- There are seventeen thousand (17,000) Ayah in the original Quran. (Al Shafi, Vol. 2, p. 616)
- A comparison between the present Quran and the original Quran (which was compiled by Imam Ali (r.a) and will be brought by Imam Mahdi (Shia's 12th Imam) when he appears before the Day of Judgment. (Usool Kaafi, Vol. 2, p. 123)
- The Quran has been purposely altered by the drunkard Caliphs {Abu-Bakr (r.a), Umar (r.a) and Usman (r.a)}; The present Quran is false; It’s the duty of Imam Mehdi (Shia's 12th Imam) to bring it in its original form; When Imam Mahdi comes, then the Quran will be recited in its original form. (Quran Translation by Maqbool Hussain Delhvi, Chap.12, p. 384 & p.479 – Published in India)
- Original Quran will not be known until the manifestation of Imam Mahdi (Shia’s 12th Imam). (Anwaar-ul-Na'umania, Vol. 2, p. 360 - Published in Iran)
- The present Quran is abridged whereas the Original Quran is kept by Imam Mahdi." (Hazaar Tumhari Das Hamari, p. 553)
- No one possesses complete knowledge of the Quran except the Imams. (Usool Kaafi, Vol. 1, p. 228)
- After the death of Holy Prophet (s.a.w), the original Quran was in the custody of Ali (r.a) and he brought it to Abu-Bakr (r.a), but Abu Bakr refused to allow this original version. That is why Muslim Ummah was deprived of original Quran. (Sheikh-e-Saqifah, p. 138 – Published in Pakistan)
- Shaikhain (Abu Bakr & Omar) refused to accept the Quran which was compiled by Ali (r.a). (Fasal-ul-Khitab, p. 64)
- Insult to the Holy Quran. (Tohfa-tul-Awaam, Vol. 2, p. 293)
- The Quran descended (was revealed) in four parts, whereas present Quran consists of three parts. (Shia Aur Tehreef-e-Quran, p. 62)
- The present Quran is in an altered, corrupted and distorted form.. (Fatuhat-e-Shia, p. 129)
- An acceptance of the belief that the Quran has been altered. Shia accuse Abu Bakr (r.a) of being involved in the alteration. (Ayat-ul-Qaloob, Vol. 2, p. 832)
- Renegades changed the Original Quran. (Quran Majeed by Hakeem Syed Maqbool, p. 1011)
- Un Islamic views of the Quran. (Sheikh-e-Saqifa, p. 138)
- The main compilers of Quran altered, corrupted, and distorted the Quran. (Al-Ehtijaj, p. 257)
- Collectors of Quran deleted verses about the virtues of Prophet’s progeny from Surah Al-Ahzab which were about the length of Surah Al-Bakrah. (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, p. 66 - Published in Iran)
- Usman (r.a) made alteration in Surah Al-Rahman by eliminating words “MINKUM”. (Haq-ul-Yaqeen, p. 525 – Published in Iran)
- The statement “ILAA AJALIN-MUSAMMA” has been removed from the Quran." (Muta’h Aur Salahuddin A’ybi, p. 60 – Published in Pakistan)
- Attempts to provide re-interpretation of the Quranic verses related to “WATI-FIL-DUBR”. (Tehzeeb-ul-Ahkaam, Vol. 7, p. 415 – Published in Iran)
- The Quranic verses were not arranged by Abu-Bakr (r.a) in the same order as that in which they were revealed. (Sheikh-e-Saqifah, p. 134 Published in Pakistan)
- The present Quran doesn’t mention the name of “Pakistan”; however, our (Shia’s) true Quran contains the name of “Pakistan”. (Hazar Tumhari Das Hamari, p. 554 – Published in Pakistan)
Sunday, April 1, 2012
The 73rd Sect
The Qadiani cult often quotes the hadith:
Abdullah bin Amarra relates that the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said
‘Surely things will happen to my people as happened earlier to Israelites, they will resemble each other like one shoe in a pair resembles the other to the extent that if anyone among the Israelites has openly committed adultery to his mother there will be some who will do this in my Ummah as well, verily the Israelites were divided into 72 sects but my people will be divided into 73 sects, all of them will be in the fire except one.' The companions asked. 'Who are they O Messenger of Allah,' Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said. `They are those who will be like me and my companions.’
(Tirmidhi - Kitabul Eeman)
There is no doubt the saying of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is true, the Ummah has split into many factions, yet of all these groups we still share fundamental beliefs and one of them being that Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is the final Prophet.
The Qadiani cult claim to be the ‘73rd Sect’ prophesised by Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم. After reading the above hadith we notice that there is no mention of the 73rd sect being on the right path. For arguments sake and to simplify this issue, let’s say that the Qadianis are the 73rd sect.
Some important points to note before we go any further:
· Qadianis claim that as long as someone recites the Kalimah, no one has the right to call them Kafir.
· Qadianis claim that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was the messiah who came to unite the world.
· According to the Hadith there will only be 73 sects and the Qadianis have claimed to be the last.
· The Qadianis claim that they are the ONLY group who are all united
Though most Qadianis know of the split in 1914 which resulted in another movement called ‘Lahori Ahmadiyya Jamaat’ What many innocent members of this cult do not know is how their own religion is split into many more factions.
A list of the different Qadiani groups:
· Lahori Movement
· Jamaat Ahmadiyya Al Mouslemeen
· Anwar-Ul Islam Movement Of Nigeria
· Jamaat Ul Sahih Al Islam
· Green Ahmadiyya
Indonesians who believe Mirza Qadiani was just a teacher
The Ahmadiyya Reform Movement
Al-Ahmadiyyat
All these groups believe in Mirza Qadiani, whether to be a Prophet, Messiah, Imam, Reformer or just a teacher. So with the Qadianis claiming to be the 73rd sect, it would then mean that these groups formed after them have increased the number of sects:
· 73rd Qadiani Ahmadiyya,
· 74th Lahori Movement,
· 75th Jamaat Ahmadiyya Al Mouslemeen,
· 76th Anwar-Ul Islam Movement Of Nigeria,
· 77th Jamaat Ul Sahih Al Islam,
· 78th The Infamous Qadiani Movement,
· 79th Green Ahmadiyya
· 80th Teacher group
· 81st Al-Ahmadiyyat
The Hadith of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم stated there would only be 73 sects and the Qadianis have claimed to being the 73rd sect, it would mean that with the creation of these other groups, either the Hadith is wrong (nauzubillah) or that these other groups formed after the Qadiani group are all Kafirs and out of the fold of Islam (as there will be only 73 sects). This would leave the Qadianis in a tricky position as they claim any person who recites the Kalimah cannot be called a Kafir.
As Muslims it is simple for us to clarify the dilemma that the Qadianis have been left with. When Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم declared that no one has the right to call a reciter of the Kalimah a Kafir, it clearly means that no individual knows what is in the heart of the other. During the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed term, many people would come forward and declare that he is a Prophet of Allah, many were sincere and others were hypocrites. His rightly guided companions would hold doubts about certain individuals as to whether they just wanted to spy & create fitnah. The Qadianis do not fall into this category as we know what is in their hearts. The followers of Musailama Kazzaab were declared Kafir even though they recited the Kalimah, prayed 5 times a day, fasted and declared Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم to be the messenger of Allah. Only because they believed in another Prophet (Musailama) they were declared Kafirs. It’s the same with Qadianis who believe in Mirza Qadiani to be a prophet.
If Mirza Qadiani was the Messiah then why do the Qadianis continue to split into more and more factions knowing well that the Messiah is supposed to unite the Muslims? If these are just ‘rebellious’ groups, as some Qadianis claim, then are not you the same as you have rebelled against Allah SWT and his final Messenger Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم?
Three options have been left for the Qadianis on the issue of the 73 sects:
· The Hadith is completely wrong as 81 sects have now been formed.
· The rest of those break away factions are Kafirs.
· All the followers of Mirza Qadiani are Kafirs.
Signs Of The Saved Sect
“And hold fast altogether to the Rope of Allah and do not become divided.”
[3:103]
“And be not those who commit shirk (associate partners With Allah), those who split up their Deen (religion) and become sects;
each rejoicing in what is with them.”
[30:31-32]
Hadith no.1
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "The Jews split into 71 groups; one will enter Paradise and 70 will enter Hell. The Christians split into 72 groups; 71 will enter Hell and one will enter Paradise. By Him in Whose Power is the life of Muhammad, without doubt, my Ummah will be divided into 73 groups. Only one will enter Paradise and 72 will enter Hell." When asked which group will be on the right path, the Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم replied, "The main (al-Jama'ah) body of the Muslims." [Ibne Majah Kitab al-Fitan]
Hadith no.2
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “There was disagreement amongst Jews and they split into 72 groups. In exactly the same way, there will be disagreement and divisions in my Ummah. It will split into 73 groups. Apart from one of those groups, all the remaining 72 will be thrown into Hell." When asked which group will be on the right path, the Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم replied, "The group on the right path, which will enter Paradise, will be the group which follows my Sunna and that of my Sahaba and this will be the largest group of Muslims." [Tirmidhi, Imam Ahmad, Abu Daud, Mishkat]
Hadith no.3
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "Without doubt my Ummah will never be gathered in misguidance. Whenever you see disagreement, then hold fast to the Sawad-e-A'zam (the great majority)" [Ibne Majah]
Hadith no.4
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "Follow the way of the largest group of Muslims! For, he who deviates from this group will be thrown into Hell!" [Ibne Majah]
Hadith no.5
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "The devil continually pursues humans as a wolf pursues sheep. The wolf only dares to attack those sheep which have separated from the rest of the flock and are standing alone. And so, my followers and my devotees! Save yourselves from being caught in the traps of misguidance and firmly remain with the largest and most well-known group of Muslims!" [Imam Ahmad]
Hadith no.6
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "Allah will never allow my Ummah to unite upon misguidance and incorrect beliefs. Allah's mercy, blessings and protection are with the largest group of Muslims. And he who deviates from this largest group of Muslims will be thrown into Hell." [Tirmidhi]
Hadith no.7
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "He who deviates from the largest group of Muslims, even as much as a hand span, has himself cut off his connection with Islam." [Abu Daud, Imam Ahmed]
Hadith no.8
The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم warned his Followers: “I have left you upon clear proofs, its night is like its day, and no one deviates from it except one who is destroyed, and whoever lives (long) from amongst you will see great controversy. So stick to what you know from my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Khalifahs - cling to that with your molar teeth.” [Imam Ahmed, Ibne Majah]
Having quoted no less than eight Hadiths, from authentic sources, four points stand out:
1. The Muslims will divide into 73 Groups
2. The largest group will be the right group
3. To stick to the main body
4. Through time there will always be one group who have the Aqeedah of Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم & his companions.
The Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is the main body of Islam, with the vast majority of followers. Qadiani's at most are 2 Million, They claim 200 million but still they are a minority.
Please note: Qadianis cannot provide a solid chain of beliefs leading through time direct to Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Many of the claim and beliefs of Mirza Qadiani were newly formed. Instead of Qadianis wasting time in finding these 73 sects, we request you study the beliefs of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamah, who are the one rightly guided group with a solid chain of beliefs, knowledge and practice leading directly to the last Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Abdullah bin Amarra relates that the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said
‘Surely things will happen to my people as happened earlier to Israelites, they will resemble each other like one shoe in a pair resembles the other to the extent that if anyone among the Israelites has openly committed adultery to his mother there will be some who will do this in my Ummah as well, verily the Israelites were divided into 72 sects but my people will be divided into 73 sects, all of them will be in the fire except one.' The companions asked. 'Who are they O Messenger of Allah,' Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said. `They are those who will be like me and my companions.’
(Tirmidhi - Kitabul Eeman)
There is no doubt the saying of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is true, the Ummah has split into many factions, yet of all these groups we still share fundamental beliefs and one of them being that Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is the final Prophet.
The Qadiani cult claim to be the ‘73rd Sect’ prophesised by Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم. After reading the above hadith we notice that there is no mention of the 73rd sect being on the right path. For arguments sake and to simplify this issue, let’s say that the Qadianis are the 73rd sect.
Some important points to note before we go any further:
· Qadianis claim that as long as someone recites the Kalimah, no one has the right to call them Kafir.
· Qadianis claim that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was the messiah who came to unite the world.
· According to the Hadith there will only be 73 sects and the Qadianis have claimed to be the last.
· The Qadianis claim that they are the ONLY group who are all united
Though most Qadianis know of the split in 1914 which resulted in another movement called ‘Lahori Ahmadiyya Jamaat’ What many innocent members of this cult do not know is how their own religion is split into many more factions.
A list of the different Qadiani groups:
· Lahori Movement
· Jamaat Ahmadiyya Al Mouslemeen
· Anwar-Ul Islam Movement Of Nigeria
· Jamaat Ul Sahih Al Islam
· Green Ahmadiyya
Indonesians who believe Mirza Qadiani was just a teacher
The Ahmadiyya Reform Movement
Al-Ahmadiyyat
All these groups believe in Mirza Qadiani, whether to be a Prophet, Messiah, Imam, Reformer or just a teacher. So with the Qadianis claiming to be the 73rd sect, it would then mean that these groups formed after them have increased the number of sects:
· 73rd Qadiani Ahmadiyya,
· 74th Lahori Movement,
· 75th Jamaat Ahmadiyya Al Mouslemeen,
· 76th Anwar-Ul Islam Movement Of Nigeria,
· 77th Jamaat Ul Sahih Al Islam,
· 78th The Infamous Qadiani Movement,
· 79th Green Ahmadiyya
· 80th Teacher group
· 81st Al-Ahmadiyyat
The Hadith of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم stated there would only be 73 sects and the Qadianis have claimed to being the 73rd sect, it would mean that with the creation of these other groups, either the Hadith is wrong (nauzubillah) or that these other groups formed after the Qadiani group are all Kafirs and out of the fold of Islam (as there will be only 73 sects). This would leave the Qadianis in a tricky position as they claim any person who recites the Kalimah cannot be called a Kafir.
As Muslims it is simple for us to clarify the dilemma that the Qadianis have been left with. When Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم declared that no one has the right to call a reciter of the Kalimah a Kafir, it clearly means that no individual knows what is in the heart of the other. During the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed term, many people would come forward and declare that he is a Prophet of Allah, many were sincere and others were hypocrites. His rightly guided companions would hold doubts about certain individuals as to whether they just wanted to spy & create fitnah. The Qadianis do not fall into this category as we know what is in their hearts. The followers of Musailama Kazzaab were declared Kafir even though they recited the Kalimah, prayed 5 times a day, fasted and declared Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم to be the messenger of Allah. Only because they believed in another Prophet (Musailama) they were declared Kafirs. It’s the same with Qadianis who believe in Mirza Qadiani to be a prophet.
If Mirza Qadiani was the Messiah then why do the Qadianis continue to split into more and more factions knowing well that the Messiah is supposed to unite the Muslims? If these are just ‘rebellious’ groups, as some Qadianis claim, then are not you the same as you have rebelled against Allah SWT and his final Messenger Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم?
Three options have been left for the Qadianis on the issue of the 73 sects:
· The Hadith is completely wrong as 81 sects have now been formed.
· The rest of those break away factions are Kafirs.
· All the followers of Mirza Qadiani are Kafirs.
Signs Of The Saved Sect
“And hold fast altogether to the Rope of Allah and do not become divided.”
[3:103]
“And be not those who commit shirk (associate partners With Allah), those who split up their Deen (religion) and become sects;
each rejoicing in what is with them.”
[30:31-32]
Hadith no.1
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "The Jews split into 71 groups; one will enter Paradise and 70 will enter Hell. The Christians split into 72 groups; 71 will enter Hell and one will enter Paradise. By Him in Whose Power is the life of Muhammad, without doubt, my Ummah will be divided into 73 groups. Only one will enter Paradise and 72 will enter Hell." When asked which group will be on the right path, the Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم replied, "The main (al-Jama'ah) body of the Muslims." [Ibne Majah Kitab al-Fitan]
Hadith no.2
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “There was disagreement amongst Jews and they split into 72 groups. In exactly the same way, there will be disagreement and divisions in my Ummah. It will split into 73 groups. Apart from one of those groups, all the remaining 72 will be thrown into Hell." When asked which group will be on the right path, the Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم replied, "The group on the right path, which will enter Paradise, will be the group which follows my Sunna and that of my Sahaba and this will be the largest group of Muslims." [Tirmidhi, Imam Ahmad, Abu Daud, Mishkat]
Hadith no.3
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "Without doubt my Ummah will never be gathered in misguidance. Whenever you see disagreement, then hold fast to the Sawad-e-A'zam (the great majority)" [Ibne Majah]
Hadith no.4
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "Follow the way of the largest group of Muslims! For, he who deviates from this group will be thrown into Hell!" [Ibne Majah]
Hadith no.5
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "The devil continually pursues humans as a wolf pursues sheep. The wolf only dares to attack those sheep which have separated from the rest of the flock and are standing alone. And so, my followers and my devotees! Save yourselves from being caught in the traps of misguidance and firmly remain with the largest and most well-known group of Muslims!" [Imam Ahmad]
Hadith no.6
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "Allah will never allow my Ummah to unite upon misguidance and incorrect beliefs. Allah's mercy, blessings and protection are with the largest group of Muslims. And he who deviates from this largest group of Muslims will be thrown into Hell." [Tirmidhi]
Hadith no.7
The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said "He who deviates from the largest group of Muslims, even as much as a hand span, has himself cut off his connection with Islam." [Abu Daud, Imam Ahmed]
Hadith no.8
The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم warned his Followers: “I have left you upon clear proofs, its night is like its day, and no one deviates from it except one who is destroyed, and whoever lives (long) from amongst you will see great controversy. So stick to what you know from my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Khalifahs - cling to that with your molar teeth.” [Imam Ahmed, Ibne Majah]
Having quoted no less than eight Hadiths, from authentic sources, four points stand out:
1. The Muslims will divide into 73 Groups
2. The largest group will be the right group
3. To stick to the main body
4. Through time there will always be one group who have the Aqeedah of Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم & his companions.
The Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is the main body of Islam, with the vast majority of followers. Qadiani's at most are 2 Million, They claim 200 million but still they are a minority.
Please note: Qadianis cannot provide a solid chain of beliefs leading through time direct to Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Many of the claim and beliefs of Mirza Qadiani were newly formed. Instead of Qadianis wasting time in finding these 73 sects, we request you study the beliefs of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamah, who are the one rightly guided group with a solid chain of beliefs, knowledge and practice leading directly to the last Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Sahaba....The Companion of Holy Prophet of Allah
The companions of the Holy Prophet of God are spread all over the firmament of Islam like the brilliant stars on the sky. They were the persons who readily responded to the call of Prophet Mohammad peace be upon him when he came out with the message of the Oneness of God. They did not embrace Islam with any selfish motive or securing anything . It is not difficult to understand from a study of the circumstances prevailing at the advent of Islam that it was a very critical period for the Muslims.
To embrace Islam in those days meant to invite trouble and misery of oneself. Despite this, those scared souls, the companions of the prophets, known as Sahaba, accepted Islam without any fear of trouble and atrocities. No one could succeed in attaining such sublime state in Faith and Knowledge as these few fortunate ones. By enduring all sorts of humiliation and unbearable atrocities in the way and love for the Devine Message and devotion to Righteous path, they sent examples which will serve as a beacon light for the seekers of Truth and Righteousness.
They served and save the faith with their deeds and practices characters and conduct. Besides the slaves the other converts to Islam who belonged to various respectable tribes of Arabia, enjoy no better status than slaves, after accepting Islam. A that time, the larger number of Muslim converts were poor, helpless and weak, even powerless to defend themselves from the atrocious assaults of persecutors.
It is a sign of true faith that when a man accept it, believing to be righteous, he holds to it with rock-like firmness, under all forms of calamity, hardship and trial, and so did the Companion of the Prophet peace be upon him. They endured all kinds of hardship and put little values of their own lives in defense of their belief. They embrace Islam in perfect sincerity and with true heart, so they endured all the hardships and afflictions for the sake of God and His Massager with poise, dignity and smiling faces.
They listened to what the Prophet said. They acted as they instructed. They practiced what he showed to them. No Prophet or Messenger had ever been able to get such devoted, faithful, loyal and sincere companions as those Last Messenger of God, Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. They expressed their deep devotion and love for him. They could not bear either in a war or peace, the slightest discomfort of their Master. Neither adversity nor danger could separate them from him.
It is the fact that every Companion of the Prophet was in his place in sign of God. We are to follow their footprints if we want to succeed in our lives. There is no lota of doubt of this matter that, after the Holy Quran and the traditions of the Holy Prophet, the lives and examples of the Sahaba are burning torches of light for us. We cannot do without this light. May God grant us the guidance and strength to follow the footsteps of those Sacred Souls.
The Sahaba - Companions of the Prophet (PBUH).
The Companions are all those who met the Prophet (PBUH) and died as Muslims. Scholars have said that they were 114,000 in number (as stated by Abu Zur'ah, the teacher of Imam Muslim, and recorded by As-Suyootee).
Allah has praised in many Qur'anic verses:
"You are the best of peoples ever raised for mankind, you enjoin good and forbid evil, and you believe in Allah." (3:110)
"Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave their pledge to you (O Muhammad) under the tree. He knew what was in their hearts and He sent down calmness and tranquility upon them..." (48:18)
Our Attitude Towards Them
Our attitude towards the Sahaba should be that of love, respect, peace and purity of our hearts and tongues. Allah has described this in His saying: "And those who come after them say: 'Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who have preceded us in Faith, and put not in our hearts any hatred against those who have believed.” (59:10)
The Prophet (PBUH) advised us: "When my Companions are mentioned then withhold" [Saheeh, at-Tabaranee]. And he also said, "Do not abuse my Companions, for if any of you were to spend gold equal to (mountain of) Uhud in charity, it would not equal a handful of one of them or even half of that" (Al Bukhari, Muslim).
And he said, "Whoever abuses my Companions, upon them is the curse of Allah, the angels and all the people" (Saheeh, At-Tabaranee).
Al-Barbaharee said, "Know that anyone who tries to attack the Companions of Muhammad (PBUH) really seeks to attack Muhammad (PBUH)."
The Best of the Companions
We should note that the best of the Ummah, after the Prophet (PBUH) were Imam Abu Bakr, then Imam Umar, then Imam Uthman, then Imam Ali. As far as the Caliphate is concerned, Ibn Taymeeyah has said that anyone who "objects against anyone of these regarding this order of caliphate, he will be regarded more misguided than the domestic donkey."
The Companions' Noble Deeds
The deeds and virtues of the Sahaba, may Allah be pleased with them all, should be what every Muslim should strive to emulate to the best of one's ability. Their behaviour and sincerity were praised by Allah and His Messenger (PBUH) and that suffices as proof.
The Sahaba were undoubtedly the best in terms of understanding the religious obligations, the Sunnah of the Prophet and the way of establishing the Islamic teachings. Their belief is an example for us, as Allah says in the Al Qur'an: "So if they believe in the like of that which you believe, they are rightly guided, but if they turn away, then they are only in opposition. So Allah will suffice you against them. And He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower." (2:137)
The Best of People
The Prophet (PBUH) said: "The best of my people are my generation then those who come after them, then those who come after them, then there will come a people in whom there will be no good." (At-Tabaranee, authenticated by al-Albanee).
Also, in Al Bukhari, "The best of the people are my generation, then those after them, then those after them..." This is also reported by Muslim, Abu Dawood, at-Tirmidhee, An-Nasa'ee and others.
Following Their Footsteps
All this should suffice as evidence that the correct understanding of Islam is that of the Sahaba and all those that follow their path, in truth. They are the best generation of Islam and they understood Al Qur'an and Sunnah the best.
We should approach the Deen in the manner they approached it. We are obliged to follow them, and that means, first and foremost, to have the same creed as they did, no deviations, no additions and no deletions. We also have to approach `ibadah in the same way, no innovations, no additions and no deletions. We take all of the Sunnah and refer all disagreements to Allah and His Messenger, as Allah (s.w.t.) commanded us in the Al Qur'an (4:59).
We ask Allah to enable us to learn about the lives of the Sahaba and to make our lives resemble theirs. As Ibn Taymeeyah said, "Whoever will read their biographies with understanding and insight will come to know the rewards bestowed by Allah upon them and he will certainly realize that these are the best among humans after the Prophets. Neither has there been anyone like them nor will there be.
To embrace Islam in those days meant to invite trouble and misery of oneself. Despite this, those scared souls, the companions of the prophets, known as Sahaba, accepted Islam without any fear of trouble and atrocities. No one could succeed in attaining such sublime state in Faith and Knowledge as these few fortunate ones. By enduring all sorts of humiliation and unbearable atrocities in the way and love for the Devine Message and devotion to Righteous path, they sent examples which will serve as a beacon light for the seekers of Truth and Righteousness.
They served and save the faith with their deeds and practices characters and conduct. Besides the slaves the other converts to Islam who belonged to various respectable tribes of Arabia, enjoy no better status than slaves, after accepting Islam. A that time, the larger number of Muslim converts were poor, helpless and weak, even powerless to defend themselves from the atrocious assaults of persecutors.
It is a sign of true faith that when a man accept it, believing to be righteous, he holds to it with rock-like firmness, under all forms of calamity, hardship and trial, and so did the Companion of the Prophet peace be upon him. They endured all kinds of hardship and put little values of their own lives in defense of their belief. They embrace Islam in perfect sincerity and with true heart, so they endured all the hardships and afflictions for the sake of God and His Massager with poise, dignity and smiling faces.
They listened to what the Prophet said. They acted as they instructed. They practiced what he showed to them. No Prophet or Messenger had ever been able to get such devoted, faithful, loyal and sincere companions as those Last Messenger of God, Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. They expressed their deep devotion and love for him. They could not bear either in a war or peace, the slightest discomfort of their Master. Neither adversity nor danger could separate them from him.
It is the fact that every Companion of the Prophet was in his place in sign of God. We are to follow their footprints if we want to succeed in our lives. There is no lota of doubt of this matter that, after the Holy Quran and the traditions of the Holy Prophet, the lives and examples of the Sahaba are burning torches of light for us. We cannot do without this light. May God grant us the guidance and strength to follow the footsteps of those Sacred Souls.
The Sahaba - Companions of the Prophet (PBUH).
The Companions are all those who met the Prophet (PBUH) and died as Muslims. Scholars have said that they were 114,000 in number (as stated by Abu Zur'ah, the teacher of Imam Muslim, and recorded by As-Suyootee).
Allah has praised in many Qur'anic verses:
"You are the best of peoples ever raised for mankind, you enjoin good and forbid evil, and you believe in Allah." (3:110)
"Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave their pledge to you (O Muhammad) under the tree. He knew what was in their hearts and He sent down calmness and tranquility upon them..." (48:18)
Our Attitude Towards Them
Our attitude towards the Sahaba should be that of love, respect, peace and purity of our hearts and tongues. Allah has described this in His saying: "And those who come after them say: 'Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who have preceded us in Faith, and put not in our hearts any hatred against those who have believed.” (59:10)
The Prophet (PBUH) advised us: "When my Companions are mentioned then withhold" [Saheeh, at-Tabaranee]. And he also said, "Do not abuse my Companions, for if any of you were to spend gold equal to (mountain of) Uhud in charity, it would not equal a handful of one of them or even half of that" (Al Bukhari, Muslim).
And he said, "Whoever abuses my Companions, upon them is the curse of Allah, the angels and all the people" (Saheeh, At-Tabaranee).
Al-Barbaharee said, "Know that anyone who tries to attack the Companions of Muhammad (PBUH) really seeks to attack Muhammad (PBUH)."
The Best of the Companions
We should note that the best of the Ummah, after the Prophet (PBUH) were Imam Abu Bakr, then Imam Umar, then Imam Uthman, then Imam Ali. As far as the Caliphate is concerned, Ibn Taymeeyah has said that anyone who "objects against anyone of these regarding this order of caliphate, he will be regarded more misguided than the domestic donkey."
The Companions' Noble Deeds
The deeds and virtues of the Sahaba, may Allah be pleased with them all, should be what every Muslim should strive to emulate to the best of one's ability. Their behaviour and sincerity were praised by Allah and His Messenger (PBUH) and that suffices as proof.
The Sahaba were undoubtedly the best in terms of understanding the religious obligations, the Sunnah of the Prophet and the way of establishing the Islamic teachings. Their belief is an example for us, as Allah says in the Al Qur'an: "So if they believe in the like of that which you believe, they are rightly guided, but if they turn away, then they are only in opposition. So Allah will suffice you against them. And He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower." (2:137)
The Best of People
The Prophet (PBUH) said: "The best of my people are my generation then those who come after them, then those who come after them, then there will come a people in whom there will be no good." (At-Tabaranee, authenticated by al-Albanee).
Also, in Al Bukhari, "The best of the people are my generation, then those after them, then those after them..." This is also reported by Muslim, Abu Dawood, at-Tirmidhee, An-Nasa'ee and others.
Following Their Footsteps
All this should suffice as evidence that the correct understanding of Islam is that of the Sahaba and all those that follow their path, in truth. They are the best generation of Islam and they understood Al Qur'an and Sunnah the best.
We should approach the Deen in the manner they approached it. We are obliged to follow them, and that means, first and foremost, to have the same creed as they did, no deviations, no additions and no deletions. We also have to approach `ibadah in the same way, no innovations, no additions and no deletions. We take all of the Sunnah and refer all disagreements to Allah and His Messenger, as Allah (s.w.t.) commanded us in the Al Qur'an (4:59).
We ask Allah to enable us to learn about the lives of the Sahaba and to make our lives resemble theirs. As Ibn Taymeeyah said, "Whoever will read their biographies with understanding and insight will come to know the rewards bestowed by Allah upon them and he will certainly realize that these are the best among humans after the Prophets. Neither has there been anyone like them nor will there be.
What is Halalah?
By Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Q. When a husband divorces his wife three times, she is already traumatized, why does Shariah punish her again by subjecting her to halalah? Why isn't a simple nikah sufficient without consummation? Why should the divorcee be dirtied by another man? I personally won't return to such a woman. Doesn't the process of halalah also create temptations of other men in the divorcee?
A. The concept of halalah, where the divorcee of three times (Talaq-e-Mugallazah) is required to marry another man and have the marriage consummated as a precondition for her to revert to her husband is expressly mentioned in the Quran (Baqarah: 230) and many Ahadith (Bukhari, vol. 2 - pg. 731 H.M. Saeed). Allah Ta'ala is Al-Hakeem (The All-Wise). Every decree of Allah is filled with wisdom. The full depth of the wisdom of Allah Ta'ala can never be fathomed by all the most intelligent people of the world. We as the slaves of Allah Ta'ala are duty bound to express submission to Allah. He is our Master and we are His slaves. We have to simply obey the orders of Allah whether we understand them or not. Allah out of infinite mercy has also granted the understanding of deen to the Ulama. That understanding creates a sense of fulfillment in expressing servitude to Allah. The practice of halalah is the express order of Allah. This was also advised by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to the wife of Rifa'ah Al-Qurazi who was previously married to Abdul Rahman Ibn Zabeer. This incident is recorded in almost every book of Hadith and several places in Bukhari. Let us briefly discuss the wisdom of this decree of Allah. Shariah has granted a lofty position to a woman as a daughter, as a wife, as a sister and as a mother. She ascends on the throne of nobility as she passes the different phases of a woman. My focus here is only on her position as a wife and maintaining the marriage bond.
It is mentioned in Bukhari that at the time of Jaahiliyah a man could divorce his wife for any number of times and take her back as he wished to. Any noble woman would understand the trauma of this practice. She can never be focused in life. There is absolutely no dignity or honor for her if she is repeatedly divorced. Her position as a wife is always in suspense. She was no more than a cheap commodity, in fact worse. The reasons for that are clear as she is a human being with feelings equal to a man. Shariah has restored her with a right of dignity and restricted the unlimited number of divorces. If a man wants her as a wife, he must understand the commitment of marriage and the respect of his wife. He knows ahead of time that the limit of divorce is three. Shariah has advised him that divorce is the most abhorred thing. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, Verily the most abhorred among permissible things is divorce. The husband must exercise restraint and tolerate his wife just as she too, tolerates him.
If he divorces her expressly one or two times (Talaq-e-Raji) in one sitting or in different sittings then he can unilaterally take her back within the period of iddat. He cannot take her back thereafter without her consent. This is also the ruling if an indicative divorce (Talaq-e-Ba'in) was issued. It is now her independent right. She must decide whether she wants to live with the man that divorced her and abused her. Once he gives her three divorces, he just cannot have her back. Now it is not even her right to decide to go back to her ex-husband. Shariah steps in to protect her dignity and honor and stop abuse against her. A woman by nature gives in more often and easily than a man. It is possible she may simply subject herself to her abusive husband. Shariah considers her nature and now throws a strong armour around her. She now is the sole right of the Shariah. Now nobody owns her. Her abusive husband needs to be treated with contempt. Any noble man who knows the consequences of three divorces and the process to have his wife back will never divorce his wife. He will respect her and tolerate her. The purpose of halalah is clearly misunderstood. It is incorrectly regarded as an unjust punishment to the divorcee. In fact, the institution of halalah is to protect a woman against the abuse of divorce. If a man cannot respect his wife, he is not worthy of respect. He must be taught the hard way. This does not mean that halalah is a punishment to the woman. Shariah does not impose on her to remarry. It is her right. She can choose not to re-marry. If she does marry, it should not be to merely fulfill a prerequisite to revert to her ex-husband. It is to be a marriage of honor and dignity, a permanent and normal marriage with all its rights. If this marriage happens to be unsuccessful, then again she has the right to marry her ex-husband. She does not have to if she chooses not to remarry him. It is clear from the above explanation that the concept of halalah is:
1. To protect the wife from the abuse of her husband.
2. The husband should understand the implications of three divorces and exercise restraint.
3. If he does not contain himself, he cannot be given an unlimited right of divorce.
The above explanation and subsequent points fulfil you. Now, reverting to your points;
1.You enquire why must she consummate her marriage with her new husband. Our response is why not. Why did she re-marry? Just to legitimize her return? She should not enter into a marriage with that intention. If she does so, what remedy is there for a woman who does not accept the dignity granted to her by Shariah? She is subjecting herself to a process for her abusive ex-husband.
2.You state you will never return to a woman dirtied by another man. If you feel like that, you can be a perfect husband and never divorce your wife for her to be "dirtied" by another man. If you do divorce her, why would you be worried about her being dirtied for you? You did worse to her by your abuse to her than her merely being dirtied. An abusive husband needs the psychological punishment of halalah. If the ex-husband feels she is dirtied, he doesn't have to take her back if he doesn't want to. Nobody forces him to do so. It is his choice. He must decide. If he takes her back, why call her dirty?
3.You enquire that her sleeping with another man creates more temptations for her. That is correct. The husband must realize all this ahead of time and exercise control. A chaste woman will only fulfil herself in a legitimate avenue. She will look after her chastity and respect. We are discussing the preservation of the dignity and honor of an Allah fearing chaste woman, not just any woman.
Q. When a husband divorces his wife three times, she is already traumatized, why does Shariah punish her again by subjecting her to halalah? Why isn't a simple nikah sufficient without consummation? Why should the divorcee be dirtied by another man? I personally won't return to such a woman. Doesn't the process of halalah also create temptations of other men in the divorcee?
A. The concept of halalah, where the divorcee of three times (Talaq-e-Mugallazah) is required to marry another man and have the marriage consummated as a precondition for her to revert to her husband is expressly mentioned in the Quran (Baqarah: 230) and many Ahadith (Bukhari, vol. 2 - pg. 731 H.M. Saeed). Allah Ta'ala is Al-Hakeem (The All-Wise). Every decree of Allah is filled with wisdom. The full depth of the wisdom of Allah Ta'ala can never be fathomed by all the most intelligent people of the world. We as the slaves of Allah Ta'ala are duty bound to express submission to Allah. He is our Master and we are His slaves. We have to simply obey the orders of Allah whether we understand them or not. Allah out of infinite mercy has also granted the understanding of deen to the Ulama. That understanding creates a sense of fulfillment in expressing servitude to Allah. The practice of halalah is the express order of Allah. This was also advised by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to the wife of Rifa'ah Al-Qurazi who was previously married to Abdul Rahman Ibn Zabeer. This incident is recorded in almost every book of Hadith and several places in Bukhari. Let us briefly discuss the wisdom of this decree of Allah. Shariah has granted a lofty position to a woman as a daughter, as a wife, as a sister and as a mother. She ascends on the throne of nobility as she passes the different phases of a woman. My focus here is only on her position as a wife and maintaining the marriage bond.
It is mentioned in Bukhari that at the time of Jaahiliyah a man could divorce his wife for any number of times and take her back as he wished to. Any noble woman would understand the trauma of this practice. She can never be focused in life. There is absolutely no dignity or honor for her if she is repeatedly divorced. Her position as a wife is always in suspense. She was no more than a cheap commodity, in fact worse. The reasons for that are clear as she is a human being with feelings equal to a man. Shariah has restored her with a right of dignity and restricted the unlimited number of divorces. If a man wants her as a wife, he must understand the commitment of marriage and the respect of his wife. He knows ahead of time that the limit of divorce is three. Shariah has advised him that divorce is the most abhorred thing. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, Verily the most abhorred among permissible things is divorce. The husband must exercise restraint and tolerate his wife just as she too, tolerates him.
If he divorces her expressly one or two times (Talaq-e-Raji) in one sitting or in different sittings then he can unilaterally take her back within the period of iddat. He cannot take her back thereafter without her consent. This is also the ruling if an indicative divorce (Talaq-e-Ba'in) was issued. It is now her independent right. She must decide whether she wants to live with the man that divorced her and abused her. Once he gives her three divorces, he just cannot have her back. Now it is not even her right to decide to go back to her ex-husband. Shariah steps in to protect her dignity and honor and stop abuse against her. A woman by nature gives in more often and easily than a man. It is possible she may simply subject herself to her abusive husband. Shariah considers her nature and now throws a strong armour around her. She now is the sole right of the Shariah. Now nobody owns her. Her abusive husband needs to be treated with contempt. Any noble man who knows the consequences of three divorces and the process to have his wife back will never divorce his wife. He will respect her and tolerate her. The purpose of halalah is clearly misunderstood. It is incorrectly regarded as an unjust punishment to the divorcee. In fact, the institution of halalah is to protect a woman against the abuse of divorce. If a man cannot respect his wife, he is not worthy of respect. He must be taught the hard way. This does not mean that halalah is a punishment to the woman. Shariah does not impose on her to remarry. It is her right. She can choose not to re-marry. If she does marry, it should not be to merely fulfill a prerequisite to revert to her ex-husband. It is to be a marriage of honor and dignity, a permanent and normal marriage with all its rights. If this marriage happens to be unsuccessful, then again she has the right to marry her ex-husband. She does not have to if she chooses not to remarry him. It is clear from the above explanation that the concept of halalah is:
1. To protect the wife from the abuse of her husband.
2. The husband should understand the implications of three divorces and exercise restraint.
3. If he does not contain himself, he cannot be given an unlimited right of divorce.
The above explanation and subsequent points fulfil you. Now, reverting to your points;
1.You enquire why must she consummate her marriage with her new husband. Our response is why not. Why did she re-marry? Just to legitimize her return? She should not enter into a marriage with that intention. If she does so, what remedy is there for a woman who does not accept the dignity granted to her by Shariah? She is subjecting herself to a process for her abusive ex-husband.
2.You state you will never return to a woman dirtied by another man. If you feel like that, you can be a perfect husband and never divorce your wife for her to be "dirtied" by another man. If you do divorce her, why would you be worried about her being dirtied for you? You did worse to her by your abuse to her than her merely being dirtied. An abusive husband needs the psychological punishment of halalah. If the ex-husband feels she is dirtied, he doesn't have to take her back if he doesn't want to. Nobody forces him to do so. It is his choice. He must decide. If he takes her back, why call her dirty?
3.You enquire that her sleeping with another man creates more temptations for her. That is correct. The husband must realize all this ahead of time and exercise control. A chaste woman will only fulfil herself in a legitimate avenue. She will look after her chastity and respect. We are discussing the preservation of the dignity and honor of an Allah fearing chaste woman, not just any woman.
Who was Mirza Ghula Ahmad Qadiyani?
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was the founder of the Non-Muslim Ahmadiyya Movement. He introduces himself to the world.Mirza says that I am not son of a human but am "such a place of human`s body that causes shame and hate: guess what? (Braheen Ahmaiyya part 5, page 97 Roohani Khazain volume 21 page 127, Dur-re- sameen old page 88, new p. 125).
Who was Mirza Qadiyani?.please do guess it!Every man is best known to himself!
Was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani a gentleman?
The delicate secrets between God and Mirza Qadiani JMirza Qadiyani lies in his teeth ;
The name of Mirza Qadiyani’s God is ”Yalash” (The collection of his Revelations: Tazkarah page no.379).Mirza claims "In fact between God and myself there are delicate secrets of which the world do not know and I have an inexplicable spiritual link with God. (Braheen Ahmadiyya part 5,Nusratul Haq p. 63, Roohani Khazain volume 21 page 81).
Mirza Qadiyani became pregnant!
Mirza lies in his throat. He writes: "I became pregnant and gave birth to a child and later made Isa (Jesus) from Mariam. (Mary). (Kashti-e- Noah p53, Roohani Khazain volume 19 page 68, Braheen Ahmadiyya part.5, Addendum p.old 189, new edition p.361 ).
Tonic wine & Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani
Mirza used to drink. One of his followers brought Tonic Wine. (Khatoot Imam to Ghulam page 5).
Miza Qadiani used to commit adultery
One of Mirza ’s followers writes that Mirza committed adultery and as a saint he could do it now and again.But his son, the present caliph,carries on comitting it. (Al-Fazal 31August1938)
A prophet or a liar?
Mirza qadiani made many false declarations. He claims also that he is a prophet, Jesus, a promised Massiah,Reformer, Mahdi, Hindue's god Krishan, David etc. .
Qadiyani’s desperate disease
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadyani died of cholera on the 26th of May 1908. according to his father-in-law Mir Nasir Nawab. (Hyat-e-Nasir page 14).All’s well that ends well.
Qadiyanism ( Ahmadiyya Movement) is a movement started in a town called Qadiyan in India by a man called Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1839 - 1908).Ahmadiyya Movement insists on labeling themselves as Muslims, but they are non-muslims because they are the followers of a new so-called prophet(Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani). We pray that May Allah show the light of the right path to qadianis/ahmadis and give them the courage to embrace Islam. Ameen We reques to our Qadianis friends to come forward and accept the truth, because truth is mighty and will prevail.“Who dares nothing, need hope for nothing”
Who was Mirza Qadiyani?.please do guess it!Every man is best known to himself!
Was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani a gentleman?
The delicate secrets between God and Mirza Qadiani JMirza Qadiyani lies in his teeth ;
The name of Mirza Qadiyani’s God is ”Yalash” (The collection of his Revelations: Tazkarah page no.379).Mirza claims "In fact between God and myself there are delicate secrets of which the world do not know and I have an inexplicable spiritual link with God. (Braheen Ahmadiyya part 5,Nusratul Haq p. 63, Roohani Khazain volume 21 page 81).
Mirza Qadiyani became pregnant!
Mirza lies in his throat. He writes: "I became pregnant and gave birth to a child and later made Isa (Jesus) from Mariam. (Mary). (Kashti-e- Noah p53, Roohani Khazain volume 19 page 68, Braheen Ahmadiyya part.5, Addendum p.old 189, new edition p.361 ).
Tonic wine & Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani
Mirza used to drink. One of his followers brought Tonic Wine. (Khatoot Imam to Ghulam page 5).
Miza Qadiani used to commit adultery
One of Mirza ’s followers writes that Mirza committed adultery and as a saint he could do it now and again.But his son, the present caliph,carries on comitting it. (Al-Fazal 31August1938)
A prophet or a liar?
Mirza qadiani made many false declarations. He claims also that he is a prophet, Jesus, a promised Massiah,Reformer, Mahdi, Hindue's god Krishan, David etc. .
Qadiyani’s desperate disease
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadyani died of cholera on the 26th of May 1908. according to his father-in-law Mir Nasir Nawab. (Hyat-e-Nasir page 14).All’s well that ends well.
Qadiyanism ( Ahmadiyya Movement) is a movement started in a town called Qadiyan in India by a man called Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1839 - 1908).Ahmadiyya Movement insists on labeling themselves as Muslims, but they are non-muslims because they are the followers of a new so-called prophet(Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani). We pray that May Allah show the light of the right path to qadianis/ahmadis and give them the courage to embrace Islam. Ameen We reques to our Qadianis friends to come forward and accept the truth, because truth is mighty and will prevail.“Who dares nothing, need hope for nothing”
Zakir Naik and his erroneous Views
It would require a complete book to describe the erroneous views (on Islamic Jurisprudence, Fiqh) of Dr.Zakir Naik. People get too caught into personalities in the subcontinent. Zakir has created some guidelines for misleading people, described in Arabic as, "Kalimatu Haqqun yu'raadu bee hal-baatil" (a word of truth [spoken] with the intention of spreading mischief". To understand this let me just present some of Zakir's punch lines:
1. He insists that one should only, "Follow only the Quran and Sahih Hadith" and one would reach the right conclusion.
2. When he disagree's with anyone's position he insists that his position is based on sahih hadith and that the others position is based on "daeef" hadith.
3. He has introduced a new "prophetic seal" called "Authentic". Whatever, Zakir calls authentic is "Authentic". So, when you read books published by "Darus Salaam" they always read, "your source of authentic literature". Zakir Naik has stamped Nasir-ud-deen Albani's research on Hadith as Authentic compared to the research of the four great Imaams.
4. Zakir Naik also portrays to the people that one should only follow the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) and not some Imaam.
5. Zakir will insist that "Sufism" is bida'a and that it has no realities. This is the Half-Truth formula. Tell the public only half the story not the complete story. For, example Imaam Ibn Tamiyya and Ibn Qayyim have on one hand condemned the bad Sufee's. This is the one that Zakir Naik propagates, but what he intentionally leaves out is that the same people have praised the good Sufee's and have written volumes describing the differences.
So, please be the judge, as I will be very objective and clear in my approach to dispell the new rulings introduced by Dr.Naik.
1. There is nothing in the Quran or Sahih hadith to substantiate the rule that following the Quran and Sahih hadith is the ONLY right way to achieve guidance and the ONLY way to reach to the correct conclusion. There is no such statement uttered by the beloved messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam). In the court of the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) such erroneous and fabricated statements are not only dangerous but will lead one to the fire of hell. So, this is a caution for Dr.Naik.
2. Zakir plays fast and loose with the narrators of Hadith. When it comes to the issue of "Rafayadayn" he will make a certain hadith Sahih but when he disagree on the position of "Ameen" he will disqualify the same "raawiyy (narrator)" that he used when taking a stand on "Rafayadayn".
3/4. After the Three Golden Era (Sahaba, Tabieen & Taba Tabieen) no one is immune from making grave and serious mistakes. No one can authenticate books in our time. The only reason people will take steps to authenticate contemporary literature / translations is because they want to create a blind-following behind themselves. Win peoples trust and leverage this trust to hurt other Muslims under the pretext of following the "Prestine" Islamic way of life. If the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) is our Imaam, then why do we all have to put our trust in Imaam Bukhari? Well, the story is told of his integrity and his dream; but who told the story? Did the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) authenticate Imaam Bukhari? Well, Zakir will tell the viewers that the dream of the messenger of Allah is true. But can a dream become a law? Since, when did believing in dreams become part of Zakir's Aqeedah? Half-Truth of Zakir Naik can be seen in his video's (on youtube) where he talks about Taraawih. However, he has yet to tell his audience that the word "Tarawih" is nowhere to be found in any Sahih Hadith. Why doesn't he tell us and clarify this matter once and for all?
5. Zakir Naik never tells the people that Allamah Hafiz Ibn Tamiyya wrote in his Fataawa Ibn Tamiyya Al-Kubra volumes titled "Sulook" and "Tasawwuf". Why doesn't he tell the people the historical facts laid out by Ibn Tamiyya who said, "As Sufi huwa fil haqeeqa, nawun minas-siddiqeen. Fa huwa As-Sideeq, al-ladhee iktassa bil zuhaadi wal i'baada" (The Sufi is a reality, and a type from amongst the siddiqeen. The Sideeq are those who maintain Zuhd and Worship (to highest standards)".
May Allah guide us all. Islam is our deen and we have speak the truth.
An answer to Dr. Zakir Naik's answer regarding Schools of thought
Composed by M. Yasin Achhodi
In a question posed to Dr. Zakir Naik regarding which school of thought a Muslim should follow, he answered in the following manipulating manner in which a layman can easily be affected with lack of knowledge. His answer will be quoted first followed by the reply. To read his entire article first, click here.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
1. Muslims should be united
Muslims today, are divided amongst themselves. Such divisions are not endorsed by Islam. Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“And hold fast, altogether, by the rope Which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves.” [Al-Qur’an 3:103]
Which is the rope of Allah that is being referred to in this verse? It is the Glorious Qur’an. The Glorious Qur’an is the rope of Allah which all Muslims should hold fast together. There is double emphasis in this verse. Beside saying ‘hold fast all together’ it also says, ‘be not divided’.
Taqleed and following of an Imam has not broken unity. In the Haramayn, it is the Muqallideen who read together and coexist peacefully whereas the ones who are strictly against it decide to make their own gatherings, Jamaa’ah and also groups.
My question: who has broken unity? A Muqallid or a person with his own views of Deen?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
The Qur’an further says,
“Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger” [Al-Qur’an 4:59]
All the Muslims should follow the Qur’an and authentic Ahadith and ensure that they are not divided among themselves
Why is the remaining verse of the Holy Qur’aan forgotten?
“O you who believe! Follow Allah; follow the Messenger and those of authority (Amr) amongst you.” (Surah al-Nisaa Verse 59)
Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) says that in this verse, ‘Amr’ refers to the jurists. This explanation is narrated from Mu’aawiyah ibn Salah from Ali ibn Talhah which is a sound chain, Al-Itqaan)
The verse continues, “And if you dispute, then refer to Allah and the Messenger if you really do believe in Allah and in the last day. (Surah al-Nisaa Verse 59)
Allah’s statement subsequently “if you dispute…” proves that those of Amr are indeed jurists because He has ordered everyone else to follow them and then proceed to say that “if you dispute..” Hence Allah has ordered those of Amr to refer the disputed issue to the Book of Allah the traditions of the Prophet. The lay person would be unaware of how to refer the disputed issue to the Book of Allah and to the Sunnah and how their proofs would apply to the situations and events. Thus, it is established that the second command, is for the scholars. (Ahkaamul Qur’aan, vol 2, pg 257)
My question: Why state quarter of the verse as proof for not following scholars when the remainder of the verse denies your claim?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
2. It is prohibited to make divisions in Islam.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“As for those who divide Their religion and break up Into sects, you have no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” [Al-Qur’an 6:159]
In this verse Allah (swt) says that one should disassociate oneself from those who divide their religion and break it up into sects.
But when one asks a Muslim, “who are you?” the common answer is either ‘I am a Hanafi or Shafi or Maliki or Hanbali. Some call themselves ‘Ahle-Hadith’.
When a non-Muslim asks, “who are you?” the common answer is “I am a Muslim”
When a Muslim asks, “who are you?” the common answer is, “son of so n so” or “I am a Gujrati/Pakistani/Malaysian” etc. Does this mean that to be a Pakistani is being guilty of the people mentioned in this verse?
I, till today, have not heard “I am a Hanafi” or “Shaafi’ee” being the answer to “who are you?”
Furthermore, Taqleed has not created divisions. This is grave misconception. Ahlus Sunaah Wal Jamaa’ah are proud to follow the Sahaabah. The Islam of the Sahabaah was the complete Islam. They saw Nabi (s) and they saw the Qur’aan in him. The understandings of the Sahaabah is our understanding.
There were differences of opinion in the Sahaabah too. Ibn Abbas (ra) narrates that ‘Umar ibn Khattab gave a sermon at Jabiyah and said, “O people! If you want to know about the Qur’aan, go to ‘Ubaid ibn Ka’b. If you want to know about inheritance, go to Zaid ib Thaabit. If you want to about Fiqh, go to Mu’aadh ibn Jabal. If you want to know about wealth, then come to me for Allah has made me a guardian and a distributor. “ (Tabarani)
We hear it all the time, “oh you follow them, but we follow Qur’aan & Sunnah.” Those who claim to follow the Qur’aan & Sunnah as understood by themselves, please take a moment to observe the following.
Salim ibn Abdullah narrates that Abdullah ibn ‘Umar was asked about a person who owed another person some money and had to pay the load at a fixed time. The creditor then agrees to forgive a portion of the load if the debtor pays before the deadline. Ibn ‘Umar disliked this agreement and forbade it. (Muwatta Imam Malik)
There is no explicit Hadith of the Prophet which has been offered as proof nor was any proof sought from Ibn ‘Umar (ra). It is evident that this ruling was a personal judgement of Ibn ‘Umar.
Abdur Rahmaan narrated that he asked Ibn Sireen about entering public baths. Ibn Sireen said that ‘Umar used to dislike the idea. (Mataalibul ‘Aaliyah by Hafiz Ibn Hajar)
Ibn Sireen, who was one of the most learned followers of the Companions, did not mention any proof except to say that ‘Umar used to dislike the idea.
This is despite the fact that there are several Ahadeeth regarding the issue of public baths.
There are plenty more examples available. Now my question: Who is causing the division? The one who follows a jurist like the Sahaabah and those who followed them did? Or the ones who are breaking all bonds and ties from the people of authority, the people of knowledge and telling everyone not to follow those of authority and to follow only Qur’aan & Sunnah no matter how you understand it? Who is this verse more likely to refer to?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
3. Four Schools of Thoughts
The Islamic world has produced several learned Islamic scholars (Imams), but out of these, four became more famous and their teachings spread in different parts of the world.
It is a misconception that a Muslim should follow any one of these four schools of thoughts i.e. Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali or Maliki. There is no proof whatsoever in the Qur’an or any authentic Hadith that a Muslim should only follow one of these four Imams.
‘Umar Ibn Khattab (ra)’s sermon at Jabiyah in which mentioned who to go to for which subjects is also not mentioned in the Qur’aan. It is very easy to say “it is a misconception,” maybe if the conception was mentioned, the misconception would not remain. To avoid the possibility of contradictions amongst the scholars of differing Ijtihad over a primary source, the laity were encouraged to follow only one Madhhab and Mujtahideen instead of referring to several. This idea gained domination during the 3rd and 4th century AH. One of the most important reasons for this was that a person can not take the judgement which suits his desires best. According to some jurists for example, Talaaq (divorce) takes place whereas according to some, it doesn’t. Most people will no doubt follow the jurist which suits their desire best.
Following desires to the extent that they believe Halaal to be Haraam and Haraam to Halaal is disastrous. Disobedience of this nature is fatal and makes religion and law mere shame. For this reason, the acceptance of following only one Madhhab has successfully continued for around 11 centuries in the majority of Muslims. Furthermore to proudly state its acceptance in the eyes of Allah that it is the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa’ah, those who do follow the Qur’aan, those who do follow the Sunnah, those who do follow the two as understood by the Sahaabah and those who do follow an Imam are those who Allah has accepted to lead prayers in the Haramayn Shareefayn.
My question: Is Qur’aan & Sunnah your only source of making judgements? If yes, why did the Sahaabah not ask for proof from Qur’aan & Sunnah? Why did some Sahaabah refer to other Sahaabah for rulings? Were they not learned enough?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
4. Respect all the Great Scholars of Islam.
We must respect all the great scholars of Islam, including the four Imaams, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Hanbal and Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all). They were great scholars and may Allah reward them for their research and hard work. One can have no objection if someone agrees with the view and research of any one or more from these four great scholars of Islam.
Again, please refer to following rulings which suit the desires under number 3. I see no other reason why one would object to their ruling.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
5. All Four Imam said follow the Qur’an and Sunnah.
All the four great Imams said that if any of their Fatwas or teachings contradict Allah’s word, i.e. the Qur’an, or the sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) i.e. authentic Hadith, then that particulars Fatwa of theirs should be rejected, and the Sunnah of the Prophet should be followed.
To give you an example in this context – Imam shafi said that when a women touches a man who is in a state of wudhu, the wudhu of the man breaks. However, this ruling of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet.
Narrated Aisha
The Prophet (may peace be upon him) kissed one of his wives and went out for saying prayer. He did not perform ablution. (Sunan Abu Dawood Vol. 1 Chapter No. 70 Hadith No. 179)
Thus this particular teaching of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. So I reject this specific ruling of Imam Shafi who himself said , “ If I say something, then compare it to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger and if it agrees to them, then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall” – This is a saying of ash-Shafi’ee-rahimaullah. See Al-Majmoo’ of an-Nawawee (1/63).
Thus by rejecting this particular teaching of Imam Shafi which contradicts the authentic Hadith, I am practically a better follower of Imam Shafi than those who call themselves ‘Shafi’.
The response to this is; This is the opinion of Ibn 'Umar and some other Sahabah. However, when the Sahabah disagree in a matter, their statements are not a proof unless proof is brought from the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (s). As we stated before, Ibn 'Abbas and the reports from 'Aa'ishah contradict the opinion of Ibn 'Umar and those with their opinion. Thus, the opinion of Ibn Umar is not accepted unless supported with proof from the mouth of the beloved Messenger Muhammad (s). This topic itself is a lengthy topic in which one can not lightly accuse Imaam Shafi’ee (Rahimahullah) of going against a Hadeeth.
Furthermore, everyone learning Ahadeeth and extracting rulings from them in the light of Qur’aan is unreal and somewhat impossible. Not many if not all have the ability to do so. Therefore, to say one can follow a different ruling if they find a Hadeeth which contradicts it, is absurd for a common person.
Bearing in mind, does a common person have enough knowledge to know that there is no other stronger Hadeeth that this ruling? Does the layman have enough knowledge to understand why Imam Shafi’ee uses that Hadeeth as Hujjah and Imam Abu Hanifah uses this?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
Similarly in practice, I claim to be a better follower of Imam Abu Hanifa than those who call themselves ‘Hanafi’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Hanbal than those who call themselves ‘Hanbali’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Malik than those who call themselves ‘Maliki”. If being a ‘Ahle-Hadith’ means following Qur’an and authentic Hadith then I claim to be a better follower of the Qur’an and authentic Hadith than those who call themselves ‘ Ahle-Hadith’. All these are mere labels (Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki, Ahle-Hadith) that are not endorsed by the Qur’an or the Sahih Ahadith.
The only label or title given by the Qur’an and the Sahih Ahadith is MUSLIM.
Very easy to fall for this last statement, yet the solution and answer is even easier. A Muslim is a person who believes in one Allah and believes in Muhammad (s) as the final Messenger. A Hanafi, Shafi’ee, Hanbali, Maliki does not come contradictory to MUSLIM. As the meaning of Hanafi is not the opposite of what makes a person MUSLIM. Being a Hanafi does not take the Shahaadah away from a MUSLIM. In fact, the following (Number 6) helps.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
6. All the Groups have sub divisions
I personally have no objection if someone calls himself Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith. People give different labels to themselves to identify which set of teachings they prefer to follow and to disassociate themselves from those people who follow wrong practices. From history we come to know that all the labels given to different groups, at a later stage the people from that group themselves did not follow their teachings and made new sub-groups. Therefore in all the groups you find a sub-division.
But as far as giving a label to identify what a person practices in Islam is concerned, there can not be better label than what Allah (swt) has given i.e. a Muslim.
We have never labelled ourselves as an entirety ‘Hanafi’ or ‘Shafi’ee’. But to use it to deny Taqleed is using false logic and inaccurate claims. Every title or label has its position. If a person says, “I am a MAN”, does this change the fact that he is a Human? The Qur’aan and Hadeeth says we are ‘son of Adam’, does this mean we can’t say we are son of our blood father? When one can claim that this logic is out of context, then how can saying, ‘I am a Hanafi’ hence not MUSLIM as the Qur’aan labels us be true logic?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
7. Our Prophet was a Muslim
“Who was our beloved Prophet (pbuh)? Was he a Hanafi or a Shafi, or a Hanbali or a Maliki ?” No! He was a Muslim, like all the other Prophets and Messengers of Allah before him.
This is enough to show the desperateness of trying to deny Taqleed. Was Imam Abu Hanifah , Imam Shafi’ee, Imam Ahmad or Imam Malik before our Prophet (s)? A Muslim is a person of Islam. Unless Hanafi, Shafi’ee, Hanbali or Maliki is a religion, one can not use the above to clarify anything which is trying to be proven. The entire context is off track.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur’an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.
Further , in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur’an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.
To clarify my above point, I use this quote of Doctor Zakir Naik. Here he has put a MUSLIM in oppose to Christian or Jew. Christianity and Judaism are religions, so this can be used to prove Jesus was a Muslim. Hanafi or Shafi’ee etc is not a religion, it is mere ignorance to use this out of such context.
InshaAllah I will not have to use any more Qur’aan, Hadeeth, Logic or doctor Zakirs own statements to answer the following as InshaAllah one will be able to understand his lack of awareness by reading his following proofs.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
8. Qur’an says call yourselves Muslims
There is no Qur’anic verse or any authentic Hadith that says you should call yourselves Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith.
If anyone poses a Muslim the question who are you, he should say “I am a Muslim, not a Hanafi or a Shafi or a Ahle-Hadith”.
In Surah Fussilat chapter 41 verse 33 Allah (swt) says: “Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, ‘I am of those Who bow in Islam (Muslim)?’ “[Al-Qur’an 41:33]
The Qur’an instructs, “Say: I am of those who bow in Islam”. In other words, say, “I am a Muslim”.
The Prophet (pbuh) dictated letters to non-Muslim kings and rulers inviting them to accept Islam. In these letters he mentioned the verse of the Qur’an from Surah Al Imran chapter 3 verse 64:
Say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (submitting to Allah’s Will).”[Al-Qur’an 3:64]
9. Lip Service Muslims
Allah knew that even in the Muslim Ummah there will be many people who claim to be Muslims (i.e. claim to submit their will to Allah) but practically will not follow Allah’s commands.
Allah refers to such people in the Qur’an as lip service Believers (Al Qur’an 5:41). Thus we can conclude that those who claim to be Muslims but do not follow Qur’an and Sunnah are Lip-Service Muslims. Those who follow the Qur’an and authentic Hadith should not change their label, and stick to the best label given by Allah (swt) i.e. Muslim and which the Prophet also called himself.
This verse is being used once again against the Muqallideen. This time, the Muqallideen are said to not be following the Qur’aan & Sunnah.
Imagine giving a person the Qur’aan, the Ahadeeth and then saying, live your life according to these rulings. Will that person be able to understand what the Qur’aan means by Quroo’ in the verse where Allah says, “And those women who are divorced should wait for three Quroo’”?
And what type of (Mukhaabarah) will he know or understand in the Hadeeth where Nabi (s) said, “Whoever does not stop the practice of Mukhaabarah should hear the proclamation of war (against him).”? (Mukhaabarah is a certain type of farming. There were several forms of Mukhaabarah practiced) The Hadeeth is fairly general, how would a lay person distinguish between the permitted ones and the forbidden one?
Then there’s one Hadeeth which says, “Whoever has an Imaam, then the Imaam’s recitation is his recitation.” On the other hand, another Hadeeth says, “There is no Salaah for he who does not recite the Faatihah.” How would a common person which Qur’aan and Hadeeth be able to choose which Hadeeth to follow, or what is the middle route, or does it refer to something else, or was the Hadeeth for a particular event only? Obviously one is will have to turn to a learned jurist who has mastered himself in these issues and whom Allah (swt) has blessed unrecognizable wisdom. So when the person asks this jurist/imam, is he now following the Imaam or Qur’aan and Sunnah?
Obviously he is following the Qur’aan and Sunnah as passed on by these scholars as they compiled rulings. And it is common sense that if a person tries to follow all the Madhaahib then he will lead to following the rulings which suit him best.
My question is, who is following a more reliable and sound meaning of the Qur’aan and Sunnah and who is taking literal and incomplete perceptions of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. The obvious answer would be the one who chooses to follow a Madhhab is safer from making his own meaning of Deen whereas following a Madhhab is actually following a sound understanding of Qur’aan and Hadeeth.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
10. The Prophet had said that there would be 73 sects.
Some may argue by quoting the Hadith of our beloved Prophet, from Sunan Abu Dawood Hadith No. 4579. In this Hadith the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My community will split up into seventy-three sects.”
This hadith reports that the prophet predicted the emergence of seventy-three sects. He did not say that Muslims should be active in dividing themselves into sects. The Glorious Qur’an commands us not to create sects. Those who follow the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith, and do not create sects are the people who are on the true path.
According to Tirmidhi Hadith No. 171, the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My Ummah will be fragmented into seventy three sects, and all of them will be in Hell fire except one sect.” The companions asked Allah’s messenger which group that would be. Where upon he replied, “It is the one to which I and my companions belong”.
The answer of Nabi (s) is so strong and true in its wisdom. He did not say, “It is the one who follows Qur’aan & Sunnah.” He said, “It is the one to which I and my companions belong.” Note, the Sahaabah are mentioned. The Sahaabah passed on the true Islam to the Tabi’een. When the Tabi’een followed the Islam of the Sahaabah, they are included in that sect. Now will you say that the Tabi’een aren’t because they followed the Sahaabah and not the Qur’aan and Sunnah? The Tabi’een turned to certain Sahaabah and similarly the Tab’ Tabi’een turned to certain Tabi’een for certain issues. Why did they not look directly into Qur’aan and Hadeeth?
A Madhhab is a compilation of rulings, an understanding of Fiqh related issues. The Islaam we follow is the Islaam of the Sahaabah. Do we have a better understanding of Hadeeth and Qur’aan than these great scholars? If one does, they can feel free to be a Mujtahid and have their own Fiqh. As for those who follow a Madhhab, they are following the Islaam of the Sahaabah.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
The Glorious Qur’an mentions in several verses, “Obey Allah and obey His Messenger”. A true Muslim should only follow the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith. He can agree with the views of any scholar as long as they conform to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith. If such views go against the Word of Allah, or the Sunnah of His Prophet, then they carry no weight, regardless of how learned the scholar might be. A true Muslim will not follow any ruling or teaching of any great scholar of Islam if that particular ruling or teaching contradicts the Qur’an and Saheeh Hadith.
Thus, the only school of thought that a Muslim should follow, is that of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The only Madhab that a Muslim should follow, is the Madhab of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). And Allah knows the Best.
By saying the only school of thought you should follow is Prophet Muhammad, you have clearly showed that you do not understand the meaning of “school of thought.” A school of thought is a doctrine, The point of view held by a particular group (dictionary) a set of ideas or opinions which a group of people share about a matter (Cambridge).
The Islaam of Nabi (s) was not a ‘point of view.’ It was the true Islaam in its state. When the narrations varied after the Sahaabah, that is when the need for school of thoughts emerged. That is when a strong opinion was required. A common person can not conclude the Deen with his own understandings.
[END OF ARTICLE AND ANSWERS]
The following questions were posed very nicely upon the above reply:
Questioner wrote:
Brother mash'Allah nice points. I'm guessing that you beleive in madhabs and that we should follow them?let me ask you on what basis?Does following a madhab go against the teachings of Rasulullah?Brother if you have a problem with the statement made by our honorable Zakir Naik then oh well.Till now brother mash'Allah nice points,but what you said is the same exact thing people say to approve of madhabs.Why is this?
Reply:
Questioner wrote:
I'm guessing that you beleive in madhabs and that we should follow them?let me ask you on what basis?
On the basis that the Muslims of early years were more knowledgable, more pious and less affected by Shaytaan than us. If you have the ability to extract rulings from Qur'aan in the light of Ahadeeth so it does not contradict other Ahadeeth being aware of the chains of narrations making sure that when you take one Hadeeth for the ruling, the other Hadeeth is not rejected and a valid reason is available, if you are able to distinguish between different terms used for the same ruling or the same word used in different context for multiple rulings, if you are able to distinguish between a weak chain and a sound chain of narrations, if you are able to distinguish between rulings which were permitted for a certain period of time, if you are able to do all this and more then by all means, Taqleed is not for you.
Now ask yourself, are we capable of even 1% that they spent their entire lives on? If everyone becomes this, what will happen to Muslims? The entire Muslim world will differ in rulings and the entire Muslim population will be stuck in books their entire lives.
Now you tell me, on what basis should we not follow a Madhhab and on what basis should we reject what has been a successful way of life from the time of Sahaabah. Like i said above in reply to Dr Zakir Naik, even the Sahaabah (ra) followed other Sahaabah in Fiqh matters and did not look into Qur'aan & Hadeeth as the Sahaabah they followed in the matter knew the ruling better than them. They did not ask for proof in differences of opinions like we do.
Questioner wrote:
Does following a madhab go against the teachings of Rasulullah?
Following a Madhhab is securing oneself to following a steadfast Fiqh instead of a purpose driven misunderstood perception of what a person makes of Ayaat and Ahaadeeth.
Questioner wrote:
Brother if you have a problem with the statement made by our honorable Zakir Naik then oh well.
Ironic that you used the word honorable. In your honor for him, you have forgotten that he dishonored all the verses I mentioned, the Ahadeeth and events of the Sahaabah i mentioned above and also the ways of the Muslims since the 3rd century AH. I'm afraid he lost all his honor upon this one article. This doesn't change the fact the he speaks very good intellectual things. But once he talks about 'Aqaaid or Taqleed, I can't but help feel sorry for him as do many scholars and highly respected and learned Ulamaa-e-Kiraam.
Questioner wrote:
Till now brother mash'Allah nice points,but what you said is the same exact thing people say to approve of madhabs.Why is this?
What I said is not to approve Madhhabs, to approve Madhhabs, there are much stronger and evident literature available. What I said was a simple answer to everything Dr Zakir Naik has said. Any person attacking Taqleed with Qur'aan and Hadeeth can be answered with their own statements because all their statements are incomplete and very easy to be blinded to a simple minded person.
"The Legal Status of Following a Madhab" by Chief Justice Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani is a book i recommend. If any, read this inshaAllah at the least. If you still do not agree then Innallaha Yahdee Man-Yashaau Wa Yudhillu Man-Yashaa.
And Allah knows best.The article itself
The following is his entire article article. One can easily notice how he manipulates the mind in thinking that Taqleed holds no value.
1. Muslims should be united
Muslims today, are divided amongst themselves. Such divisions are not endorsed by Islam. Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“And hold fast, altogether, by the rope Which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves.” [Al-Qur’an 3:103]
Which is the rope of Allah that is being referred to in this verse? It is the Glorious Qur’an. The Glorious Qur’an is the rope of Allah which all Muslims should hold fast together. There is double emphasis in this verse. Beside saying ‘hold fast all together’ it also says, ‘be not divided’.
The Qur’an further says,
“Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger” [Al-Qur’an 4:59]
All the Muslims should follow the Qur’an and authentic Ahadith and ensure that they are not divided among themselves
2. It is prohibited to make divisions in Islam.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“As for those who divide Their religion and break up Into sects, you have no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” [Al-Qur’an 6:159]
In this verse Allah (swt) says that one should disassociate oneself from those who divide their religion and break it up into sects.
But when one asks a Muslim, “who are you?” the common answer is either ‘I am a Hanafi or Shafi or Maliki or Hanbali. Some call themselves ‘Ahle-Hadith’.
3. Four Schools of Thoughts
The Islamic world has produced several learned Islamic scholars (Imams), but out of these, four became more famous and their teachings spread in different parts of the world.
It is a misconception that a Muslim should follow any one of these four schools of thoughts i.e. Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali or Maliki. There is no proof whatsoever in the Qur’an or any authentic Hadith that a Muslim should only follow one of these four Imams.
4. Respect all the Great Scholars of Islam.
We must respect all the great scholars of Islam, including the four Imaams, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Hanbal and Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all). They were great scholars and may Allah reward them for their research and hard work. One can have no objection if someone agrees with the view and research of any one or more from these four great scholars of Islam.
5. All Four Imam said follow the Qur’an and Sunnah.
All the four great Imams said that if any of their Fatwas or teachings contradict Allah’s word, i.e. the Qur’an, or the sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) i.e. authentic Hadith, then that particulars Fatwa of theirs should be rejected, and the Sunnah of the Prophet should be followed.
To give you an example in this context – Imam shafi said that when a women touches a man who is in a state of wudhu, the wudhu of the man breaks. However, this ruling of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet.
Narrated Aisha
The Prophet (may peace be upon him) kissed one of his wives and went out for saying prayer. He did not perform ablution. (Sunan Abu Dawood Vol. 1 Chapter No. 70 Hadith No. 179)
Thus this particular teaching of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. So I reject this specific ruling of Imam Shafi who himself said , “ If I say something, then compare it to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger and if it agrees to them, then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall” – This is a saying of ash-Shafi’ee-rahimaullah. See Al-Majmoo’ of an-Nawawee (1/63).
Thus by rejecting this particular teaching of Imam Shafi which contradicts the authentic Hadith, I am practically a better follower of Imam Shafi than those who call themselves ‘Shafi’.
Similarly in practice, I claim to be a better follower of Imam Abu Hanifa than those who call themselves ‘Hanafi’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Hanbal than those who call themselves ‘Hanbali’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Malik than those who call themselves ‘Maliki”. If being a ‘Ahle-Hadith’ means following Qur’an and authentic Hadith then I claim to be a better follower of the Qur’an and authentic Hadith than those who call themselves ‘ Ahle-Hadith’. All these are mere labels (Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki, Ahle-Hadith) that are not endorsed by the Qur’an or the Sahih Ahadith.
The only label or title given by the Qur’an and the Sahih Ahadith is MUSLIM.
6. All the Groups have sub divisions
I personally have no objection if someone calls himself Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith. People give different labels to themselves to identify which set of teachings they prefer to follow and to disassociate themselves from those people who follow wrong practices. From history we come to know that all the labels given to different groups, at a later stage the people from that group themselves did not follow their teachings and made new sub-groups. Therefore in all the groups you find a sub-division.
But as far as giving a label to identify what a person practices in Islam is concerned, there can not be better label than what Allah (swt) has given i.e. a Muslim.
7. Our Prophet was a Muslim
“Who was our beloved Prophet (pbuh)? Was he a Hanafi or a Shafi, or a Hanbali or a Maliki ?” No! He was a Muslim, like all the other Prophets and Messengers of Allah before him.
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur’an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.
Further , in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur’an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur’an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.
Further , in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur’an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.
8. Qur’an says call yourselves Muslims
There is no Qur’anic verse or any authentic Hadith that says you should call yourselves Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith.
If anyone poses a Muslim the question who are you, he should say “I am a Muslim, not a Hanafi or a Shafi or a Ahle-Hadith”.
In Surah Fussilat chapter 41 verse 33 Allah (swt) says: “Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, ‘I am of those Who bow in Islam (Muslim)?’ “[Al-Qur’an 41:33]
The Qur’an instructs, “Say: I am of those who bow in Islam”. In other words, say, “I am a Muslim”.
The Prophet (pbuh) dictated letters to non-Muslim kings and rulers inviting them to accept Islam. In these letters he mentioned the verse of the Qur’an from Surah Al Imran chapter 3 verse 64:
Say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (submitting to Allah’s Will).”[Al-Qur’an 3:64]
9. Lip Service Muslims
Allah knew that even in the Muslim Ummah there will be many people who claim to be Muslims (i.e. claim to submit their will to Allah) but practically will not follow Allah’s commands.
Allah refers to such people in the Qur’an as lip service Believers (Al Qur’an 5:41). Thus we can conclude that those who claim to be Muslims but do not follow Qur’an and Sunnah are Lip-Service Muslims. Those who follow the Qur’an and authentic Hadith should not change their label, and stick to the best label given by Allah (swt) i.e. Muslim and which the Prophet also called himself.
10. The Prophet had said that there would be 73 sects.
Some may argue by quoting the Hadith of our beloved Prophet, from Sunan Abu Dawood Hadith No. 4579. In this Hadith the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My community will split up into seventy-three sects.”
This hadith reports that the prophet predicted the emergence of seventy-three sects. He did not say that Muslims should be active in dividing themselves into sects. The Glorious Qur’an commands us not to create sects. Those who follow the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith, and do not create sects are the people who are on the true path.
According to Tirmidhi Hadith No. 171, the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My Ummah will be fragmented into seventy three sects, and all of them will be in Hell fire except one sect.” The companions asked Allah’s messenger which group that would be. Where upon he replied, “It is the one to which I and my companions belong”.
The Glorious Qur’an mentions in several verses, “Obey Allah and obey His Messenger”. A true Muslim should only follow the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith. He can agree with the views of any scholar as long as they conform to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith. If such views go against the Word of Allah, or the Sunnah of His Prophet, then they carry no weight, regardless of how learned the scholar might be. A true Muslim will not follow any ruling or teaching of any great scholar of Islam if that particular ruling or teaching contradicts the Qur’an and Saheeh Hadith.
Thus, the only school of thought that a Muslim should follow, is that of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The only Madhab that a Muslim should follow, is the Madhab of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). And Allah knows the Best.
Zakir Naik, Salafi's and Prayers
People always send me emails and queries wondering why I continue to write about Dr.Naik; knowing well that he has so many great contributions - especially in the field of comparative religion. What most Muslims fail to understand that comparative religion is a specialized branch of Islam and Jurisprudence is another specialized branch in Islam. A medical doctor is not expected to build the next tallest building in the world! So, this criticism is based on Dr.Naik's weakness in the area of Jurisprudence.
Take for example, the video above: Dr.Zakir is quoting Sunan Abu Dawood Volume 1, Book of Salaah Chapter 271, Hadith No.755. This is what he is saying, "...there is a hadith in Abu Dawood, if you read....which says that the prophet kept his hands below the navel when he offered his salaah, BUT this is a Daeef (weak) hadith."
Dr. Naik Continues further, "Immediately, the next sahih hadith says that the prophet kept his hands above the navel. There are other Sahih Hadeeth, like in Sahih ibn Khuzaima that the prophet kept his hands on the chest":
Dr. Naik now draws his conclusion as follows:
"When there are Sahih Hadith saying that the prophet kept his hands (not clear if Zakir is saying hand or arm) on his chest, so the hadith of below the navel is weak. Thus, the right way to offer salaat is to keep the hands on the chest." This research is based on the Works of Nasirudeen Albani's book "Sifah Salatu Nabi".
The problem is that Dr.Naik (and Albani) contradicts himself by saying that there is a Sahih Hadith that the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) prayed with his hands above the navel. If that is the case, then there are two methods of placing the hands, that is, one above the navel and the one as suggested viz "on the chest".
Examining Zakir (and Albani's) Claim:
Here are the Narrators of Ibn Khuzaimah:
1. Mumil lbn Ismail
2. Sufyaan
3. A'asim
4. Kulaib
5. Wail (radhi allahu anhu)
Please note that if any of the above listed narrators appear in a chain of a Hadith; Albani, the Ahle-Hadith, Salafi's and all those who follow the literalist school of thought outright brand that particular hadith as daeef (weak). In the narration of Ibn Khuzaimah (quoted by Dr.Naik) all four unacceptable narrators appear in that hadith back-to-back. This is the Mother-Lode of DAEEF - according to Albani's criteria. Yet Albani and Zakir have now conveniently hidden this fact from the readers. When Albani and Zakir see that a hadith fits the purpose of their thoughts they brand it Sahih eventhough there exists a weak narrator. In Ibn Khuzaimah's narration Mu'mil ibn Ismail is extremely weak.
In fact, what Zakir Naik needs to tell his audience is how did Imaam Bukhari perform his Salaat, and where did Imaam Bukhari place his hands? Why did such a great Muhadith like Imaam Bukhari not quote a hadith in his Sahih? So, should we be ranting and raving like Dr.Naik that the Sahih Hadith of where the hands should be placed during salaat did not reach Imaam Bukhari? The Arabic words "Ala'a Sadr" (on the chest) are not to be found in Imaam Bukhari's and Muslim's Sahih!
Zakir Naik in light of India's History
It is amazing how people have such a short memory of the historical facts that have led to the success of Dr.Zakir Naik. The subcontinent -India and Pakistan - has produced some of the most remarkable Muslim scholars that have left an indelible mark on Islamic History. For example, Pakistan - having the second largest population of Muslims in the world - stands at a very critical juncture as war in the region unfolds in front of our eyes. However, the war waging in Pakistan dates back to pre-partition; when Pakistan was actually India. A time when the British had waged an ideological war against the Muslims of India. The colonialists launched a deceptive campaign, using Christian Evengalists, to create confusion in the hearts of Indian Muslims. Before Zakir Naik was even born, Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanvi, a Hanafi scholar educated in the "Darse-Nizami" curriculum came to the forefront of rescuing the faith of the Muslims in India. Sheikh Kairanvi was a contemporary of the great Maulana Imadadullah Muhajir Makki (rahmatullahi alayhi). In fact, both will later migrate to Mecca when the the British stepped up their "Lal-Masjid" type mission of slaugtering the Muslim scholars. Maulana Kairanvi (rah) wrote his magnum opus, "Izhar-ul-Haq" in 1864 becoming the most authoritative work on the Christian Bible:
"This book, internationally recognized as one of the most authoritative and objective studies of the Bible, was originally written in Arabic under the title Izharul-Haq (Truth Revealed) by the distinguished 19th century Indian scholar, Rahmatullah Kairanvi, and appeared in 1864. The book was subsequently translated into Urdu, and then from Urdu into English by Mohammad Wali Raazi. Rahmatullah Kairanvi wrote the book in response to the Christian offensive against Islam during the British rule in India, and specifically to counter the subversive attack made by the Rev. C. C. P. Fonder. Rev. Fonder had written a book in Urdu entitled Meezanul Haq, the open intention of which was to create doubts into the minds of the Muslims about the authenticity of the Qur’an and Islam. Sheikh Kairanvi’s intention in his book was first of all to show that the Bible cannot in any way be considered as a directly revealed book. He does this very effectively by means of his voluminous and authoritative knowledge of the Jewish and
Christian scriptures. He demonstrates beyond doubt that the Books of the Old and New Testaments have been altered, almost beyond recognition, from their original forms. The work is even more notable in the light of subsequent Jewish and Christian scholarship and the various discoveries that have since been made in this field which all bear out the truth of Sheikh Kairanvi’s thesis."
Let us wind past the events of Maulana Kairanvi to the time when all went quite, history quitely folded its events with the passage of time; until another Muslim Scholar was born. Sheikh Ahmed Deedat was born in India, but later migrated to South Africa. Turn of events would lead Ahmed Deedat (rahtullahi alayhi) to the discovery of a historical event that would turn the tides on Christian Missionaries; the book "Izhar-ul-Haq". The profound nature of the book would pave the path for Sheikh Ahmed Deedat, taking him to great heights of scholarship and rewarding his life with the title of "Muslim Scholar of the Christian Bible".
Sheikh Ahmed Deedat will become an inspiration for millions, if not billions of Muslims across the world including Dr.Zakir Naik. It is sad that Dr.Naik down plays the role of Hanafi Ulema, who sacrificed their lives and saved millions of souls despite being branded as "Mullahs". It is so sad that he has not given the classical ulema the respect that they deserve; yet he enjoys his fame under the pretext of a doctoral title and as a "modern" forward thinking "scholar". He got his authentic seal from Sheikh Ahmed Deedat (rah) who possessed "ilm-Laduna" through the book of Maulana Kairanvi (rah). Dr.Naik would not be what he is today had he not drank from the fountain of knowledge flowing from stream of classical Ulema - who were in fact non other than from the "Deoband" school of Islamic scholarship.
Let me conclude with this very couplet I learned from my grandmother, who actually saw the great Muslim scholar Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmatullahi alayhi) in her teens. The couplet is:
"Baa Adab Baa Naseeb" (He / She that possess 'Adab' - etiquettes & respect - is very blessed)
"Bay Adab Bay Naseeb" (He / She that possess no 'Adab' is without blessing)
Zakir Naik and the Yazeed Dilemma
In summary, the Ahle-Sunnah-wal-Jamaa'a refrain from cursing Yazid Ibn Mu'awiyya; and this is also the position of Dr.Naik. This is the most balanced, correct and acceptable view.
On another note, this issue with Yazid bin Mua'aawiyah tends to remind a lot of people in from the Subcontinent about Abdul Ala'a Maududi's book in urdu titled, "Khilafaat-aur-Mulookiat" - Khilafah and Kingship. Mr.Maududi (acclaimed scholar and thinker) was praised by the Ulema until he raised his pen against Sayyidna Usman Ibn Affan (radhi Allaho anho) and called him "Khaain" - one who steals, or does not measure with equity. However, Maududi's book gave Shia's the boost they needed in accusing the Sahaba (radhi allahu anhu) of stealing, lying, cheating and political favortism (astaghfirullah). Anyway, if Usman Ibn Affan (radhi Allaho anho) is "khaain" then where does that leave us regarding the integrity of the Quran and the compilation of the Quran? The followers of Mr.Maududi feel insulted when he is challenged, yet no one feels insulted when the Sahaba Ikhraam are labeled "Khaain" (cheaters) - God Forbid. I would like to add that Justice Mufti Taqi Usmani has written a monumental book in the Urdu language titled, "Hazrat Mua'awiyya aur Tareekhi Haqaaiq" (available from http://www.albalagh.net/). This book is a response to Maududi's "Khilafat aur Mulukiat" and is an excellent reading on this very challenging subject.
I personally like Dr.Naik and appreciate his contributions and efforts. However, when it comes to the issue of Yazid, Dr Naik's organization has put out a clarification on "Youtube" and to ones surprise he has listed Darul Uloom Deoband at the top of his list. It is sad that on one hand Dr.Naik knows the reality of Ulema-of-Deoband, however, he insists on spreading ill feelings amongst his fans against "Deobandi" scholars! Here a very scholarly response from Scholars in South Africa: http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?askid=e65dfd0bcc40c10cb8b82b808fc45dfd
Zakir Naik the second Muslim Group
In an oft quoted hadith, regarding the 73 sects in Islam , one finds many a scholar like Zakir Naik insisting that the four schools of thought and any Muslim following the research of the four illustrious jurists are sects in Islam. Conversely, he has argued that the rightly guided out of 73 are those following the Quran and Sahih hadith. To examine Dr.Naik's claim we have to look at two major groups of people in the world today:
1. Those who follow only the Quran but they reject the Sunnah; specifically the vast literature of Hadith. They claim that the Quran is enough and there is no need for Hadith. In their catechism (if I spelt the word right), they belief that the Quran is Absolute, it is the word of God, whereas the the Hadith is the word of man which is not absolute in its purity. By rejecting hadith they want to rid the world of the “inconsistencies” created by hadith. This group of people are rejectors of the Sunnah and not in the fold of Islam by all logical and Quranic evidence.
2. The second group are those who follow the Quran and Hadith but reject the Fiqh. They claim that the Quran and Hadith is enough, and that Fiqh is the reason for confusion. These people have gone so far as to brand the four schools of thought as the reason behind the disunity of this ummah. This group proudly claims that the word of the Prophet (SAW) has more value than the word of a fallible individuals - like the four Imaams. The problem with this rule is that Imaam Bukhari is also a fallible individual yet Dr.Naik follows Bukhari blindly and accepts all the narrators (who are also fallible individuals) blindly in the chain that links upto the Messenger of Allah (pbuh). But when it comes to trusting Imaam Abu Hanifa (or the other jurists who are Thiqa / Adil), suddenly the people following their investigation are branded as "Mushriks" and "Kafirs" and all the reason behind dividing the ummah into sects! Furthermore, Dr.Naik claims to follow the Quran (script of Hafs an-Asim al Kufi -another blind following) and Sahih ahadith trusting the research of Nasir-ud-Deen Albani, yet branding the following of Mujtahid Imaams as a misguided practice? When Dr.Naik follows someone blindly it is a guided practice, but if I follow Imaam Azam Abu Hanifa blindly, he categorizes me as a sect - doomed to Hell! So, there is no doubt that Naik's claim is erroneous and false. He is unable to show, nor will he ever be able to show till the day of judgement, a single hadith from Imaam Bukhari regarding the placing of hands during salaat (i.e., below, on or above the navel). This group of Muslims has created more confusion in the Ummah by blindly following their own teachers, lecturers and Imaams, yet, they continue to brand everyone else misguided for assuming such a position. Dr.Naik has taken established practices of Islam and rejected them; for example he insists on 8 rakaats of taraawih instead of 20. This group of Muslims always want the masses to focus on “daeef (weak)” vs“Sahih”, but they never tell the people the whole truth. For example, they never tell the people that there is not a single Sahih hadith in Bukhari or Muslim where the prophet (pbuh) uttered the words “Tarawih”. So, where did they get this word from? Well, their scholars took it from the four schools of thought but failed to tell the people that they have done so. Regarding the Hadith of Aisha (ra), Dr.Naik has created an erroneous interpretation that 8 rakaats when prayed in 11 regular months are called "Qiyamul-Layl (night prayer)", but when prayed during the month of ramadaan are called “Taraawih”. Now, if Dr.Naik is such a champion of following Sahih Hadith why can't he ever prove this claim; 8 in ramadhan equals Tarawih, 8 outside ramadhan equals qayamul layl - all from Sahih Hadith? Everyone is welcome to search this hadith, carefully read it and sincerely see for themselves the problem with Dr.Naik's interpretations / claims.
What it all boils down to is mass confusion created by these two groups that never tell people the whole truth. Yet they continue (without fear of Allah) to leverage their podiums in spreading bigotry, hate, mistrust and erroneous information. Another example is the Al-Maghrib institute in America, which has done a dis-service to Muslims in America by not really explaining the basis of Fiqh. By not explaining fiqh, and talking to people about “Usool-ul-Fiqh”; yet being rejectors of the four established schools of jurisprudence is an extremely dangerous position. I as a Muslim should be sincere and open to the people when explaining something, and letting people know my position. This allows others to understand my approach and correct me where I am wrong. But by playing Mickey Mouse games, hide and seek, charging people money, and passing out printed material that fails to cover 1/1000 of Fiqh, goes to show that there is something seriously wrong with such groups of Muslims.
Finally, before the need for another Fiqh can be suggested, we need someone that can explain the existing Fiqh as understood by the Jurists. For example the hadith on a fly falling into a cup of Milk is known to all Muslims. But this is the ONLY hadith. If someone where to ask Zakir Naik (and this is a challenge to him), “please could you show a hadith or ayat where if four ants fell in a cup of yogurt, whether one can remove the ants and eat the yogurt or not?” It is here that we find the intelligence of the Fuqahaa who derived from this hadith a list of insects. Ijtihaad in modern issues is necessary but the rules to base the ijtehaad have to come from the established four schools.
Zakir Naik going where Shk.Deedat didn't go!
It was 1991 when I picked up the phone and called South Africa. The person that answered on the other side was Sheikh Ahmed Deedat. After asking my age and where I was calling from, he said, "Assalam alaykum son, my only area of specialization is comparative religion. I am not an Imam, a sheikh that can answer questions related to fiqh / masail, nor am I am a Muhadith or a Quranic teacher; if you are seeking any services other than my area of expertise you have reached the wrong number." I assured him that my question was regarding "Christianity". On the other hand, Dr.Naik has suddenly shifted lanes from comparative religion to Fiqh; an area where he lacks understanding. His Ustaaz (teacher) the late Sheikh Ahmed Deedat (rahmatullahi alayhi) never delved into the arena of fiqh.
Dr.Naik has generated a series of videos and lectures blaming that the four schools of thought viz Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali are the reason behind the Muslim Ummah's disunity. In an effort to set the record straight he has offered following of the "Quran and Sahih Hadith" as the means to solving the problem. In regards to the four schools of thought he boldly quotes the statements of Aimma Mujtahideen that these great illustrious men absolved themselves by saying that if a sahih (authentic) hadith is found to contradict their madhab, then follow the Hadith. All pious people of Allah have taken great care in matters of deen by adding disclaimers to show their humility and piety (taqwa). A lesson for all of us to learn. All Dr.Naik had to do was to tell the viewers, listeners and readers what Allamah Hafiz Ibn Hajr has written in his book "Fathul Bari bi Sharh al Bukhari" that the statement of Imam Shafi, "Idhaa saahal hadith, fa huwa Madhabi" (if you find a sahih hadith than that is my madhab) has doubt (Shakh) in it. How can one prove in this time and age that a certain hadith reached Imam Abu Hanifa or not? To make this discussion painless, Hafiz ibn Hajar (ra) cites the example that Imam Malik has recorded two saheeh ahadeeth in his Muwatta regarding tying of hands during salaat. Eventhough, these ahadeeth reached Imam Malik and are recorded in his Muwatta, his practice on these ahaadeeth was quite different. Dr.Naik fails to explain this to his audience. Qadhi Sahnoon - a student of Malik (ra) - writes in Al-Mudawwanah that Imam Malik considered the practice of tying of hands during fardh salaat as"weak" (eventhough he has two sahih ahadeeth in his Muwatta). Dr.Naik boasts that he is a Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali according to the rule of "Idhaa saahal hadeeth fa huwa madhabi". However, one finds that the illustrious fuqahaa are being misquoted by Naik. Imaam Malik has recorded two sahih ahaadeth, yet his practice was that tying of hands is not a "Sahih" during obligatory prayers; rather a practice to be adopted during "Sunnah" and "Nawaafil". Is this the practice of Dr.Naik? No, he blindly follows Albani's research of placing hands on the chest. But now listen to Zakir Naik on this video link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGeGc0zSAlQ. Why did Dr.Naik keep all the facts away from the audience if his intention was to explain and elaborate a critical issue? However, he falsely claims that he is Maliki - watch the video! Not only that but Dr.Naik does not allow anyone to post any comments against this video on "youtube". Try posting a note that "cheers" him and then post something "opposing" him. The black and white of Dr.Naik's response will show you his extent of bias. He is quick in criticizing the Muslim masses yet not able to take criticism.
Verdicts About Dr Zakir Naik
(Fatwa: 1541/1322=B/1429)
The statements made by Dr Zakir Naik indicate that he is a preacher of Ghair Muqallidin, he is of free mind and does not wear Islamic dress. One should not rely upon his speeches.
Allah (Subhana Wa Ta'ala) knows Best
Darul Ifta,
Darul Uloom Deoband
(Fatwa: 352=363/B)
He seems Ghair Muqallid and his knowledge is not deep. Therefore, he is not reliable and Muslims should avoid listening to him.
Allah (Subhana Wa Ta'ala) knows Best
Darul Ifta,
Darul Uloom Deoband
1. He insists that one should only, "Follow only the Quran and Sahih Hadith" and one would reach the right conclusion.
2. When he disagree's with anyone's position he insists that his position is based on sahih hadith and that the others position is based on "daeef" hadith.
3. He has introduced a new "prophetic seal" called "Authentic". Whatever, Zakir calls authentic is "Authentic". So, when you read books published by "Darus Salaam" they always read, "your source of authentic literature". Zakir Naik has stamped Nasir-ud-deen Albani's research on Hadith as Authentic compared to the research of the four great Imaams.
4. Zakir Naik also portrays to the people that one should only follow the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) and not some Imaam.
5. Zakir will insist that "Sufism" is bida'a and that it has no realities. This is the Half-Truth formula. Tell the public only half the story not the complete story. For, example Imaam Ibn Tamiyya and Ibn Qayyim have on one hand condemned the bad Sufee's. This is the one that Zakir Naik propagates, but what he intentionally leaves out is that the same people have praised the good Sufee's and have written volumes describing the differences.
So, please be the judge, as I will be very objective and clear in my approach to dispell the new rulings introduced by Dr.Naik.
1. There is nothing in the Quran or Sahih hadith to substantiate the rule that following the Quran and Sahih hadith is the ONLY right way to achieve guidance and the ONLY way to reach to the correct conclusion. There is no such statement uttered by the beloved messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam). In the court of the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) such erroneous and fabricated statements are not only dangerous but will lead one to the fire of hell. So, this is a caution for Dr.Naik.
2. Zakir plays fast and loose with the narrators of Hadith. When it comes to the issue of "Rafayadayn" he will make a certain hadith Sahih but when he disagree on the position of "Ameen" he will disqualify the same "raawiyy (narrator)" that he used when taking a stand on "Rafayadayn".
3/4. After the Three Golden Era (Sahaba, Tabieen & Taba Tabieen) no one is immune from making grave and serious mistakes. No one can authenticate books in our time. The only reason people will take steps to authenticate contemporary literature / translations is because they want to create a blind-following behind themselves. Win peoples trust and leverage this trust to hurt other Muslims under the pretext of following the "Prestine" Islamic way of life. If the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) is our Imaam, then why do we all have to put our trust in Imaam Bukhari? Well, the story is told of his integrity and his dream; but who told the story? Did the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) authenticate Imaam Bukhari? Well, Zakir will tell the viewers that the dream of the messenger of Allah is true. But can a dream become a law? Since, when did believing in dreams become part of Zakir's Aqeedah? Half-Truth of Zakir Naik can be seen in his video's (on youtube) where he talks about Taraawih. However, he has yet to tell his audience that the word "Tarawih" is nowhere to be found in any Sahih Hadith. Why doesn't he tell us and clarify this matter once and for all?
5. Zakir Naik never tells the people that Allamah Hafiz Ibn Tamiyya wrote in his Fataawa Ibn Tamiyya Al-Kubra volumes titled "Sulook" and "Tasawwuf". Why doesn't he tell the people the historical facts laid out by Ibn Tamiyya who said, "As Sufi huwa fil haqeeqa, nawun minas-siddiqeen. Fa huwa As-Sideeq, al-ladhee iktassa bil zuhaadi wal i'baada" (The Sufi is a reality, and a type from amongst the siddiqeen. The Sideeq are those who maintain Zuhd and Worship (to highest standards)".
May Allah guide us all. Islam is our deen and we have speak the truth.
An answer to Dr. Zakir Naik's answer regarding Schools of thought
Composed by M. Yasin Achhodi
In a question posed to Dr. Zakir Naik regarding which school of thought a Muslim should follow, he answered in the following manipulating manner in which a layman can easily be affected with lack of knowledge. His answer will be quoted first followed by the reply. To read his entire article first, click here.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
1. Muslims should be united
Muslims today, are divided amongst themselves. Such divisions are not endorsed by Islam. Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“And hold fast, altogether, by the rope Which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves.” [Al-Qur’an 3:103]
Which is the rope of Allah that is being referred to in this verse? It is the Glorious Qur’an. The Glorious Qur’an is the rope of Allah which all Muslims should hold fast together. There is double emphasis in this verse. Beside saying ‘hold fast all together’ it also says, ‘be not divided’.
Taqleed and following of an Imam has not broken unity. In the Haramayn, it is the Muqallideen who read together and coexist peacefully whereas the ones who are strictly against it decide to make their own gatherings, Jamaa’ah and also groups.
My question: who has broken unity? A Muqallid or a person with his own views of Deen?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
The Qur’an further says,
“Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger” [Al-Qur’an 4:59]
All the Muslims should follow the Qur’an and authentic Ahadith and ensure that they are not divided among themselves
Why is the remaining verse of the Holy Qur’aan forgotten?
“O you who believe! Follow Allah; follow the Messenger and those of authority (Amr) amongst you.” (Surah al-Nisaa Verse 59)
Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) says that in this verse, ‘Amr’ refers to the jurists. This explanation is narrated from Mu’aawiyah ibn Salah from Ali ibn Talhah which is a sound chain, Al-Itqaan)
The verse continues, “And if you dispute, then refer to Allah and the Messenger if you really do believe in Allah and in the last day. (Surah al-Nisaa Verse 59)
Allah’s statement subsequently “if you dispute…” proves that those of Amr are indeed jurists because He has ordered everyone else to follow them and then proceed to say that “if you dispute..” Hence Allah has ordered those of Amr to refer the disputed issue to the Book of Allah the traditions of the Prophet. The lay person would be unaware of how to refer the disputed issue to the Book of Allah and to the Sunnah and how their proofs would apply to the situations and events. Thus, it is established that the second command, is for the scholars. (Ahkaamul Qur’aan, vol 2, pg 257)
My question: Why state quarter of the verse as proof for not following scholars when the remainder of the verse denies your claim?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
2. It is prohibited to make divisions in Islam.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“As for those who divide Their religion and break up Into sects, you have no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” [Al-Qur’an 6:159]
In this verse Allah (swt) says that one should disassociate oneself from those who divide their religion and break it up into sects.
But when one asks a Muslim, “who are you?” the common answer is either ‘I am a Hanafi or Shafi or Maliki or Hanbali. Some call themselves ‘Ahle-Hadith’.
When a non-Muslim asks, “who are you?” the common answer is “I am a Muslim”
When a Muslim asks, “who are you?” the common answer is, “son of so n so” or “I am a Gujrati/Pakistani/Malaysian” etc. Does this mean that to be a Pakistani is being guilty of the people mentioned in this verse?
I, till today, have not heard “I am a Hanafi” or “Shaafi’ee” being the answer to “who are you?”
Furthermore, Taqleed has not created divisions. This is grave misconception. Ahlus Sunaah Wal Jamaa’ah are proud to follow the Sahaabah. The Islam of the Sahabaah was the complete Islam. They saw Nabi (s) and they saw the Qur’aan in him. The understandings of the Sahaabah is our understanding.
There were differences of opinion in the Sahaabah too. Ibn Abbas (ra) narrates that ‘Umar ibn Khattab gave a sermon at Jabiyah and said, “O people! If you want to know about the Qur’aan, go to ‘Ubaid ibn Ka’b. If you want to know about inheritance, go to Zaid ib Thaabit. If you want to about Fiqh, go to Mu’aadh ibn Jabal. If you want to know about wealth, then come to me for Allah has made me a guardian and a distributor. “ (Tabarani)
We hear it all the time, “oh you follow them, but we follow Qur’aan & Sunnah.” Those who claim to follow the Qur’aan & Sunnah as understood by themselves, please take a moment to observe the following.
Salim ibn Abdullah narrates that Abdullah ibn ‘Umar was asked about a person who owed another person some money and had to pay the load at a fixed time. The creditor then agrees to forgive a portion of the load if the debtor pays before the deadline. Ibn ‘Umar disliked this agreement and forbade it. (Muwatta Imam Malik)
There is no explicit Hadith of the Prophet which has been offered as proof nor was any proof sought from Ibn ‘Umar (ra). It is evident that this ruling was a personal judgement of Ibn ‘Umar.
Abdur Rahmaan narrated that he asked Ibn Sireen about entering public baths. Ibn Sireen said that ‘Umar used to dislike the idea. (Mataalibul ‘Aaliyah by Hafiz Ibn Hajar)
Ibn Sireen, who was one of the most learned followers of the Companions, did not mention any proof except to say that ‘Umar used to dislike the idea.
This is despite the fact that there are several Ahadeeth regarding the issue of public baths.
There are plenty more examples available. Now my question: Who is causing the division? The one who follows a jurist like the Sahaabah and those who followed them did? Or the ones who are breaking all bonds and ties from the people of authority, the people of knowledge and telling everyone not to follow those of authority and to follow only Qur’aan & Sunnah no matter how you understand it? Who is this verse more likely to refer to?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
3. Four Schools of Thoughts
The Islamic world has produced several learned Islamic scholars (Imams), but out of these, four became more famous and their teachings spread in different parts of the world.
It is a misconception that a Muslim should follow any one of these four schools of thoughts i.e. Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali or Maliki. There is no proof whatsoever in the Qur’an or any authentic Hadith that a Muslim should only follow one of these four Imams.
‘Umar Ibn Khattab (ra)’s sermon at Jabiyah in which mentioned who to go to for which subjects is also not mentioned in the Qur’aan. It is very easy to say “it is a misconception,” maybe if the conception was mentioned, the misconception would not remain. To avoid the possibility of contradictions amongst the scholars of differing Ijtihad over a primary source, the laity were encouraged to follow only one Madhhab and Mujtahideen instead of referring to several. This idea gained domination during the 3rd and 4th century AH. One of the most important reasons for this was that a person can not take the judgement which suits his desires best. According to some jurists for example, Talaaq (divorce) takes place whereas according to some, it doesn’t. Most people will no doubt follow the jurist which suits their desire best.
Following desires to the extent that they believe Halaal to be Haraam and Haraam to Halaal is disastrous. Disobedience of this nature is fatal and makes religion and law mere shame. For this reason, the acceptance of following only one Madhhab has successfully continued for around 11 centuries in the majority of Muslims. Furthermore to proudly state its acceptance in the eyes of Allah that it is the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa’ah, those who do follow the Qur’aan, those who do follow the Sunnah, those who do follow the two as understood by the Sahaabah and those who do follow an Imam are those who Allah has accepted to lead prayers in the Haramayn Shareefayn.
My question: Is Qur’aan & Sunnah your only source of making judgements? If yes, why did the Sahaabah not ask for proof from Qur’aan & Sunnah? Why did some Sahaabah refer to other Sahaabah for rulings? Were they not learned enough?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
4. Respect all the Great Scholars of Islam.
We must respect all the great scholars of Islam, including the four Imaams, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Hanbal and Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all). They were great scholars and may Allah reward them for their research and hard work. One can have no objection if someone agrees with the view and research of any one or more from these four great scholars of Islam.
Again, please refer to following rulings which suit the desires under number 3. I see no other reason why one would object to their ruling.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
5. All Four Imam said follow the Qur’an and Sunnah.
All the four great Imams said that if any of their Fatwas or teachings contradict Allah’s word, i.e. the Qur’an, or the sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) i.e. authentic Hadith, then that particulars Fatwa of theirs should be rejected, and the Sunnah of the Prophet should be followed.
To give you an example in this context – Imam shafi said that when a women touches a man who is in a state of wudhu, the wudhu of the man breaks. However, this ruling of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet.
Narrated Aisha
The Prophet (may peace be upon him) kissed one of his wives and went out for saying prayer. He did not perform ablution. (Sunan Abu Dawood Vol. 1 Chapter No. 70 Hadith No. 179)
Thus this particular teaching of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. So I reject this specific ruling of Imam Shafi who himself said , “ If I say something, then compare it to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger and if it agrees to them, then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall” – This is a saying of ash-Shafi’ee-rahimaullah. See Al-Majmoo’ of an-Nawawee (1/63).
Thus by rejecting this particular teaching of Imam Shafi which contradicts the authentic Hadith, I am practically a better follower of Imam Shafi than those who call themselves ‘Shafi’.
The response to this is; This is the opinion of Ibn 'Umar and some other Sahabah. However, when the Sahabah disagree in a matter, their statements are not a proof unless proof is brought from the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (s). As we stated before, Ibn 'Abbas and the reports from 'Aa'ishah contradict the opinion of Ibn 'Umar and those with their opinion. Thus, the opinion of Ibn Umar is not accepted unless supported with proof from the mouth of the beloved Messenger Muhammad (s). This topic itself is a lengthy topic in which one can not lightly accuse Imaam Shafi’ee (Rahimahullah) of going against a Hadeeth.
Furthermore, everyone learning Ahadeeth and extracting rulings from them in the light of Qur’aan is unreal and somewhat impossible. Not many if not all have the ability to do so. Therefore, to say one can follow a different ruling if they find a Hadeeth which contradicts it, is absurd for a common person.
Bearing in mind, does a common person have enough knowledge to know that there is no other stronger Hadeeth that this ruling? Does the layman have enough knowledge to understand why Imam Shafi’ee uses that Hadeeth as Hujjah and Imam Abu Hanifah uses this?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
Similarly in practice, I claim to be a better follower of Imam Abu Hanifa than those who call themselves ‘Hanafi’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Hanbal than those who call themselves ‘Hanbali’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Malik than those who call themselves ‘Maliki”. If being a ‘Ahle-Hadith’ means following Qur’an and authentic Hadith then I claim to be a better follower of the Qur’an and authentic Hadith than those who call themselves ‘ Ahle-Hadith’. All these are mere labels (Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki, Ahle-Hadith) that are not endorsed by the Qur’an or the Sahih Ahadith.
The only label or title given by the Qur’an and the Sahih Ahadith is MUSLIM.
Very easy to fall for this last statement, yet the solution and answer is even easier. A Muslim is a person who believes in one Allah and believes in Muhammad (s) as the final Messenger. A Hanafi, Shafi’ee, Hanbali, Maliki does not come contradictory to MUSLIM. As the meaning of Hanafi is not the opposite of what makes a person MUSLIM. Being a Hanafi does not take the Shahaadah away from a MUSLIM. In fact, the following (Number 6) helps.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
6. All the Groups have sub divisions
I personally have no objection if someone calls himself Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith. People give different labels to themselves to identify which set of teachings they prefer to follow and to disassociate themselves from those people who follow wrong practices. From history we come to know that all the labels given to different groups, at a later stage the people from that group themselves did not follow their teachings and made new sub-groups. Therefore in all the groups you find a sub-division.
But as far as giving a label to identify what a person practices in Islam is concerned, there can not be better label than what Allah (swt) has given i.e. a Muslim.
We have never labelled ourselves as an entirety ‘Hanafi’ or ‘Shafi’ee’. But to use it to deny Taqleed is using false logic and inaccurate claims. Every title or label has its position. If a person says, “I am a MAN”, does this change the fact that he is a Human? The Qur’aan and Hadeeth says we are ‘son of Adam’, does this mean we can’t say we are son of our blood father? When one can claim that this logic is out of context, then how can saying, ‘I am a Hanafi’ hence not MUSLIM as the Qur’aan labels us be true logic?
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
7. Our Prophet was a Muslim
“Who was our beloved Prophet (pbuh)? Was he a Hanafi or a Shafi, or a Hanbali or a Maliki ?” No! He was a Muslim, like all the other Prophets and Messengers of Allah before him.
This is enough to show the desperateness of trying to deny Taqleed. Was Imam Abu Hanifah , Imam Shafi’ee, Imam Ahmad or Imam Malik before our Prophet (s)? A Muslim is a person of Islam. Unless Hanafi, Shafi’ee, Hanbali or Maliki is a religion, one can not use the above to clarify anything which is trying to be proven. The entire context is off track.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur’an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.
Further , in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur’an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.
To clarify my above point, I use this quote of Doctor Zakir Naik. Here he has put a MUSLIM in oppose to Christian or Jew. Christianity and Judaism are religions, so this can be used to prove Jesus was a Muslim. Hanafi or Shafi’ee etc is not a religion, it is mere ignorance to use this out of such context.
InshaAllah I will not have to use any more Qur’aan, Hadeeth, Logic or doctor Zakirs own statements to answer the following as InshaAllah one will be able to understand his lack of awareness by reading his following proofs.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
8. Qur’an says call yourselves Muslims
There is no Qur’anic verse or any authentic Hadith that says you should call yourselves Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith.
If anyone poses a Muslim the question who are you, he should say “I am a Muslim, not a Hanafi or a Shafi or a Ahle-Hadith”.
In Surah Fussilat chapter 41 verse 33 Allah (swt) says: “Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, ‘I am of those Who bow in Islam (Muslim)?’ “[Al-Qur’an 41:33]
The Qur’an instructs, “Say: I am of those who bow in Islam”. In other words, say, “I am a Muslim”.
The Prophet (pbuh) dictated letters to non-Muslim kings and rulers inviting them to accept Islam. In these letters he mentioned the verse of the Qur’an from Surah Al Imran chapter 3 verse 64:
Say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (submitting to Allah’s Will).”[Al-Qur’an 3:64]
9. Lip Service Muslims
Allah knew that even in the Muslim Ummah there will be many people who claim to be Muslims (i.e. claim to submit their will to Allah) but practically will not follow Allah’s commands.
Allah refers to such people in the Qur’an as lip service Believers (Al Qur’an 5:41). Thus we can conclude that those who claim to be Muslims but do not follow Qur’an and Sunnah are Lip-Service Muslims. Those who follow the Qur’an and authentic Hadith should not change their label, and stick to the best label given by Allah (swt) i.e. Muslim and which the Prophet also called himself.
This verse is being used once again against the Muqallideen. This time, the Muqallideen are said to not be following the Qur’aan & Sunnah.
Imagine giving a person the Qur’aan, the Ahadeeth and then saying, live your life according to these rulings. Will that person be able to understand what the Qur’aan means by Quroo’ in the verse where Allah says, “And those women who are divorced should wait for three Quroo’”?
And what type of (Mukhaabarah) will he know or understand in the Hadeeth where Nabi (s) said, “Whoever does not stop the practice of Mukhaabarah should hear the proclamation of war (against him).”? (Mukhaabarah is a certain type of farming. There were several forms of Mukhaabarah practiced) The Hadeeth is fairly general, how would a lay person distinguish between the permitted ones and the forbidden one?
Then there’s one Hadeeth which says, “Whoever has an Imaam, then the Imaam’s recitation is his recitation.” On the other hand, another Hadeeth says, “There is no Salaah for he who does not recite the Faatihah.” How would a common person which Qur’aan and Hadeeth be able to choose which Hadeeth to follow, or what is the middle route, or does it refer to something else, or was the Hadeeth for a particular event only? Obviously one is will have to turn to a learned jurist who has mastered himself in these issues and whom Allah (swt) has blessed unrecognizable wisdom. So when the person asks this jurist/imam, is he now following the Imaam or Qur’aan and Sunnah?
Obviously he is following the Qur’aan and Sunnah as passed on by these scholars as they compiled rulings. And it is common sense that if a person tries to follow all the Madhaahib then he will lead to following the rulings which suit him best.
My question is, who is following a more reliable and sound meaning of the Qur’aan and Sunnah and who is taking literal and incomplete perceptions of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. The obvious answer would be the one who chooses to follow a Madhhab is safer from making his own meaning of Deen whereas following a Madhhab is actually following a sound understanding of Qur’aan and Hadeeth.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
10. The Prophet had said that there would be 73 sects.
Some may argue by quoting the Hadith of our beloved Prophet, from Sunan Abu Dawood Hadith No. 4579. In this Hadith the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My community will split up into seventy-three sects.”
This hadith reports that the prophet predicted the emergence of seventy-three sects. He did not say that Muslims should be active in dividing themselves into sects. The Glorious Qur’an commands us not to create sects. Those who follow the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith, and do not create sects are the people who are on the true path.
According to Tirmidhi Hadith No. 171, the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My Ummah will be fragmented into seventy three sects, and all of them will be in Hell fire except one sect.” The companions asked Allah’s messenger which group that would be. Where upon he replied, “It is the one to which I and my companions belong”.
The answer of Nabi (s) is so strong and true in its wisdom. He did not say, “It is the one who follows Qur’aan & Sunnah.” He said, “It is the one to which I and my companions belong.” Note, the Sahaabah are mentioned. The Sahaabah passed on the true Islam to the Tabi’een. When the Tabi’een followed the Islam of the Sahaabah, they are included in that sect. Now will you say that the Tabi’een aren’t because they followed the Sahaabah and not the Qur’aan and Sunnah? The Tabi’een turned to certain Sahaabah and similarly the Tab’ Tabi’een turned to certain Tabi’een for certain issues. Why did they not look directly into Qur’aan and Hadeeth?
A Madhhab is a compilation of rulings, an understanding of Fiqh related issues. The Islaam we follow is the Islaam of the Sahaabah. Do we have a better understanding of Hadeeth and Qur’aan than these great scholars? If one does, they can feel free to be a Mujtahid and have their own Fiqh. As for those who follow a Madhhab, they are following the Islaam of the Sahaabah.
Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:
The Glorious Qur’an mentions in several verses, “Obey Allah and obey His Messenger”. A true Muslim should only follow the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith. He can agree with the views of any scholar as long as they conform to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith. If such views go against the Word of Allah, or the Sunnah of His Prophet, then they carry no weight, regardless of how learned the scholar might be. A true Muslim will not follow any ruling or teaching of any great scholar of Islam if that particular ruling or teaching contradicts the Qur’an and Saheeh Hadith.
Thus, the only school of thought that a Muslim should follow, is that of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The only Madhab that a Muslim should follow, is the Madhab of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). And Allah knows the Best.
By saying the only school of thought you should follow is Prophet Muhammad, you have clearly showed that you do not understand the meaning of “school of thought.” A school of thought is a doctrine, The point of view held by a particular group (dictionary) a set of ideas or opinions which a group of people share about a matter (Cambridge).
The Islaam of Nabi (s) was not a ‘point of view.’ It was the true Islaam in its state. When the narrations varied after the Sahaabah, that is when the need for school of thoughts emerged. That is when a strong opinion was required. A common person can not conclude the Deen with his own understandings.
[END OF ARTICLE AND ANSWERS]
The following questions were posed very nicely upon the above reply:
Questioner wrote:
Brother mash'Allah nice points. I'm guessing that you beleive in madhabs and that we should follow them?let me ask you on what basis?Does following a madhab go against the teachings of Rasulullah?Brother if you have a problem with the statement made by our honorable Zakir Naik then oh well.Till now brother mash'Allah nice points,but what you said is the same exact thing people say to approve of madhabs.Why is this?
Reply:
Questioner wrote:
I'm guessing that you beleive in madhabs and that we should follow them?let me ask you on what basis?
On the basis that the Muslims of early years were more knowledgable, more pious and less affected by Shaytaan than us. If you have the ability to extract rulings from Qur'aan in the light of Ahadeeth so it does not contradict other Ahadeeth being aware of the chains of narrations making sure that when you take one Hadeeth for the ruling, the other Hadeeth is not rejected and a valid reason is available, if you are able to distinguish between different terms used for the same ruling or the same word used in different context for multiple rulings, if you are able to distinguish between a weak chain and a sound chain of narrations, if you are able to distinguish between rulings which were permitted for a certain period of time, if you are able to do all this and more then by all means, Taqleed is not for you.
Now ask yourself, are we capable of even 1% that they spent their entire lives on? If everyone becomes this, what will happen to Muslims? The entire Muslim world will differ in rulings and the entire Muslim population will be stuck in books their entire lives.
Now you tell me, on what basis should we not follow a Madhhab and on what basis should we reject what has been a successful way of life from the time of Sahaabah. Like i said above in reply to Dr Zakir Naik, even the Sahaabah (ra) followed other Sahaabah in Fiqh matters and did not look into Qur'aan & Hadeeth as the Sahaabah they followed in the matter knew the ruling better than them. They did not ask for proof in differences of opinions like we do.
Questioner wrote:
Does following a madhab go against the teachings of Rasulullah?
Following a Madhhab is securing oneself to following a steadfast Fiqh instead of a purpose driven misunderstood perception of what a person makes of Ayaat and Ahaadeeth.
Questioner wrote:
Brother if you have a problem with the statement made by our honorable Zakir Naik then oh well.
Ironic that you used the word honorable. In your honor for him, you have forgotten that he dishonored all the verses I mentioned, the Ahadeeth and events of the Sahaabah i mentioned above and also the ways of the Muslims since the 3rd century AH. I'm afraid he lost all his honor upon this one article. This doesn't change the fact the he speaks very good intellectual things. But once he talks about 'Aqaaid or Taqleed, I can't but help feel sorry for him as do many scholars and highly respected and learned Ulamaa-e-Kiraam.
Questioner wrote:
Till now brother mash'Allah nice points,but what you said is the same exact thing people say to approve of madhabs.Why is this?
What I said is not to approve Madhhabs, to approve Madhhabs, there are much stronger and evident literature available. What I said was a simple answer to everything Dr Zakir Naik has said. Any person attacking Taqleed with Qur'aan and Hadeeth can be answered with their own statements because all their statements are incomplete and very easy to be blinded to a simple minded person.
"The Legal Status of Following a Madhab" by Chief Justice Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani is a book i recommend. If any, read this inshaAllah at the least. If you still do not agree then Innallaha Yahdee Man-Yashaau Wa Yudhillu Man-Yashaa.
And Allah knows best.The article itself
The following is his entire article article. One can easily notice how he manipulates the mind in thinking that Taqleed holds no value.
1. Muslims should be united
Muslims today, are divided amongst themselves. Such divisions are not endorsed by Islam. Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“And hold fast, altogether, by the rope Which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves.” [Al-Qur’an 3:103]
Which is the rope of Allah that is being referred to in this verse? It is the Glorious Qur’an. The Glorious Qur’an is the rope of Allah which all Muslims should hold fast together. There is double emphasis in this verse. Beside saying ‘hold fast all together’ it also says, ‘be not divided’.
The Qur’an further says,
“Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger” [Al-Qur’an 4:59]
All the Muslims should follow the Qur’an and authentic Ahadith and ensure that they are not divided among themselves
2. It is prohibited to make divisions in Islam.
The Glorious Qur’an says:
“As for those who divide Their religion and break up Into sects, you have no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” [Al-Qur’an 6:159]
In this verse Allah (swt) says that one should disassociate oneself from those who divide their religion and break it up into sects.
But when one asks a Muslim, “who are you?” the common answer is either ‘I am a Hanafi or Shafi or Maliki or Hanbali. Some call themselves ‘Ahle-Hadith’.
3. Four Schools of Thoughts
The Islamic world has produced several learned Islamic scholars (Imams), but out of these, four became more famous and their teachings spread in different parts of the world.
It is a misconception that a Muslim should follow any one of these four schools of thoughts i.e. Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali or Maliki. There is no proof whatsoever in the Qur’an or any authentic Hadith that a Muslim should only follow one of these four Imams.
4. Respect all the Great Scholars of Islam.
We must respect all the great scholars of Islam, including the four Imaams, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Hanbal and Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all). They were great scholars and may Allah reward them for their research and hard work. One can have no objection if someone agrees with the view and research of any one or more from these four great scholars of Islam.
5. All Four Imam said follow the Qur’an and Sunnah.
All the four great Imams said that if any of their Fatwas or teachings contradict Allah’s word, i.e. the Qur’an, or the sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) i.e. authentic Hadith, then that particulars Fatwa of theirs should be rejected, and the Sunnah of the Prophet should be followed.
To give you an example in this context – Imam shafi said that when a women touches a man who is in a state of wudhu, the wudhu of the man breaks. However, this ruling of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet.
Narrated Aisha
The Prophet (may peace be upon him) kissed one of his wives and went out for saying prayer. He did not perform ablution. (Sunan Abu Dawood Vol. 1 Chapter No. 70 Hadith No. 179)
Thus this particular teaching of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. So I reject this specific ruling of Imam Shafi who himself said , “ If I say something, then compare it to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger and if it agrees to them, then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall” – This is a saying of ash-Shafi’ee-rahimaullah. See Al-Majmoo’ of an-Nawawee (1/63).
Thus by rejecting this particular teaching of Imam Shafi which contradicts the authentic Hadith, I am practically a better follower of Imam Shafi than those who call themselves ‘Shafi’.
Similarly in practice, I claim to be a better follower of Imam Abu Hanifa than those who call themselves ‘Hanafi’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Hanbal than those who call themselves ‘Hanbali’. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Malik than those who call themselves ‘Maliki”. If being a ‘Ahle-Hadith’ means following Qur’an and authentic Hadith then I claim to be a better follower of the Qur’an and authentic Hadith than those who call themselves ‘ Ahle-Hadith’. All these are mere labels (Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki, Ahle-Hadith) that are not endorsed by the Qur’an or the Sahih Ahadith.
The only label or title given by the Qur’an and the Sahih Ahadith is MUSLIM.
6. All the Groups have sub divisions
I personally have no objection if someone calls himself Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith. People give different labels to themselves to identify which set of teachings they prefer to follow and to disassociate themselves from those people who follow wrong practices. From history we come to know that all the labels given to different groups, at a later stage the people from that group themselves did not follow their teachings and made new sub-groups. Therefore in all the groups you find a sub-division.
But as far as giving a label to identify what a person practices in Islam is concerned, there can not be better label than what Allah (swt) has given i.e. a Muslim.
7. Our Prophet was a Muslim
“Who was our beloved Prophet (pbuh)? Was he a Hanafi or a Shafi, or a Hanbali or a Maliki ?” No! He was a Muslim, like all the other Prophets and Messengers of Allah before him.
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur’an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.
Further , in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur’an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur’an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.
Further , in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur’an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.
8. Qur’an says call yourselves Muslims
There is no Qur’anic verse or any authentic Hadith that says you should call yourselves Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith.
If anyone poses a Muslim the question who are you, he should say “I am a Muslim, not a Hanafi or a Shafi or a Ahle-Hadith”.
In Surah Fussilat chapter 41 verse 33 Allah (swt) says: “Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, ‘I am of those Who bow in Islam (Muslim)?’ “[Al-Qur’an 41:33]
The Qur’an instructs, “Say: I am of those who bow in Islam”. In other words, say, “I am a Muslim”.
The Prophet (pbuh) dictated letters to non-Muslim kings and rulers inviting them to accept Islam. In these letters he mentioned the verse of the Qur’an from Surah Al Imran chapter 3 verse 64:
Say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (submitting to Allah’s Will).”[Al-Qur’an 3:64]
9. Lip Service Muslims
Allah knew that even in the Muslim Ummah there will be many people who claim to be Muslims (i.e. claim to submit their will to Allah) but practically will not follow Allah’s commands.
Allah refers to such people in the Qur’an as lip service Believers (Al Qur’an 5:41). Thus we can conclude that those who claim to be Muslims but do not follow Qur’an and Sunnah are Lip-Service Muslims. Those who follow the Qur’an and authentic Hadith should not change their label, and stick to the best label given by Allah (swt) i.e. Muslim and which the Prophet also called himself.
10. The Prophet had said that there would be 73 sects.
Some may argue by quoting the Hadith of our beloved Prophet, from Sunan Abu Dawood Hadith No. 4579. In this Hadith the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My community will split up into seventy-three sects.”
This hadith reports that the prophet predicted the emergence of seventy-three sects. He did not say that Muslims should be active in dividing themselves into sects. The Glorious Qur’an commands us not to create sects. Those who follow the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith, and do not create sects are the people who are on the true path.
According to Tirmidhi Hadith No. 171, the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My Ummah will be fragmented into seventy three sects, and all of them will be in Hell fire except one sect.” The companions asked Allah’s messenger which group that would be. Where upon he replied, “It is the one to which I and my companions belong”.
The Glorious Qur’an mentions in several verses, “Obey Allah and obey His Messenger”. A true Muslim should only follow the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith. He can agree with the views of any scholar as long as they conform to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith. If such views go against the Word of Allah, or the Sunnah of His Prophet, then they carry no weight, regardless of how learned the scholar might be. A true Muslim will not follow any ruling or teaching of any great scholar of Islam if that particular ruling or teaching contradicts the Qur’an and Saheeh Hadith.
Thus, the only school of thought that a Muslim should follow, is that of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The only Madhab that a Muslim should follow, is the Madhab of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). And Allah knows the Best.
Zakir Naik, Salafi's and Prayers
People always send me emails and queries wondering why I continue to write about Dr.Naik; knowing well that he has so many great contributions - especially in the field of comparative religion. What most Muslims fail to understand that comparative religion is a specialized branch of Islam and Jurisprudence is another specialized branch in Islam. A medical doctor is not expected to build the next tallest building in the world! So, this criticism is based on Dr.Naik's weakness in the area of Jurisprudence.
Take for example, the video above: Dr.Zakir is quoting Sunan Abu Dawood Volume 1, Book of Salaah Chapter 271, Hadith No.755. This is what he is saying, "...there is a hadith in Abu Dawood, if you read....which says that the prophet kept his hands below the navel when he offered his salaah, BUT this is a Daeef (weak) hadith."
Dr. Naik Continues further, "Immediately, the next sahih hadith says that the prophet kept his hands above the navel. There are other Sahih Hadeeth, like in Sahih ibn Khuzaima that the prophet kept his hands on the chest":
Dr. Naik now draws his conclusion as follows:
"When there are Sahih Hadith saying that the prophet kept his hands (not clear if Zakir is saying hand or arm) on his chest, so the hadith of below the navel is weak. Thus, the right way to offer salaat is to keep the hands on the chest." This research is based on the Works of Nasirudeen Albani's book "Sifah Salatu Nabi".
The problem is that Dr.Naik (and Albani) contradicts himself by saying that there is a Sahih Hadith that the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) prayed with his hands above the navel. If that is the case, then there are two methods of placing the hands, that is, one above the navel and the one as suggested viz "on the chest".
Examining Zakir (and Albani's) Claim:
Here are the Narrators of Ibn Khuzaimah:
1. Mumil lbn Ismail
2. Sufyaan
3. A'asim
4. Kulaib
5. Wail (radhi allahu anhu)
Please note that if any of the above listed narrators appear in a chain of a Hadith; Albani, the Ahle-Hadith, Salafi's and all those who follow the literalist school of thought outright brand that particular hadith as daeef (weak). In the narration of Ibn Khuzaimah (quoted by Dr.Naik) all four unacceptable narrators appear in that hadith back-to-back. This is the Mother-Lode of DAEEF - according to Albani's criteria. Yet Albani and Zakir have now conveniently hidden this fact from the readers. When Albani and Zakir see that a hadith fits the purpose of their thoughts they brand it Sahih eventhough there exists a weak narrator. In Ibn Khuzaimah's narration Mu'mil ibn Ismail is extremely weak.
In fact, what Zakir Naik needs to tell his audience is how did Imaam Bukhari perform his Salaat, and where did Imaam Bukhari place his hands? Why did such a great Muhadith like Imaam Bukhari not quote a hadith in his Sahih? So, should we be ranting and raving like Dr.Naik that the Sahih Hadith of where the hands should be placed during salaat did not reach Imaam Bukhari? The Arabic words "Ala'a Sadr" (on the chest) are not to be found in Imaam Bukhari's and Muslim's Sahih!
Zakir Naik in light of India's History
It is amazing how people have such a short memory of the historical facts that have led to the success of Dr.Zakir Naik. The subcontinent -India and Pakistan - has produced some of the most remarkable Muslim scholars that have left an indelible mark on Islamic History. For example, Pakistan - having the second largest population of Muslims in the world - stands at a very critical juncture as war in the region unfolds in front of our eyes. However, the war waging in Pakistan dates back to pre-partition; when Pakistan was actually India. A time when the British had waged an ideological war against the Muslims of India. The colonialists launched a deceptive campaign, using Christian Evengalists, to create confusion in the hearts of Indian Muslims. Before Zakir Naik was even born, Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanvi, a Hanafi scholar educated in the "Darse-Nizami" curriculum came to the forefront of rescuing the faith of the Muslims in India. Sheikh Kairanvi was a contemporary of the great Maulana Imadadullah Muhajir Makki (rahmatullahi alayhi). In fact, both will later migrate to Mecca when the the British stepped up their "Lal-Masjid" type mission of slaugtering the Muslim scholars. Maulana Kairanvi (rah) wrote his magnum opus, "Izhar-ul-Haq" in 1864 becoming the most authoritative work on the Christian Bible:
"This book, internationally recognized as one of the most authoritative and objective studies of the Bible, was originally written in Arabic under the title Izharul-Haq (Truth Revealed) by the distinguished 19th century Indian scholar, Rahmatullah Kairanvi, and appeared in 1864. The book was subsequently translated into Urdu, and then from Urdu into English by Mohammad Wali Raazi. Rahmatullah Kairanvi wrote the book in response to the Christian offensive against Islam during the British rule in India, and specifically to counter the subversive attack made by the Rev. C. C. P. Fonder. Rev. Fonder had written a book in Urdu entitled Meezanul Haq, the open intention of which was to create doubts into the minds of the Muslims about the authenticity of the Qur’an and Islam. Sheikh Kairanvi’s intention in his book was first of all to show that the Bible cannot in any way be considered as a directly revealed book. He does this very effectively by means of his voluminous and authoritative knowledge of the Jewish and
Christian scriptures. He demonstrates beyond doubt that the Books of the Old and New Testaments have been altered, almost beyond recognition, from their original forms. The work is even more notable in the light of subsequent Jewish and Christian scholarship and the various discoveries that have since been made in this field which all bear out the truth of Sheikh Kairanvi’s thesis."
Let us wind past the events of Maulana Kairanvi to the time when all went quite, history quitely folded its events with the passage of time; until another Muslim Scholar was born. Sheikh Ahmed Deedat was born in India, but later migrated to South Africa. Turn of events would lead Ahmed Deedat (rahtullahi alayhi) to the discovery of a historical event that would turn the tides on Christian Missionaries; the book "Izhar-ul-Haq". The profound nature of the book would pave the path for Sheikh Ahmed Deedat, taking him to great heights of scholarship and rewarding his life with the title of "Muslim Scholar of the Christian Bible".
Sheikh Ahmed Deedat will become an inspiration for millions, if not billions of Muslims across the world including Dr.Zakir Naik. It is sad that Dr.Naik down plays the role of Hanafi Ulema, who sacrificed their lives and saved millions of souls despite being branded as "Mullahs". It is so sad that he has not given the classical ulema the respect that they deserve; yet he enjoys his fame under the pretext of a doctoral title and as a "modern" forward thinking "scholar". He got his authentic seal from Sheikh Ahmed Deedat (rah) who possessed "ilm-Laduna" through the book of Maulana Kairanvi (rah). Dr.Naik would not be what he is today had he not drank from the fountain of knowledge flowing from stream of classical Ulema - who were in fact non other than from the "Deoband" school of Islamic scholarship.
Let me conclude with this very couplet I learned from my grandmother, who actually saw the great Muslim scholar Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmatullahi alayhi) in her teens. The couplet is:
"Baa Adab Baa Naseeb" (He / She that possess 'Adab' - etiquettes & respect - is very blessed)
"Bay Adab Bay Naseeb" (He / She that possess no 'Adab' is without blessing)
Zakir Naik and the Yazeed Dilemma
In summary, the Ahle-Sunnah-wal-Jamaa'a refrain from cursing Yazid Ibn Mu'awiyya; and this is also the position of Dr.Naik. This is the most balanced, correct and acceptable view.
On another note, this issue with Yazid bin Mua'aawiyah tends to remind a lot of people in from the Subcontinent about Abdul Ala'a Maududi's book in urdu titled, "Khilafaat-aur-Mulookiat" - Khilafah and Kingship. Mr.Maududi (acclaimed scholar and thinker) was praised by the Ulema until he raised his pen against Sayyidna Usman Ibn Affan (radhi Allaho anho) and called him "Khaain" - one who steals, or does not measure with equity. However, Maududi's book gave Shia's the boost they needed in accusing the Sahaba (radhi allahu anhu) of stealing, lying, cheating and political favortism (astaghfirullah). Anyway, if Usman Ibn Affan (radhi Allaho anho) is "khaain" then where does that leave us regarding the integrity of the Quran and the compilation of the Quran? The followers of Mr.Maududi feel insulted when he is challenged, yet no one feels insulted when the Sahaba Ikhraam are labeled "Khaain" (cheaters) - God Forbid. I would like to add that Justice Mufti Taqi Usmani has written a monumental book in the Urdu language titled, "Hazrat Mua'awiyya aur Tareekhi Haqaaiq" (available from http://www.albalagh.net/). This book is a response to Maududi's "Khilafat aur Mulukiat" and is an excellent reading on this very challenging subject.
I personally like Dr.Naik and appreciate his contributions and efforts. However, when it comes to the issue of Yazid, Dr Naik's organization has put out a clarification on "Youtube" and to ones surprise he has listed Darul Uloom Deoband at the top of his list. It is sad that on one hand Dr.Naik knows the reality of Ulema-of-Deoband, however, he insists on spreading ill feelings amongst his fans against "Deobandi" scholars! Here a very scholarly response from Scholars in South Africa: http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.php?askid=e65dfd0bcc40c10cb8b82b808fc45dfd
Zakir Naik the second Muslim Group
In an oft quoted hadith, regarding the 73 sects in Islam , one finds many a scholar like Zakir Naik insisting that the four schools of thought and any Muslim following the research of the four illustrious jurists are sects in Islam. Conversely, he has argued that the rightly guided out of 73 are those following the Quran and Sahih hadith. To examine Dr.Naik's claim we have to look at two major groups of people in the world today:
1. Those who follow only the Quran but they reject the Sunnah; specifically the vast literature of Hadith. They claim that the Quran is enough and there is no need for Hadith. In their catechism (if I spelt the word right), they belief that the Quran is Absolute, it is the word of God, whereas the the Hadith is the word of man which is not absolute in its purity. By rejecting hadith they want to rid the world of the “inconsistencies” created by hadith. This group of people are rejectors of the Sunnah and not in the fold of Islam by all logical and Quranic evidence.
2. The second group are those who follow the Quran and Hadith but reject the Fiqh. They claim that the Quran and Hadith is enough, and that Fiqh is the reason for confusion. These people have gone so far as to brand the four schools of thought as the reason behind the disunity of this ummah. This group proudly claims that the word of the Prophet (SAW) has more value than the word of a fallible individuals - like the four Imaams. The problem with this rule is that Imaam Bukhari is also a fallible individual yet Dr.Naik follows Bukhari blindly and accepts all the narrators (who are also fallible individuals) blindly in the chain that links upto the Messenger of Allah (pbuh). But when it comes to trusting Imaam Abu Hanifa (or the other jurists who are Thiqa / Adil), suddenly the people following their investigation are branded as "Mushriks" and "Kafirs" and all the reason behind dividing the ummah into sects! Furthermore, Dr.Naik claims to follow the Quran (script of Hafs an-Asim al Kufi -another blind following) and Sahih ahadith trusting the research of Nasir-ud-Deen Albani, yet branding the following of Mujtahid Imaams as a misguided practice? When Dr.Naik follows someone blindly it is a guided practice, but if I follow Imaam Azam Abu Hanifa blindly, he categorizes me as a sect - doomed to Hell! So, there is no doubt that Naik's claim is erroneous and false. He is unable to show, nor will he ever be able to show till the day of judgement, a single hadith from Imaam Bukhari regarding the placing of hands during salaat (i.e., below, on or above the navel). This group of Muslims has created more confusion in the Ummah by blindly following their own teachers, lecturers and Imaams, yet, they continue to brand everyone else misguided for assuming such a position. Dr.Naik has taken established practices of Islam and rejected them; for example he insists on 8 rakaats of taraawih instead of 20. This group of Muslims always want the masses to focus on “daeef (weak)” vs“Sahih”, but they never tell the people the whole truth. For example, they never tell the people that there is not a single Sahih hadith in Bukhari or Muslim where the prophet (pbuh) uttered the words “Tarawih”. So, where did they get this word from? Well, their scholars took it from the four schools of thought but failed to tell the people that they have done so. Regarding the Hadith of Aisha (ra), Dr.Naik has created an erroneous interpretation that 8 rakaats when prayed in 11 regular months are called "Qiyamul-Layl (night prayer)", but when prayed during the month of ramadaan are called “Taraawih”. Now, if Dr.Naik is such a champion of following Sahih Hadith why can't he ever prove this claim; 8 in ramadhan equals Tarawih, 8 outside ramadhan equals qayamul layl - all from Sahih Hadith? Everyone is welcome to search this hadith, carefully read it and sincerely see for themselves the problem with Dr.Naik's interpretations / claims.
What it all boils down to is mass confusion created by these two groups that never tell people the whole truth. Yet they continue (without fear of Allah) to leverage their podiums in spreading bigotry, hate, mistrust and erroneous information. Another example is the Al-Maghrib institute in America, which has done a dis-service to Muslims in America by not really explaining the basis of Fiqh. By not explaining fiqh, and talking to people about “Usool-ul-Fiqh”; yet being rejectors of the four established schools of jurisprudence is an extremely dangerous position. I as a Muslim should be sincere and open to the people when explaining something, and letting people know my position. This allows others to understand my approach and correct me where I am wrong. But by playing Mickey Mouse games, hide and seek, charging people money, and passing out printed material that fails to cover 1/1000 of Fiqh, goes to show that there is something seriously wrong with such groups of Muslims.
Finally, before the need for another Fiqh can be suggested, we need someone that can explain the existing Fiqh as understood by the Jurists. For example the hadith on a fly falling into a cup of Milk is known to all Muslims. But this is the ONLY hadith. If someone where to ask Zakir Naik (and this is a challenge to him), “please could you show a hadith or ayat where if four ants fell in a cup of yogurt, whether one can remove the ants and eat the yogurt or not?” It is here that we find the intelligence of the Fuqahaa who derived from this hadith a list of insects. Ijtihaad in modern issues is necessary but the rules to base the ijtehaad have to come from the established four schools.
Zakir Naik going where Shk.Deedat didn't go!
It was 1991 when I picked up the phone and called South Africa. The person that answered on the other side was Sheikh Ahmed Deedat. After asking my age and where I was calling from, he said, "Assalam alaykum son, my only area of specialization is comparative religion. I am not an Imam, a sheikh that can answer questions related to fiqh / masail, nor am I am a Muhadith or a Quranic teacher; if you are seeking any services other than my area of expertise you have reached the wrong number." I assured him that my question was regarding "Christianity". On the other hand, Dr.Naik has suddenly shifted lanes from comparative religion to Fiqh; an area where he lacks understanding. His Ustaaz (teacher) the late Sheikh Ahmed Deedat (rahmatullahi alayhi) never delved into the arena of fiqh.
Dr.Naik has generated a series of videos and lectures blaming that the four schools of thought viz Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali are the reason behind the Muslim Ummah's disunity. In an effort to set the record straight he has offered following of the "Quran and Sahih Hadith" as the means to solving the problem. In regards to the four schools of thought he boldly quotes the statements of Aimma Mujtahideen that these great illustrious men absolved themselves by saying that if a sahih (authentic) hadith is found to contradict their madhab, then follow the Hadith. All pious people of Allah have taken great care in matters of deen by adding disclaimers to show their humility and piety (taqwa). A lesson for all of us to learn. All Dr.Naik had to do was to tell the viewers, listeners and readers what Allamah Hafiz Ibn Hajr has written in his book "Fathul Bari bi Sharh al Bukhari" that the statement of Imam Shafi, "Idhaa saahal hadith, fa huwa Madhabi" (if you find a sahih hadith than that is my madhab) has doubt (Shakh) in it. How can one prove in this time and age that a certain hadith reached Imam Abu Hanifa or not? To make this discussion painless, Hafiz ibn Hajar (ra) cites the example that Imam Malik has recorded two saheeh ahadeeth in his Muwatta regarding tying of hands during salaat. Eventhough, these ahadeeth reached Imam Malik and are recorded in his Muwatta, his practice on these ahaadeeth was quite different. Dr.Naik fails to explain this to his audience. Qadhi Sahnoon - a student of Malik (ra) - writes in Al-Mudawwanah that Imam Malik considered the practice of tying of hands during fardh salaat as"weak" (eventhough he has two sahih ahadeeth in his Muwatta). Dr.Naik boasts that he is a Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali according to the rule of "Idhaa saahal hadeeth fa huwa madhabi". However, one finds that the illustrious fuqahaa are being misquoted by Naik. Imaam Malik has recorded two sahih ahaadeth, yet his practice was that tying of hands is not a "Sahih" during obligatory prayers; rather a practice to be adopted during "Sunnah" and "Nawaafil". Is this the practice of Dr.Naik? No, he blindly follows Albani's research of placing hands on the chest. But now listen to Zakir Naik on this video link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGeGc0zSAlQ. Why did Dr.Naik keep all the facts away from the audience if his intention was to explain and elaborate a critical issue? However, he falsely claims that he is Maliki - watch the video! Not only that but Dr.Naik does not allow anyone to post any comments against this video on "youtube". Try posting a note that "cheers" him and then post something "opposing" him. The black and white of Dr.Naik's response will show you his extent of bias. He is quick in criticizing the Muslim masses yet not able to take criticism.
Verdicts About Dr Zakir Naik
(Fatwa: 1541/1322=B/1429)
The statements made by Dr Zakir Naik indicate that he is a preacher of Ghair Muqallidin, he is of free mind and does not wear Islamic dress. One should not rely upon his speeches.
Allah (Subhana Wa Ta'ala) knows Best
Darul Ifta,
Darul Uloom Deoband
(Fatwa: 352=363/B)
He seems Ghair Muqallid and his knowledge is not deep. Therefore, he is not reliable and Muslims should avoid listening to him.
Allah (Subhana Wa Ta'ala) knows Best
Darul Ifta,
Darul Uloom Deoband
When should one stand up during the Iqamah?
When should the muqtadis[1] stand up for salah in congregation? Should they stand before the iqamah begins, when the iqamah begins or when the words hayya ‘ala al-falah are reached?
The answer to this question lies in the practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and the Noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them).
Practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)
(1) Sayyiduna Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) would render the adhan for Zuhr after zawal (i.e., when the sun reaches its zenith or midway point). He would not say the iqamah until the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerged from his quarters. When he emerged and he saw him, the iqamah would begin. (Muslim)
(2) The people would stand for salah in preparation for the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace). The people would take their place in the prayer rows (saffs) before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) stood up from his place. (Muslim)
(3) Sayyiduna Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) says that once they stood up for salah and straightened the rows even before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerged from his quarters. (Muslim)
(4) The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) told the Companions: “Do not stand for salah until you see me”. (Al-Bukhari)
(5) Ibn Shihab narrates that the people would stand up for salah when the muezzin would say Allahu Akbar Allahu Akbar. The rows would be straightened before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) reached his place [to lead prayer]. (Musannaf ‘Abd al-Razzaq)
(6) The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) would stand up from his place when Sayyiduna Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) would say: “qad qamat al-salah“. (Majma’ al-Zawa’id)
These are six narrations describing the practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace).
The first narration explains that the general habit of Sayyiduna Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) was to keep an eye on the quarters of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace). When he emerged from his quarters, Sayyiduna Bilal would commence the iqamah. ‘Allamah Zurqani in his commentary of the Muwatta of Imam Malik and Qadi ‘Iyad in Sharh al-Shifa have mentioned the above-mentioned explanation.
The words of ‘Allamah Zurqani:
“Sayyiduna Bilal would await the appearance of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace). As soon as he saw him, he would begin the iqamah; and this was even before most of the people saw him. The people would stand as they saw him. He would not stand in his (Allah bless him and give him peace) position until the rows were straightened.” (Sharh al-Zurqani, 1:214)
The second and third narrations substantiate that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would usually stand up when the iqamah started and would begin straightening the rows.
Explaining the words “straightening the rows” in the third narration, Imam Nawawi writes in the commentary of Sahih Muslim: “There is an indication (in the words ‘straightening the rows’) that they considered this a Sunnah. The ‘ulama are unanimous on the merits of straightening the rows.” (Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Muslim, 5:103)
The fourth narration is indicative that at times Sayyiduna Bilal would commence with the iqamah even before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerged from his quarters and the Companions would stand up and prepare the rows when the iqamah started. The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) for some reason got delayed in emerging from his quarters so he advised them not to stand before he came out. Obviously this was to save the people from the inconvenience of waiting while standing for a long period of time.
The words “do not stand until you see me” means that do not stand until I emerge from my quarters. It is also indicative that there is no harm in standing as soon as he emerged from his quarters.
The fifth narration explains the common routine; Sayyiduna Bilal would commence with the iqamah when he saw the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerging from his quarters and the people would stand up as soon as the iqamah commenced and begin straightening the rows.
The sixth narration makes clear that at times the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) would be present in the masjid well before the commencement of salah. In this case he would stand up for the salah when the muezzin said qad qamat al-salah. It seems that in this case the Companions stood up when he stood up.
The common factor derived from these narrations is that when the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) was not present in the masjid beforehand but would come out from his quarters, Sayyiduna Bilal would commence with the iqamah as soon as he emerged from his quarters and the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would stand immediately on hearing the iqamah and straightened their rows and the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) never forbade this practice.
Yes, he did discourage them from commencing the iqamah and standing up before his appearance from his quarters and this was because of his consideration for them, and if done, it is termed makruh tanzihi (slightly disliked) by the jurists [because of his discouragement].
Practice of the rightly-guided Caliphs
(1) Sayyiduna Nu’man ibn Bashir (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) would straighten our rows when we stood up for salah and only said the takbir (i.e., Allahu Akbar) for salah after we were straight [in the rows]. (Sunan Abu Dawud)
(2) Sayyiduna ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would appoint people to straighten the rows. He would not begin the salah until he was told that the rows were straight. Imam Tirmidhi has recorded this narration and he has also written that this was also the practice of Sayyiduna ‘Ali and Sayyiduna ‘Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them both). (Nayl al-Awtar, 2:187)
The first narration explains the method of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and the second narration the method of Sayyiduna ‘Umar, Sayyiduna ‘Ali and Sayyiduna ‘Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them). They would also themselves check on the rows and would not begin the salah until they were satisfied that the rows were straight, i.e., there were no gaps in-between the rows and all were in a straight line. They would not begin the salah until then.
This is possible when the people stand up for salah from the commencement of the iqamah, as mentioned in the narrations above that this was the usual procedure of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). If they had stood when the muezzin said hayya ‘ala al-salah or hayya ‘ala al-falah or qad qamat al-salah, and thereafter the straightening of the rows took place, the salah would have been delayed for a long period after the completion of the iqamah, which is unanimously condemned by the ‘ulama.
Rulings of the jurists
The jurists (fuqaha) have included this issue under the heading Adab al-Salah, i.e., Etiquette of Salah. Etiquettes are those factors that if a person leaves them out, he is not committing a makruh (disliked) act nor is he worthy of reproach. Fulfilling the etiquettes is best but to reproach a person who fails to fulfil them is not permissible and in fact a bid’ah.
The following is recorded in Al-Durr al-Mukhtar:
“The salah consists of a few etiquettes. No sin is incurred by leaving them out nor is reproach like leaving the Sunan al-Zawa’id but to act upon them more virtuous.” (Al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 1:477)
Regarding the views of the mujtahid Imams, Imam Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes in the commentary of Sahih Muslim:
“According to Imam Shafi’i (may Allah have mercy on him) and a group of scholars, it is mustahabb (recommended) not to stand up until the muezzin has completed the iqamah. Qadi ‘Iyad has related from Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) and from many ‘ulama that it is mustahabb to stand up when the muezzin commences the iqamah. Sayyiduna Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) would stand up when the muezzin said qad qamat al-salah and Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) is of the same view. The view of Imam Abu Hanifah and the ‘ulama of Kufah is the people should stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-salah.” (Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Muslim, 5:103)
The details of the Hanafi madhhab are recorded in Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah (or Fatawa Alamgiri):
“If the muezzin and the imam is not the same person and the imam and muqtadis are in the masjid, the imam and muqtadis will stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-falah, according to our three ‘ulama (Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Abu Yusuf, Imam Muhammed) and this is the correct view.
“If the imam is outside the masjid and he enters from behind the rows, each row [of muqtadis] will stand when he passes that particular row. This is the opinion of Shams al-A’immah Al-Halwani, Al-Sarakhsi and Shaykh al-Islam Khuwahar Zadah. If the imam enters the masjid from the front, the people will stand as soon as they see the imam. They will not stand before he enters the masjid.” (Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah, 1:57).
The following is recorded in Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’:
“The qiyam (standing) is for the purpose of salah [in Congregation] and it is not possible without the imam. Thus, standing [without the presence of the imam] is not beneficial. If the imam enters from the front of the masjid, the people will stand as soon as they see him because when he enters he will directly proceed to the place of leading the salah (imamah). If he enters from the back of the masjid [from behind the rows], the correct view is that each row [of muqtadis] will stand as he passes the particular row, for by his passing of each row it becomes valid for that row to follow him in salah. It is as if the imam is already on his place [in front of them] for each row passed.” (Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’, 1:200)
Imam Malik himself has expressed his view in his compilation Muwatta in reply to a question:
“Imam Malik was asked when is it necessary for the people to stand for salah. He replied: ‘I have not heard of any definite ruling regarding this, but I suppose that this is according to the strength of the people. For, among them are those who are heavy and those who are light-bodied. All of them are not the same [and cannot stand at the same time]‘”. (Muwatta Imam Malik, 2:96)
The views of the four Imams have been mentioned above. The summary is as follows: According to Imam Shafi’i it is mustahabb to stand after the completion of the iqamah. According to the statement of Qadi ‘Iyad, the view of Imam Malik is that it is mustahabb to stand from the commencement of the iqamah. But according to the statement in Muwatta, there is no fixed ruling for this and people should stand up according to their ability, respectively. A heavy-bodied person takes longer to stand up compared to a light-bodied person. A sick person also takes longer to stand up. A light-bodied person can stand up quickly.
The view of Imam Ahmad is to stand when the muezzin says qad qamat al-salah. The details of the view of the madhhab of Imam Abu Hanifah is explained in Fatawa Alamgiri and Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’ (above). If the imam and muqtadis are present in the masjid, then according to the reliable narration, they should stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-falah. If the imam is entering from outside then there are two scenarios: (a) if he is entering from the front of the masjid, the muqtadis will stand upon seeing the imam and (b) if the imam enters from the back of the masjid, each row will stand as he passes it.
Where the Hanafi madhhab is explained in Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq that if the imam and muqtadis are present in the masjid before time, the imam and muqtadis will stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-falah, the following reason is furnished:
“It is better to stand up on the words of hayya ‘ala al-falah because these words carry an instruction [to come to success]. Therefore on these words a person will make an effort and hasten [towards success]“. (Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq, 1:321)
This implies that those who are of the opinion that it is mustahabb to stand at hayya ‘ala al-falah and qad qamat al-salah because of the instruction contained in it, consider it against etiquette to still be seated thereafter but do not consider standing up before these words to be against etiquette, because standing before these words are said is also hurrying [towards success] on a greater level.
Thus, those who consider it mustahabb to stand at hayya ‘ala al-salah are not saying that to stand before it is contrary to mustahabb, but to remain seated after those words is against etiquette, for this will be against hastening towards obedience.
After pondering it will be realised that the four Imams are unanimous on two aspects:
(a) The differences of opinion is based on better and best and not a matter of impermissibility and blameworthiness (makruh). Thus, no one has the right to object or oppose anyone in this regard. The followers of the four madhhabs do not oppose each other in this matter.
(b) The consensus of the Companions, Followers (tabi’un) and unanimity of the four Imams proves that it is wajib (compulsory) to straighten the rows which should be attained before the salah commences and this can be easily achieved when the people stand up at the commencement of the iqamah. According to Imam Malik, there is no harm if the weak and the ill stand up a bit later.
The essence of this is as follows: When the Imam and muqtadis are present in the masjid before time, it is best to stand at hayya ‘ala al-falah and qad qamat al-salah according to Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and according to Imam Shafi’i after the iqamah is complete. According to Imam Malik, at the beginning of the iqamah and the general practice of the rightly-guided Caliphs and most Companions substantiate this view. Thus, the ruling of Sa’id ibn al-Musayyab is that to stand up at the beginning of the iqamah is not only mustahabb but wajib.
Not one of the four Imams have ruled that it is necessary for the imam to first sit on the place of prayer to reprimand those who are standing and to consider those standing wrong. It is not the madhhab of any Imam to consider standing from the beginning as makruh or to or to think ill of or to insult such people.
The authentic views of the Hanafi madhhab has been mentioned in Fatawa Alamgiri and Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’ which have been approved by Shams al-A’immah al-Sarakhsi and other Hanafi scholars. No one among the Hanafi scholars in their books, commentaries and fatwa compilations have written that it is makruh to stand from the beginning except in the narration of Al-Mudmarat which has been related by Al-Tahtawi. No one else has said that it is makruh, and how could they say so whereas standing from the beginning [of the iqamah] has been proven from the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), the rightly-guided Caliphs, the other Companions and Followers.
As far as the narration of Al-Mudmarat is concerned, Al-Tahtawi has recorded it as follows:
“If a person enters the masjid when the muezzin has begun the iqamah, the person will sit and will not wait while standing”. (Hashiyah al-Tahtawi ‘ala Maraqi al-Falah, 1:186)
This narration can clearly imply that the person will not wait while standing if the iqamah has begun before the imam has entered the masjid, which has been discouraged by the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) as mentioned earlier. The words “do not wait” means not to wait for the imam while standing. By taking this meaning of this narration, it now complies with the other narrations of the Hanafi madhhab and does not oppose the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and of the Companions.
On the other hand, if it is interpreted that it is makruh for a person entering to stand while the iqamah is being said [but should first sit] and the imam is present in the masjid, then because it is contrary to the other texts and commentaries of the Hanafi madhhab, this narration will be ignored, because it is also contrary to the Sunnah and because the narration can be interpreted (to comply) as mentioned above.
Al-Tahtawi has interpreted the narration of Al-Mudmarat in this manner which opposes the common texts and commentaries of the Hanafis and also the Sunnah of the Companions in this regard. The greatness and knowledge of ‘Allamah Al-Tahtawi is in its place, but to interpret the narration in this manner is reason in itself to discard it.
In fact ‘Allamah Al-Tahtawi has recorded the same view as mentioned in Fatawa Alamgiri and Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’ in his commentary on Al-Durr al-Mukhtar, i.e., if the imam enters from the front of the masjid, the people will stand on seeing him, and if he enters from the back, each row will stand as he passes it.
It is recorded in Al-Durr al-Mukhtar that if the imam himself also renders the iqamah, the people will not stand until the completion of the iqamah. Al-Durr al-Mukhtar narrates this with reference to Zahiriyyah.
Al-Tahtawi has written the following under this issue:
“From this previous discussion, sometimes some people understand (i.e., misunderstand) it to mean that it is makruh to stand from the beginning”. (Al-Tahtawi ‘ala al-Durr, 1:245)
The words “sometimes some people understand” used by ‘Allamah al-Tahtawi shows that to believe it as makruh is not a weighty opinion and he did not say that this is his opinion but said that some people take this meaning from the text.
To sum up, among all the Hanafi texts on this discussion, the text of only Al-Mudmarat is unclear and it can also be interpreted according to the views of the majority and the common texts of the Hanafi books. If the meaning of makruh is taken from it, then because it is contrary to the view of the Imams of the madhhab and texts and commentaries, it will be thrust aside.
Concluding remarks
It has been elucidated that the practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), the rightly-guided Caliphs and the majority of the Companions and Followers was that when the imam enters the masjid people would stand from the beginning of the iqamah and straighten the rows.
If the imam is present in the masjid before time, it is mustahabb to stand at hayya ‘ala al-falah, meaning that it is against etiquette to remain seated after these words because it will be against the instruction of hastening towards success but not against etiquette to stand up before these words because it is hastening towards success even earlier.
In some masjids there is a custom that at the time of iqamah the imam emerges from one of the corners, considers it necessary to sit on the place of prayer (musallah) first, instructs those standing to be seated and censures them, this is not the view of any Imam or jurist of this Ummah but is a pure innovation (bid’ah).
Important advice
The purpose of this article was to clarify and explain this issue. Although the last method is contrary to the view of majority of the jurists and abominable, fighting and arguing over this issue is far worse. It is not appropriate to fight and argue over this issue. With affection and kindness, explain the issue to those whom there is hope that they will accept otherwise silence is better. Align your own actions according to the Sunnah and do not oppose others.
Allah Most High knows best.
Jawahir al-Fiqh, vol. 1, p. 309, Maktabah Dar al-’Ulum Karachi, Karachi
_____________________________
Muqtadi: one who follows the imam in congregational salah.
The answer to this question lies in the practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and the Noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them).
Practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)
(1) Sayyiduna Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) would render the adhan for Zuhr after zawal (i.e., when the sun reaches its zenith or midway point). He would not say the iqamah until the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerged from his quarters. When he emerged and he saw him, the iqamah would begin. (Muslim)
(2) The people would stand for salah in preparation for the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace). The people would take their place in the prayer rows (saffs) before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) stood up from his place. (Muslim)
(3) Sayyiduna Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) says that once they stood up for salah and straightened the rows even before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerged from his quarters. (Muslim)
(4) The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) told the Companions: “Do not stand for salah until you see me”. (Al-Bukhari)
(5) Ibn Shihab narrates that the people would stand up for salah when the muezzin would say Allahu Akbar Allahu Akbar. The rows would be straightened before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) reached his place [to lead prayer]. (Musannaf ‘Abd al-Razzaq)
(6) The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) would stand up from his place when Sayyiduna Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) would say: “qad qamat al-salah“. (Majma’ al-Zawa’id)
These are six narrations describing the practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace).
The first narration explains that the general habit of Sayyiduna Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) was to keep an eye on the quarters of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace). When he emerged from his quarters, Sayyiduna Bilal would commence the iqamah. ‘Allamah Zurqani in his commentary of the Muwatta of Imam Malik and Qadi ‘Iyad in Sharh al-Shifa have mentioned the above-mentioned explanation.
The words of ‘Allamah Zurqani:
“Sayyiduna Bilal would await the appearance of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace). As soon as he saw him, he would begin the iqamah; and this was even before most of the people saw him. The people would stand as they saw him. He would not stand in his (Allah bless him and give him peace) position until the rows were straightened.” (Sharh al-Zurqani, 1:214)
The second and third narrations substantiate that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would usually stand up when the iqamah started and would begin straightening the rows.
Explaining the words “straightening the rows” in the third narration, Imam Nawawi writes in the commentary of Sahih Muslim: “There is an indication (in the words ‘straightening the rows’) that they considered this a Sunnah. The ‘ulama are unanimous on the merits of straightening the rows.” (Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Muslim, 5:103)
The fourth narration is indicative that at times Sayyiduna Bilal would commence with the iqamah even before the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerged from his quarters and the Companions would stand up and prepare the rows when the iqamah started. The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) for some reason got delayed in emerging from his quarters so he advised them not to stand before he came out. Obviously this was to save the people from the inconvenience of waiting while standing for a long period of time.
The words “do not stand until you see me” means that do not stand until I emerge from my quarters. It is also indicative that there is no harm in standing as soon as he emerged from his quarters.
The fifth narration explains the common routine; Sayyiduna Bilal would commence with the iqamah when he saw the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) emerging from his quarters and the people would stand up as soon as the iqamah commenced and begin straightening the rows.
The sixth narration makes clear that at times the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) would be present in the masjid well before the commencement of salah. In this case he would stand up for the salah when the muezzin said qad qamat al-salah. It seems that in this case the Companions stood up when he stood up.
The common factor derived from these narrations is that when the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) was not present in the masjid beforehand but would come out from his quarters, Sayyiduna Bilal would commence with the iqamah as soon as he emerged from his quarters and the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would stand immediately on hearing the iqamah and straightened their rows and the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) never forbade this practice.
Yes, he did discourage them from commencing the iqamah and standing up before his appearance from his quarters and this was because of his consideration for them, and if done, it is termed makruh tanzihi (slightly disliked) by the jurists [because of his discouragement].
Practice of the rightly-guided Caliphs
(1) Sayyiduna Nu’man ibn Bashir (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) would straighten our rows when we stood up for salah and only said the takbir (i.e., Allahu Akbar) for salah after we were straight [in the rows]. (Sunan Abu Dawud)
(2) Sayyiduna ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would appoint people to straighten the rows. He would not begin the salah until he was told that the rows were straight. Imam Tirmidhi has recorded this narration and he has also written that this was also the practice of Sayyiduna ‘Ali and Sayyiduna ‘Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them both). (Nayl al-Awtar, 2:187)
The first narration explains the method of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and the second narration the method of Sayyiduna ‘Umar, Sayyiduna ‘Ali and Sayyiduna ‘Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them). They would also themselves check on the rows and would not begin the salah until they were satisfied that the rows were straight, i.e., there were no gaps in-between the rows and all were in a straight line. They would not begin the salah until then.
This is possible when the people stand up for salah from the commencement of the iqamah, as mentioned in the narrations above that this was the usual procedure of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). If they had stood when the muezzin said hayya ‘ala al-salah or hayya ‘ala al-falah or qad qamat al-salah, and thereafter the straightening of the rows took place, the salah would have been delayed for a long period after the completion of the iqamah, which is unanimously condemned by the ‘ulama.
Rulings of the jurists
The jurists (fuqaha) have included this issue under the heading Adab al-Salah, i.e., Etiquette of Salah. Etiquettes are those factors that if a person leaves them out, he is not committing a makruh (disliked) act nor is he worthy of reproach. Fulfilling the etiquettes is best but to reproach a person who fails to fulfil them is not permissible and in fact a bid’ah.
The following is recorded in Al-Durr al-Mukhtar:
“The salah consists of a few etiquettes. No sin is incurred by leaving them out nor is reproach like leaving the Sunan al-Zawa’id but to act upon them more virtuous.” (Al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 1:477)
Regarding the views of the mujtahid Imams, Imam Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes in the commentary of Sahih Muslim:
“According to Imam Shafi’i (may Allah have mercy on him) and a group of scholars, it is mustahabb (recommended) not to stand up until the muezzin has completed the iqamah. Qadi ‘Iyad has related from Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) and from many ‘ulama that it is mustahabb to stand up when the muezzin commences the iqamah. Sayyiduna Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) would stand up when the muezzin said qad qamat al-salah and Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) is of the same view. The view of Imam Abu Hanifah and the ‘ulama of Kufah is the people should stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-salah.” (Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Muslim, 5:103)
The details of the Hanafi madhhab are recorded in Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah (or Fatawa Alamgiri):
“If the muezzin and the imam is not the same person and the imam and muqtadis are in the masjid, the imam and muqtadis will stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-falah, according to our three ‘ulama (Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Abu Yusuf, Imam Muhammed) and this is the correct view.
“If the imam is outside the masjid and he enters from behind the rows, each row [of muqtadis] will stand when he passes that particular row. This is the opinion of Shams al-A’immah Al-Halwani, Al-Sarakhsi and Shaykh al-Islam Khuwahar Zadah. If the imam enters the masjid from the front, the people will stand as soon as they see the imam. They will not stand before he enters the masjid.” (Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah, 1:57).
The following is recorded in Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’:
“The qiyam (standing) is for the purpose of salah [in Congregation] and it is not possible without the imam. Thus, standing [without the presence of the imam] is not beneficial. If the imam enters from the front of the masjid, the people will stand as soon as they see him because when he enters he will directly proceed to the place of leading the salah (imamah). If he enters from the back of the masjid [from behind the rows], the correct view is that each row [of muqtadis] will stand as he passes the particular row, for by his passing of each row it becomes valid for that row to follow him in salah. It is as if the imam is already on his place [in front of them] for each row passed.” (Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’, 1:200)
Imam Malik himself has expressed his view in his compilation Muwatta in reply to a question:
“Imam Malik was asked when is it necessary for the people to stand for salah. He replied: ‘I have not heard of any definite ruling regarding this, but I suppose that this is according to the strength of the people. For, among them are those who are heavy and those who are light-bodied. All of them are not the same [and cannot stand at the same time]‘”. (Muwatta Imam Malik, 2:96)
The views of the four Imams have been mentioned above. The summary is as follows: According to Imam Shafi’i it is mustahabb to stand after the completion of the iqamah. According to the statement of Qadi ‘Iyad, the view of Imam Malik is that it is mustahabb to stand from the commencement of the iqamah. But according to the statement in Muwatta, there is no fixed ruling for this and people should stand up according to their ability, respectively. A heavy-bodied person takes longer to stand up compared to a light-bodied person. A sick person also takes longer to stand up. A light-bodied person can stand up quickly.
The view of Imam Ahmad is to stand when the muezzin says qad qamat al-salah. The details of the view of the madhhab of Imam Abu Hanifah is explained in Fatawa Alamgiri and Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’ (above). If the imam and muqtadis are present in the masjid, then according to the reliable narration, they should stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-falah. If the imam is entering from outside then there are two scenarios: (a) if he is entering from the front of the masjid, the muqtadis will stand upon seeing the imam and (b) if the imam enters from the back of the masjid, each row will stand as he passes it.
Where the Hanafi madhhab is explained in Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq that if the imam and muqtadis are present in the masjid before time, the imam and muqtadis will stand when the muezzin says hayya ‘ala al-falah, the following reason is furnished:
“It is better to stand up on the words of hayya ‘ala al-falah because these words carry an instruction [to come to success]. Therefore on these words a person will make an effort and hasten [towards success]“. (Al-Bahr al-Ra’iq, 1:321)
This implies that those who are of the opinion that it is mustahabb to stand at hayya ‘ala al-falah and qad qamat al-salah because of the instruction contained in it, consider it against etiquette to still be seated thereafter but do not consider standing up before these words to be against etiquette, because standing before these words are said is also hurrying [towards success] on a greater level.
Thus, those who consider it mustahabb to stand at hayya ‘ala al-salah are not saying that to stand before it is contrary to mustahabb, but to remain seated after those words is against etiquette, for this will be against hastening towards obedience.
After pondering it will be realised that the four Imams are unanimous on two aspects:
(a) The differences of opinion is based on better and best and not a matter of impermissibility and blameworthiness (makruh). Thus, no one has the right to object or oppose anyone in this regard. The followers of the four madhhabs do not oppose each other in this matter.
(b) The consensus of the Companions, Followers (tabi’un) and unanimity of the four Imams proves that it is wajib (compulsory) to straighten the rows which should be attained before the salah commences and this can be easily achieved when the people stand up at the commencement of the iqamah. According to Imam Malik, there is no harm if the weak and the ill stand up a bit later.
The essence of this is as follows: When the Imam and muqtadis are present in the masjid before time, it is best to stand at hayya ‘ala al-falah and qad qamat al-salah according to Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and according to Imam Shafi’i after the iqamah is complete. According to Imam Malik, at the beginning of the iqamah and the general practice of the rightly-guided Caliphs and most Companions substantiate this view. Thus, the ruling of Sa’id ibn al-Musayyab is that to stand up at the beginning of the iqamah is not only mustahabb but wajib.
Not one of the four Imams have ruled that it is necessary for the imam to first sit on the place of prayer to reprimand those who are standing and to consider those standing wrong. It is not the madhhab of any Imam to consider standing from the beginning as makruh or to or to think ill of or to insult such people.
The authentic views of the Hanafi madhhab has been mentioned in Fatawa Alamgiri and Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’ which have been approved by Shams al-A’immah al-Sarakhsi and other Hanafi scholars. No one among the Hanafi scholars in their books, commentaries and fatwa compilations have written that it is makruh to stand from the beginning except in the narration of Al-Mudmarat which has been related by Al-Tahtawi. No one else has said that it is makruh, and how could they say so whereas standing from the beginning [of the iqamah] has been proven from the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), the rightly-guided Caliphs, the other Companions and Followers.
As far as the narration of Al-Mudmarat is concerned, Al-Tahtawi has recorded it as follows:
“If a person enters the masjid when the muezzin has begun the iqamah, the person will sit and will not wait while standing”. (Hashiyah al-Tahtawi ‘ala Maraqi al-Falah, 1:186)
This narration can clearly imply that the person will not wait while standing if the iqamah has begun before the imam has entered the masjid, which has been discouraged by the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) as mentioned earlier. The words “do not wait” means not to wait for the imam while standing. By taking this meaning of this narration, it now complies with the other narrations of the Hanafi madhhab and does not oppose the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and of the Companions.
On the other hand, if it is interpreted that it is makruh for a person entering to stand while the iqamah is being said [but should first sit] and the imam is present in the masjid, then because it is contrary to the other texts and commentaries of the Hanafi madhhab, this narration will be ignored, because it is also contrary to the Sunnah and because the narration can be interpreted (to comply) as mentioned above.
Al-Tahtawi has interpreted the narration of Al-Mudmarat in this manner which opposes the common texts and commentaries of the Hanafis and also the Sunnah of the Companions in this regard. The greatness and knowledge of ‘Allamah Al-Tahtawi is in its place, but to interpret the narration in this manner is reason in itself to discard it.
In fact ‘Allamah Al-Tahtawi has recorded the same view as mentioned in Fatawa Alamgiri and Al-Badai’ al-Sanai’ in his commentary on Al-Durr al-Mukhtar, i.e., if the imam enters from the front of the masjid, the people will stand on seeing him, and if he enters from the back, each row will stand as he passes it.
It is recorded in Al-Durr al-Mukhtar that if the imam himself also renders the iqamah, the people will not stand until the completion of the iqamah. Al-Durr al-Mukhtar narrates this with reference to Zahiriyyah.
Al-Tahtawi has written the following under this issue:
“From this previous discussion, sometimes some people understand (i.e., misunderstand) it to mean that it is makruh to stand from the beginning”. (Al-Tahtawi ‘ala al-Durr, 1:245)
The words “sometimes some people understand” used by ‘Allamah al-Tahtawi shows that to believe it as makruh is not a weighty opinion and he did not say that this is his opinion but said that some people take this meaning from the text.
To sum up, among all the Hanafi texts on this discussion, the text of only Al-Mudmarat is unclear and it can also be interpreted according to the views of the majority and the common texts of the Hanafi books. If the meaning of makruh is taken from it, then because it is contrary to the view of the Imams of the madhhab and texts and commentaries, it will be thrust aside.
Concluding remarks
It has been elucidated that the practice of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), the rightly-guided Caliphs and the majority of the Companions and Followers was that when the imam enters the masjid people would stand from the beginning of the iqamah and straighten the rows.
If the imam is present in the masjid before time, it is mustahabb to stand at hayya ‘ala al-falah, meaning that it is against etiquette to remain seated after these words because it will be against the instruction of hastening towards success but not against etiquette to stand up before these words because it is hastening towards success even earlier.
In some masjids there is a custom that at the time of iqamah the imam emerges from one of the corners, considers it necessary to sit on the place of prayer (musallah) first, instructs those standing to be seated and censures them, this is not the view of any Imam or jurist of this Ummah but is a pure innovation (bid’ah).
Important advice
The purpose of this article was to clarify and explain this issue. Although the last method is contrary to the view of majority of the jurists and abominable, fighting and arguing over this issue is far worse. It is not appropriate to fight and argue over this issue. With affection and kindness, explain the issue to those whom there is hope that they will accept otherwise silence is better. Align your own actions according to the Sunnah and do not oppose others.
Allah Most High knows best.
Jawahir al-Fiqh, vol. 1, p. 309, Maktabah Dar al-’Ulum Karachi, Karachi
_____________________________
Muqtadi: one who follows the imam in congregational salah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)