others. Along with this, they also declare:
(3) Even the acknowledgement of His having the knowledge of some of the Unknown Secrets through the Divine Instruction will be shirk (profession of someone’s participation in the Divinity);
(4) To add curse to themselves, they deny for Muhammad, Allah’s Rasool (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) even the knowledge of what is behind a wall but believe in the accursed Satan as having the knowledge of the whole Earth;
(5) and this on the pretext that the spaciousness of Satan’s knowledge is proven by the Nass (the clear-cut Holy Text of the Holy Quran), and what definitive Nass is there on the amplitude of the knowledge enshrined by the Pride-For-The world (upon him Salat and Salam)?
(6) Again damnation to them! If it is acknowledged for Muhammad, Allah’s Rasool (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) what they have professed to be proven for Satan they immediately brand it shirk, i.e. the peculiar Attribute of Allah Ta’ala is proven. Alas! for Satan, and thus he participates in the Divinity (They regard this belief as not being shirk, but it will be shirk!), but it will be shirk if the same is proven for his Presence (upon him salat and salam);
(7) Some of the extremists went so far as to declare expressively that every lunatic, even every quadruped has such a knowledge of the Unknown as Muhammad Allah’s Rasool (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) enshrines.

The real discussion is about these words. The malicious stiflingly shun them and uselessly fall into a mere discussion on the peculiarity or non-peculiarity of knowledge that the Ayahs and Ahadeeth have peculiarised the Unknown to Allah Ta’ala, and the Fuqaha have imputed the acknowledgement of the Unknown for others to Kufr. To this an answer has already been made that only the Private-Real-Comprehensive knowledge is peculiar to Allah Ta’ala and the Fuqaha have called the affirmation of this specific knowledge for others to be Kufr. The Confermental-Real-Non-Comprehensive knowledge can never be for Allah Ta’ala, not to speak (Allah save us!) of its being His Peculiar Attribute. Neither we confirm this knowledge for the non-Divine nor the Nasoos (The plural of the Nass) and the Fuqahas legal opinions are applicable to us. But ask these sires whether the Ayahs and the ahadeeth about the encompassing and the Fuqahas opinions include the Confermental-Real-Non-Comprehensive knowledge or not. If not, why are you so crazy as to present them to us? What contradiction do they bear to our claim? And if they include, then tell us O Gangohi! You who prove the comprehensive knowledge of the earth for satan, O Ashraf Thanvi! you who are convinced of the Unknown even for every lunatic and every quadruped, you tell us whether you affirm for them the Private-Real-Comprehensive knowledge or otherwise. For the first opinion you are Kafir absolutely; for the second the same Ayahs and ahadeeth and the Fuqaha’s opinions as uttered by you are applicable to you yourselves, and thus you yourselves stand Kafirs and renegades in accordance with the very arguments offered by you yourselves.

Now say whereto is the way out? Yes! The only way out is the acknowledgement that Satan, lunatics and quadrupeds have the knowledge of the Unknown! The Ayahs, the ahadeeth and the Fuqahas opinions are not about them, they are about the refutation of the knowledge for Muhammad, Allah’s Rasool (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) only! Allah’s curse be upon the transgressors!

THE FIFTH ARGUMENT

The Controversial Limits of the Unknown and the Course Followed by the Urafa.
Let those who deny the Superiority of Muhammad, Allah’s Rasool (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) be damned! Please listen to the conclusion.

After all these consensus’s our Ulema (The especially trained-in-religion scholars) differ with one another as to whether the incalculable knowledge out of the Unknown that the Most High and Supreme Lord has granted His Greatest Beloved (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) includes the whole of the universe from the first day to the last day as the Ayahs and the ahadeeth generally denote or there is specification in it.

Many of the exteriorists (Ahl-uz-Zahir) espouse specification. One thinks that the specificity pertains to the Mutashabihat (The obscure Ayahs), while for the other it belongs to the knowledge of the Five Mysteries. Numerous of them say that it is about the Great Hour. The interiorist Ulema (Ulema-ul-Batin) and numerous exteriorist Ulema following them have maintained the generality of these Ayahs and ahadeeth. Accordingly, they have generalised the meaning because the utmost contains both inclusion and exclusion whether the Great Hour is included or not. Anyhow this aggregate is also a slight somewhat of the Divine knowledge’s and, rather, is included in the information’s of Al-Mustafa (upon him salat and salam).

I have proved through the Encomium “Burdah Shareef” and its interpretation by Mulla Ali Qari that the sum-total knowledge of “What was and what is to be” is one drift out of the ocean of the knowledge possessed by Muhammad Allah’s Rasool (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam), not to speak of Allah’s knowledge that is infinitely-limitless. Then how can it be matched with Allah’s Infinite knowledge? Those who have failed to perceive the Divinity equate this very knowledge with Allah’s. Allah save us! They have not evaluated Allah as He deserves. And certainly so! When their Imam takes the counting of the leaves of a tree for the Divinity, the knowledge of “Ma Kaana wa Ma Yakoonu” is assuredly for greater. Let them be damned! This specific issue as it revolves among our Ulema of Ahl-us-Sunna is just like controversial issues between “The Ash’aris” and “The Matureedis” that are by no means reproachable.
Yes! Our authentic argument that is generally the creed of the honourable Urafa (Those who recognise Allah Ta’ala by Allah Ta’ala Himself) and the overpowering majority of the religious dignitaries is the last one. Your honour will find some of the Ayahs, ahadeeth and the clarifications by the Imams about this matter in my booklet “Amba-ul-Mustafa“, “Al-Luelu-ul-Maknoon fI Ilm-il-Basheer Ma Kana wa ma Yakoonu” and other booklets written by myself comprise them abundantly. And so far as the statements of the revered Auliya and the great Ulema, they are so profuse that a copious volume is required to record them. Here I’ll confine myself to a few mentions by The Imams. And we have no succour and power except by Allah, the Powerful the Ever-Forgiver. The Authentic-Comprehensive Tirmizi reports the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) as saying:
Everything has manifested to me and I have recognised it“.
And He (upon him Salat and Salam), Further says:
I have known whatever is in the Heavens and the Earth.”
(51) The Researcher Sheikh Maulana Abdul-Haq Muhaddith of Dehli footnotes this very Hadeeth in his Ashia-tul-Lum’aat an exposition of the Mishkat.
I know whatever is in the Heavens and the Earths” refers to the fact that He (upon him Salat and Salam) has achieved and encompassed the whole of knowledge partial as well as total.
(52) Imam Muhammad Buseeri puts forward in his Honourable Encomium “Burdah“.

“O Allah’s Prophet! The world and the Hereafter are one portion of the Bounty: and the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen is a single segment of Thy knowledge’s.
(53) Allama Ali Qari, while glossing the above couplet, writes:
The knowledge of the Tablet and The Pen is only one segment of His (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) knowledge’s because his knowledge is multifarious, pertaining to the general and the particulars, the truths and the niceties, the gnosis and the sciences relating to the Divine Self and His Attributes; and the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen is a single line out of the lines of the Prophet’s knowledge, a single river out of the seas of His knowledge. And then despite all this, it is because of the Blessing of the Prophet’s Being (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam).
(54) “The Noble Umm-ul-Qura” says:
The knowledge and Percipience of his Presence (upon him Salat and Salam) encompasses all worlds.
(55) While explaining it Imam ibn-e Hajar declares:
Because Allah Ta’ala informed Him of the world and thus He (upon him Salat and Salam) achieved the knowledge possessed by the first and the last, of what has been and what is to be.
(56,57) Naseem-ur-Riadh says:
In his exposition of The Muhazzab, the Iraqi pinpoints that all creation from Hadrat Adam (upon him Salat and Salam) up to the Judgement Day was put before Him (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam); consequently He (upon Him salat and salam) recognised all of it as His Presence Adam (Upon him salat and salam) recognised all the Names.
(58) That is why Imam Buseeri, in his Hamziyya Encomium proclaims:
For Thou (upon Thou salat and salam) is the self of the Knowledge’s out of the Unknown, and for Adam (upon Him salam) are only The Names out of them.
(59,60) Imam ibn-e-Hajar Makki in his Madkhal and Imam Ahmad Qastalani in his noble Mawahibul Ladunya say:
Our Ulema (Allah ta’ala Bless them) have declared that the pilgrim must convince himself of his being standing Before Him (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) as much as he stood before Him (upon Him salat and salam) in His life; for there is no difference between His life and His Departure so far as his observation of His Ummah, his recognition of their states, their resolves, their determination and their minds. All these are crystal-open to Him (upon Him Salat and Salam).
(61) The noble Mawahib further continues: “Undoubtedly Allah Ta’ala has informed Him (upon Him Salat and Salam) on more than this, and has revealed to Him (upon Him salat and salam) all knowledge of the First and the last.”
(62,63,64) Imam Qadi Allama Qari, and Allama Manawi in Taiseer, the exposition of Jami-us-Sagheer by Imam Suyuti write:
When the sacrosanct dignitaries get free of the physical bonds, they are united with the Uppermost Body and no veil remains for them. Consequently they see and hear all as if they were present here.
(65) Mulla Ali Qari, elucidating the noble Shifa says:
Indeed, the Soul of the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) is present in the houses of all Muslims.
(66) The Great Madarij-un-Nabuwwah proclaims: “All that is in the world from the time of Hadrat Adam (Upon Him Salam) to the first Blow has been revealed to His Presence (upon Him Salat and Salam) until He has known all affairs from the First to the Last, out of which He (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) has communicated some with his friends.
(67) It continues on: “He is the Knower of everything and He (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) knows all – The Divine standings and terms, the terms of the Attributes of The Haq, the names, actions and effects – and has encompassed all the exterior and interior knowledge from the First to the Last; upon Him the best of salats and the most perfect and consummate of tahiyyats.
(68) Shah Wali-ul-Allah, the author of Fuyoodh-ul-Haramain, says:
His Holy Excellency (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) has revealed to me the state in which man ascends from his own sphere to the Sacrosanct Domain; and thus everything becomes crystal-clear to him as He (upon him Salat and Salam) has informed of this station in the narrative of The Miraj.
(69) He further says:
Attracted towards the Domain of the Haq, the Arif (singular of Urafa) draws so near to Allah that everything becomes crystal-open to him.
(70) The Shah elaborates, in the same book, the traits of the Solo-Wali that he dominates over all elemental and physical life, and this domination is obvious in respect of the Prophets (upon them salat and salam) and so far as the non-prophets, they have ranks of inheritance of the Prophets as Mujaddidiyyat, Qutbiyyat, the emergence of their effects and powers and attaining at the reality of every knowledge and state.
(71) Having elucidated the delicacies of the Solo-Wali in detail the same Shah says: “After all this, man’s self has originally been moulded sacrosanct self; it is neither diverted from any such thing to another nor prevails upon it any such state from its getting free of all here to its attaining to the Universal Centre as it does not know now. What comes next will be the detail of this brevity.”
(72) Imam Qadi Iyad, in his noble Shifa, writes: “Though the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) did not write, yet he was granted knowledge of everything so far that ahadeeth inform of His recognition of the characters of calligraphy and beauty of their shape as He (upon him salat and salam) has said: “Don’t lay out (i.e. form the notches of the letter “seen”. Ibne Shaban narrated this Hadeeth from ibn-e-Abbas. Another Hadeeth narrated by Muawiya (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) reports that once Muawiya was writing down before Him, He (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) said to him, “Put sponge into the ink-pot, nib the pen at a slant, straighten the “Baa” vertically, match the “Seen” distinctly, don’t blend the “Meem”, better the word and prolong the word with madda and write the word beautifully.
(73,74) Imam Sha’rani (Quddassa Sirruhu) in his Kitab-ul-Jawahiri wad-Durar and then again Durra-tul-Ghawwas cites from Sayyid Ali Khawwas: “Muhammad (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) is the First and the Last, the Manifest and the Hidden. On the Night of the Miraj he entered the world of the Names, the first of which was the centre of the Earth and the last the Heaven of the Earth and He came to know all its principles and relationships. Then He (upon him salat and salam) traversed the Barzakh to its end that is the Seventh Heaven. Then He entered the world of Al-Arsh and travelled up to where there is no end and all forms of the Uppermost and the Lowermost Worlds were revealed to Him (upon Him salat and salam).
(75) In the exegesis of the Noble Ayah the Tafseer-ul-Kabeer of Imam Fakhr-al-Din al-Razi says:
Only the great of the Prophets (upon them salat and salam) are informed upon the marks of the Wisdom of Allah Ta’ala, embedded in each and every of the creatures of this Universe in accordance with their genre, specifics, categories, persons and bodies. To this purport our Rasool (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) used to say in his prayer: “O Our Allah! show us things as they are“.
I (Ahmad Raza) say that what is meant here is that for the Imam of Ahl-us-Sunna (al-Razi), the Prophets (upon them salat and salam) know minutely the genesis, kind, category, person and body of every particle of the creatures of this Universe, and the Divine purports embedded in them. For the Wahhabia, this very is sufficient to be Kafir and Mushrik, but the glorified Imam is rather more than this. Mr. Gangohi, merely on the fact that his Holy Presence (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) is present of the Meelad Congregation wherever it is held, which indicates his knowledge to be comprehensive of the Earth only, passed the judgement of shirk saying: “if not shirk, which part of Iman it is!” So the Imam (al-Razi) who confirms comprehensive knowledge not only of the earth but also of the Heavens, The Arsh and the Farsh, and all genera, species, categories, persons and bodies of the whole universe for not only His Presence, the Leader of the Sent (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) but all the reverend Prophets (upon them salat and salam) must, by millions of degrees, be Kafir according to the Gangohi Creed (Allah Shelter us against this nonsense). Otherwise, the fact is that by grant and viceregancy, the conferment of detailed knowledge of every particle of the universe on the revered Auliya the great servants to the Prophets – (Allah’s ridwan upon them) is not impossible at all, as soon you will read of it. Alhamdu lillahi rabbil ‘aalameen.
(76) The same argument has been confirmed by the the Tafseer Neeshapuri in the following words: “Only the great of the Prophets are informed on the details of the signs of the Wisdom of Allah Ta’ala imbedded in every of the creatures of these Worlds, relating to their genre, kinds, categories, accidentals and their essentials as they are. That is why His Presence (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) prayed. “Show me things as they are”.
This passage contains “Tafseel” (details). Added to “atharu hikmatillahi” (The signs of the Wisdom of Allah), and “hazihil awalim” (These worlds) in stead of “hazal alam” (This universe) so that the “details” be kept in view more than anything else. Further, along with genera, kinds, accidentals and essentials have also been mentioned so that the elements and properties be explained away. Although the genera of the universe also include the accidentals, even yet the words “Kama Hiya” (as they are) have been added so as to accentuate the accuracy of the knowledge, by which to banish any type of doubt or casuistry about it. So Allah reward them with the best reward, Ameen!.
(77) The Tafseer Neeshapuri comments on the Ayah: “Because the soul of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) is the witness to all souls, hearts and selves, in accordance with the word of His own (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam): “The first that Allah created was My Soul”.
(78) The Hafiz of the Hadeeth Sayyidi Ahmad Saljasi (Quddassa Sirruhu) narrates for his Noble Sheikh Hadrat Sayyidi Abdul Azeez ibn-e-Masood Dabbagh (radiyallahu ta’ala Anhu) in the commendable book Al-Ibreez that the Sheikh commented on the Holy Ayah, “And Allah taught Adam all the names”.
“What is meant by these Names are the Sublime Names, not the Sub-names. Every Creature has a Sublime Name and a Sub-Name. The Sub-Name informs of the named in general while the Sublime Name informs of the very nature of the named, the source of his creation, his utility and essence. All these things are known as soon as the Sublime Name is heard. Adam (upon Him salat and salam) was taught all these Sublime Names, and in accordance with human need and capability he knew all the things. And they range from under the Arsh to what is under the earth. They include the Paradise, the Hell, the Seven Heavens and what is within them and what is between the Heaven and the Earth, and what is on and within, the earth including forests, deserts, valleys, rivers, and rivulets and trees etc.;, and every creature there speaking as well as non-speaking. Thus, Adam (upon Him salam) knew by the Sublime Name three things. About the named: its nature, its utility, and its order and structure. Accordingly He (upon Him salam) knew by the very name of the Paradise where from and for what the Paradise was created. Then he also knew the system of its orders. The “Hoors” in it and number of those who would live in it after the Resurrection. In the same manner He (upon Him salam) knew by the name of the the “Naar” (hell) all that related to it and by the name of “As-Samau” (The Heaven / The Sky) he Knew why the First Heaven was where it is, and why the second one was as it is. Likewise he came to know the nature, position and utility of every Heaven. By the word “Angels” he (upon him salam) recognised where from and for what they were created, along with the nature of their creation and the system of their orders, and why this angel deserved this station and other are other than his. Likewise he knew about all Angels from the Arsh to the underneath of the earth. Consequently, all those are the knowledge of Adam and his descendants from among the Prophets (upon them salat and salam) and the perfect Auliya (radiyallahu ta’ala anhum ajma’een). And the mention of Adam has been particularised because he was the first to receive these knowledge’s, and His descendants knew them after Him. And this does not mean that none except Adam knows. And we have confined these knowledge’s to what Adam and His descendants require and to what they were capable of, so that the encompassing of all the information’s of Allah Ta’ala should not be indispensable. The difference between our Prophet’s (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) knowledge of these things and Adam’s and other Prophet’s (upon them salat and salam) knowledge is that when they turn toward these knowledge’s, they become almost dormant to the Observation of the Haq Subhanahu wata’ala and similarly when they turn to the Divine Observation they become almost dormant to these knowledge’s, while our Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) enshrines such a perfect power that His turning to the one does not divert Him from the other. Consequently, when He turns towards the Haq Subhanahu wa ta’ala, he receives the perfect Observation and simultaneously he attains all these knowledge’s along with many other ones of which none is capable, and when He turns towards these knowledge’s, he simultaneously observes the Haq Subhanahu wa ta’ala. Thus, the Observation of the Haq does not screen him off from the Observation of the Creation, nor does the Observation of the Creation screen Him (upon him salat and salam) off from the Observation of the Haq Subhanahu wa ta’ala.

O Wahhabia! Do you find any air now? Yes! Yes! Hurry up with the Shirk-pot of “Taqwiyat-ul-Iman” and the Baraheen-e-Qaatia! Count the rosary of “Mushrik, Mushrik”! You’ll know tomorrow, on the Day of Judgement who the Mushrik, Kafir, apostate or loser was (you shall know the worst liar tomorrow).

The worst are also of two types:
(i) The worst by word who burble orally:
(ii) The worst by act who keep silent by the tongue but keep at their wickedness and malevolence.

The Wahhabia are both of these. Allah has fought against them, so where will they find a refuge? Sayyidi Hadrat Shah Abdul Azeez (Quddassa Sirruhu) is one of the greatest Auliya and dignified venerated Saadaat (plural of Sayyid). It will not be strange if the unbridled Wahhabia, in accordance with their sordid habit, commit a depraved impudence and tongue-lashing to him; it, therefore, seems appropriate, in support of this sacred, auspicious, endeared son, to refer to some of the statements of his gracious father, the lord of the Muslims, the Triumphant lion of the Only One Omnipotent Allah, Sayyiduna Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen Maula Ali, the dispeller of difficulties and problems, fulfiller of needs, killer of the Kuffar., the refuge of Mo’mineen (Karram Allahu Wajhahu = Allah honour him) so that the burblers of “Shirk, shirk” should flee away and be silenced definitively.
(79) Ibn-un-Najjar Abdul Mu’tamar Muslim Bin Aus and Jaria Bin Qadama Sadia relate that Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen, the father of “The Immaculate Imams” Sayyiduna Ali (Karram Allahu Wajhahu) said: “Ask me before you lose me because I’ll inform of whatever beneath the Arsh I am asked.

“Beneath the Arsh” includes the Elevated Chair, the Seven Heavens, the Seven Earths and whatever there is between the heavens and the Earths to the Subterranean. His Presence, Maula Ali, declares that his knowledge encompasses all of them, so “you can ask me of anything out of them.
(80) Imam ibn-ul-Ambari in Kitab-ul-Mashif”u and Imam Abu Umar bin Abdul Birr in Kitab-ul-Ilm quote Hadrat Abu Tufail Amir bin Wathila (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu): He said that he was present when Ali bin Abi Talib was addressing and said: “Ask me. By Allah! You will not ask me of anything up to the Day of Judgement except that I report you on it“.
Ameer-ul Mo’mineen claims to enshrine all knowledge of the whole universe until the Day of Judgement. His Majesty of Millat and Deen, the sublime Imam Suyuti has also made a mention of these reports in the Jamiul-Kabeer.
(81,82,83,84) ibn-e-Qutaiba, ibn-e-Khalkam, Imam Dameeri and then Allama Zarqani in his exposition of Mawahib-e-Ladunya: say: “Al-Jafar” is a one-volume book which Imam Jafar Sadiq (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) wrote and in which he wrote, for “The Ahl-e Bait”, everything they wanted to know of and everything that was to occur to the Day of Judgement.
(85) Allama Sayyid Shareef (Allah bless him) says in his exposition of “The Mawaqif” “Al-Jafar” and “Al Jamia” are two books written by Hadrat Ali (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu). By means of the knowledge of letters he has mentioned those events that are to take place until the end of the world. The famous Imams out of his descendants knew them well, and made decisions in accordance with the books. In the acceptance-letter written by Imam Ali bin Moosa (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) to Mamoon who appointed him his Crown-Prince, the Imam said; “You have recognised our rights not recognised by your ancestors. I accept your covenant but “Al-Jafar” and “Al-Jamia” do indicate that the covenant shall not be fulfilled” (and so happened, for the Imam met his martyrdom during the very life of Mamoon-ur-Rasheed). And the Shaikhs of the west have a portion of this knowledge which they ascribe to “The Ahl-ul-Bait” and in Syria I saw a poem that symbolically referred to the events of Egyptian Kings, and I heard that the poem was composed out of these two books.
I have made a great and rare research on this noble sublimated knowledge and on its legality in my booklet “Mujtal-ul-Uroos wa Murad-un-Nufoos
(86) His Luminous Presence Sayyiduna Ghauth-ul-Azam (Radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) says: By honour of my Rabb, the blessed and the wretched are presented to my eye that is in the Preserved Tablet.
(87) He (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) further says: “If there were not the check of shariat on my tongue, I would tell you of what you ate and what you laid by in your houses. Before me you are just like crystal vials; I see whatever is your interior and whatever is your exterior.
(88) He (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) says: “My heart is informed on the secrets of creatures and I am looking into all hearts. Allah has purified it of the squalor of viewing other than Him until it has become a tablet to which is translated what is on the Preserved Tablet, and He has consigned to it the rains of the affairs of the people of the world and empowered it to grant him whom it likes and refuse whom it wills.
(89) Walhamdu lillahi Rabb-il-alameen. Many great Imams like Imam Auhad Sayyidi Noor-ul-Haq wad Deen and Abdul Hasan Ali Shatnuni, the writer of the commendable book “Bahjat-ul-Asrar” have quoted this and such other magnificent and sacred utterances of the Ghauth.
(90) The great Imam Sayyidi Abdullah bin Asad Yafi’ee Shafi’ee, the writer of “Khulasat-ul-Mufakhir” has quoted this word of Hudoor Ghauth-ul-A’zam (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) by authentic sources.
(91) Ulema like Ali Qari and others have cited these words of the magnificent Ghauth in “Nuzhat-ul-Khawatir“, and the books on grand manaqib.
(92) The great Arif one of the Four Qutbs Sayyidana Hadrat Ahmad Rafa’ee (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) writes on the perfect spiritual advancements: “Allah ta’ala informs the Arif on his Unknown so that neither a tree grows nor a leaf gets green but before his eyes.
(93) Arif Billah Hadrat Sayyidi Raslan Damishqi (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) defines the Arif: “The Arif is a person in whose heart Allah ta’ala installs a tablet on which the secrets of the beings are inscribed and whom He assists with lights of “Haqq-ul-Yaqeen”, who comprehends these inscribed facts despite the difference of their states, and understands the secrets of actions. So there occurs not a single movement, exterior or interior, in the Dominion or the kingdom but that the Arif Observes it by knowledge as well as revelation, for Allah ta’ala opens the eye of His Iman and observation to it.”
(94) The above two great statements have also been reported by Sayyidi Imam Abdul Wahhab Sharani (Quddisa Sirruhur Rabbani) in “Tabaqat-ul-Kubra“.
(95) Hadrat Azeezan (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu), the Imam of the Sublime Order “Naqshbandiyya” used to say:
To the eye of this denomination the earth is open like the dining-table.
(96) Having narrated the above Statement, Hadrat Khawaja Bahaul-Haq-wad-Deen Naqshband (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) used to say: And we say “like the surface of a nail.” Nothing is secret to their eyes.

Oh Gangohi! See your satanic contentions on Shirk a while!

(97) The above two auspicious statements have also been reported by Hadrat Maulana Jami (Quddisa Sirruhu) in “Nafahat-ul-Ins.
(98) The great Imam Sayyidi Ali Wafa (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) says: “Man is not one who is confined to the Arsh and what it includes out of the Heavens, the Paradise and the Hell, but one whose eyes penetrates across this whole existence and thereby recognises the greatness of its Creator Subhanahu wa ta’ala.
(99) This sacred passage has also been written in “Kitab-ul-yawaqeeti-wal-Jawahiri fi Aqaid-il-Akabir“.
(100) The honourable “Ibreez” contains: “Many times I heard him (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) say: “to the eyes of a perfect Mu’min, the seven Heavens and the seven Earths are just like a ring thrown into a desert.
(101) In “Kitab-ul-Jawahir“, Imam Sharani reports Hadrat Sayyidi Ali Khawa (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) as saying:
The heart of a perfect man is, in detail, a mirror of the Upper and the Lower worlds.”
(102) Multiplying arguments for the nature of the miracles done by the Auliya so as to stultify the Mutazila, Imam Razi says in his “Tafseer-ul-Kabeer“:
“The seventh argument is that the soul, not the body, is undoubtedly in charge of actions. Therefore we hold that one who possesses knowledge of the states of the world of the Unknown more is stronger in the heart. That is why Hadrat Ali (Karramallahu ta’ala wajhuhu) said:” I did not pull out the gate of Khaibar by the physical power but by the Divine power“. Likewise, when man perseveres in devotions he gets to the station where Allah Ta’ala says that He becomes man’s eye and ear. When the light of Allah’s magnificence becomes his ear, he hears far and near, when this light (“Noor”) becomes his eye he sees far and near, and when this light becomes his hand, he has power over the difficult and the easy, the near and the distant.”
(103) Hadrat Allama Manawi (Quddisa Sirruhu) in “Dafter III” of “The Mathnawi” (Maulana Rumi) says that His Enlightened Presence, the Lord of the Divine Sent (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) has said: “Although Allah Ta’ala showed us every Unknown, yet our heart was busy in itself that moment.”
(104) Maulana Bahr-ul-Uloom Malik-ul-Ulema (Quddisa Sirruhu) explains the couplet: “Namely the heart was not conscious of the body. And because of the absorption some of the events of the Unknown become secret to the Prophets. The couplet means that the heart was observing its own self, and the One Essential Self along with His All Names is in the heart. So because of the absorption in these observations, attention was to the beings, consequently, some of the beings remained unattended. This is the best justification.”
(105,106,107,108) Imam Qurtubi, the expositor of Saheeh Muslim, Imam al-Ayni, Imam Ahmad Qastalani, the expositor of Saheeh Bukhari, Allama Ali Qari in the Mirqat, the exposition of Mishkat, explain the Hadeeth (The Five of which none but Allah knows): “Anybody who claims to have knowledge of any of these Five without Allah’s Prophet’s (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) informing him on it is a liar in his claim.

It is crystal clear that Allah’s Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) enshrines the knowledge of these Five Unknowns and can inform any of his men on any of these Unknown. That is why the claim of a person to the knowledge of them without His (upon Him Salat and salam) information is false.
(109) The Great Imam Suyuti, in his book Raudh-un-Nadheer, the exposition of Jame-us-Sagheer writes on this Hadeeth: “So far as His (upon him salat and salam) statement that none but Allah knows these Five Unknown, it means that Allah knows these Five Unknown by his own self, none other. Yet others can know them only by His imparting. So there are those who know them, and we have met a group of persons who knew when they would die and what was in the Womb of a woman before delivery.
(110) The Researcher Shaikh Abdul Haq Dehlwi (Quddisa Sirruhu), in his “Lama’at” – The exposition of Mishkat writes on this Hadeeth: “This means that these Five cannot be known without the instruction of Allah Ta’ala“.
(111) Allama Beijoori, in his exposition of the commendable “Burdah“, says: “The Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) did not depart from this world but after that Allah Ta’ala had imparted to him the knowledge of the Five.
(112) Allama Shanwani, in “Jam-un-Nehaya“, has reported it as Hadeeth that: “Allah Ta’ala did not take the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) out of this world but when He Ta’ala had informed Him (upon Him Salat and Salam) on every thing.
(113) Hafiz-ul-Hadeeth Sayyidi Ahmad Maliki reports the Ghauth of the time Sayyid Shareef ‘Abdul’ Azeez Mas’ood Hasani (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu) as saying: “The Five Unknown (i.e. (1) when will the Day of Judgement be? (2) When, where and how much will it rain? (3) What is there in the womb of a female? (4) What is to happen tomorrow? (5) When and where will so and so person die?) Mentioned in the Great Ayah are not secret to Him (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam). And how can they be secret to Him when the Seven Qutbs out of His Umma know them, and the Qutbs are subordinate to the Ghauth. So what about the Ghauth! And above all what about the Chief of the First and the Last, who is the Cause of everything and from Whom everything emanates!
(114) “Al-Ibreez” further goes on: “I asked the Shaikh that the exteriorist Ulema out of the Muhadditheen differed from one another in the issue of the Five whether the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) had the knowledge of them or not. The Shaikh said: “How can the Five be concealed from Him. (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) when none of “The Ahl-u-Tasarruf” (The Divine power-wielding) of His Umma cannot wield power and authority unless he knows the Five.”
(115) At-Tafseer-ul-Kabeer comments on the Noble Ayah: “Namely the time of the occurrence of the Day of Judgement is of those Unknown that Allah ta’ala does not reveal to anyone. If it is said that when you have applied this Ayah to “the knowledge of the Day of Judgement why Allah has said,” “except the Prophet Whom Allah Chooses,” despite the fact that Allah will not reveal this Unknown to anyone, we answer that He ta’ala shall reveal it near the occurrence of the Day of Judgement.”
This exquisite tafseer obviously shows that Allah ta’ala is the Knower of the Unknown and He reveals the knowledge of the time of the Day of Judgement to none but His Choice Prophets.
(116) Mentioning the false doubts of the false sect Mu’tazala about the miracles of Auliya and refuting them in “Sharh-ul-Maqasid”, Allama Sad-ud-Deen Taftazani says: “Their fifth argument pertains to their denial that the Auliya have the knowledge of the Unknown. They predicate their argument on the Ayah. “Allah is the Knower of the Unknown, so He does not reveal His Unknown to anyone but the Prophet whom He chooses” they argue that the Unknown is accordingly particular to the Prophets, consequently Allah Ta’ala does not inform anybody except the Prophets on the Unknown, not even the Auliya. The answer to this argument is that here “The Unknown” is not for the general but is absolute or definite and that is, in accordance with the previous Ayah, the time of the occurrence of the Day of Judgement. And it is not distant of the Messengers out of men and angels to be granted its knowledge. On this ground the exception made by Allah ta’ala is correct.
Note: The above exquisite passage amply demonstrates that the Wahhabia are worse than even the Mu’tazala: for the Mu’tazala denied the Honourable Auliya the knowledge of the Unknown but not the Prophets,; while the vicious Wahhabia have denied the Prophets themselves.
Here the possibility to have that particular knowledge by the Auliya has been made in the manner that this knowledge is originally imparted to the Prophets and the Auliya receive it from them. And the very fact is that the Ayah denies those other than the Prophets the knowledge of the Unknown originally or directly, not absolutely or indirectly.
(118,119) Allama Hasan Bin Ali Mudabighi in his glossary on Fath-ul-Mubeen, Imam ibn-e-Hajar Makki and Fadhil ibn-e-Atiyya in Futoohat-e-Wahbiyya – The exposition of “Al-Arbaeen” by Imam Nawawi – write about the conferment of the knowledge of the Day of Judgement on the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam):
The authentic creed is what a school of Ulema has declared that indeed the Perfect Majestic Allah did not take our Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) out of this world unless He had informed Him (upon him Salat and Salam) on whatever was concealed from him. He ta’ala, however, commanded His Presence to reveal some of the Unknown and keep some of it.
(120) In his commendable book “Ajab-ul-Ajaib“, the exposition of Salat-ul-Hadrati Sayyidi Ahmad Badawi Kabeer (radiyallahu ta’ala anhu), Allama Uthmawi says: “It is said that He (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) was granted the knowledge of the Five at last but was commanded to keep it, and this very is the accurate statement.

A SIGNIFICANT WARNING

Alhamdulillah! These are, for example, one hundred and twenty cogent extracts because of which not only the weak abject edifice of the Wahhabia Crumbles down but the very foundation of its house sinks underground. Bihamdillahi ta’ala, this is the part of the total. If you wish to look for hundreds of such texts, study my book ” Ma Liyal Habeebi be-Uloom-il-Ghaib” and my booklet “Al-Luelu-ul-Maknoonu fi Ilm-il-Basheeri Ma Kana wa Ma Yakoonu“, where rivers of texts are overflowing; the moons of the love for Al-Mustafa (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) are beaming; the suns of reverence for His Presence are effulgent; the stars of the light of the Faith are glittering; The gardens of Al-Haq are swaying; The flowers of research send out fragrance; the nightingales of the Guidance are twittering; the crows of the Najdiyyat breathing their last; the owls of the Wahhabia squalling; and the impudent slaughtered tossing.

The Wahhabia (Khazzalahum-Allahu ta’ala) cite some sundry passages about the Specificity of the Unknown in comparison to these cogent “nusoos” and foolishly rejoice whereas they demonstrate their mere ignorance, crooked-mindedness, obvious deceit and stubbornness. Seen justly these passages actually present the other aspect of what we say.
The Faqeer has already stated that after having the consensus mentioned in the Fourth Argument, the Ulama of the Ahl-us-Sunna differ in the issue of the Specificity and the generality. Most of the reverent Auliya and majority of great Ulama have espoused the generality. And this is what the text of the Great Quran and the purport of the Ahadeeth of the Illuminant Presence (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) illustrate. And many surfacists, even out of them perhaps the most narrow-minded.

ALL PROPHETS, ALL COMPANIONS ALL ULAMA AND AULIYA THE TARGETS OF THE WAHHABI TAKFEER

Now consider that Imams, Ulama, Muhadditheen, Fuqaha, Mufassirs, mutakallims, Auliya, Sihaba and Prophets (upon them salat and salam) have been rendered Kafirs by Mr Gangohi, Mr Isma’eel and the Wahhabia! Count only those whose statements have been recorded in this brief.

(1) Shah Wali-Ullah Dehlwi,
(2) Maulana Malik-ul-Ulama Bahr-ul-Uloom,
(3) Allama Shami – The writer of “Rad-dul-Mukhtar”,
(4) The Imams of Ahl-us-Sunna and writers on the Beliefs,
(5) The Researcher Shaikh Maulana Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlwi,
(6) Allama Shahab-ud-Din Khafaji
(7) Imam Fakhr-ud-Deen Razi
(8) Allama Sayyid Shareef Jurjani
(9) Allama Sad-ud-Deen Taftazani
(10) Ali Qari Makki
(11) Imam ibn Hajar Makki
(12) Allama Muhammad Zarqani
(13) Allama Abd-ur-Raoof Manawi
(14) Imam Ahmed Qastalani
(15) Imam Qurtubi
(16) Imam Badr-ud-Deen Aini
(17) Imam Baghawi – The writer of “Tafseer-ul-Mu’aalim
(18) Shaikh Ala-ud-Deen Ali Baghdadi – The writer of “Tafseer-ul-Khazin”
(19) Allama Baidawi
(20) Allama Nizam-ud-Deen Neeshapuri – The writer of the Tafseer “Gharaib-ul-Quran”.
(21) Allama Jamal – The expositor of “Jalalain”
(22) Imam Ibne-e-Bakre Razi – The write of the Tafseer “Anmozaj-ul-Jaleel”
(23) Imam Qadi Iyad
(24) Imam Zain-ud-Deen Iraqi – The teacher of Imam ibn-e-Hajar Asqalani
(25) Hafiz-ul-Hadeeth Ahmed Kaljalbasi
(26) Ibn-e-Qutaiba
(27) Ibn-e-Khalqan
(28) Imam Kamal-ud-Deen Dameeri
(29) Allama Ibraheem Beijuri
(30) Allama Shanwani
(31) Allama Mudabighi
(32) Allama Ibn-e-Atiyya
(33) Allama Uthmawi
(34) Imam Nasir-ud-Deen Samarqandi – The writer of “Multaqat”.
(35) Allama Badr-ud-Deen Mahmood bin Israeel (The writer of “Jame-ul-Fasoolain)
(36) Shaikh Alim bin Sahib Tatar Khania
(37) Imam Faqeeh – The writer of “Fatawa Hujja”
(38) Imam Abdul Wahhab Sharani
(39) Imam Yafi’ee
(40) Imam Auhad Abul Hasan Shatnooni
(41) Imam ibn Hajar Makki
(42) Imam Muhammad “Sahib-e-Madhiyya Barda Shareef”
(43) Hadhrat Maulana Jami
(44) Hadhrat Molvi Manavi
(45) Hadhrat Sayyid Abdul Azeez Dabbagh
(46) Hadhrat Sayyid Ali Khawwas
(47) Hadhrat Khawaja Baha-ul-Haqqu-wad-Deen
(48) Hadhrat Khawaja Azeezan Rameitni
(49) Hadhrat Shaikh-e-Akbar
(50) Hadhrat Sayyidi Ali Wafa
(51) Hadhrat Sayyidi Raslan Damishqi
(52) Hadhrat Sayyidi Abu Abdullah Sheerazi
(53) Hadhrat Sayyidi Abu Sulaiman Darani
(54) Hadhrat Qutb-e-Kabeer Sayyed Ahmed Rafaee
(55) His Presence Quib-ul-Aqtab Sayyiduna Ghauth-ul-Azam
(56) Hadhrat Imam Ali Raza
(57) Hadhrat Imam Jafar Sadiq
(58) Their Presences other Immaculate Imams
(59) Imam Mujahid
(60) Hadhrat Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn-e-Abbas
(61) His Presence Sayyiduna Ameer-ul-Momineen Ali Murtada
(62) The Venerable Companions generally
(63) Hadhrat Khidr
(64) Hadhrat Moosa Shakhan
(65) His Presence the Lord of the Prophets Himself (Sall Allahu alaihi wa sallam)
(66) Allah Rabb-ul-Alameen Himself (Curse upon these Trangressors – The Wahhabia and Deobandia!)

In count they are sixty-six, but out of them the Imams of Ahl-us-Sunna, The writers on the beliefs, whom Allama Shami has quoted, and the Immaculate Imams whom Allama Sayyid Shareef cited and all the Companions quoted by Imam Qastalani and Allama Zarqani all are schools in themselves. And above all when even Allah and the Prophet themselves fall within the pale, all jinni and men The first and the Last The angels, all Momins fall to the target of the Wahhabia’s Takfeer (call somebody a kafir).

Look on these disbelievers! When takfeer was meted out to the ill blabbers of Allah’s Prophet Muhammed (Salla Allahu taala wa sallam) They whimpered out so painfully that they declared all the world to be Kafir (as if the world contains only these two-and-half persons). Alas! The sphere of Islam was straitened! (As if the sphere of Islam comprise these disbelievers and when they got smothered the sphere of Islam got straitened!). And these wicked themselves have gone to such lengths as to pass kufr-verdict on the Auliya, the Sihaba, Mustafa (Sall Allahu taala wa alihi wa sallam), and His Grand Presence (Azza wajal), and still they are “corpulent” Muslims! Hello! Verily the curse of Allah is levelled on transgressors.

Yes! Yes! oh Wahhabis! Gangohis! Deobandis! Thanis! Dehlavis! Amratsaris! If you are true to your word, with your eyes shut, pronounce distinctly that certainly from Shah Wali Allah all the Fuqaha, Muhaddiths, Musfassirs, Matakallims to the great Ulama, from the great Ulama to Auliya from Auliya to the great prophets, from the great prophets to the Lord of the Prophets, from the Lord of the Prophets (Sall Allahu alaihi wa sallam) to the One Omnipotent – All are Kafirs in your creed. This is actually what is to be discussed. Producing mere two, four, ten or twenty passages on The Specificity, twisting sides, saying, then backing out, flying off and wandering round will not do. It was easy to say that Ahmed Raza confessed the knowledge of the Unknown for Allah’s Prophet (Sall Allahu alihi wa sallam), and this belief was Kufr, but none saw who were the sacred propitious souls to whom Ahmed Raza was related. Ahmed Raza’s Chain of the Faith is Continuously related through the Ulama, The Auliya, the Imams, and The Sahaba to Muhammad, Allah’s Prophet (Sall Allahu alihi wa alihi wa sallam), and through the Prophet to Allah Rabb-ul-Allamenn.
Wal Hamdu Lillahi Rabb-il-Almeen
“Though I am inferior, my relation is superior”.
Hadhrat Maulavi Manavi (Quddisa Sirruhu) has said well: “Rumi neither has talked nor will talk Kufr, don’t repudiate it; Kafir is he who denies and turns universal outcast.”

Now think of yourselves. To what extent has reached the flame of your fire that has branded The Ulama, The Auliya, The Sahaba, The Prophets, Mustafa (Sall Allahu alaihi wa alihi wa sallam) and The Most High The Most Loftly Presence Taala with the same accursed verdict (Allah save us), and thus achieved for yourselves the medal of (a kafir becomes a universal outcast.)

Then again, will your fire do any injury to Allah Jalla wa Ala and The Prophet (Sall Allahu alaihi wa sallam)? Not at any rate. Contrarily it will burn you up, let you die without any contraction and make you taste eternally (taste it, verily you are created the best and the wisest) In Sha Allah-ul-Qahhar.

Even then we’ll talk justly. It is not complainable that you call all the Imams, the Auliya, and the beloveds of Allah Kafir; They have committed such a “gross crime”! The vastness of Satan’s knowledge of whom you have sung in “Braheen-eQuati”, is a comfort for your heart and a delight of your eye. But it is regrettable that they haven’t said, “your enemies have taken away the vastness of Muhammad, Allah’s Rasool’s and His men’s knowledge why not you, then, pass the very verdict of” `if not shirk what part of Imam it is” on them”.

Hitherto it was easy for you, but “takfeer” of Allah will be a bit difficult. you have called Him liar but feel ashamed of calling Him Kafir. And the greatest calamity is Hadhrat Sah Waliullah’s affair that has proved for Wahhabia a task that they can neither do nor avoid. He has declared that everything is known to Muhammad, Allah’s Rasool (Sall Allahu alaihi wa sallam), His men and Urfa, they have attained at the nature of every knowledge and every state; they are informed on whatever is to occur until death. How gross is Mr Gangohi’s Kufr-Shirk Claptrap on one’s confessing the Prophet’s (Sall Allahu alaih wa sallam’s) being informed on the Meelad Assemblies! And above all, to your preposterousness, how many are your takfeers of Fatawa Hanfiyya for one’s mere confessing one’s being informed on mere a nikah (marriage)! And how great and obvious is Walliullahs’s statement! Now if he is not called kafir how will the takfeer of the poor-minded be possible, apart from the worst humiliation of Wahhabiyyat? And if stone-heartedly he is branded with Kufr, every relation of Wahhabiyyat is snapped! And as soon as he is branded with Kufr Mr. Isma’eel whom you sing of, whom you admit to be your Imam, your leader, your spiritual lord, your hakeem-ul-Umma and owner of revelation and innocence, directly turns a Kafir doubly, and you who are the eulogisers and followers of Mr Isma’eel, and his bound disciples are all ancient Kafirs.

Allah! Allah! how much love Kufr has for you that however you pace, wherever you go, whatever guise you wear, it remains a garland ever-hanging about your necks! “The bee of Kufr, even if driven away, does not go off and if it ever goes off it immediately comes back; it is, indeed, the mole of a Wahhabi’s cheek”. Such is the comeuppance for them, and the comeuppance on the Day of Judgment is greater, would that they know.

The Humbler
Faqeer Ahmed Raza Khan al-Qadiri Uffi anhu (Be he pardoned)
From: Bareilly
Monday, 14th Rabee’-ul-Awwal Shareef, 1328 Hijri

Source: www.aqdas.co.uk

Posted in Blogroll | 1 Comment »

“Salafi” forgeries & manipulations

Posted by PakNik on November 13, 2006

Salafi” forgeries & manipulations

GF Haddad

It seems that every fifteen minutes another textual tampering or distortion of meaning is born at the hands of a certain sect, and to refute them is like trying to reason with Gog and Magog. However, the following reply is not addressed to them.
Qadi Iyad: “It was from this standpoint, of this high estimate of Imam Malik, that ash-Shafi’i argued convincingly against Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ash-Shaybani, the student of Abu Hanifa, in support of the superiority of the knowledge of Malik over that of Abu Hanifa when the two of them argued with each other on this point. (Etc.)

This is without doubt a forged report as indicated by Imam al-Bayhaqi himself when he cited it in Manaaqib al-Shafi`i.

Al-Qurtubi al-Maliki (d.671) said, “and not a single person from the righteous salaf rejected that His Istawaa upon His Throne was literal, and He specified the Throne because it is from the greatest of His creation. And they were ignorant of the kayfiyyah of His Istawaa.and Imaam Maalik said, -al-Istawaa is known’ meaning in the language, -and the nature is not know known, and to ask about (how) is a bid’ah’” [ -al-Jaami lil Ahkaam al-Qur'aan' of al-Qurtobee under the verse -then He rose over His Throne', see -Mukhtasar al-Uluw' (pg. 286).]

The above is cut-and-paste and a lie against the great Ash`ari Maliki Imam al-Qurtubi. The authentic position of al-Qurtubi from his Tafsir is thus:

1. The original quote from al-Qurtubi in al-Dhahabi’s `Uluw [full edition, 600 pages edited by Hasan al-Saqqaf] here states (p. 574): “for its reality cannot be known.” This is also what is found in al-Qurtubi’s Tafsir. This tampering is one among many examples of the mendacity of al-Albani and his followers! The reason for this particular tahrif is that when the Salafiyya were faced with the reality of Tafwid (committal) among the Salaf, they invented the subdivision of Tafwid al-Kayfiyya (‘committal of modality’!) so as to deny that the Salaf actually practiced Tafwid al-Ma`na (‘committal of meaning’!) which is pure and unadulterated nullification (ta`teel). So when proof to actual committal of meaning comes up, they deny it or manipulate it, as in this case.

2. Al-Qurtubi stated verbatim: “Istiwa’ is one of the Attributes of acts (min sifat al-af`al) according to the majority of the explanations.” Al-Qurtubi, Tafsir (18:281). This is is the exact same position of Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`ari RadyAllahu `anh and the position of the entirety of the Ash`ari School. There is no disagreement over the fact that istiwa’ is real. Anyone that denies it is a kafir since it is in the Qur’an. What is rejected is vulgar, meddlesome, ignorant literalism and the attribution of istiwa’ to Allah SWT as an attribute of the Essence as if the Throne existed without beginning, like the Essence!

3. The continuation of al-Qurtubi’s words quoted in Mukhtasar al-`Uluw (p. 286) states: “And He mentioned His Throne specifically because it is the greatest of His creations. However, they actually did not know the modality or howness of his Istiwa’ for its haqiqa cannot be known.” This shows that al-Qurtubi understood the modality of istiwa’ to be the same as the actuality of istiwa’. Why do the Hashwiyya (gross anthropomorphists) not mention this when they cite from Mukhtasar al-`Uluw?

4. Then al-Qurtubi continues, in his Tafsir (al-A`raf 54): “I SAY: the `Uluw [exaltation] of Allah Most High and His irtifa` [elevation] are an expression of the `uluw of His Majesty, Attributes, and Dominion. Meaning: There is nothing above Him whatsoever in the sense of Majesty and its qualities, nor with Him as a partner. Rather, He is the Most High in absolute and unconditional terms – exalted is He!” Why do the Hashwiyya not mention this when they cite from Tafsir al-Qurtubi?

5. To cite Imam al-Qurtubi in support of literalism and anthropomorphism in the Attributes is the height of ignorance and impertinence, as his strong Ash`ari position is clear as the sun in his book on the Names and Attributes of Allah SWT titled al-Asna fi Sharh al-Asma’, in print in two volumes. But it is the historical proof against the Mujassima of Ahl al-Bid`a that just as their predecessors lied, they have no choice but to lie also. The examples of Tahreef and distortion in their books today are simply beyond count. See the introduction and appendices to our translation of Sayyid Yusuf al-Rifa`i’s Nasiha to the Ulema of Najd for many examples of such tampering and misreprentations of the Ulema of Islam and their books. (Forthcoming at the Islamic Supreme Council of America publications insha Allah.)

The Reviver of the Sunnah, Abu Muhammad al-Baghawee said, “.The Finger is an Attribute from amongst the Attributes of Allah, and likewise everything of this nature that occurs in the Book and Sunnah, for example the Face (Wajh), Eye (Ayn), Hand (Yad), Leg (Rijl), Coming (Ityaan and Majee), and the Descent to the Lowest Heaven, His Rising over His Throne, Laughter (Dahk), Joy (Farh).so these and their likes are Attributes of Allah in which it is obligatory to have faith in, and to leave them upon their literal meanings turning away from ta’weel and distancing from tashbeeh, with the belief that none of the Attributes of the Creator resemble anything from the attributes of the creation, just as His Self does not resemble the selves of the creation. Allah said, -there is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing’ And it was upon this that the salaf of this nation, and the scholars of the Sunnah were upon, they accepted them all with faith and stayed away from tamtheel and ta’weel. And they relegated the knowledge (of their kayfiyyah) to Allah.” [-al-Mu'jam al-Lateef' (no.66) of adh-Dhahabee who quotes from him with his own chain of narration. See also -Sharh as-Sunnah' (1/168+) of al-Baghawee verified by the Salafi Hanafi Imam Shuaiyb al-Arnaut who according to Keller should be an anthropomorphist)

Yet another example of manipulation: What Imam al-Baghawi said is that "they relegated their knowledge to Allah." He never said "They relegated the knowledge (of their kayfiyyah) to Allah."

As for Shaykh Shu`ayb, whoever said he is a "Salafi"? Rather, most of his marginal comments on the hadiths of the Attributes in his editions of the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, Sahih Ibn Hibban, Sharh al-Sunna of al-Baghawi, and Riyad al-Salihin of al-Nawawi, show clearly that he follows the Ash`ari position. Now watch them turn against him just like the Yahud, after first praising him, turned against `Abd Allah ibn Salam when they learnt he was now a Muslim.

[for an updated version see below ]
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©

More tamperings of Salafis

Someone wrote:

1. “Abu Haneefah (RH) said, when asked of his opinion of the one who says, ‘I do not know whether Allah is above the heavens or on the earth.’ – “He has disbelieved, because Allah says, “The Most Merciful rose above the Throne.” , and His Throne is above His seven heavens.’ He was then asked , ‘what if he said that Allah is above His Throne but he does not know whether the Throne is in the heavens or on the earth?’ He said, ‘He has disbelieved, because He has denied that He is above the heavens, And whosoever denied that He is above the heavens has disbelieved.” ['al-Uluww' of adh- Dhahabee, also 'Sharh Aqueedah at-Tahaawiyyah' of ibn Abee al-Izz al-Hanafee]“

Mawdu` and a lie in its attribution to the Imam. Al-Dhahabi himself states [Mukhtasar p. 136 #118; al-`Uluw p. 391 #327] that everything above was reported from the Imam by Abu Muti` al-Hakam ibn `Abd Allah al-Balkhi who is DISCARDED as a narrator according to Imam Ahmad, Ibn `Adi, Abu Dawud, a liar according to Abu Hatim, and a forger according to al-Dhahabi himself as reported by Ibn Hajar in Lisan al-Mizan (2:407)!.

Even so, the text mentioned by the Hanafi authorities is: “Whoever says, ‘I do not know whether my Lord is in the heaven or on earth’ is a disbeliever and, similarly, whoever says, ‘He is on the Throne and I do not know whether the Throne is in the heaven or on earth ‘ is a disbeliever.”

As to its meaning: al-Bayadi said in Ishaaraat al-Maraam: “This is because he implies that the Creator has a direction and a boundary, and anything that possesses direction and boundary is necessarily created. So this statement explicitly attributes imperfection to Allah Most High. The believer in [divine] corporeality and direction is someone who denies the existence of anything other than objects that can be pointed to with the senses. They deny the Essence of the Deity that is transcendent beyond that. This makes them positively guilty of disbelief.” As quoted in al-Kawthari, “Khuturat al-Qawl bi al-Jiha” (“The Gravity of the Doctrine That Attributes Direction [to Allah Most High]“) in his _Maqalat_ (p. 368-369).

Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi states something similar in Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar, and others.

2.”Abdullah bin Nafi’ reported: Malik bin Anas said: ‘Allah is above the heavens, but His knowledge encompasses everything. Nothing escapes His knowledge.’” [Abdullah bin Ahmad, as-Sunnah, and others. ]

From Mutarrif ibn ‘Abd Allâh – al-Bukhârî’s shaykh – and Habib ibn Abî Habib on the h.adîth of descent (“Our blessed Lord descends in the lat third of the night”): “It is our Blessed and Exalted Lord’s command which descends 1 ; as for Him, He is eternally the same, He does not move or go to and fro.”2 Ibn Rushd in Sharh. al-’Utbiyya – a commentary on an early work of Mâlikî jurisprudence by Muh.hammad ibn Ah.mad ibn ‘Abd al-’Aziz al-’Utbî al-Qurt.ubî (d. 254) – stated that Mâlik’s position is: “The Throne is not Allâh’s location of settledness (mawdi’ istiqrâr Allâh).”3 The report attributing to Imâm Mâlik the words: “Allâh is in the heaven and His knowledge is in every place” is a condemned (munkar), anomalous (shâdhdh) report of questionable authenticity narrated through Ah.mad ibn H.anbal from Surayj ibn al-Nu’mân al-Lu’lu’i 4 from ‘Abd Allâh ibn Nâfi’ al-Sa’igh from Mâlik.5 Imâm Ah.mad himself declared ‘Abd Allâh ibn Nâfi’ al-Sa’igh weak (da’îf), Abû Zur’a frowned at his name and declared him “condemned” (munkar), al-Bukhârî questioned his memorization, and Ibn ‘Adi stated that he transmitted oddities (gharâ’ib) from Mâlik.6 As for the content of the report, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Fattah Abû Ghudda noted in his commentary on Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr’s al-Intiqa’ that it is contradicted by what is firmly established in mass-transmitted narrations from Mâlik and by al-Sa’igh’s other report from Mâlik omitting the above words.7 The report is made further dubious by the fact that Mâlik was well-known to condemn any statements about the Essence and Attributes of Allâh Most High other than sound reports, particularly statements that suggest anthropomorphism.8 Al-Awzâ’î said: “Whoever holds on to the rare and unusual positions of the scholars has left Islâm.”9

NOTES

1 The bracketed words are only in the wording cited by al-Qâdî ‘Iyâd in his Tartîb al-Madârik (2:44).
2 Narrated from Mutarrif by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhîd (7:143) with a weak chain because of Jâmi’ ibn Sawada as per al-Dâraqut.nî in Ibn H.ajar’s Lisân (2:93). Also narrated from Salih ibn Ayyûb from Habib ibn Abî Habib – who is very weak – by al-Dhahabî in Syar A’lâm al-Nubalâ’ (8:418). The latter reported in his Mîzân (1:452) from Ibn ‘Adi’s Kamil (2″818) the opinion that all of Ibn Abî Habib’s narrations are forged but this is an extreme statement in light of three factors: (a) Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhîd (24:177) mentioned Habib as merely weak, adding: “His reports from Mâlik are full of mistakes and condemned matters”; (b) Salih ibn Ayyûb said: “I mentioned this report to Yah.yâ ibn Bukayr and he said: “Excellent, by Allâh! and I did not hear it from Mâlik.” Narrated by al-Dhahabî who describes Ibn Bukayr in Tadhkirat al-H.uffâz. (2:420) as “the muh.addith of Egypt, the Imâm and trustworthy h.adîth Master… one of the vessels of knowledge together with truthfulness and complete reliability… Where is the like of Ibn Bukayr in his leadership in the Religion, his insight in fatwâ, and the abundance of his learning?” (c) Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhîd (7:143) also narrates this report from Habib, then goes on to narrate it from Mutarrif, adding: “It is possible that the matter be as Mâlik said, and Allâh knows best.” It is established that Jâmi’ did narrate from Mutarrif, as stated by al-Mizzî in Tahdhîb al-Kamâl (28:71).
3 As quoted in Fath. al-Bârî (1959 ed. 7:124 #3592).
4 Misspelt Shurayh in al-Saqqâf’s edition of al-’Uluw (p. 396 #340) and al-Mahdî’s edition of al-Shari’a (p. 293 #663-664). Shurayh ibn al-Nu’mân al-Sa’idi al-Kûfî is a Tâbi’î who died before al-Sa’igh was born.
5 In Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr’s al-Intiqa’ (p. 71), al-Dhahabî’s Mukhtasar al-’Uluw (p. 247), and al-Ajurrî’s al-Shari’a (p. 293 #663-664).
6 Al-Dhahabî, Mîzân (2:513-514 #4647); al-’Uqayli, al-Du’afa’ (2:311), Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil (4:242 #1070=4:1556); Abû Hatim, al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil (5:183); Ibn H.ajar, Tahdhîb al-Tahdhîb (6:46-47 #99). Dr. Nur al-Dîn ‘Itr, however, states in his margins on al-Dhahabî’s al-Mughnî fî al-Du’afa’ (1:513 #3396) that al-Sa’igh is very reliable when narrating from Mâlik and that Ibn H.ajar declared him trustworthy (thiqa) in al-Taqrîb. Yet, the latter grading was downgraded to “truthful” (sadûq) by al-Arna’ût and Ma’rûf in al-Tahrir (2:277 #3659). Al-Albânî in his notes in Mukhtasar al-’Uluw (p. 140) criticized al-Kawthari for citing al-Sa’igh as weak in his introduction to al-Bayhaqî’s al-Asmâ’ wa al-Sifat (p. 0), but he himself cites him as weak in al-Silsila al-Da’ifa (2:231-232) as pointed out by Shaykh H.asan al-Saqqâf in his edition of al-’Uluw (p. 397 n. 708)!
7 In Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, al-Intiqa’ (p. 71 n. 3 and p. 73).
8 For example, Mâlik said: “Allâh is neither ascribed a limit nor likened with anything” (lâ yuhaddad wa lâ yushabbah). Ibn al-’Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’ân (4:1740).
9 Cited by al-Dhahabî, Siyar A’lâm al-Nubalâ’ (1997 ed. 7:99).

3. Imaam adh-Dhahabee said in the final lines of his most excellent work, ‘al-Uluww lil-’Aliyyil-Ghaffaar’ (pp.286-287):

I have this edition in front of me and the title is incorrectly reported. The actual title is: Mukhtasar al-`Uluw i.e. the abridgment – in 300 pages – edited by the chief innovator of our time, Nasir Albani. The complete edition is not that of Albani but that of Hasan al-Saqqaf – in over 600 pages – which I also have.

Now, if it was a “most excellent work” then why did al-Dhahabi disclaim it later in his adult career (he wrote the book as a young man)? He wrote on its manuscript with his own hand, “I have realized it [this book] contains baseless narrations and statements by many people that spoke loosely, and so I neither subscribe to those expressions nor follow those people in them – may Allah forgive them – nor do I consider them binding upon me as long as I live, and this is my firm conviction, and I know that Allah – there is nothing whatsoever like Him.” As reported by the Hadith Master Ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi in his handwriting on the front page of the original manuscript of al-`Uluw.

“Al-Qurtubee said concerning the saying of Allah, the Most High, “Then he ascended (istawaa) the Throne”, We have explained the sayings of the Scholars regarding this issue in the book ‘al-Asnaa fee Sharh al-Asmaa al-Husnaa’ and we mentioned fourteen different sayings therein”

I have that book also and al-Qurtubi in it makes abundantly clear that he is against the position of the anthropomorphists!

up until he said, “And the Salaf of the very first times – may Allah be pleased with them all – never used to negate direction (al-jihah) for Allah and nor did they used to express this (negation). Rather, they, and all of the others, used to speak with its affirmation for Allah, the Most High just as His Book has spoken about it and just as His Messengers informed of it. And not a single one of the Salaf denied that his ascending (istawaa) the Throne was real and true (haqeeqah) (as opposed to metaphorical, majaaz).”

The continuation of al-Qurtubi’s words quoted in Mukhtasar al-`Uluw (p. 286) states:

“And He mentioned His Throne specifically because it is the greatest of His creations. However, they actually did not know the modality or howness of his Istiwa’ for the reality of its modality cannot be known.”

NOTE: The original in al-Dhahabi’s `Uluw [full edition, 600 pages edited by Hasan al-Saqqaf] here states (p. 574): “for its reality cannot be known.” This is also what is found in al-Qurtubi’s Tafsir. This tampering is one among many examples of the mendacity of al-Albani and his followers! The reason for this particular tahrif is that when the Salafiyya were faced with the reality of Tafwid among the Salaf, they invented the subdivision of Tafwid al-Kayfiyya so as to deny that the Salaf actually practiced Tafwid al-Ma`na. So when proof to the latter comes up, they deny it or manipulate it, as in this case.

THEN al-Qurtubi continues, in his Tafsir: “I SAY: the `Uluw [exaltation] of Allah Most High and His irtifa` [elevation] are an expression of the `uluw of His Majesty, Attributes, and Dominion. Meaning: There is nothing above Him whatsoever in the sense of Majesty and its qualities, nor with Him as a partner. Rather, He is the Most High in absolute and unconditional terms – exalted is He!”

See the introduction and appendices to our translation of Sayyid Yusuf al-Rifa`i’s Nasiha to the Ulema of Najd for many more examples of their tampering and misreprentations of the Ulema of Islam and their books.

As for the Ghunya: it is not an integrally preserved text and the copies we have today are corrupt. As for the book Ijtima` al-Juyush al-Islamiyya it is crammed with forgeries – like al-Sunna by `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad – and Ibn al-Qayyim is a notorious Mujassim.

In conclusion:

Those who call themselves Salafiyyah do not mind lying about the Ulema they quote; make up their own definitions of tafwid and ta’wil; and generally have no idea of the accurate positions of the Salaf and the latter are innocent of them. Allah is our refuge from their bid`a and dalala. And Allah knows best.

Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©

[March 10, 2001]

Refutation of the “Salafi” refutation

Refutation of the “Salafi” refutation of the Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim

Quotations from troid.org site as of March 2003. See also the chapter “More tamperings of Salafis” above and < Ibn Taymiyya, a survey >

(1) “Salafi” refutation of Imam Ahmad’s Ta’wil…. [Interpretation of the "coming of Allah" as the coming of his order (amr) or that of his reward (thawab).] (Ibn Hazm, al-Fisal (2:173). Al-Kawthari in his edition of al-Bayhaqis al-Asma wal-Sifat (p. 448 cf. p. 292) states that Abu Yala also narrates it from Ahmad. See also Ibn al-Jawzis Daf Shubah al-Tashbih (Saqqaf ed. p. 110 and 141).

The “Salafis” said:
This presentation of Imaam Ahmads view is rejected for a number of reasons: i. The chain of transmission of the narration which al-Bayhaqee mentions from Haakim from Aboo Amr ibn as-Sammaak is weak. Adh-Dhahabee said in his Talkhees of al- Haakims al-Mustadrak (1/539) that Aboo Amr ibn as-Sammaak is unknown.

Look at the ignorance of those people who take bladders for lanterns. Abu `Amr ibn al-Sammak is one of the great Hadith Masters, the Shaykh of al-Hakim and al-Daraqutni over whom there is no doubt. Al-Dhahabi called him “the Shaykh, the Imam, the abundant Muhaddith, the truthful, the Musnid of Iraq, `Uthman ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd Allah…” (Siyar) and he mentions him in Tadhkirat al-Huffaz also.

The one referred to in Talkhis al-Mustadrak is a different person. How ignorant to confuse the two! Here is the chain in question: Haddathana Ibn al-Sammak, haddathana Muhammad ibn `Isa al-Mada’ini, haddathana Shu`ayb ibn Harb, haddathana jaarun lana yukanna Aba `Amr = one of our neighbors called Abu `Amr narrated to us. The latter is the unknown, not Ibn al-Sammak.
The “Salafis” said:
ii. What is authentically related from Imaam Ahmad is that which al-Qaadee Aboo Yalaa narrates in his book Ikhtilaaf ur-Riwaayatain (1/250) and also ibn al-Qayyim in Mukhtasar us-Sawaaiq (p.386): “Hanbal said: I said to Aboo Abdullaah (Imaam Ahmad): Allaah – the Mighty and Magnificent – descends to the lowest heaven? He said: Yes. I said: Is His descent by His Knowledge or what? He said to me: Be quiet about this, and he became very angry and said: Pass on the hadeeth as it has come”. And Abdullaah bin Ahmad said in his book as-Sunnah: “I asked my father: Allaah descends to the lowest heaven. How is his descending, is it His knowledge or not? He said: Be quiet or severe punishment shall afflict you! Then he said: Pass on the hadeeth as it has come.”

The above is false on many levels. First, the narration from Ahmad under discussion is his ta’wil of the “coming” and “arrival” – maji’ and ityan – of Allah Most High in the Qur’anic verses to that effect, NOT the hadith of Nuzul.

Second, Abu Ya`la is considered unreliable by the Hanbalis themselves in matters of `Aqida and he is notorious for being a Mujassim; as is Ibn al-Qayyim without doubt, not to mention the centuries between him and Imam Ahmad in the first place – where are their isnads to begin?!

Third, the book named al-Sunna and attributed to `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad contains things like “Is istiwa’ any other than sitting??” and contains MOSTLY FORGERIES according to Shaykh Shu`ayb al-Arna’ut.

Fourth, a few lines below these people adduce that same man’s – Ibn al-Qayyim – claim that Hanbal ibn Ishaq is supposedly unreliable in relating matters from Ahmad. Consider how they produce him when it suits them and reject him when it suits them!
The “Salafis” said:
iii. Ibn Taymiyyah said: “There is no doubt that that which is reported in mutawaatir form from Ahmad opposes this narration (in which Imaam Ahmad is supposed to have resorted to taweel) and makes it clear that he does not say: The Lord comes (meaning) His command comes and descends, rather he rejects the one who says that.” (ibn Taymiyyah, Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool, p.202)

Note that the above is a purely conjectural argument because he is unable to weaken the report outwardly. So he resorts to zann i.e. “He couldn’t have said so.” It is typical of Ibn Taymiyya to use grand terms such as the attribution of tawatur and so forth to defend his views. The fact is, he is notorious for his unreliable manner in quoting the Salaf.

For example, in Majmu` al-Fatawa (4:319) you find:
“The view that the Prophets were protected from the major sins but not from the minor sins is that of the majority of the Ulema of Islam and all the groups. It is even the view of most of the people of Kalam; as mentioned by Abu al-Hasan al- Amidi, this is the view of most of the Ash`aris. It is also the view of most of the people of Tafsir and Hadith and the Fuqaha’. In fact, nothing was reported from the Salaf, the Imams, the Companions, the Tabi`in, and their successors except what conforms to this view….”

The above is a thoroughly inaccurate statement. Qadi `Iyad in al-Shifa’ said that the Jumhur of the Fuqaha’ from the schools of Malik, al-Shafi`i, and Abu Hanifa, agree that the Prophets are protected from all minor sins because one is required to follow them in the minutest matters. It is even reported from Malik that this is obligatory to believe.

As for the report from al-Amidi it is inaccurate. He actually said in al-Ihkam (1:171) that all but the Khawarij concur Prophets are protected from the minor sins if the latter bear on their character. If, however, it comes to a rare word spoken out of anger, then the majority of the Ash`aris and Mu`tazilis allow it. So the issue is not by any means as clearcut as the words attributed to Ibn Taymiyya would lead one to believe. Ibn Taymiyya often relies on tahweel – verbal intimidation – with phrases such as “the Book, the Sunna, the Companions, the Tabi`in, their successors, and the Imams all support what I am saying.” This impressed the public in his time as it continues to do in ours and there is no power save by Allah.
The “Salafis” said:
iv. Ibn al-Qayyim wrote: “As for the narration reported from Imaam Ahmad – then his companions are divided into three groups regarding it. The first: That this is mistakenly attributed to him since the only one who spoke about it is Hanbal and he is one who has many opinions/reports which are in opposition to what is well known from the madhhab of Ahmad… However, what is correct is that it is a rejected narration (shaadh) which opposes the essence of his madhhab.”

This is among the typical high-handed statements of Ibn al-Qayyim and his teacher. Ibn Abi Ya`la in Tabaqat al-Hanabila narrated that al-Khallal – the principal compiler of the early Hanbali Madhhab – said of Hanbal that his narrations from Ahmad were so good that “I might compare them to those of al- Athram in excellence, thoroughness, and perfection”! It is no use to attempt ta`til of his reliability. More importantly, note that the positions of Imam Ahmad in `Aqida are one thing and those held by later Hanbalis are another! Even in his own lifetime, Imam Ahmad had a problem with some of his students in their attributing to him things he never said. I have discussed this in some detail in my new book _The Four Imams and Their Schools_, please look it up.
The “Salafis” said:
Ibn al-Qayyim went on to say that a similar difference arose amongst the companions of Imaam Maalik: “Something similar to this difference occurred in the madhhab of Maalik. It is well known from him and from the Scholars of the Salaf to affirm the texts of the Attributes and the prohibition of resorting to taweel (interpolation). It has been reported from him (Maalik) that he interpolated the saying (of Allaahs Messenger):
Our Lord descends

with the meaning: His command descends. This report (from Maalik) has two chains of narration; the first: from Habeeb his scribe, and this Habeeb is not the actual Habeeb, rather he is a liar (kadhdhaab) and a forger (waddaa) by unanimous agreement of all the Ahl ul-Jarh wat-Tadeel and not a single one of the scholars depended upon him in his narration and in the isnaad. The second, in which there is an unknown person (majhool) whose condition is not known. Therefore, amongst his companions are some who affirm this narration and amongst them are those who do not because the most famous of his companions have not narrated anything like this from him.” (ibn al-Qayyim, Mukhtasar us-Sawaaiq al-Mursalah, 2/260- 261)

The above is more of the same unreliability in reporting in addition to a mindless mistake in translation. What one of the Ulema said is: This Habeeb is no habeeb i.e. he is not lovely as his name claims – etc. – not “this Habeeb is not the actual Habeeb”!!

To address Ibn al-Qayyim’s argument: first, we are not discussing interpolations in Malik’s discourse – a claim which also requires proof – but a narration authentically related from Imam Ahmad and verified by the Huffaz. It is useless to discuss other matters rather than focussing on this chain: it is either false or true.

Second, Ibn al-Qayyim has not gotten all the facts about the narration he brought up from Imam Malik. If he had, he would have seen that it supports the opposite of what he is trying to claim. Namely, that the SECOND narration from Malik to that effect is from Mutarrif ibn `Abd Allah, one of al-Bukhari’s authorities, a most reliable companion of Malik and most definitely one of his most famous ones. Nor does his chain contain any unknown narrator. I refer to it again further below.

Third, the bases of Ibn al-Qayyim’s argument is that the Malik report is definitely inauthentic, which is not at all the position of the Hadith Masters – namely, Salih ibn Ayyub, Yahya ibn Bukayr, Qadi `Iyad, and Ibn `Abd al-Barr! `Iyad even questions the weakening of Ibn Abi Habib as exaggerated. In all, it is evident that Ibn al-Qayyim is swayed by his bias in `aqida, which clouds his judgment.

The “Salafis” said:
v. Furthermore, ibn Jareer at-Tabaree in his Tafseer of 89:22 reports the following narrations from the Salaf in explanation of the verse: Ad-Dahhaak said: “the angels descend in ranks of separate lines, then the Exalted King descends with Jahannam next to Him, on His left.” Qataadah said: ” and Allaah comes on that Day with Jahannam.” He also said: “Paradise and Hellfire are next to Him when He descends from His Throne to His Kursee to judge His creation.”

Yet another irrelevancy. The above refers to another verse and has nothing to with the discussion at hand. Further, the chains from Qatada are very weak because of Ibn Humayd who was accused of lying while the report from al-Dahhak refers to the *vision* of Allah together with the vision of Hellfire, not their *being* side by side – subhan Allah! Even supposing the above were authentic, we can mention far many more reports from the Salaf confirming the view of Imam Ahmad’s ta’wil.

The Tâbi`î Abû al-`Aliya (d. 90) and al-Rabî` (d. 139) said of 2:210: “It means the angels come in the clouds. It is confirmed by His saying: {A day when the heaven with the clouds will be rent asunder and the angels will be sent down, a great descent} (25:25).”1

Al-Bayhaqî said: “[Abû al-`Aliya's] commentary rightly establishes that the clouds are a place and vehicle only for the angels, whereas there is neither place nor vehicle for Allâh Almighty.”2

Al-Ash`arî said that Allâh Almighty on the Day of Judgment shall bring about a certain act (fî`l) which He named “coming” and “arrival.”3

Al-Qurtubî reiterated al-Ash`arî’s explanation and said: “It is based on the lexical meaning of ityân, which is to proceed to do something (al-qasd ilâ al-shay’). The meaning of the verse is thus: Wait they for naught else than that Allâh should cause to pass a certain act with some of His creatures whereby He shall proceed to requite them and judge them, just as He brought to be a certain act which He called `descent’ and another which He called `establishment.’”4

The grammarian al-Akhfash (d. 210) said that {that Allâh should come} (2:210) is not understood literally concerning Allâh, but means that His order (amr) should come.5

The grammarian al-Zajjâj (d. ~310) said: “It means the promised reckoning and punishment shall come to them in the form of a cloud, as in His saying: {Allâh visited them from a place whereof they recked not} (59:2), that is: by abasing them.”6

Al-Fakhr al-Râzî reiterated Ahmad’s interpretation of verse 2:210: “It means that His order should come unto them, as proved by His saying: {Await they aught save that the angels should come unto them or your Lord’s command should come to pass?} (16:33). The two verses relate a single event, and one explains the other.”7

Al-Râzî further said that the saying of Allâh {Wait they} (2:210, 16:33) is referring to the Jews: “His saying: {O you who believe! Come, all of you, into submission} (2:208) was revealed only concerning the Jews.8 Then His saying {And if you slide back after the clear proofs have come unto you} (2:209) addresses the Jews, and therefore His saying {Wait they} is referring to them.9 The meaning is: “They shall not accept your Religion except if Allâh comes to them in the shadows of the clouds so that they can see Him distinctly, for the Jews were anthropomorphists (mushabbiha). They considered it possible for Allâh to come and go, and they said that He manifested Himself to Mûsâ – upon him peace – on the Mount in the shadows of the clouds. So they asked for something similar in the time of Muh.ammad MHMD upon him blessings and peace.”10

Concerning the h.adîth: “On the Day of Resurrection, Allâh shall come to the people in the form (s.ûra) that is familiar to them” 11 Imâm al-Bayhaqî said:

This can be interpreted to mean that He shall come to them in the Attribute (s.ifa) that is familiar to them… What confirms this interpretation is the Prophet’s saying MHMD upon him blessings and peace – in the narration of `At.â’ ibn Yasâr from Abû Sa`îd al-Khudrî: “Then Allâh will come to them in a form lower [or more suitable] (adnâ) than the one wherein they had seen Him,” 12 whereas they had not seen Him at all prior to this. One understands therefore that the meaning of “form” here is “Attribute.”13

Similarly, Imâm Abû Sulaymân al-Khat.t.âbî said:

The meaning of ‘Allâh shall come to the people etc.’ is He shall lift the veil for them so that they shall see Him with the eyes (h.attâ yarawnahu `iyânan) just as they used to know Him in the world through proofs (kamâ kânû `arafûhu fîl-dunyâ istidlâlan). And the sight of Him after they used not to see Him, is equivalent to the coming of someone never seen heretofore.14

Similarly Sult.ân al-`Ulamâ’:

His coming (majî’uhu) is a figure of speech (majâz) for His being present (h.ud.ûr) and His appearing for the eyes to see following invisibility, as in the verse {And your Lord shall arrive with angels, rank on rank} (89:22).15

Similarly Shaykh al-Islâm:

Know that there are two positions among the people of learning on the narrations and verses of the Divine Attributes. The first one – and this is the school of the majority of the Salaf or rather all of them – states that one does not address their meaning but says: We are obliged to believe in them and we hold, concerning them, whatever befits the majesty of Allâh Most High and His magnificence, at the same time categorically believing that Allâh Most High – {Nothing whatsoever is like unto Him} (42:11) and that He is declared transcendent (munazzah) beyond corporeality (al-tajsîm), displacement (al-intiqâl), dimensionality (al-tah.ayyuz) in any given direction (jiha), and all the rest of the attributes of creatures. And this position is that of a group of the scholars of kalâm and a group of their verifying scholars have preferred it. And it is the safest position (wa-huwa al-aslam).

The second position – and it is that of most of the mutakallimûn – is that such texts be interpreted (tata’awwal) according to what befits them in their respective contexts, and that this is permissible only to those who are qualified to interpret them. Namely, one thoroughly versed in the language of the Arabs, the principles of jurisprudence, and the branches of the Law, with mastery in learning. According to this position one says, about the words “Then Allâh shall come to them”: the “coming” (al-ityân) is an expression for their seeing Him. For custom dictates that whoever is absent from someone else cannot be seen by the latter except by coming to him. So the “coming” and “arrival” (majî’) here express the vision metaphorically (majâzan). It was also said that the “coming” is an act among the acts of Allâh Most High which He named “coming.” It was also said that by the coming of Allâh is meant that one of the angels of Allâh comes to them. Al-Qâd.î `Iyâd. said: “This latter meaning is the most correct for the h.adîth in my view.”16

The above suffices to refute any claim of a supposed consensus of the Salaf (as claimed by a modern Wahhabi) whereby they did not interpret the “coming” of Allâh Most High as His order.17

NOTES

1 Narrated from Abû al-`Aliya [al-Riyâh.î the student of Ibn `Abbâs] by al-Bayhaqî in al-Asmâ’ (Kawtharî ed. p. 448; H.âshidî ed. 2:370 §943) through al-H.âkim with a chain containing Abû Ja`far al-Râzî (`Isâ ibn Abî `Isâ Mâhân) whom al-Khat.îb and Ibn H.ajar declared “truthful but poor in memorizing” – although considered trustworthy (thiqa) by Ibn al-Madînî, Ibn Ma`în, Abû H.âtim, and al-D.iyâ’ al-Maqdisî – and by al-T.abarî, Ibn Abî H.âtim, al-Qurt.ubî, and al-Suyût.î in their Tafsîr (verse 2:210), also by Abû `Ubayd ibn Sallâm and Ibn al-Mundhir as stated in al-Suyût.î’s al-Durr al-Manthûr.

2 Al-Bayhaqî, Al-Asmâ’ wal-S.ifât (Kawtharî ed. p. 448; H.âshidî ed. 2:370).

3 Ibid. (Kawtharî ed. p. 448; H.âshidî ed. 2:371).

4 Al-Qurt.ubî, Tafsîr (verse 2:210).

5 As cited by al-Qurt.ubî in his Tafsîr (verse 2:210).

6 Ibid.

7 As cited by al-Kawtharî, Al-Asmâ’ wal-S.ifât (Kawtharî ed. p. 447).

8 As established in al-Wâh.idî’s Asbâb al-Nuzûl and al-Suyût.î’s Asbâb al-Nuzûl.

9 This is also the position of Ibn Kathîr, al-Qurt.ubî, and others on verse 2:210.

10 As cited by al-Kawtharî, Al-Asmâ’ wal-S.ifât (Kawtharî ed. p. 448).

11 Narrated in a long h.adîth from Abû Hurayra and Abû Sa`îd by al-Bukhârî and Muslim.

12 Narrated by al-Bukhârî.

13 Al-Asmâ’ wal-S.ifât (Kawtharî ed. p. 296; H.âshidî ed. 2:70).

14 In Ibn al-Jawzî, Daf` Shubah al-Tashbîh (1998 al-Kawtharî repr. p. 35).

15 Ibn `Abd al-Salâm, al-Ishâra ilâ al-Ijâz (p. 106-107).

16 Al-Nawawî, Sharh. S.ah.îh. Muslim (Turâth ed. 3:19).

17 “To explain these verses as a reference to the coming or arrival of the order of Allâh is unsound because it contravenes the literal meaning (z.âhir al-lafz.) of the verse and the consensus of the salaf, and there is no proof for it.” Muh.ammad ibn S.âlih. al-`Uthaymîn, Commentary on Ibn Taymiyya’s `Aqîda Wâsit.iyya (Cairo: Maktabat al-`Ilm, p. 23). In reality, such interpretation is in strict conformity with the principles of Qur’anic commentary nor is there any consensus to its contrary, as shown by the above quotes. As for its proof, it is given in the verse (16:33) adduced by Imâm Ah.mad.
The “Salafis” said:
vi. And ibn Katheer, despite recording the statement attributed to Imaam Ahmad in his al- Bidaayah, wrote in his Tafseer of 89:22: “The Lord – Blessed and Exalted is He – comes as He wills, and the Angels come in front of Him, ranks upon ranks.”

The phrase “as he wills” in no way contradicts the ta’wil reported from Imam Ahmad.
The “Salafis” said:
Just as al-Haafidh ibn Hajar indicated: “The one who takes the path of the Khalaf cannot be sure that that which he makes taweel of is the intended meaning and it is not possible to be certain of the correctness of the taweel.” (Fath al-Baaree 13/436 of ibn Hajar)

Can they read?? They are attributing to Ibn Hajar what in fact is his quotation of al-Amidi, one of the famous mutakallimun of the Khalaf, in a long passage in which al-Amidi begins by quoting the positions of those who support the way of the Khalaf as wiser and explaining what they mean – namely, that it is more complex and detailed for persuading atheists or skeptics – then he moves to the contra argument and says: Others said that one who takes the path of the Khalaf cannot be sure…” There is no doubt that al-Amidi supports qualified ta’wil.
The “Salafis” said:
Imaam al-Juwaynee explained in his retraction from the way of the Asharees: “I did not find anything by which he (the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) followed up such texts (about the Attributes) with which he described his Lord, neither with another text nor with anything that would cause the meanings to be removed from their real (haqeeqah) meaning or cause taweel to be made of them I did not find that he sallallahu alayhi wa sallam used to warn the people from having faith in what was apparent in his speech with which he described his Lord, whether it was concerning Allaah being above His creation or the Hands of Allaah or other than these. There is nothing recorded from him which proves that these Attributes have another inner meaning other than what is apparent from their meaning” (Risaalah Ithbaatul-Istawaa wal-Fawqiyyah, pp.176-183, which is part of Majmooatur-Rasaail al-Muneeriyyah)

Note that the Juwayni in question here is not Imam al- Haramayn – Abu al-Ma`ali – but his father Abu Muhammad. More importantly, the above epistle is SPURIOUS. Even if it were authentic, his own son followed the Ash`ariyya and so did the latter’s student, Hujjat al-Islam al-Ghazzali. As for the “Salafis’” reference to Fath al-Bari 13:350 to show that Imam Ibn al-Juwayni – Imam al-Haramayn – abandoned `Ilm al-Kalam and the way of the Ash`ariyya, it is another falsehood built on a deliberate misrepresentation of Ibn al- Juwayni’s words. What Ibn Hajar said is that he embarked on the perilous seas of Kalam i.e. he over-specialized in it, and this is why he recommended to others not to follow his path. Al-Shafi`i disrecommended kalam to al-Muzani on the very same grounds: “You are in Taran” i.e. a whirlpool in the Black Sea. This does not mean that their involvement in Kalam was not necessary. Rather, it was both necessary and useful since it is by such involvement that they defeated the heretics of their time. However, the exact words of Ibn al-Juwayni do not even mention kalam but sound more like a Sufi search for the simplest direct taste (dhawq) of faith: Ibn al-Sam`ani in Dhayl Tarikh Baghdad narrated from Abu Ja`far Muhammad ibn Abi `Ali al-Hamadhani that Imam al- Haramayn said:

“I read fifty thousand times fifty thousand [folios]. Then I left behind the people of Islam and their Islam of outward sciences in those books. I took to the vast sea and probed what Muslims deem prohibited to probe. I did all this in the pursuit of truth. I used, in bygone times, to flee from imitation. Now I have returned from all this to the word of truth: ‘Cling to the faith of old women’ (`alaykum bi-din al-`aja’iz). If Allah does not catch me with His immense kindness so that I shall die with the faith of old women and my final end be sealed with the uprightness of the People of Truth and the pure declaration: la ilaha illallah – then woe to al-Juwayni’s son!”

Ibn al-Subki comments in Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra (5:191-192):

“Ash`aris have two well-known positions regarding the affirmation of the Attributes and whether they are let pass according to their literal meaning but in confirmity with Transcendence, or whether they should be interpreted. The first position is that which is traced back to the Salaf and forms the Imam’s choice in al-Risala al-Nizamiyya as well as in other passages of his kalam works. So his ‘return’ means a return from interpretation (al-ta’wil) to committal (al-tafwid). Neither the latter nor the former are condemned for it is a question of ijtihad. I mean the question of interpreting on the one hand or committing together with Transcendence. The great problem and terrible disaster consists in letting them pass according to literal meaning while believing that the latter is the actual meaning and that it is not impossible for it to apply to the Creator. And that is the creed of the idol-worshipping anthropomorphists. {Those in whose hearts is doubt} (3:7), their doubt impels them to pursue that which is allegorical {seeking to cause dissension}. Allah’s curses be upon them uninterruptedly! How bold they are in committing lies, and how little is their understanding of realities!”

As for the “Salafis’” citation of Imam al-Dhahabi in his Siyar A`lam al-Nubala’ censuring Ta’wil, our reply is that al-Dahahabi is not ma`sum. He claimed that the Salaf “never subjected the verses and hadiths of the Attributes to tawil” but this is not entirely true. Yet, what is more to the point here, is that the Salaf never subjected the verses and hadiths of the Attributes to ta’wil leading to tajsim, which is what the “Salafis” do at the drop of a hat. The same goes for their citation of a similar claim by Ibn Qudama in Tahrim al-Nazar: he requests proofs of the ta’wil of the Salaf. But these proofs are many and can be readily accepted by those who have no leaning to anthropomorphism.
The “Salafis” said:
Abul Hasan al-`Ash’ari said: “And he has two eyes without any mention of how.” (Imam al-`Ash’ari, Al Ibanaah ‘an Usul ad-Diyanah, Page. 9 and Maqalat, Page 290)

The above is definitely not al-Ash`ari’s original text. Ibn `Asakir’s citation of the same passage in Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari (p. 158-159) states: “[Our position is] that He has an eye (`aynan) without saying how.” A recent edition of the Ibana by Bashshar `Uyun (p. 44) consequently amended its own tradition to follow the text cited by Ibn `Asakir since the evidence of the Qur’an and the Sunna mentions {My Eye (`ayni)} (20:39) in the singular and {Our Eyes} (52:48, 54:14) in the plural but never two eyes in the dual. Accordingly Ibn Hazm said:

“Saying: ‘He has two eyes’ is null and void and part of the belief of the anthropomorphists… Allah I said ‘eye’ (`ayn) and ‘eyes’ (a`yunin)… so it is not permissible for anyone to describe Him as possessing ‘two eyes’ because no text has reached us to that effect.” Al-Fisal fil-Milal (2:166).

Today’s anthropomorphists continue to insist on the attribution of two eyes without proof, adducing the Prophet’s statement, upon him peace: “The Antichrist (al-dajjal) is one-eyed whereas your Lord is not one-eyed” [Narrated from Ibn `Umar in al-Bukhari, Muslim, and the Sunan] but ignoring or rather pretending to ignore that Ahl al-Sunna explained this statement to mean that Allah Most High is exempt of defects and of the attributes of creatures, whereas the Antichrist is both created and imperfect. Cf. Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari and al-Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim.

Further down, in all versions of the Ibana, the text states: “Allah Most High said that He possesses a face and an eye which is neither given modality nor defined”! Al-Ash`ari also said, in two editions of the Ibana (Dr. Fawqiyya Husayn Mahmud’s 1977 edition and Abbas Sabbagh’s 1994 edition):

“And [we believe] that He established Himself over the Throne in the sense that He said and the meaning that He wills in a way that transcends touch, settlement, fixity, immanence, and displacement. The Throne does not carry Him, rather the Throne and its carriers are carried by the subtleness of His power, subdued under His grip. He is above the Throne and the Heavens and above everything to the limits of the earth with an aboveness which does not bring Him nearer to the Throne and the Heavens, just as it does not make Him further from the earth. Rather, He is Highly Exalted above the Throne and the Heavens, just as He is Highly Exalted above the earth. Yet He is near to every entity and is {nearer to [the worshipper] than his jugular vein} and He witnesses everything.”

Al-Ash`ari also said, in his Risala ila Ahl al-Thughar, that it is categorically obligatory to affirm that Allah is not a body and that such attributes are not in the sense of organs, and that Allah has no limit and does not move from one place to another. He said these were a matter of Ijma` among Ahl al-Sunna.

Can you comment upon the tradition narrated through ‘Uqbah Ibn ‘Amir whereby the Prophet SAW pointed to his two eyes upon reciting verse 58 of Surah Nisa
verily the Lord heres and Sees

This hadith has been graded Hasan by Ibn Hajar (Fath al-Bari, 13/373).

More precisely, he MHMD upon him peace – “placed his thumb on his ear and his index finger on his eye.” You will find this hadith explained by our Sunni Imams – Ibn Hibban and al-Bayhaqi with further comments by al- `Izz Ibn `Abd al-Salam – in the PDF file “The ‘Hand’ of Allah Most High” available at http://www.aqsaonline.co.uk/

(7) Can you check al-Buti’s ‘Supposed-defense’ of Ibn Taymiyya in his Kitab titled Nadwa Ittjahaat al-Fiqr al-Islami,, Page. 264-265. If you do not have the text, you can read the report on page 25 of the attached document.

It is evident that al-Buti has a mixed opinion of the man as is clear from his suspecting Ibn Taymiyya of following Aristotelian causality and his accusing him of over-involvement in philosophy and kalam cf. al-Buti, al-Salafiyya (p. 164-175).
(8) What can you say regarding Ibn Kathirs report in defence of Ibn Taymiyya’s books, ‘Aqida Wasitiyya and ‘Aqida al-Hamawiyya? The text from Ibn Kathir’s Bidaya is referenced and found on page 26 of the attached document (at the top).

Such defense was probably because he was a loyal young student of Ibn Taymiyya and probably thought that he deserved better consideration for his learning. A close examination of Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir and his other works shows that he shared none of the anthropomorphist errors of the Hamawiyya and Wasitiyya but steered clear of them.
Ibn Abbas’s interpretation of Allah’s throne as meaning >His knowledge (al-Khazin, Tafsir, 2:255) cited through >Ibn Abi hatim by Ibn Ibn kathir. The isnad of this >report has been declared weak by Ibn Kathir in at- >Taqreeb, No. 960 and by al-Dhahabi in his Mizan al-I’tidal >No, 1536.

This is narrated marfu` from the Prophet MHMD upon him peace – by Sufyan al-Thawri in his Tafsir with a sound chain according to Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 8:199) and al-Tabarani in al-Sunna. It is narrated mawquf at Ibn `Abbas by al-Tabari with three sound chains in his Tafsir (3:9-11) and others. Al-Tabari chooses it as the most correct explanation: “The external wording of the Qur’an indicates the correctness of the report from Ibn `Abbas that it [the kursi] is His `ilm and the original sense of al-kursi is al-`ilm.” Also narrated in “suspended” form (mu`allaq) by al- Bukhari in his Sahih from Sa`id ibn Jubayr (Book of Tafsir, chapter on the saying of Allah Most High: {And if you go in fear, then (pray) standing or on horseback} (2:239). Its chains are documented by Ibn Hajar in Taghliq al-Ta`liq (2/4:185-186) where he shows that Sufyan al-Thawri, `Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi, and Waki` narrated it marfu` from the Prophet MHMD upon him peace – although in the Fath he declares the mawquf version from Ibn `Abbas more likely. This report was never declared weak by Ibn Kathir nor by Ibn Hajar, the author of al-Taqrib. Yes, al-Dhahabi tends to weaken its chain in Mizan al-I`tidal because, like Ibn Kathir, he prefers the “footstool” version. The report from Ibn `Abbas is also found in `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad’s book al-Sunna (2:501). They rely on it when it is convenient to them then they disregard it when it is invonvenient to them. Imam al-Bayhaqi in al-Asma’ wal-Sifat (2:272), like the rest of the Salaf already mentioned, gives precedence to Ibn `Abbas’s authentic explanation of the Kursi as “His Knowledge.”
The “Salafis” said:
these and their likes are Attributes of Allaah in which it is obligatory to have faith, leaving them upon their literal meanings, turning away from taweel and keeping a distance from resemblance, along with the belief that none of the Attributes of the Creator resemble anything from the attributes of the creation, just as His Self does not resemble the selves of the creation. Allaah said: It was upon this that the Salaf of this nation and the scholars of the Sunnah were upon, they accepted them all with faith and stayed away from likening Allaah to His creation and taweel. They relegated the knowledge of the how (of the Attributes) to Allaah.” (Sharh as-Sunnah, 1/170, of al-Baghawee)

And this is a flagrant example of their perverse tampering of the books of Islam as Imam al-Baghawi never said anything close to their words “They relegated the knowledge of the ‘how’ (of the Attributes) to Allah” but what he said is “wa-wakalu al-`ilma fiha ila Allah” – meaning, “they RELEGATED ALL KNOWLEDGE PERTAINING TO THEM [THE ATTRIBUTES] TO ALLAH.” {Qaatalahum Allah anna yu’fakun.}
What is the authenticity of Imam Awza’i’s report (al-Bayhaqi in Asma Wa Sifat (Pg. 408), San[a]d graded jayyid in Fath al-Bari 13/406) which states that Allah is above the throne.

It is narrated by al-Bayhaqi in al-Asma’ wal-Sifat (Kawthari ed. p. 408=Hashidi ed. 2:304 #865 isnad layyin) with a weak chain containing Muhammad ibn Kathir al- Missisi who is da`if cf. al-Arna’ut, Tahrir Taqrib al- Tahdhib (3:310) while Muhammad ibn `Ali al-Jawhari is unknown. Yet Ibn Hajar grades its chain “good” (isnad jayyid) in the Fath (13:406) while others go to rather typical excess such as Ibn Taymiyya who claimed the chain was sahih in his Fatwa Hamawiyya and Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyya (2:38) as did Ibn al-Qayyim in his Ijtima` al-Juyush al-Islamiyya (p. 69) while in al-Sawa`iq (2:211) he claims, “Its narrators are all trustworthy Imams”! As for al-Dhahabi his case is the strangest of the four as he declares the chain sound in Tadhkirat al-Huffaz (1:181-182) although he himself states of al-Missisi in the Siyar (Fikr ed. 9:113): “His narrations can be written but, as for providing any proof, they are not up to it.”
The “Salafis” said:
Imaam Maalik: “Allaah is above the sky and His Knowledge is in every place, not being absent from anything.” (Aboo Dawood in al-Masaail p.263, al-Aajuree in ash-Shareeah p.289, and others)

From Mutarrif ibn ‘Abd Allâh – al-Bukhârî’s shaykh – and Habib ibn Abî Habib on the h.adîth of descent (“Our blessed Lord descends in the lat third of the night”): “It is our Blessed and Exalted Lord’s command which descends 1 ; as for Him, He is eternally the same, He does not move or go to and fro.”2 Ibn Rushd in Sharh. al-’Utbiyya – a commentary on an early work of Mâlikî jurisprudence by Muh.hammad ibn Ah.mad ibn ‘Abd al-’Aziz al-’Utbî al-Qurt.ubî (d. 254) – stated that Mâlik’s position is: “The Throne is not Allâh’s location of settledness (mawdi’ istiqrâr Allâh).”3 The report attributing to Imâm Mâlik the words: “Allâh is in the heaven and His knowledge is in every place” is a condemned (munkar), anomalous (shâdhdh) report of questionable authenticity narrated through Ah.mad ibn H.anbal from Surayj ibn al-Nu’mân al-Lu’lu’i 4 from ‘Abd Allâh ibn Nâfi’ al-Sa’igh from Mâlik.5 Imâm Ah.mad himself declared ‘Abd Allâh ibn Nâfi’ al-Sa’igh weak (da’îf), Abû Zur’a frowned at his name and declared him “condemned” (munkar), al-Bukhârî questioned his memorization, and Ibn ‘Adi stated that he transmitted oddities (gharâ’ib) from Mâlik.6 As for the content of the report, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Fattah Abû Ghudda noted in his commentary on Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr’s al-Intiqa’ that it is contradicted by what is firmly established in mass-transmitted narrations from Mâlik and by al-Sa’igh’s other report from Mâlik omitting the above words.7 The report is made further dubious by the fact that Mâlik was well-known to condemn any statements about the Essence and Attributes of Allâh Most High other than sound reports, particularly statements that suggest anthropomorphism.8 Al-Awzâ’î said: “Whoever holds on to the rare and unusual positions of the scholars has left Islâm.”9

NOTES

1 The bracketed words are only in the wording cited by al-Qâdî ‘Iyâd in his Tartîb al-Madârik (2:44).
2 Narrated from Mutarrif by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhîd (7:143) with a weak chain because of Jâmi’ ibn Sawada as per al-Dâraqut.nî in Ibn H.ajar’s Lisân (2:93). Also narrated from Salih ibn Ayyûb from Habib ibn Abî Habib – who is very weak – by al-Dhahabî in Syar A’lâm al-Nubalâ’ (8:418). The latter reported in his Mîzân (1:452) from Ibn ‘Adi’s Kamil (2″818) the opinion that all of Ibn Abî Habib’s narrations are forged but this is an extreme statement in light of three factors: (a) Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhîd (24:177) mentioned Habib as merely weak, adding: “His reports from Mâlik are full of mistakes and condemned matters”; (b) Salih ibn Ayyûb said: “I mentioned this report to Yah.yâ ibn Bukayr and he said: “Excellent, by Allâh! and I did not hear it from Mâlik.” Narrated by al-Dhahabî who describes Ibn Bukayr in Tadhkirat al-H.uffâz. (2:420) as “the muh.addith of Egypt, the Imâm and trustworthy h.adîth Master… one of the vessels of knowledge together with truthfulness and complete reliability… Where is the like of Ibn Bukayr in his leadership in the Religion, his insight in fatwâ, and the abundance of his learning?” (c) Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhîd (7:143) also narrates this report from Habib, then goes on to narrate it from Mutarrif, adding: “It is possible that the matter be as Mâlik said, and Allâh knows best.” It is established that Jâmi’ did narrate from Mutarrif, as stated by al-Mizzî in Tahdhîb al-Kamâl (28:71).
3 As quoted in Fath. al-Bârî (1959 ed. 7:124 #3592).
4 Misspelt Shurayh in al-Saqqâf’s edition of al-’Uluw (p. 396 #340) and al-Mahdî’s edition of al-Shari’a (p. 293 #663-664). Shurayh ibn al-Nu’mân al-Sa’idi al-Kûfî is a Tâbi’î who died before al-Sa’igh was born.
5 In Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr’s al-Intiqa’ (p. 71), al-Dhahabî’s Mukhtasar al-’Uluw (p. 247), and al-Ajurrî’s al-Shari’a (p. 293 #663-664).
6 Al-Dhahabî, Mîzân (2:513-514 #4647); al-’Uqayli, al-Du’afa’ (2:311), Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil (4:242 #1070=4:1556); Abû Hatim, al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil (5:183); Ibn H.ajar, Tahdhîb al-Tahdhîb (6:46-47 #99). Dr. Nur al-Dîn ‘Itr, however, states in his margins on al-Dhahabî’s al-Mughnî fî al-Du’afa’ (1:513 #3396) that al-Sa’igh is very reliable when narrating from Mâlik and that Ibn H.ajar declared him trustworthy (thiqa) in al-Taqrîb. Yet, the latter grading was downgraded to “truthful” (sadûq) by al-Arna’ût and Ma’rûf in al-Tahrir (2:277 #3659). Al-Albânî in his notes in Mukhtasar al-’Uluw (p. 140) criticized al-Kawthari for citing al-Sa’igh as weak in his introduction to al-Bayhaqî’s al-Asmâ’ wa al-Sifat (p. 0), but he himself cites him as weak in al-Silsila al-Da’ifa (2:231-232) as pointed out by Shaykh H.asan al-Saqqâf in his edition of al-’Uluw (p. 397 n. 708)!
7 In Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, al-Intiqa’ (p. 71 n. 3 and p. 73).
8 For example, Mâlik said: “Allâh is neither ascribed a limit nor likened with anything” (lâ yuhaddad wa lâ yushabbah). Ibn al-’Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’ân (4:1740).
9 Cited by al-Dhahabî, Siyar A’lâm al-Nubalâ’ (1997 ed. 7:99).

[from above]
The “Salafis” said:
Shaykh ul-Islaam Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak (d.181H): “He is above the seventh heaven above His Throne and we do not say as the Jahmiyyah say: He is here on the earth.” (Khalq Afaalul-Ibaad no.13 of al-Bukhaaree, ar-Radd alal Mareesee pp.24, 103 and ar- Radd alal-Jahmiyyah p.50 of ad-Daarimee and Abdullaah ibn Ahmad in as-Sunnah pp.7, 25, 35 and 72)

Imam al-Bayhaqi said in al-Asma’ wal-Sifat (Kawthari ed. p. 426-427; Hashidi ed. 2:334-336):
As for the report to which cling those who believe that Allah Most High has a direction, whereby `Ali ibn al-Hasan said: ‘I asked `Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak, “How (kayf) do we know our Lord?” He replied, “In the seventh heaven on His Throne.” I said, “The Jahmiyya also say He is such.” He said, “We do not mean it like the Jahmiyya. We mean He Himself (huwa huwa).” I said, “With a limit (bi-hadd)??” He said, “Yes, by Allah, with a limit!”‘ [Narrated mostly in anthropomorphist works: `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad's al-Sunna, `Uthman ibn Sa`id al-Darimi's al-Radd `ala al-Marisi and al-Radd `ala al-Jahmiyya, al-Dhahabi's al-`Uluw, and Ibn Taymiyya's Hamawiyya.] – `Abd Allah only meant by ‘limit’ the limit dictated by transmission (hadd al-sam`), namely, that the truthful report stated that {He established Himself on the Throne} (20:5), so He is on the Throne as He related. By saying this, he meant to belie the Jahmiyya who claimed that He is in every place. His other report confirms this, and Allah knows best.
From `Ali ibn al-Hasan ibn Shaqiq: ‘I heard `Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak say, “We know our Lord to be above (fawq) seven heavens, [He established Himself over His Throne], distinct (ba’in) from His creation, and we do not say as the Jahmiyya said, that He is right here’ – and he pointed to the ground (hahuna fil-ard).”‘ By the term ‘distinct’ he means, as he explained directly afterwards, to negate the claim [of intermixing (imtizaj)] of the Jahmiyya, NOT to suggest direction on the opposite side. He means what the Law said in absolute terms, and Allah knows best.

Al-Kawthari pointed out that nowhere in the Qur’an and Sunna are the terms “in the seventh heaven” applied to Allah Most High nor the term “on His Throne” other than exactly as the verse of istiwa’ said and that that report from Ibn al-Mubarak is therefore munkar regardless of its chain.
The “Salafis” said:
Al-Haafidh ibn Hajar wrote: “Some embarked to affirm (the Attributes of Allaah) whilst others negated it. The former went to the extent of making resemblance between Allaah and the creation, whilst the latter went to the extent of denying the Attributes of Allaah (tateel). The rejection of thisfrom the Salaf, such as Aboo Haneefah, Aboo Yusuf and ash-Shaafiee, and their sayings in regards to the censure of the people of kalaam, is well known. The reason for such censure was that the people of kalaam spoke about those matters which both the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam and his Companions remained quiet about The people of kalaam did notcontent themselves until they filled the Religion with issues and the sayings of the philosophers. They made this philosophy the basis and the foundational principle to which everything was referred back to, and all that which opposed it from the narrations then false interpretation (taweel) was made of them, even if they were averse to the result. They claimed that what they had compiled was the noblest branch of knowledge and the most deserving to be acquired, and those who did not utilise what they had laid down, then they were from the laymen and the ignorant ones. So delight is for the one who clings to what the Salaf were upon and distances himself from the innovations that the khalaf introduced. However, if one cannot keep away from it, then let him take only that which he needs and let the way of the Salaf be his intended goal.” (Fath al-Baaree, 13/253)

May Allah ever curse the liars and the people of ta`teel and tahreef. The above excerpt deliberately cuts out the core of Ibn Hajar’s words in which he identifies the culprits that are meant. Namely: “It is established from Malik that in the time of the Prophet, upon him peace, and that of Abu Bakr and `Umar, there was nothing of these idle lusts – *meaning the innovations of the Khawarij, Rawafid, and Qadariyya*.” This is the passage that was suppressed from the above excerpt, in place of the ellipsis.
The “Salafis” said:
Imaam Aboo Yusuf, a leading student of Imaam Aboo Haneefah, said: “Whoever seeks his religion through kalaam is a heretic (zindeeq).” (Taweel Mukhtalif al-Hadeeth (p.43) of ibn Qutaybah; Tabyeen Kadhib al-Muftaree (p.333) of ibn Asaakir; Sharfu Ashaab al-Hadeeth (p.4) of al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadeel; and Sawn al-Mantiq wal-Kalaam (p.60) of as-Suyootee)

As Imam Muhammad Abu Zahra said in his book on Abu Hanifa (p.133): “Whenever you hear Abu Yusuf or Muhammad [ibn al- Hasan] or al-Shafi`i or Ibn Hanbal and others [among the early Imams] revile the science of kalam and those who take knowledge by following the methods of the mutakallimun, know that they only meant by their criticism the Mu`tazila and the methodology of the Mu`tazila.” In fact, beginning with Sayyiduna `Ali and through the time of the four Imams, Ahl al-Sunna did involve themselves in kalam to the extent that they refuted the innovators, just as we now wade through those time-consuming proofs against illiterate promoters of Salafitic kalam to stem somewhat the tide of moneyed misguidance now flooding the Muslim world.
The “Salafis” said:
Al-Haafidh ibn Abdul-Barr wrote (citing ibn Khuwaizimdaad): “The people of the innovated sects in the view of (Imaam) Maalik and the remainder of our companions (of the Maalikee madhab) are the people of kalaam. Every person of kalaam is from the people of the innovated sects and innovations, whether he is an Asharee or other than an Asharee, and his witness is never accepted in Islaam. Indeed, his witness is to be ostracised and he is to be punished for his innovation, and if he persists then repentance is sought from him.” (Jaami Bayaan al-Ilm, 2/117)

Ibn Khuwayz Mindaad died in 390. He is NOT a companion of Imam Malik but came 200 years and seven biographical layers later. When he says “Maalik said…” he is not a reliable source unless he is confirmed independently. This, even if he produced his chain to Malik’s supposed statement; what then if he does not even have a chain! Ibn Khuwayz Mindaad’s reports from Maalik “contain anomalies” and he “contradicts the Madhhab in both Fiqh and Usul nor do the [Maliki] experts rely on his positions” according to al-Qadi `Iyad (d. 544) in Tartib al-Madaarik (Moroccan ed. 7:77-78). `Iyad also said: “He was not insightful in his positions nor strong in fiqh. Abu al-Walid al-Baji said of him: I never heard him mentioned once by the Ulema of Iraq.” `Iyad also exposes Ibn Khuwayz Mindaad as an extremist in his anti-kalam stance: “He alienated the Mutakallimin of Ahl al-Sunna and ruled that all of them were among the people of vain lusts (ahwa’) concerning whom Malik said his famous statement on [avoiding] their marriage, [rejecting] their witness and leadership, and alienating them.” Ibn Farhun (d. 799) cites all of the above in al-Deebaaj al-Mudhahhab (#491). Imam Malik meant the Mu`tazilis and their sub-sects by consensus in the statement in question, as is made clear (among other sources) by Ibn `Abd al-Barr himself in his report from the same Ibn Khuwayz Mindaad in the previous page cf. Jaami` Bayaan al-`Ilm wa Fadlih (1994 Saudi ed. 2:942-943 #1800). It is known that Imam Malik never retained any Mu`tazilis, Qadaris, or Khawaarij in his Muwatta’ as narrators, while the Two Shaykhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim) and their students such as Imam al-Tirmidhi did narrate from Qadaris and even Jahmis. See on this the relevant chapter in al-Suyuti’s Tadrib al-Raawi. Clearly, the misguided view Ibn Khuwayz Mindaad expressed in including the Ash`aris among the people of innovation was rejected by his own School and is not considered in the least valid by the major Maliki Huffaz and Fuqaha’ such as Qaadi `Iyaad, al-Maazari, Abu Bakr ibn al-`Arabi, Abul-Walid al-Baaji, al-Qurtubi, and others – all thorough Ash`aris.
The “Salafis” said:
As for al-Subkis son, Taaj ad-Deen al-Subki, he went to extremes in criticising ibn Taymiyyah. Such that as-Sakhaawee endorsed the following words about him, following his statement: “Did any of the Hanbalees raise their heads (i.e. become prominent)?” “This is from the strangest of things, and the most sectarian/partisan of attitudes, and this is why the Qaadee of our time, and Shaykh of the madhhab al-Izz al-Kanaanee wrote under this statement: ‘And likewise Allaah did not raise the heads of the Mu’attila’ and then he said about Taaj ad-Deen Subki: ‘He is a man having little manners, lack of scholarly integrity, ignorant of Ahl as-Sunnah and their ranks.’” (al-I’laan bi at-Tawbeekh liman Dhamma at-Taareekh (94-95) of as-Sakhaawee)

The passage in question in al-Tawbikh (p. 56-57 of the Dar al-Kitab al-`Arabi ed.) is about criticism by Ibn al-Subki of his teacher al-Dhahabi, not Ibn Taymiyya. It is inside a series of excerpts from Ibn al-Subki’s Tabaqat. Al-Sakhawi considers that Ibn al-Subki exaggerated in his criticism of al-Dhahabi and cites al-`Izz al-Kinani’s violent comments to show the counter-effect of those exaggerations. This never means that he approved of – even less endorsed – al-Kinani’s comments! Ibn al-Subki may have gone too far against al-Dhahabi, but he is unanimously respected, especially in the Shafi`i madhhab. To call him ignorant or a mu`attil is itself a mark of ignorance and disrespect that does not speak well for the accuser. Similarly, al-Sakhawi does not approve of all of Ibn al-Subki’s criticism of al-Dhahabi or the excessive, sweeping barb against the Hanbalis (“Did any Hanbali ever merit to raise his head?…”) at which al-Kinani rightly took offence, but al-Sakhawi did approve of some of it as he states further down (p. 76): “He [Ibn al-Subki] went too far in his anti-Hanbali fanaticism as I showed before… although I do not exonerate al-Dhahabi from some of the charges he brought against him.” Al-Sakhawi probably quotes Ibn al-Subki as a historian more than anyone else in al-Tawbikh – a book written in praise of history and historians. WAllahu a`lam. Was-Salam,

Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad
Qasyoun/at/ziplip.com
[11 Mar 2003]

Posted in Personal Thoughts | Leave a Comment »

PC Troubleshooting

Posted by PakNik on November 10, 2006

I’ve decided to move all articles pertaining to PC troubleshooting and stuff to pcproblems.wordpress.com. Everyone’s invited to view and comment on it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Run Command Missing?

Posted by PakNik on November 3, 2006

I’ve move this article to my troubleshooting blog. Please go here

Posted in Tips & Tricks | 8 Comments »

Killed for wearing Hijab

Posted by PakNik on November 1, 2006

Defender of the Flag: In Memory of Alia Ansari

By Imam Zaid Shakir (Zaytuna Institute)

This past Tuesday, Muslims celebrated ‘Id al-Fitr, one of Islam’s two great festivals. For me, it was a beautiful day that began with a truly warm and vibrant ‘Id gathering at the Zaytuna Institute. God afforded me a wonderful opportunity to see friends who had been “missing in action,” to meet enthusiastic new converts to the Islam, and to kiss so many babies I felt like a politician. During that time, I was also able to break away from the gathering to visit the graves of some distinguished Muslims buried in a nearby cemetery. Visiting the local Muslim cemetery on ‘Id day is a practice I have been able to maintain since my earliest years in Islam. They serve as a solemn reminder that all of us have an appointment with the Angel of Death.

I was blessed to stay at Zaytuna until the early afternoon when I departed to attend a meeting at a local school, a reminder that we are in America and sometimes, despite our best efforts to clear our schedules on the day of our festivals, the requisites of our everyday duties intervene. After that meeting, I was able to visit some of the Muslim families in the area. All of those visits filled my heart with awe at the simple dignity of ordinary Muslims, many of whom are struggling valiantly to survive in this sometimes cruel, always challenging and complicated society.

The last of those visits was to the family of Alia Ansari, the Afghani-American mother of six who was gunned down in central Fremont last Thursday as she walked to pick up her children from school. The Ansari family are everyday people-and, they are proud people. As I talked with Alia’s husband, brothers, and cousins who were gathered in the family’s humble apartment, it became clear to me that, most of all, they were proud to be Ansaris, descendants of the companion of the Prophet Muhammad, peace upon him, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, and the great Muslim mystical sage, Khawaja Abdullah Ansari. In Afghan society, they are people who are identified with piety and they endeavor to live up to that identification, in their various ways.

Alia Ansari migrated from war-torn Afghanistan at the age of 17. When her father died shortly thereafter, she became a second parent to her younger siblings. A life of hardship could not suppress her inner beauty, expressed most readily in an irrepressible smile. Her husband, Ahmadullah Ansari, an auto mechanic struggling to make ends meet for a family that includes six young children, five of them girls, spoke glowingly of Alia’s martyrdom and the place God has reserved for her in Heaven. Her story impressed on me the truth embodied in the words of a poet who said, “Be yourself beautiful, and
you will find the world full of beauty.”

Her husband, contrary to the caricature of the vindictive, hateful, enraged Muslim, mentioned how the family did not wish her martyrdom be treated as a hate crime, because he did not want her death to be a source of agitation in the area’s large Muslim community. He also mentioned that the family would not want the murderer executed, because that would not bring his wife back. His wife was a martyr, her place in Paradise secure-for him that was enough.

His gentle voice was most emphatic when he mentioned that he did not want his wife’s death to be politicized. Rather, he wanted her spirit of love and reconciliation to prevail after her passing as it had during her life. He spoke of his desire that her funeral be a solemn service, where people of all faiths could gather to remind each other just how important it is to work to remove the pernicious stain of racial and religious hatred from this society lest it lead to ever deepening spirals of senseless violence.

As we sat on the floor of their sparsely furnished living room to eat a meal of traditional Afghan food, our gathering was overseen by four walls decorated with only an unframed picture of the Ka’aba, and a tapestry with Ayatu Kursi, the Qur’anic Verse of the Throne (2:255), printed on it. Husband, brothers, and cousins gathered around to tell me more about just who Alia Ansari was. They spoke proudly of a deeply religious individual who embodied the true spirit of the “Ansar,” the Helpers. The original Ansar were those Muslims in Medina who welcomed into their city and homes the faithful believers who had migrated from Mecca, fleeing the persecution of that city’s population. The Qur’an mentions the spirit the Ansar exhibited in the following terms:

As for those who had previously established homes [in Medina], having adopted the faith; they show their love and affection to those who migrated to them [seeking refuge]. You will not find their hearts harboring any desire for that given to those migrants; rather they give preference to them over themselves, even though they are themselves afflicted with grinding poverty. (59:9)

Alia was indeed a helper. In addition to her tireless and faithful service to her immediate family, she was constantly helping relatives and neighbors, many of whom themselves had recently migrated to this country from their native Afghanistan. Her brother, Humayun, remarked that she did the work of six people and never complained. A typical day might find her preparing meals for the family, dropping the children to school, taking a neighbor shopping, shuttling a newly-arrived relative to the immigration department, watching a neighbor’s child, nursing a sick relative, or numerous other tasks demanding the sacrifice of her time and energy.

Although never formally educated in Islam, she was a deeply devout and spiritual individual. Her husband noted that she never missed a prayer. He quietly added that she would stand for voluntary prayer every night until she wept beseeching God to save her daughters from the ravages of the lewd, violent, promiscuous youth culture of this country. Her deep spirituality is illustrated by the following incident. A few days before her demise, she told her husband that she had seen her deceased grandfather, an individual well known for his righteousness, in a dream. The learned sage indicated that the end of her worldly struggles was near, and a resting place in Paradise would soon be hers.

As a pious Muslim woman, she never left home without her hijab, the traditional head scarf worn by Muslim women. She was proud of her hijab. In the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001, some of her friends and relatives, afraid of reprisal attacks, took off their hijabs. Alia encouraged them not to compromise their religion, especially when they had nothing to do with those crimes. As for herself, she told them that she would never take off her hijab, even if someone put a gun to her head demanding that she do so. Alia said that her hijab was her flag. She could not have known as she began the fateful walk to her children’s school last Thursday that her path would cross that of a lone gunman who in a single act of mindless violence would bring a close to a life of dedication and service. She could not have known that her grandfather’s words were so close to fulfillment. She could not have known that she would soon die defending her flag.

Among the believers are those who have been true to their covenant to God. Among them are those who have given their lives, others patiently wait their turn, having never weakened in their resolve. (33:23)

Imam Zaid Shakir
Zaytuna Institute
10/25/05

Posted in Personal Thoughts | Leave a Comment »