کرسمس اور اسلام

ﺑﺴﻢ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﯿﻢ

ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭﻭﮞ ﻣﺜﻼ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ﻭﻏﯿﺮﮦ ﮐﯽ ﺧﻮﺷﯽ ﻣﻨﺎﻧﺎ

ﺗﺤﺮﯾﺮ : ﺳﺎﺟﺪ ﺧﺎﻥ ﻧﻘﺸﺒﻨﺪﯼ

ﻧﻮﭦ : ﯾﮧ ﻣﻀﻤﻮﻥ ﻓﯿﺼﻞ ﺍٓﺑﺎﺩ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺟﻌﻠﯽ ﭘﯿﺮ ﮐﮯ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ ﮔﯿﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﺍﺏ ﻣﻮﻗﻊ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺖ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﮑﺎﻝ ﮐﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺮﺍﻣﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﮐﮯ ﺷﺎﯾﻊ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺟﺎﺭﮨﺎ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﻗﺎﺭﺋﯿﻦ ﺍﮨﻠﺴﻨﺖ ! ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯽ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﮐﯽ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻧﺠﺎﺕ ﺍﺱ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺗﮏ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﺐ ﺗﮏ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺑﺎﻃﻞ ﻣﺬﮨﺐ ﮐﻮ ﭼﮭﻮﮌ ﮐﺮ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺮﻟﯿﮟ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﭽﮧ ﺭﺏ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﯽ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ:

ﻟَﻘَﺪْ ﮐَﻔَﺮَ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﻗَﺎﻟُﻮْ ٓﺍ ﺍِﻥَّ ﺍﻟﻠّٰﮧَ ﮬُﻮَ ﺍﻟْﻤَﺴِﯿْﺢُ ﺍﺑْﻦُ ﻣَﺮْﯾَﻢَ ﻭَ ﻗَﺎﻝَ ﺍﻟْﻤَﺴِﯿْﺢُ ﯾٰٓﺒَﻨِﯽْ ﺍِﺳْﺮَﺍٓﺋِﯿْﻞَ ﺍﻋْﺒُﺪُﻭْﺍٓ ﺍﻟﻠّٰﮧَ ﺭَﺑِِّﯽْ ﻭَ ﺭَﺑَّﮑُﻢْ ﺍِﻧَّﮧ ‘ ﻣَﻦْ ﯾُّﺸْﺮِﮎْ ﺑِﺎﻟﻠّٰﮧِ ﻓَﻘَﺪْ ﺣَﺮَّﻡَ ﺍﻟﻠّٰﮧُ ﻋَﻠَﯿْﮧِ ﺍﻟْﺠَﻨَّۃَ ﻭَﻣَﺎْﻭٰﮦُ ﺍﻟﻨَّﺎﺭَ ﻭَﻣَﺎ ﻟِﻠﻈَّﺎِﻟﻤِﯿْﻦَ ﻣِﻦْ ﺍَﻧْﺼَﺎﺭٍﻟَﻘَﺪْ ﮐَﻔَﺮَ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﻗَﺎﻟُﻮﺍٓ ﺍِﻥَّ ﺍﻟﻠَّﮧَ ﺛَﺎﻟِﺚ ‘’ ﺛَﻼَﺛَۃ ﻭَﻣَﺎ ﻣِﻦْ ﺍِﻟٰﮧٍ ﻭَّﺍﺣِﺪ ‘’ ﻭَّ ﺍِﻥْ ﻟَّﻢْ ﯾَﻨْﺘَﮭُﻮْﺍ ﻋَﻤَّﺎ ﯾَﻘُﻮْﻟُﻮْﻥَ ﻟَﯿَﻤَﺴَّﻦَّ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﮐَﻔَﺮُﻭْﺍ ﻣِﻨْﮭُﻢْ ﻋَﺬَﺍﺏ ‘’ ﺍَﻟِﯿْﻢ ‘’ ۔
‏( ﺳﻮﺭۃ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺋﺪﮦ : ﺍٓﯾﺖ ۷۲۔۷۳ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﻭﮦ ﻟﻮﮒ ﺟﻮ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻭﮨﯽ ﻣﺴﯿﺢ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺮﯾﻢ ﮐﺎ ﺑﯿﭩﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺣﺎﻻﻧﮑﮧ ﻣﺴﯿﺢ ﻧﮯ ﺗﻮ ﯾﮧ ﮐﮩﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﮮ ﺑﻨﯽ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺋﯿﻞ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﮐﺮﻭ ﺟﻮ ﻣﯿﺮﺍ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺭﺏ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺗﻤﮩﺎﺭﺍ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺑﻼﺷﺒﮧ ﺟﺲ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﺷﺮﯾﮏ ﭨﮭﺮﺍﯾﺎ ﺗﻮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻧﮯ ﺍﺱ ﭘﺮ ﺟﻨﺖ ﺣﺮﺍﻡ ﮐﺮﺩﯼ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﮭﻨﻢ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﭨﮭﮑﺎﻧﮧ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻇﺎﻟﻤﻮﮞ ﮐﺎ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﻣﺪﺩﮔﺎﺭ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﻭﮦ ﺟﻮ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺗﯿﻦ ﺧﺪﺍﻭٔﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﺍﯾﮏ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺗﻮ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮨﮯ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺑﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻧﮧ ﺍٓﺋﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺟﻮ ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ‏( ﻣﺮﯾﮟ ﮔﮯ ‏) ﺿﺮﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﺩﺭﺩﻧﺎﮎ ﻋﺬﺍﺏ ﭘﮩﻨﭽﮯ ﮔﺎ۔

ﺍﻥ ﺍٓﯾﺎﺕ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﮐﮧ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻃﻮﺭ ﭘﺮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﭘﺎﮎ ﻧﮯ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮐﮩﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺩﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﮔﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﻣﺸﺮﮐﺎﻧﮧ ﻋﻘﺎﺋﺪ ﺳﮯ ﺗﻮﺑﮧ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺮﯾﮟ ﺗﻮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﺎ ﭨﮭﮑﺎﻧﮧ ﺟﮩﻨﻢ ﮨﮯ ۔ﺍﻭﺭ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮩﻮﺩﯾﻮﮞ ﺳﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ :

ﯾٰﺎَﯾُّﮭَﺎ ﺍﻟَّﺬِﯾْﻦَ ﺍَﻣَﻨُﻮْﺍ ﻟَﺎ ﺗَﺘَّﺨِﺬُﻭْﺍ ﺍﻟْﯿَﮭُﻮْﺩَ ﻭَ ﺍﻟﻨَّﺼَﺎﺭٰﯼ ﺍٓﻭْﻟِﯿَﺎٓﺉً ﺑَﻌْﻀُﮭُﻢْ ﺍَﻭْﻟِﯿَﺎٓﺉَ ﺑَﻌْﺾٍ ﻭَّ ﻣَﻦْ ﯾَّﺘَﻮَﻟَّﮭُﻢْ ﻣِﻨْﮑُﻢْ ﻓَﺎِﻧَّﮧ ‘ ﻣِﻨْﮭُﻢْ ﺍِﻥَّ ﺍﻟﻠَّﮧَ ﻻَ ﯾَﮭْﺪِﯼ ﺍﻟْﻘَﻮْﻡَ ﺍﻟﻈَّﺎﻟِﻤِﯿْﻦَ۔ ‏( ﺳﻮﺭۃ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺋﺪﮦ : ﺍٓﯾﺖ ۵۱ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﺍﮮ ﺍﯾﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻮ ! ﯾﮩﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﮐﻮ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﻧﮧ ﺑﻨﺎﻧﺎ ،ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺑﻌﺾ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﻮ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﺗﻢ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﻑ ﭘﮭﺮﺍ ﺗﻮ ﻭﮦ ﺍﻧﮩﯽ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻇﺎﻟﻤﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﮨﺪﺍﯾﺖ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺩﯾﺘﺎ۔
ﺍﺱ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻃﻮﺭ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺩﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮩﻮﺩﯾﻮﮞ ﺳﮯ ﮨﺮ ﮔﺰ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﺤﺒﺖ ﮐﮯ ﭘﯿﻨﮕﮯ ﻧﮧ ﺑﮍﮬﺎﻧﺎ ﯾﮧ ﺗﻤﮩﺎﺭﮮ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺍٓﭘﺲ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺩﻭﺳﺮﮮ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﺱ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﻣﻤﺎﻧﻌﺖ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺗﻢ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻧﮧ ﺍٓﺋﮯ ﺗﻮ ﭘﮭﺮ ﯾﮩﯽ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﻮ ﮐﮧ ﺗﻢ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﻧﮩﯽ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﮨﻮ۔ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻗﺎﺿﯽ ﻋﯿﺎﺽ ﻣﺎﻟﮑﯽ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

’’ ﻭﻣﻦ ﻟﻢ ﯾﮑﻔﺮ ﺍﺣﺪﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﻭﺍﻟﯿﮭﻮﺩ ﻭﮐﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻓﺎﺭﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﯿﻦ ﺍﻭ ﻭﻗﻒ ﻓﯽ ﺗﮑﻔﯿﺮﮬﻢ ﺍﻭ ﺷﮏ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﯽ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﻻﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻗﯿﻒ ﻭﺍﻻﺟﻤﺎ ﻉ ﺍﺗﻔﻘﺎ ﻋﻠﯽ ﮐﻔﺮﮬﻢ ﻓﻤﻦ ﻭﻗﻒ ﻓﯽ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﻓﻘﺪ ﮐﺬﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺺ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻗﯿﻒ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﮏ ﻓﯿﮧ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﮑﺬﯾﺐ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﺸﮏ ﻓﯿﮧ ﻭﻻ ﯾﻘﻊ ﺍﻻ ﻣﻦ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ۔ ‏( ﺍﻟﺸﻔﺎﺀ : ﺝ۲ : ﺹ ۱۷۰۔ﺣﻘﺎﻧﯿﮧ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﮨﮯ ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﮐﻔﺮ ﭘﺮ ﺟﻮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯽ ﯾﮩﻮﺩﯼ ﯾﺎ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﯾﺴﮯ ﺷﺨﺺ ﮐﻮ ﺟﻮ ﺩﯾﻦ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺳﮯ ﺟﺪﺍ ﮨﻮﮔﯿﺎ ﮨﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﻧﮧ ﮐﮩﮯ ﯾﺎ ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮐﮩﻨﮯ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﮐﺮﮮ ﯾﺎ ﺷﮏ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﻗﺎﺿﯽ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﻧﮯ ﺍ ﺳﮑﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﯾﮧ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺋﯽ ﮐﮧ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺷﺮﻋﯿﮧ ﻭ ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻣﺖ ﺍﻥ ﻟﻮﮔﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﮐﻔﺮ ﭘﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﻖ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ ﺟﻮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﮐﻔﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﮐﺮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﻭﮦ ﻧﺺ ﻭ ﺷﺮﯾﻌﺖ ﮐﯽ ﺗﮑﺬﯾﺐ ﮐﺮﺗﺎﮨﮯ ﯾﺎ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺷﮏ ﺭﮐﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯽ ﺳﮯ ﮨﻮﺳﮑﺘﯽ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﺍﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺳﮯ ﯾﮧ ﺑﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﮨﻮﺋﯽ ﮐﮧ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﻧﮧ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﻨﮯ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻥ ﺳﮯ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﻻﺕ ﺣﺮﺍﻡ ﮨﮯ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺍﻓﺴﻮﺱ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﮐﮩﻨﺎ ﭘﮍﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺑﻌﺾ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﮩﺎﺩ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ،ﻣﺤﺒﺖ ،ﺍﺧﻮﺕ ،ﺑﮭﺎﺋﯽ ﭼﺎﺭﮦ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻣﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺧﻮﺑﺼﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﺍٓﮌﻣﯿﮟ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﭘﯿﺎﺭ ﻭﻣﺤﺒﺖ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﯽ ﯾﺎﺭﯼ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﺴﮯ ﺗﻌﻠﻘﺎﺕ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺭﮐﮭﻨﺎ ﭼﺎﮨﺘﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺬﺍﮨﺐ ﺍﯾﮏ ﮔﻠﺪﺳﺘﮧ ﮐﯽ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺍﺧﺘﯿﺎﺭ ﮐﺮﻟﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻣﻦ ﮐﮯ ﻧﺎﻡ ﭘﺮ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺬﮨﺒﯽ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭ ’’ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ‘‘ ﮐﻮ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﯿﺴﯽٰ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ ﮐﺎ ﺟﻨﻢ ﺩﻥ ﻣﺎﻥ ﮐﺮ ﺑﮍﮮ ﺩﮬﻮﻡ ﺩﮬﺎﻡ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﻮ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﻣﻞ ﮐﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﯾﺎ ﺟﺎﺭﮨﺎ ﮨﮯ ۔ﺣﺎﻻﻧﮑﮧ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻧﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭﻭﮞ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺷﺮﮐﺖ ﮐﻮ ﮐﻔﺮ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ ﮨﮯ۔

ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﮐﺎ ﻏﻀﺐ ﻧﺎﺯﻝ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ

ﺍﺧﺒﺮﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺭﺳﯽ ﺍﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺳﺤﺎﻕ ﺍﻻﺻﺒﮭﺎﻧﯽ ﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻓﺎﺭﺱ ﻧﺎ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺳﻤﺎﻋﯿﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﺨﺎﺭﯼ : ﻗﺎﻝ : ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﯽ ﻣﺮﯾﻢ ﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻓﻊ ﺑﻦ ﯾﺰﯾﺪ ﺳﻤﻊ ﺳﻠﯿﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﯽ ﺯﯾﻨﺐ ﻭ ﻋﻤﺮﻭ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺭﺙ ﺳﻤﻊ ﺳﻌﯿﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﯽ ﺳﻠﻤۃ ﺳﻤﻊ ﺍﺑﺎﮦ ﺳﻤﻊ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﺎﺏ ﺭﺿﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﯽ ﻋﻨﮧ ﺍﻧﮧ ﻗﺎﻟـ : ﺍﺟﺘﻨﺒﻮﺍ ﺍﻋﺪﺍٓﺀ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﯿﮭﻮﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﻓﯽ ﻋﯿﺪﮬﻢ ﯾﻮﻡ ﺟﻤﻌﮭﻢ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺨﻂ ﯾﻨﺰﻝ ﻋﻠﯿﮩﻢ ﻓﺎﺧﺸﯽ ﺍﻥ ﯾﺼﯿﺒﮑﻢ ﻭﻻ ﺗﻌﻠﻤﻮﺍ ﺑﻄﺎﻧﺘﮭﻢ ﺗﺨﻠﻘﻮﺍ ﺑﺨﻠﻘﮭﻢ۔
‏( ﺷﻌﺐ ﺍﻻﯾﻤﺎﻥ : ﺝ۷ : ﺹ ۴۳۔ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻟﮑﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﯿﮧ ﺑﯿﺮﻭﺕ ‏)

ﺗﺮﺟﻤﮧ : ﮨﻤﯿﮟ ﺧﺒﺮ ﺩﯼ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺑﮑﺮ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﯽ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺳﺤﻖ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻧﮯ ﺍﻥ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺳﻤﻌﯿﻞ ﺑﺨﺎﺭﯼ ﻧﮯ ﻭﮦ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺮﯾﻢ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻧﮑﻮ ﺧﺒﺮ ﺩﯼ ﻧﺎﻓﻊ ﺑﻦ ﯾﺰﯾﺪ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺳﻨﺎﺳﻠﯿﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺯﯾﻨﺐ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﮦ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺣﺎﺭﺙ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺳﻌﯿﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺳﻠﻤﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﻭﺍﻟﺪ ﺳﮯ ﺳﻨﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻧﮩﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﺳﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ؓ ﻧﮯ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﮯ ﺩﺷﻤﻨﻮﮞ ﯾﮭﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﺳﮯ ﺑﭽﻮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﺍﮐﮭﭩﮯ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻧﻮﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﺍﻥ ﭘﺮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﯽ ﻧﺎﺭﺍﺿﯽ ﺍﺗﺮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮈﺭﺗﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ ﮐﮧ ﮐﮩﯿﮟ ﻭﮦ ﺗﻤﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻧﮧ ﭘﮩﻨﭻ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺍﻧﺪﺭﻭﻧﯽ ﺑﺎﺗﯿﮟ ﻣﺖ ﺟﺎﻧﺎ ﮐﺮﻭ ﮐﯿﻮﻧﮑﮧ ﺗﻢ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺎﺩﺗﯿﮟ ﺳﯿﮑﮫ ﺟﺎﻭ ﮔﮯ ‏( ﯾﻌﻨﯽ ﺍﻥ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺘﺎﺛﺮ ﮨﻮﺟﺎﻭﮔﮯ ‏) ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺭﻭﺍﯾﺖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ :

ﺍﺧﺒﺮﻧﺎ ﺍﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺳﻢ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﻓﯽ ﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺑﻦ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﺑﯿﺮ ﺍﻟﮑﻮﻓﯽ ﻧﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻔﺎﻥ ﻧﺎ ﺯﯾﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺎﺏ ﻧﺎ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻘﺒﮧ ﺣﺪﺛﻨﯽ ﻋﻄﺎﺀ ﺑﻦ ﺩﯾﻨﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﮭﺬﻟﯽ ﺍﻥ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﺎﺏ ﻗﺎﻝ : ﺍﯾﺎﮐﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﻃﻨۃ ﺍﻻﻋﺎﺟﻢ ﻭ ﺍﻥ ﺗﺪﺧﻠﻮﺍ ﻋﻠﯿﮩﻢ ﻓﯽ ﺑﯿﻌﮭﻢ ﯾﻮﻡ ﻋﯿﺪﮬﻢ ﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺨﻂ ﯾﻨﺰﻝ ﻋﻠﯿﮩﻢ۔
‏( ﺷﻌﺐ ﺍﻻﯾﻤﺎﻥ : ﺝ۷ : ﺹ۴۳ ‏)

ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﻧﮯ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﯾﺎ ﺗﻢ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﻮ ﺑﭽﺎﻭٔ ﺍﮨﻞ ﻋﺠﻢ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺵ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﺑﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻨﻊ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﻋﯿﺪ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﺎﻡ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﮨﻮﺍ ﮐﺮﯾﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﻏﻀﺐ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﻧﺎﺯﻝ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﻗﺎﺭﺋﯿﻦ ﺍﮨﻠﺴﻨﺖ ! ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﺗﻮ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﺩﺷﻤﻦ ﮐﮩﮧ ﺭﮨﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﺲ ﮐﮯ ﻣﻮﻗﻊ ﭘﺮ ﺟﻤﻊ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻨﻊ ﮐﺮﺭﮨﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﺎ ﻏﻀﺐ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺭﺍﺿﮕﯽ ﻧﺎﺯﻝ ﮨﻮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ﻣﮕﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺟﻌﻠﯽ ﺻﻮﻓﯽ ﮐﮩﺘﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﯾﮧ ﺧﯿﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮐﺖ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺩﻥ ﮨﮯ ۔ﺍﺏ ﮨﻢ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﻣﺎﻧﯿﮟ ﯾﺎ ﺣﻀﺮ ﺕ ﻋﻤﺮ ؓ ﮐﯽ ؟

ﮐﺎﻓﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﺎﻡ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮨﮯ

ﻣﻼ ﻋﻠﯽ ﻗﺎﺭﯼ ﺣﻨﻔﯽ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ : ؎

ﻓﯽ ﻓﺘﺎﻭﯼ ﺍﻟﺼﻐﺮﯼ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﯼ ﯾﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﺷﯿﺌﺎ ﻭ ﻟﻢ ﯾﮑﻦ ﯾﺸﺘﺮﯾﮧ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﺍﺭﺍﺩ ﺑﮧ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺭﻭﺯ ،ﮐﻔﺮ ﺍﯼ ﻻﻧﮧ ﻋﻈﻢ ﻋﯿﺪ ﺍﻟﮑﻔﺮۃ۔ )) ﺷﺮﺡ ﻓﻘﮧ ﺍﻻﮐﺒﺮ : ﺹ ۴۹۹ ۔ﺑﯿﺮﻭﺕ ‏)

ﺍﮔﺮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻧﮯ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ‏( ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ‏) ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﺍﯾﺴﯽ ﭼﯿﺰ ﺧﺮﯾﺪﯼ ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﺳﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺧﺮﯾﺪﺗﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ،ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﮦ ﺍﺱ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﺀ ﺳﮯ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﺗﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﻮﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﮔﺎ،ﺍﺱ ﻟﺌﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍ ﺱ ﻧﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﯽ۔

ﻣﺰﯾﺪ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

ﻟﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﺟﻼ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺧﻤﺴﯿﻦ ﻋﺎﻣﺎ ﺛﻢ ﺟﺎﺀ ﯾﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﻓﺎﮬﺪﯼ ﺍﻟﯽ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺮﮐﯿﻦ ﯾﺮﯾﺪ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﺍﻟﯿﻮﻡ ﻓﻘﺪ ﮐﻔﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﻭ ﺣﺒﻂ ﻋﻤﻠﮧ ﺧﻤﺴﯿﻦ ﻋﺎﻣﺎ۔
‏( ﺷﺮﺡ ﻓﻘﮧ ﺍﻻﮐﺒﺮ : ﺹ ۵۰۰ ‏)

ﺍﮔﺮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺷﺨﺺ ﻧﮯ ﭘﭽﺎﺱ ﺳﺎﻝ ﺗﮏ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﮐﯽ ﭘﮭﺮ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﺎ ﺩﻥ ﺍٓﮔﯿﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻣﺸﺮﮎ ﮐﻮ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﮨﺪﯾﮧ ﮐﺮﺩﯾﺎ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﻧﯿﺖ ﺍﺱ ﮨﺪﯾﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﺗﮭﯽ ﺗﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﭘﭽﺎﺱ ﺳﺎﻝ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﺑﺮﺑﺎﺩ ﮨﻮﮔﺌﯽ۔

ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﮔﮯ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

’’ ﻭ ﻋﻠﯽ ﻗﯿﺎﺱ ﻣﺴﺎﻟۃ ﺍﻟﺨﺮﻭﺝ ﺍﻟﯽ ﺍﻟﻨﯿﺮﻭﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻮﺳﯽ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺍﻓﻘۃ ﻣﻌﮭﻢ ﻓﯿﻤﺎ ﯾﻔﻠﻌﻮﻥ ﻓﯽ ﺫﺍﻟﮏ ﺍﻟﯿﻮﻡ ﯾﻮﺟﺐ ﺍﻟﮑﻔﺮ ‘’

ﯾﻌﻨﯽ ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﮯ ﺟﺸﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﻧﮑﻠﻨﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﻮ ﮐﭽﮫ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯽ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻮﺍﻗﻔﺖ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﯾﮧ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮐﻮ ﻻﺯﻡ ﮐﺮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﺍﺏ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﮩﺎﺩ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﭼﯿﻠﮯ ﺟﻮ ﮐﺮﺳﻤﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯿﮏ ﮐﺎﭨﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﮔﯿﺖ ﮔﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺟﺸﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﯿﺎ ﯾﮧ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺭﮨﮯ؟
ﻋﻼﻣﮧ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺷﮭﺎﺏ ﯾﻮﺳﻒ ﺍﻟﮑﺮﺩﺭﯼ ﺍﻟﺤﻨﻔﯽ ؒ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ :

’’ ﻭﮐﺬﺍ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﻠﻤﯿﻦ ﯾﻮﻡ ﻓﺼﺢ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭﯼ ﻟﻮ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘۃ ﻟﮭﻢ۔ ‏( ﻓﺘﺎﻭﯼ ﺑﺰﺍﺯﯾﮧ : ﺝ۳ : ﺹ ۱۸۶ ‏)

ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﻮﮞ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﻋﯿﺴﺎﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻋﯿﺪ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘﺖ ﮐﺮﻧﮯ ﮐﯿﻠﺌﮯ ﮨﮯ ﺗﻮ ﯾﮧ ﺳﺐ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﻮﮔﺌﮯ۔

ﻋﻼﻣﮧ ﺑﺰﺍﺯﯼ ﻧﮯ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺑﮍﯼ ﻋﺠﯿﺐ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﯽ ﺟﻮ ﺻﻮﻓﯽ ﻣﺴﻌﻮﺩ ﮐﮯ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺎﻟﮑﻞ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﮨﮯ ﻭﮦ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﻧﻮﺭﻭﺯ ﮐﮯ ﺩﻥ ﻧﮑﻠﻨﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﮦ ﺍﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺳﺮﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﯾﻨﺎ ﺟﻮ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯽ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺗﻮ ﯾﮧ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮨﮯ ،ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ﮐﺎﻡ ﺍﮐﺜﺮ ﻭﮦ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺟﻮ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﺖ ﭼﮭﻮﮌ ﮐﺮ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻻﺋﮯ ﭘﺲ ﻭﮦ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﺍﻥ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﻑ ﻧﮑﻠﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﺠﻮﺳﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘﺖ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﻮﺟﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻓﺴﻮﺱ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ‘‘ ۔ ‏( ﻓﺘﺎﻭﯼ ﺑﺰﺍﺯﯾﮧ : ﺝ۳ : ﺹ ۱۸۶ ‏)

ﻗﺎﺭﺋﯿﻦ ﮐﺮﺍﻡ ﺍﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺣﻮﺍﻟﮧ ﺟﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﯾﮧ ﺑﺎﺕ ﺭﻭﺯ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﮐﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﮨﻮﮔﺌﯽ ﮐﮧ ﮐﻔﺎﺭ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺬﮨﺒﯽ ﺗﮩﻮﺍﺭﻭﮞ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﻈﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ،ﺍﺱ ﺩﻥ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺟﻤﻊ ﮨﻮﻧﺎ،ﻭﮦ ﺟﻮ ﺍﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﯾﮧ ﺳﺐ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﺳﺐ ﮐﺎ ﮐﺮﻧﮯ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﮐﯽ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ ۔

The REAL Christmas Story: How a Prophet was turned into a god

By Abu Zakariya

On December 25th, most Christians around the world will be celebrating Christmas, a day that commemorates the birth of who they believe is their Lord and saviour, Jesus Christ. A lot of Muslim commentaries at this time of the year tend to focus on highlighting links between Christmas and the pagan celebrations of old such as Saturnalia. We typically argue on the basis that the date of December 25th, and symbolic practices such as adorning trees with gold and silver, have direct parallels with paganism, and therefore such celebrations should be avoided.

Such arguments are unconvincing for many Christians. Putting to one side the possibility that many of the parallels may be purely coincidental (think about it, most calendar dates will coincide with a pagan festival as there are so many different pagan religions with so many different celebrations dotted throughout the year). Christians even manage to put a positive spin on things, they acknowledge such parallels but retort that the early Church Fathers assimilated many of the pagan practices that were popular with the masses and purified them in the process, taking people away from the worship of the pre-Christian, Graeco-Roman gods to the worship of the God of Abraham. In their minds, this is a good thing.

Even in the Islamic tradition, there are some rituals which have parallels with other religions. The example of Ashura springs to mind:

It was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) that when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came to Madinah, he found them fasting on one day, i.e., ‘Ashura’. They said: This is a great day; it is the day on which Allah saved Musa and drowned the people of Pharaoh, so Musa fasted in gratitude to Allah. He (the Prophet) said: “I am closer to Musa than they are.” So he fasted on that day and issued instructions to fast on that day. [1]

In another narration, we find the companions questioning the Prophet (peace be upon him) about the parallels of Ashura with the religions of the People of the Book:

Ibn ‘Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah fasted on the day of ‘Ashura’ and ordered the people to fast on it. The people said, “O Messenger of Allah, it is a day that the Jews and Christians honour.” The Prophet said, “When the following year comes, Allah willing, we shall fast on the ninth and the tenth.” [2]

We can see that the Prophet (peace be upon him) didn’t just assimilate this Jewish practice but differentiated it by changing some underlying elements, in this case by adjusting the date.

The point is that simple, ritualistic parallels in and of themselves should not be our focus. Coming back to Christmas, elements such as the date of Christmas are superficial when compared to the actual paganism that lies at the heart of Christian belief. There is a far more powerful strategy that we can adopt in our dawah, and that is showing the links between pagan belief and the fundamental doctrines of Christianity such as the Trinity. So rather than focussing on the when of Christmas, instead try to focus on the what. What is the essence of Christmas? It’s a celebration of the incarnation of the second person of the Trinity, God the Son, in the bodily form of Jesus. This shall be the focus for the rest of the article.

TO GRASP THE PRESENT, WE MUST UNDERSTAND THE PAST

In order to understand the influence of paganism on the doctrine of the Trinity, we need to first understand the world into which Christianity was born and developed. The early followers of Jesus were followers of Judaism. In fact, Christianity started out as a movement within Judaism. Like Jews since the time of Moses, these early believers kept the Sabbath, were circumcised and worshiped in the Temple. The only thing that distinguished the early followers of Jesus from any other Jews was their belief in Jesus as the Messiah, that is, the one chosen by God who would redeem the Jewish people. Today, many Christian scholars agree that authors of the New Testament such as Matthew were Jewish believers in Jesus. The influence of Judaism on the New Testament is important because it helps us to correctly understand its message. The New Testament is full of terminology like “son of God.” Such language is interpreted literally by Christians today to mean that Jesus is God the Son, but is this correct? What was the intention behind the Jewish writers of the New Testament when they used such language? What did these terms mean at the time of Jesus?

THE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE

When we turn to the Old Testament we find that such language permeates its pages. For example, Moses calls God “Father”: Is this the way you repay the Lord, you foolish and unwise people? Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you? [Deuteronomy 32:6] Angels are referred to as “sons of God”: Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. [Job 1:6] The Old Testament even goes so far as to call Moses a god: “And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.” [Exodus 7:1] The Israelites are also referred to as “gods”: “I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’”  [Psalm 82:6] What we can conclude is that such highly exalted language was commonplace and is intended figuratively; it is not a literal indication of divinity.

Even as late as the end of the first century, when the New Testament writers started penning their accounts of the life of Jesus, Jewish people were still using such language figuratively. In a conversation between Jesus and some Jewish teachers of the law, they say to Jesus: “…The only Father we have is God himself.” [John 8:41] The Gospel of Luke calls Adam a son of God when it recounts the lineage of Jesus: “the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.” [Luke 3:38] Jesus even says that anyone who makes peace is a child of God: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.” [Matthew 5:9] If the New Testament writers understood such language to be a claim to divinity, then they would have used it exclusively in relation to Jesus. Clearly, it denotes a person that is righteous before God and nothing more.

So we can see that such language, in and of itself, does not denote the divinity of Jesus. So where did such ideas come from?

THE MINDSET OF THE PEOPLE WHO RECEIVED THE GOSPEL MESSAGE

The turning point in history came when Christianity ceased being a small movement within Judaism and Gentiles (non-Jews) started to embrace the faith in large numbers. We need to look to the pagan world of the Gentiles in order to understand the mindset of the people that received the New Testament message. Since the time of Alexander the Great, Gentiles had been living in a Hellenistic (Greek) world. Their lands were dominated by Roman armies, with the Roman Empire being the superpower of the world at the time. The Roman Empire itself was heavily influenced by Hellenistic religion, philosophy and culture. Greek gods and goddesses like Zeus, Hermes and Aphrodite, as well as Roman gods and goddesses like Jupiter, Venus and Diana, dominated the landscape. There were temples, priesthoods, and feasts dedicated to the patron god or goddess of a city or region; statues to the deities dotted the forums of the cities. Even rulers themselves were frequently worshipped as gods.

Gentiles from such a polytheistic background would have naturally understood Christian preaching about the “son of God” in light of a Greek or Roman god having been begotten by another. We can see this mindset manifested in the New Testament. In the Book of Acts there is an incident where the Gentile crowds think that Paul is Zeus come among them when he heals a crippled man:

When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, “The gods have come down to us in human form!” 

Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker.

The priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought bulls and wreaths to the city gates because he and the crowd wanted to offer sacrifices to them.

But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting: 

“Men, why are you doing this? We too are only men, human like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made heaven and earth and sea and everything in them. [Acts 14:11-15]

Here we see that the Graeco-Roman peoples that Paul and Barnabas were preaching to were in the habit of taking humans for gods. Despite Paul protesting that he was not a god, the people persisted in their belief: “Even with these words, they had difficulty keeping the crowd from sacrificing to them.” [Acts 14:18] From this example we can see that according to Christian history, it was a common practice for people to attribute divinity to other humans. In spite of Paul openly denying being a god, the people continued to worship and sacrifice to him. We can conclude that even if Jesus himself rejected being God at that time, the mindset of the people was such that they would still have found a way to deify him.

With this background in mind, it’s easy to see how Judaic phrases like “son of God” took on a different meaning when transported out of their Jewish monotheistic context into pagan Greco-Roman thought. The Trinity doctrine arose neither in a vacuum, nor strictly from the text of Scripture. It was the result of the influence of certain beliefs and attitudes that prevailed in and around the Church after the first century. The Church emerged in a Jewish and Greek world and so the primitive Church had to reconcile the notions they had inherited from Judaism with those they had derived from pagan mythology. In the words of the historian and Anglican bishop John Wand, “Jew and Greek had to meet in Christ” [3]

LINKS TO THE PAGANISM OF OLD

It’s interesting to note that the Greco-Roman religions were filled with tales of gods procreating with human beings and begetting god-men. The belief that God could be incarnate, or that there were sons of God, were common and popular beliefs. For example, the chief god in the Greek pantheon, Zeus, visited the human woman Danae in the form of golden rain and fathered Perseus, a “god-man.” In another tale Zeus is said to have come to the human woman Alcmena, disguised as her husband. Alcmena bore Hercules, another “god-man.” Such tales bear a striking similarity to Trinitarian beliefs of God being begotten as a man. In fact, the early Christian apologist Justin Martyr, considered a saint in the Catholic Church, said the following in response to pagan criticisms that Christianity borrowed from their beliefs about the sons of God:

When we say that the Word, who is our teacher, Jesus Christ the first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he was crucified and died and rose again, and ascended to heaven, we propound nothing new or different from what you [pagans] believe regarding those whom you consider sons of Jupiter. [4]

According to ancient Roman myth, Jupiter was the king of all the gods. Here Justin Martyr is telling Roman pagans that what the Christians believe about Jesus being the son of God is nothing different than what they believe about the sons of the god Jupiter. That the Church Fathers’ conception of the Trinity was a combination of Jewish monotheism and pagan polytheism can be seen in the testimony of Gregory of Nyssa, a fourth century bishop who is venerated as a saint in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches. He also happens to be one of the great figures in the history of the philosophical formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity. He wrote:

For the truth passes in the mean between these two conceptions, destroying each heresy, and yet, accepting what is useful to it from each. The Jewish dogma is destroyed by the acceptance of the Word and by belief in the Spirit, while the polytheistic error of the Greek school is made to vanish by the unity of the nature abrogating this imagination of plurality. [5]

The Christian conception of God, argues Gregory of Nyssa, is neither purely the polytheism of the Greeks nor purely the monotheism of the Jews, but rather a combination of both.

Even the concept of God-men who were saviours of mankind was by no means exclusive to Jesus. Long before Jesus was born, it was not uncommon for military men and political rulers to be talked about as divine beings. More than that, they were even treated as divine beings: given temples, with priests, who would perform sacrifices in their honour, in the presence of statues of them. In Athens for example, Demetrios Poliorcetes (Demetrios the Conqueror of Cities, 337–283 BCE) was acclaimed as a divine being by hymn-writers because he liberated them from their Macedonian enemies:

How the greatest and dearest of the gods are present in our city! For the circumstances have brought together Demeter and Demetrios; she comes to celebrate the solemn mysteries of the Kore, while he is here full of joy, as befits the god, fair and laughing. His appearance is solemn, his friends all around him and he in their midst, as though they were stars and he the sun. Hail boy of the most powerful god Poseidon and Aphrodite! For other gods are either far away, or they do not have ears, or they do not exist, or do not take any notice of us, but you we can see present here, not made of wood or stone, but real. So we pray to you: first make peace, dearest; for you have the power… [6]

The Athenians gave Demetrios an arrival that was fit for a god, burning incense on altars and making offerings to their new deified king. It must be pointed out that as time passed by, he did some other things that the Athenians did not approve of, and as a consequence they revoked their adoration of him. It seems that in the days before Jesus, divinity could be stripped away from human beings just as easily as it was granted. Perhaps the best known examples of God-men are the divine honours bestowed upon the rulers of the Roman Empire, starting with Julius Caesar. We have an inscription dedicated to him in 49 BCE discovered in the city of Ephesus, which says this about him [7]:

Descendant of Ares and Aphrodite

The God who has become manifest

And universal savior of human life

So Julius Caesar was believed to be God manifest as man, the saviour of mankind. Sound familiar? Now prior to Julius Caesar, rulers in the city of Rome itself were not granted divine honours. But Caesar himself was – before he died, the senate approved the building of a temple for him, a cult statue, and a priest. Soon after his death, his adopted son and heir, Octavian, promoted the idea that at his death, Caesar had been taken up to heaven and been made a god to live with the gods. There was a good reason that Octavian wanted his adopted father to be declared a God. If his father was God, then what does that make him? This deification of Caesar set the precedent for what was to happen with the emperors, beginning with the first of them, Octavian himself, who became “Caesar Augustus” in 29 BCE. There is an inscription that survives from his lifetime found in the city of Halicarnassus (modern Turkey), which calls Augustus [8]:

…The native Zeus

and Savior of the human race

This is yet another example of a divine saviour of mankind. Now Octavian happened to also be the “son of God” by virtue of his divine father Julius Caesar. In fact Octavian became known as ‘Divi filius’ (“Son of the Divine One”). These, of course, are all titles widely used by Christians today to describe Jesus. We must realise that the early Church did not come up with these titles out of the blue, they are all things said of other men before they were said of Jesus. For early Christians, the idea was not that Jesus was the only person who was ever called such things, this is a misconception. The concept of a divine human being who was the saviour of mankind was a sort of template that was applied to people of great power and authority. We’ve seen that the history of paganism is littered with such examples, and Jesus was just another divine saviour in a long list of divine saviours that had preceded him.

HOW ISLAM ELIMINATED IDOLATRY

Pre-Islamic Arabia was a dreadful place to live in. Slavery was an economic institution with male and female slaves being bought and sold like animals. Illiteracy was common among the Arabs, as were alcoholism and adultery. Those with power and money took advantage of the poor by charging extremely high interest on loans. Arabia was a male-dominated society; men could marry any number of women. When a man died, his son “inherited” all his wives except his own mother. Women had virtually no legal status, for example they had no right to possess property and had little to no inheritance rights. Female infanticide was widely practiced with daughters often being buried alive.

It was not only the rights of human beings that were violated, but also the rights of God. The Arabs were a highly idolatrous people. The idolatry of pre-Islamic Arabia seeped into every facet of day-to-day life. Idols adorned their places of worship. Today the Ka’ba, situated in Saudi Arabia and the holiest place of worship for Muslims, contains neither idols nor images. But before Islam, the pagan Arabs housed 360 different idols in the Ka’ba. Idols were their travel partners whenever they set out on a journey, for the Arabs were very superstitious and believed that they would provide protection in a land plagued by highway robbery and kidnapping. They were also the source of their livelihoods, so central was the Ka’ba to idolatry that pagans from all over Arabia would make pilgrimage there.

In just 23 years, Islam managed to completely reform not only the social ills of Arabian society, but also its idolatry, taking people away from the worship of carved images and stones back to the worship of the One true God of Abraham. This is the testimony of Ja’far bin Abi Talib, who was a contemporary of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Here he informed the king of Abyssinia about the condition of his people and the positive change that Islam brought for them:

O King, we were an uncivilised people, worshipping idols, eating carrion, committing abominations, breaking natural ties, treating guests badly, and our strong devoured our weak. Thus we were until God sent us an apostle whose lineage, truth, trustworthiness, and clemency we know. He summoned us to acknowledge God’s unity and to worship Him and to renounce the stones and images which we and our fathers formerly worshipped. He commanded us to speak the truth, be faithful to our engagements, mindful of the ties of kinship and kind hospitality, and to refrain from crimes and bloodshed. He forbade us to commit abominations and to speak lies, and to devour the property of orphans, to vilify chaste women. He commanded us to worship God alone and not associate anything with Him, and he gave us orders about prayer, almsgiving, and fasting. We confessed his truth and believed in him, and we followed him in what he had brought from God, and we worshipped God without associating aught with Him. [9]

Just how did the Qur’an go about winning the hearts and minds of people, completely transforming every level of Arabian society in such a short space of time? The Qur’an takes into account the psychology of its audience, which is demonstrated in its use of language. In defining the relationship between God and mankind, the Qur’an avoids terms like “Father” when referring to God and “sons of God” when referring to human beings. Such language can be easily misunderstood, especially in the minds of those who come from a background of idolatry and are used to interpreting such language literally. There are even those who might take advantage of such ambiguous language in Scripture, by interpreting it in such a way as to try and justify idolatry. The Qur’an warns mankind against using ambiguity as the foundation for our beliefs:

It is He who has sent this Scripture down to you [Prophet]. Some of its verses are definite in meaning – these are the cornerstone of the Scripture – and others are ambiguous. The perverse at heart eagerly pursue the ambiguities in their attempt to make trouble and to pin down a specific meaning of their own [3:7]

The Qur’an confirms that those who believe that Jesus is the literal Son of God are imitating an ancient pagan concept: “The Christians said, ‘The Messiah is the son of God’: they said this with their own mouths, repeating what earlier disbelievers had said.” [9:30] When the Qur’an defines the relationship between God and mankind, it instead uses terms like Creator when referring to God, and we as the creation. Such terms leave no room for confusion and clearly distinguish between what is God and what is not – everything else. Such careful use of language shows the wisdom of the Qur’an’s source and the insight He has into the human condition. Our Creator knows the inner thoughts of man: “We created man – We know what his soul whispers to him: We are closer to him than his jugular vein.” [50:16]

Source: http://www.islam21c.com

Difference between the `Ulama-e-Haqq & `Ulama-e-Soo’

The `Ulama-e-Soo’

“Hadhrat `Ali bin Abi Talib (Radhiyallahu `Anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) said:

“Soon there will dawn an age upon mankind when nothing will remain of Islaam but its name and nothing will remain of the Qur’aan but its text. Their Masaajid will be beautifully adorned structures, but devoid of Hidaayat. Their `Ulamaa will be the worst (of creation) under the canopy of the sky. Fitnah will emerge from them and Fitnah will return to them.”  
[This Hadeeth is narrated by Imam ibn `Adi (Rahmatullah `Alayh) in his Kitaab, “Al-Kamaal”, and this is also narrated by Imaam Bayhaqi (Rahmatullah `Alayh) in “Shu`b-ul-Imaan”, from `Abdullah bin Dakeen, from Ja`far bin Muhammad, from his father, from his grandfather, from Hadhrat `Ali bin Abi Taalib Radhiyallahu `Anhu].”

[Note: The meaning of “Nothing will remain of the Qur’aan but its text” is that although the original text of the Qur’aan Kareem will remain among the people, its true meanings will not be followed. Instead, Baatil misinterpretations will be invented by deviated Juhhaal and these will be followed by the people.]

The time which had been mentioned by Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) has come upon us today. Morons devoid of even a shred of Shar`i `Ilm have invented their own meanings for what Allah `Azza wa Jal has said in the Qur’aan Kareem and for what Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) has said in the Ahaadeeth. These Baatil thumb-sucked opinions are then fed to the people, who follow them blindly like sheep.

The Deen brought to this Ummat by Sarkaar-e-Do Aalam (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam), which had been protected and spread throughout the Dunya by the Sahaabah-e-Kiram (Radhiyallahu `Anhum), which has reached those who live in this “Aakhir-uz-Zamaan” through a long line of Fuqaha, Mufassireen, Muhadditheen, Mu’arrikheen, and Huffaz-e-Kiraam all of whom had spent their entire lives studying this Deen, implementing it, teaching it to others, and safeguarding it in its pristine form as it had been revealed by Allaah Rabbul `Izzah to Hadhrat Jibreel-e-Ameen (`Alayhi Salaam) who brought it to Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) by the Command of Allah; these modern day `Ulama-e-Soo are displeased with this Deen.

These `Ulama-e-Soo’, who are the housewives of the Americans, are displeased with this Deen of Islam simply because their American Kuffaar masters are displeased with it. The Kuffaar find the Words of Allah Rabbul `Izzah in the Qur’aan Kareem and the words of Hudhoor (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) in the Ahaadeeth too ‘harsh’, therefore they bring out their dog scholars to attempt to destroy it through their Tahreefaat (Alterations of the intended meanings of the Qur’aan and Hadeeth) until it reaches a form which is acceptable to them.

However, the level of alteration wrought by their dogs are only acceptable to them initially; after some time these Kuffaar will again look over this ‘new’ Deen of Islaam created by the modernists, and find it yet too ‘harsh’ and ‘unpalatable’, so further Tahreefaat will again have to be made by their scholars and ‘Imams’.

This process will occur time and again until they feel they have succeeded in eradicating the Deen of Allah Rabbul `Izzah from the Dunya, but they will fail miserably in this attempt. Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala has already made this promise in the Qur’aan Kareem:

“They desire to put out the Noor of Allaah Ta`ala with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His Noor, even if the Kaafireen detest it.” [Surah as-Saff: 8]

Therefore, Allaah Ta`ala will continue to safeguard this Deen. And Insha ’Allah Ta`alala there will always be such `Ulama-e-Haqq who will stand up to defend the Deen of Allah Rabbul `Izzah even if it means their heads must be severed from their shoulders. Is that not the least one can do for the Deen of Allah Ta`ala?

However, the reality of this Deen of Islam has never, and will never penetrate the hearts of plastic “Molvis” and “Imaams” who had only embarked on the quest of studying the `Ilm of Deen for some Nafsaani reasons. Therefore, despite their having studied the classical Kutub of Deen which had been written by the `Ulama-e-Kiraam and Akabireen of the glorious past of Islam, no vestige of `Ilm or Nooraniyat can be found in them.

Defining “`Ilm”, Hadhrat Mufti Muhammed Shafi Usmani (Rahmatullah `Alayh) said:

“`Ilm is such a Noor which, after gaining it, one is restless until he acts upon it. If so then it is `Ilm, otherwise it is merely information. And information will be questioned on the day of Qiyamah; that from the information which one had acquired, how much had he acted upon.”

Hence, it is evident that these `Ulamaa-e-Soo’ who are famous for their “Halaal Fatwas”, have gained nothing from their study of the Kutub of Deen. A person is only a true `Aalim when the `Ilm he has acquired is accompanied by his heart being overwhelmed by the Taqwallaah; such Taqwa which compels him to speak the Haqq even if it is bitter, and even if it will draw the hatred, insults and criticisms of people upon himself.

This is because such an `Aalim is aware of and believes in the Aayat of the Qur’aan Kareem, wherein Allaah Rabbul `Izzah says:

“O Rasul (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam)! Convey everything which has been revealed to you from your Rabb. If you do not do this, then you would not have conveyed His Risaalah (Message). And know that Allah Ta`ala Himself will protect you from the people. Definitely, Allaah Rabbul `Izzah will never guide the Kuffaar towards the path of success.”   [Surah al-Maa`idah: 67]

Therefore, in obedience to this Aayat-e-Kareemah, an `Aalim-e-Haqq will propagate the true Deen of Islam regardless of the consequences.

After all, what is there for a person who believes in Allaah  Subhanahu wa Ta`ala to fear, in reality, from the part of the enemies of Islam?

Allah Rabbul `Izzah states in the Qur’aan Majeed:

“From the servants of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala, only the `Ulama truly fear Him. Verily, Allah is Most Powerful and Most Forgiving.” [Surah Faatir: 28]

Since Allah Rabbul `Izzah has stated in the Qur’aan Majeed that only the `Ulama truly fear Him, realize that until the end of time, such `Ulamaa-e-Haqq will exist upon the face of this Dunya who possess true Taqwallah and who will stand up in defense of His glorious Deen regardless of the consequences which will befall them.

Such `Ulama will always exist in the world, however rare they may be to find.

However, the calamity is that the majority of the `Ulama today are `Ulama-e-Soo’ in the true sense of the word. They are the kind of `Ulama that Hudhoor (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) feared for his Ummat. They are the Aimmah-e-Mudhilleen.

The job of these Aimmah-e-Mudhilleen is only to cause Fitnah amongst the Muslimeen in their vileness, through obscuring the true Deen of Islaam from them.

Their job is to slander, criticise, defame, and insult any true Muslim who takes it upon himself to carry out the Fardh (Obligatory) duties which Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala has placed upon him.

As though it were not bad enough that these false `Ulama whose heads will litter the pathway towards Jahannam make Kitmaan-ul-Haqq (Concealment of the Truth), and distort the Aayaat-e-Kareemah and Ahaadeeth-e-Mubaarakah from their intended meanings, as though this was not enough of an ugly crime on their part, these sinister “Molvi Sahebs” have taken it upon themselves to criticise every true `Aalim of the Deen as being an “extremist”, and spend their miserable time in attempting to refute that which they know to be the Haqq from Allaah `Azza wa Jall Himself, which the true `Ulamaa are preaching.

Let these `Ulama-e-Soo’ meditate on the threat of Rasoolullaah (Sallallahu Ta`aalaa `Alayhi  wasallam) in the Hadeeth of the punishment which will be meted out to them: That on the Day of Qiyamat, bridles of fire will be placed around their neck.

They may receive some false honour from the Munaafiqeen in the life of this world, but they will receive no honour when they are dragged into the Divine Court of Allaah Rabbul `Izzah, by the Malaa’ikah of `Adhaab. Every `Aalim who, despite knowing the Haqq conceals it, is a “Dumb Shaytaan”.

So let these Dumb Shayaateen understand that they will not get away with their contemptible and cowardly Kitmaan-ul-Haqq indefinitely. This is the major calamity; to witness that those who are supposed to be the “Warathaat-ul-Ambiyaa” (The Heirs of the Ambiyaa `Alayhimus Salaatu was Salaam), the flag-bearers of the Deen of Islam, the defenders of the Deen of Islam, turning out to be it’s greatest destroyers.

INEVITABLE

The corruption of the `Ulama should not come as a surprise to the Muslim Ummah. That the majority of the `Ulama are `Ulamaa-e-Soo’ rather than `Ulamaa-e-Haqq should not come as a surprise to anyone, as it was, after all, the promise of Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) that as the time proceeds towards the Day of Qiyaamah, Allaah Rabbul `Izzah would gradually take away the true `Ulama from the Dunya, until only such pseudo-`Ulamaa remain who are scum and filth like that which is carried by the torrents.

“Isma`eel bin Abi’ Uwais narrated to us; Malik narrated to me from Hishaam bin `Urwah, from his father, from (Hadhrat) `Abdullah bin `Amr bin al-`Aas (Radhiyallaahu `Anhu) that he said, “I heard Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) saying:

“Verily, Allah does not take `Ilm away from the servants all of a sudden. Rather, He takes it (`Ilm) away (from the Dunya) gradually through taking away the `Ulama (who are upon the Haqq). This continues until such a stage is reached when not a single (true) `Aalim is alive on the face of the earth. At that time, mankind will take Juhhaal (Ignoramuses) as their leaders. These Juhhaal (ignoramuses) will be asked questions (by the people) and will issue Fataawaa without any `Ilm (Knowledge). So these people (The Juhhaal) are deviates and they will cause others to become deviates.” [Bukhaari Shareef]

“Qutaybah bin Sa`eed narrated to us; Jareer narrated to us from Hishaam bin `Urwah, (who narrated) from his father, that he (his father) said, “I heard Hadhrat `Abdullah bin `Amr bin al-`Aas (Radhiyallahu `Anhu) saying, “I heard Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wa Sallam) saying:

Verily, Allah does not take `Ilm away from the people all of a sudden. Rather, He takes it (`Ilm) away (from the Dunya) gradually through taking away the `Ulama (who are upon the Haqq). This continues until such a stage is reached when not a single (true) `Aalim is left on the face of the earth. At that time, mankind will take Juhhaal (Ignoramuses) as their leaders. These Juhhaal (ignoramuses) will be asked questions (by the people) and will issue Fatawa without any `Ilm (Knowledge). So these people (The Juhhaal) are deviants and they will cause others to become deviants.” [Muslim Shareef]

“Harun bin Ishaq al-Hamdani narrated to us; `Abdah bin Sulayman narrated to us from Hisham bin `Urwah, (who narrated) from his father, (who narrated) from Hadhrat `Abdullah bin `Amr bin al-`Aas (Radhiyallahu `Anhu) that he said, “Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) said:

Verily, Allah does not take `Ilm away from the people all of a sudden. Rather, He takes it (`Ilm) away (from the Dunya) gradually through taking away the `Ulama (who are upon the Haqq). This continues until such a stage is reached when not a single (true) `Aalim is left on the face of the earth. At that time, mankind will take Juhhaal (Ignoramuses) as their leaders. These Juhhaal (ignoramuses) will be asked questions (by the people) and will issue Fatawa without any `Ilm (Knowledge). So these people (The Juhhaal) are deviants and they will cause others to become deviants.” [Tirmidhi Shareef]

“Wakee` narrated to us; Hisham informed us from his father, from (Hadhrat) `Abdullah bin `Amr (Radhiyallahu `Anhu) that he said, “Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) said:

Verily, Allah does not take `Ilm away from the people all of a sudden. Rather, He takes it (`Ilm) away (from the Dunya) gradually through taking away the `Ulama (who are upon the Haqq). This continues until such a stage is reached when not a single (true) `Aalim is left on the face of the earth. At that time, mankind will take Juhhaal (Ignoramuses) as their leaders. These Juhhaal (ignoramuses) will be asked questions (by the people) and will issue Fataawaa without any `Ilm (Knowledge). So these people (The Juhhaal) are deviants and they will cause others to become deviants.” [Musnad-e-Ahmad]

One can see quite clearly that which Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) had promised occurring throughout the Dunya in this day and age; as the `Ulama-e-Haqq are slowly dying out as Allah Rabbul `Izzah is taking them away from this Dunya, as is part of His Takween (Master Plan), Juhalaa without an inkling of Shar`i knowledge are creeping out of every nook and cranny to mislead the masses with Baatil opinions which they have sucked from their thumbs.

This Deen of Islam was perfected during the very lifetime of Janaab-e-Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah-e-Kiraam Ajma`een (Ridhwaanullaahi Ta`aalaa `Alayhim). Whatever was Haqq in that time is Haqq today, and will remain Haqq until the Day of Qiyaamah. Whatever was Baatil then is Baatil today, and will remain Baatil until the Day of Qiyamah. Understand this clearly.

The Deen of Islam was sent by Allah Rabbul `Izzah to Nabi (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam), perfected before his demise, spread throughout the world by the Sahaabah-e-Kiram, and codified by the A’immah-e-Mujtahideen for the benefit of the Ummah.

There is absolutely no place in the Shari`ah of Islam for “new and modern interpretations”. This Shari`at is not based upon the Raa’i (opinion) of every Tom, Dick and Harry.

It is Haraam for any self-proclaimed “scholar” to manufacture his own Baatil opinions and peddle them off as being part of the Deen of Islaam. If any “`Aalim” goes against the Ijma` of the Fuqaha of this Ummat, then such a person is not an `Aalim by any stretch of the imagination; his being a deviated Jaahil (ignoramus) is manifest. Such a person ceases to be from the A’immat-ul-Hudaa (Imaams of Guidance), and instead becomes from the accursed “Aimmat-ul-Mudhilleen” (Imaams of Misguidance).

This Fitnah of the rise of these A’immah-e-Mudhilleen is something which had been promised to this Ummat by Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) more than one thousand four hundred years ago.
“Ya`qoob narrated to us, “My father narrated to me from his father who said, “A brother of `Adi’ bin Artaa narrated to me from a man from Hadhrat Abu
Darda’ (Radhiyallaahu `Anhu) who said, “Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) had told us that, “The thing which I fear most for you (my Ummah) is (the rise of) the A’immat-e-Mudhilleen. (Such Imaams who lead others towards deviation).” [Musnad-e-Imaam Ahmad]

In this Hadith, Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) himself refers to these people as “Al-A’immat-ul-Mudhilloon”. It is the reality of the matter that whichever unfortunate person undertakes upon himself to follow one of these “Imaams of Dhalaalah (Deviation)” is going to end up in the fire of Jahannum. That is because such people are very far from the original, true Deen of Islam which was brought to us by Janaab-e-Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) and practiced by the Sahaabah-e-Kiraam  (Ridhwaanullaahi `Alayhim Ajma`een). These people have invented a Deen of their very own which they follow and invite others towards. This religion of theirs (which they have invented) is such a (false) Deen which is appealing to those in whose hearts lurk the wretched evils of Kufr and Nifaaq. This religion of theirs is quite acceptable to their western Kuffaar masters as it is a religion which is very far removed from the pristine Deen of Islaam.

“Yazeed narrated to us; Daylam bin Ghazwan informed us; Maymun al-Kurdi narrated to us from Abu`Uthmaan an-Nahdi who said, “Indeed I was sitting under the Mimbar of (Hadhrat) `Umar (Radhiyallahu `Anhu) whilst he was addressing the people, and he said in his Khutbah (Speech): “I heard Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) saying:

“Verily the thing I fear most for this Ummah is every Munafiq who is eloquent in speech.”  [Musnad-e-Imaam Ahmad]

This is a quality which many people are affected by; eloquence in speech.

Many of these deviated, modernist `Ulama-e-Soo’ are very eloquent in the field of oratory. Although they may be speaking utter trash in their Bayaanat, however, as they have a very eloquent manner of expressing themselves, the crowds are immediately impressed by them and accept everything which they say regardless of whether it conforms to Qur’aan and Sunnah or not.

“`Ali bin Ahmad bin Nadhr al-Azdi narrated to us; `Aasim bin `Ali narrated to us; `Abdul Hakeem bin Abi Layla narrated to us from (Hadhrat) Mu`adh bin Jabal (Radhiyallahu `Anhu) who said, “I heard Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) saying:

Indeed the things which I fear most for this Ummah are three: The slip-up of an `Aalim, the argumentation of a Munaafiq using the Qur’aan, and that the (treasures of the) Dunya should be opened up for you.”  [Mu`jam al-Kabeer lit Tabraani]

In this day and age, all of the things which were feared by Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wa Sallam) have become rife. Many of the `Ulama who had been upon the Haqq in the past have fallen into error, and modernist deviants are fabricating against the Deen of Islam and using the Qur’aan Kareem as their “Daleel (Proof)”.

Although we know that whatever Sarkaar-e-Do Aalam (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) had promised will come to pass, nevertheless it is disappointing to note the speed at which the putrefaction of the `Ulama has taken place. In this belated age, deviants who resemble the `Ulama of Bani Israa`eel have sprung up declaring Ribaa to be Halaal and Ribaa transactions, and have attempted to pull the wool over the eyes of the people by assigning to these Haraam Riba transactions Arabic names in order to pass them off as being Islaamic. Others have undertaken the process of “Halaalizing” Haraam carrion, and have even evoked the Aayat of the Qur’aan Kareem, “Wa  Ta`aamulladheena Ootul Kitaaba Hillullakum (The food of the Ahl-e-Kitaab has been made Halaal for you)” and have concluded there from that it is “Halaal” (Permissible) for a Muslim to visit the stores of Shaytaan such as “McDonalds” and stuff his stomach to the bursting point with the filthy, Haraam Maytah (Carrion) being served there.

While there are some who legalize digital pictures adding technicalities and false reasonings, others have shamelessly issued “Halaal Fatwas” to Khamr (Alcohol) and beverages containing Khamr, and have reached these Fatawa through twisting the Qur’aan and Ahaadeeth to accommodate their bestial Nafs and Shaytaan, who is their partner with whom they dine when they consume this Haraam carrion and alcohol which they have legalised.

These despicable `Ulama-e-Soo’ are amongst the things which are to blame for the Roohani decline of the Ummat of Imam-ul-Ambiyaa’i wal Mursaleen, Rasulunaa (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam). The Fussaaq (Flagrant transgressors against the Ahkaam of Allah Rabbul `Izzah) may now comfortably consume pig-gelatine (due to `Ulama-e-Soo’ devoid of any vestige of Roohaniyat tendering infirm excuses of it (the pig-gelatine) having undergone a process of Istihaala (metamorphosis) thereby rendering it fit for Muslim consumption) and become intoxicated on beverages such as “Coca-Cola” whose proceeds fund the Jewish nation of Israel, and aids their armies of Shaytaan in murdering Muslim men, women and children.

However, the Fussaaq and Fujjaar may get away with any form of vice and transgression in this Aakhir-uz-Zamaan, as the Kuffaar have employed such `Ulama who are most apt at finding a way to make anything Halaal.

The`Ulamaa-e-Haqq:

In order to understand the deviation of the “new-age” `Ulama-e-Soo’, it is also necessary to understand who the true `Ulama were. A person will only understand how lamentable is the state of the present `Ulama when he understands how great were the `Ulama of before; how much were their sacrifices for the Deen of Allaah Ta`ala; how much torture and persecution they had gone through; how strong were they in their “Zuhd” (Abstinence) towards this Dunya and how powerful was their Ta`alluq (Connection) with Allah Rabbul `Izzah. This is amongst the main sicknesses ailing the present day `Ulama and the thing which makes them so very different from the glorious `Ulama of the past; the lack of this Sifat (Quality) of “Zuhd” (Abstinence) in them towards the Dunya.

In the miserable pursuit of Jaah (name and fame) and worldly riches, these `Ulama have sold away the Deen of Allah Ta`ala. For the sake of the pleasure of their Kuffaar masters and being allowed to travel freely to whichever place of Fisq they so desire, these `Ulama-e-Soo’ have allowed themselves to become “Dumb Shayaateen” by denying and apologizing for any such facet of the Deen of Islam which the west are displeased with, be it  the issue of slavery, or the issue of polygamy, or any other issue from the variety of Masaa’il of Deen which enrages the Kuffaar. These `Ulama-e-Soo’ have exchanged the beautiful, everlasting gardens of Jannah which Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala would have kept for them in return for this ephemeral world.

Understand that the very act of apologising for any such thing which Allaah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala had ordained or Rasulullah (Sallallahu `Alayhi wasallam) had commanded us with, is an act of Kufr. When these `Ulama-e-Soo’ pule out feeble apologies for what they perceive in their wretched, deficient understandings to be “harsh tones” employed by Allah Rabbul `Izzah in the Qur’aan Kareem and by Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) in the Hadeeth Shareef, they are in fact committing an act of arrant Kufr. When these people apologise for and interpret away the Shar`i Hudood which was revealed by none other than Allah Rabbul `Izzah Himself, they are fiendishly implying that their level of ‘Rahmat’ (Mercy), ‘`Adl’ (Justice), ‘`Ilm’ (Knowledge) and ‘Hikmat’ (Wisdom) is greater than that of Allah Subhaanahu wa Ta`ala, hence the need for them to re-interpret and re-mould the Shari`ah of Allah Ta`ala into a more suitable ‘modern, civilised religion’.

Regardless of the level of `Ilm one may have attained, regardless of the number of Kitaabs he may have authored in the various `Uloom of Islam, regardless of the quantity of his Asaatidhah, and regardless of the level of worldly standing and repute he may have accrued for himself over the years, it is not permissible for any `Aalim in this belated age, even if he has attained the rank of ‘Shaykh-ul-Hadeeth’, or is the Grand Mufti of the country in which he resides, to propagate any belief, or issue any Fatwaa (Shar`i Verdict) which is at variance with the Ijma` of the Ummah for the last fourteen centuries.

“As for him who sets himself against the Rasul (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) and follows a path other than that of the Mu’mineen even after Hudaa (True Guidance) had become clear to him, We will let him go the way he has turned to, and We will cast him into Jahannum – an evil destination.”  [Surah an-Nisa: 115]

This is the `Adhaab warned of by Allah Rabbul `Izzah in the Qur’aan Majeed which will be meted out to whichever unfortunate person has taken it upon himself to follow any Tareeq (Path) other than the Tareeq which is followed by the Mu’mineen – The Mu’mineen referred to here are primarily, of course, the Sahaabah-e-Kiram (Ridhwanullahi `Alayhim Ajma`een), the Taabi`een and the Tab-e-Taabi`een, known as the ‘Khayr-ul-Quroon’ – that such a person will be cast by Allah Rabbul `Izzah into the depths of Jahannum, the worst of destinations.

The primary purport of this Aayat of the Qur’aan Kareem is that those Kuffaar who have chosen a Sabeel (Path) other than that of the Mu’mineen – which is Islam – will face the consequence of everlasting `Adhaab in the fire of Jahannum. However, the Mufassireen have explained that this Aayat-e-Kareemah is also in reference to such people who are in conflict with ‘Ijmaa`’. For example, it is well known that Ribaa is absolutely Haraam. This has been mentioned clearly by Allaah Tabaaraka wa Ta`aalaa in the Qur’aan Majeed. Therefore, if any person were to come along in this day and age and contest that Ribaa is in fact Halaal, then such a person is Mardood (Rejected) and his ‘Fatwaa’ will summarily be rejected regardless of whatever ‘Dalaa’il’ (Proofs) he may eke out to support his nefarious claim. This is because there are such things which are “Ma`loomum minan Deen bidh Dharoorah” (Known to necessarily be part and parcel of the Deen). The Fatwa of any `Aalim in the present time has to necessarily be in conformity with Qur’aan and Sunnah as explained to us by the A’immah-e-Arba`ah (The Four Imams). Therefore, as these A’immah had codified for us the Deen of Islaam, the ‘Fatwa’ of any `Aalim, be he the Grand Mufti himself, may not depart from the purview of the Madhaahib-e-Arba`ah (The Four Madhhabs, namely Hanafi, Shaafi`i, Maaliki and Hambali). Understand this matter clearly. The deviants who have issued Baatil “Fatawa” stating that music and dancing is permissible, pictures of animate beings are permissible, meat slaughtered by the alleged “Ahl-e-Kitaab” in these times – who are in fact no more than atheists – is “Halaalan Tayyibah” (Pure and Wholesome for Muslim consumption), etc. Such Fatawa are baseless, and the issuers will have to answer to Allah Rabbul `Izzah on the Day of Qiyamah for their Tahreef of the Qur’aanic Aayaat and the Ahaadeeth of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam). They themselves bear the enormous sin for issuing these Fatawa, and those Juhhaal who follow them in these matters too shall bear the sin for their Ma`siyatullaah (Disobedience of Allaah). Do not labour under the assumption that if one were to follow them he would be “Ma`soom” (Sinless) and the burden of sin would be borne by them alone. It is upon him to reject such Fatawa which are in conflict with the Deen of Islam and follow only such reliable `Ulama who will impart to him the Haqq.

Some narrations of a few of the great `Ulama-e-Kiram of the past will follow hereunder.

Imam-e-A`zam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi `Alayhi):

Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah`Alayh), besides being the greatest Faqeeh (after the Fuqaha of the Sahaabah (Ridhwanullahi `Alayhim Ajma`een), was also amongst the greatest Auliya-ullah who had ever lived. The quality of Zuhd (Abstinence) towards the Dunya was prevalent in him to a great degree, as well as the quality of Taqwa which has to necessarily accompany whatever `Ilm of Deen one has acquired. As a result of possessing these qualities, he could never be cowed down nor bought over by the ruling authorities of his time.

Ibn-e-Hubayrah, the then Governor of Kufa, requested Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) to visit him occasionally, and stated that he would be very pleased if the Imaam were to do so. However, due to Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullaahi `Alayh)’s intense dislike for corrupt rulers – of which category ibn-e-Hubayrah fell into – he refused this request quite harshly and said to him, “For what reason should I visit you? Were you to favour me, I would be associating myself with your evil, and were you to persecute me you would add to my insults. I have no interest whatsoever in any worldly position or wealth. Whatever I have been granted by Allaah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala, I am pleased with.”

Look at this Haal (State) of Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullaahi Ta`ala `Alayhi). He out rightly refused to even visit the rulers of his time due to their corrupt ways. Compare this state of Imam-e-A`zam (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi) with the wretched state of the present “A’immah” and so-called “Muslim Rulers” who are seen unashamedly standing side by side with the Kuffaar presidents.

Here Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) was unwilling to even visit a Muslim ruler due to his corruption. What would his opinion not have been of the `Ulama and Muslims of today? Let those who consider themselves `Ulama study the biography of the great A’immah of the past and see how far they have veered from their paths.

This same Yazeed bin `Umar bin Hubayrah, during the Khilaafat of Marwaan II, tried to persuade Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) to accept some job in the government. When he refused, ibn Hubayrah had him put behind bars and flogged everyday, on the hope that this would cause Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayhi) to change his mind. However, ibn Hubayrah had no such luck, and Imam Saheb stuck to his decision. Seeing Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi `Alayhi)’s resoluteness, ibn Hubayrah realised that his plan was useless and had Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi) freed.

After this incident, historians write that Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) left Kufa and migrated to Hijaz, wherein he stayed for a period of two and a half years until the overthrowal of the Ummayad Khilafat by the Abbasids.

Hakam bin Hisham, one of the Umayyad Khulafa, one day remarked about Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh), “Our government (The Umayyads) had offered two alternatives to Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi `Alayhi) – either to accept the keys of our treasuries or get his back flogged. He preferred the latter.”

In another narration it appears that during the Abbasid Khilafah, some dispute had arisen between the Khalifah of that time, “Al-Mansur”, and his wife Hurra Khatun. The Khatun wanted the matter to be referred to Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayhi), to which al-Mansur agreed. Hence, Imam Saheb was summoned to the court of the Khalifah, while his wife sat behind a curtain. Al-Mansur posed the question to Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi `Alayhi):

“In Islam, how many wives is a man permitted to have at one time?”

Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) replied, “Four.” Hearing this reply, al-Mansur was pleased and shouted to his wife, “Did you hear what he said?” Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) continued, “However, there is a Shart (condition) for this; and that is that the man should be capable of doing equal justice to all four of his wives.”

The last part of Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi `Alayh)’s reply was not to the liking of the Khalifah, al-Mansur. When Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) arrived at his home, he found a man waiting for him with a bag filled with Dinars (gold coins) and a letter of thanks of the wife of the Khalifah. Imam-e-A`zam (Rahmatullah `Alayh) rejected the gift and sent the man back to her with the message that he had issued his Fatwa only for the sake of the establishment of the Haqq; he had not done so for fear or favour.

Later on, this same Khalifah, Al-Mansur, requested that Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) assume the post of Qadhi (Judge). Al-Mansur was labouring under the misconception that Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah Ta`ala `Alayh) would be like the “`Ulama” of the present times and sell Islam out for his sake.

Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah Ta`ala `Alayh) replied to him, saying, “Suppose a complaint is lodged against you in your court and you want me to decide in your favour, and threaten to throw me in a river should I do otherwise; rest assured that I would rather be drowned than tamper with Justice.” On receiving this reply from the Imam, Al-Mansur was silenced, and did not make this request of his again for some time.

In the year 146 A.H. (763 C.E.), when Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) was in the sixty-sixth year of his life, the Abbasid Khalifah, Al-Mansur, once again offered him the post of “Qadhi-ul-Qudhat” (The Chief Qadhi of the State). However, as the Abbasid Khulafa were known for their Mu`tazili `Aqaa’id (Beliefs), and Al-Mansur was known to be a corrupt ruler, Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) again refused this offer of his. Al-Mansur persisted, but Imam Saheb (Rahmatullahi `Alayh) continued to decline, stating that he regarded himself as being unfit for the post. Al-Mansur was adamant, and became enraged at this comment of Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullaah `Alayh). He shouted, “You are a liar!” Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) replied, “If I am a liar then you have in fact just upheld my contention, as a liar can never be fit for the post of a ‘Qadhi’.”

Al-Mansur refused to accept this. He took an oath that Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullaah `Alayh) would become the “Qadhi-ul-Qudhat”. Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) in return took an oath that he would never do such a thing. The people who were present in the court at this time were amazed at the boldness of the Imam (Rahmatullah `Alayh). One of the courtiers, Rabi`, said to Imam Saheb (Rahmatullah `Alayh), “You have taken Bay`at (the oath of allegiance) at the hands of Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen (Al-Mansur).” Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) replied, “Yes, but it is easier for the Khalifah to compensate for his oath.”

Al-Mansur, thereupon, had Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) thrown in jail. However, even in jail Imam-e-A`zam (Rahmatullaah `Alayh) continued imparting `Ilm to those who were permitted to come to him.

This state of affairs continued until the year 150 A.H. (767 C.E.), wherein Al-Mansur finally had the cooks of the state mix poison in the food of the Imam (Rahmatullaah `Alayh). After eating it, Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) began feeling the effects of the poison. Realising that his Maut (Death) was near, Imam-e-A`zam (Rahmatullah `Alayh) performed Sajdah to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala and passed away in this condition.

There are varying reports concerning the amount of Tilaawat (Recitation) of the Qur’aan Kareem performed by Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) before his death. Some reports state that Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) made seven thousand Khatams (Completions) of the Qur’aan Kareem before he died, in the cell wherein he was being imprisoned.

When the news of the death of Imam-e-A`zam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) was announced, the people arrived in their droves to attend the Janaazah Salaat. 

It is narrated that more than fifty thousand people were present at the first Janaazah Salaat, and Imaam Khateeb Baghdadi (Rahmatullah `Alayh) mentions that so many people continued turning up that the Janaazah Salaat was performed six times over to accommodate for the large number of people who had turned up. He said further that for a full twenty days after Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayhi) was buried, people continued performing the Janaazah Salaat for him. One of the people who were present, by the name of Shaybah bin Hajjaaj, commented on the death of Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayh) that “Night has settled over Kufa.”
Night had indeed settled over Kufa; over the entire world, in fact. And the sun would never again rise on a greater Faqeeh than he had been.

This is the honour Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala had bestowed to this great Imam. Honour the likes of this is only bestowed by Allah Tabaraka wa Ta`ala to such `Ulama who, like Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi), defend the Deen of Islam and state the Haqq without fear or favour. For such `Ulama Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala has decreed honour. As for those who make Kitmaan-ul-Haqq (Hide the Truth) after having learned it, there will only be disgrace for them in this Dunya and in the Aakhirah (Hereafter).

Imam Darul-Hijrah, Maalik bin Anas (Rahmatullah `Alayh):

In the year 133 A.H. (750 C.E.), the Umayyads were overthrown by the Abbasids, and Abu’l `Abbas as-Suffah became the first Khalifah of “Al-Khilafat-ul`Abbasiyyah” (The Abbasid Dynasty). Abu’l `Abbas as-Suffah ruled for a period of four years, until his death on the tenth of June, 137 A.H. (754 C.E.).

After the death of Abu’l `Abbas as-Suffah, the Khilafat was assumed by al-Mansur, the same man who had persecuted Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah `Alayhi).

The people who had been living under the Umayyad dynasty were displeased with their manner of ruling, and the corruptness of the rulers. Hence, when the Khilafat shifted to the Abbasids, the people assumed that they would turn out to be better rulers than their Umayyad predecessors. This assumption, however, later turned out to be false, to the great misfortune of the people.

Nevertheless, al-Mansur succeeded Abu’l `Abbas as-Suffah to the Khilafat, and forced people to take Bay`at (the oath of allegiance) from him out of duress. This was of course not permissible, so Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh) issued a Fatwa that the Bay`at the people had taken at the hands of al-Mansur was null and void, as they had done so only out of compulsion.

Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh) based this Fatwaa of his upon a Hadeeth of Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam) wherein he says that:

ليس على مستكره طلاق

The meaning of this Hadeeth Shareef is, “The divorce given by one under coercion does not take effect.”

Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh) used his Ijtihaad upon this Hadeeth to arrive at his Fatwa that Bay`at given to a ruler under compulsion is not binding.

Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh) himself felt that there was no person worthier for the Khilafat that Hadhrat `Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin `Ali bin Abi Taalib (Rahmatullah `Alayh), who was known famously as “Nafs-e-Zakiyyah” (The Pure Soul).

The Governer of Madinah at this time was a man by the name of Ja`far, who was a cousin of al-Mansoor. When Ja`far heard of this Fatwa of Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh), he requested him once to retract it. When Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh) refused, as he would not twist the Shari`ah for the sake of al-Mansur or anyone else, Ja`far had him imprisoned, flogged, and paraded through the streets of Madinah Shareef in his blood-stained clothes.

Here again, we see the great A’immah of Islam refusing to make Tahreef of any part of the Deen for any person’s sake. This is amongst the Shi`aar (Salient Features) of the `Ulama-e-Haqq; that neither the greatest amount of persecution, nor the greatest amount of temptation presented by the enemies of Islam towards them accepting some worldly riches in return for becoming a “Dumb Shaytaan” turned them away from the proclamation of the Haqq. When this quality disappears in an `Aalim, he becomes Mal`oon (Accursed), however, when this quality is present, Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala bestows honour and dignity upon him, and this was the case with Imam Malik (Rahmatullahi `Alayh), as besides the amount of honour Allah Ta`ala gave him with regards to him being loved and revered by all the Muslims who came after him, even in this very Dunya Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala honoured him. When Al-Mansur heard of what had transpired between Ja`far and Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh), instead of being pleased, he had Ja`far – who was his cousin – punished, and himself apologised to Imam Malik (Rahmatullaah `Alayh). On another occasion he presented a gift of three thousand Dinars (gold coins) to Imam Malik (Rahmatullah `Alayh), but his gift was refused.

Imam Ahlus Sunnah, Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullahi `Alayh):

To speak about `Ulama-e-Haqq who gave their lives in defense of the Deen, without making mention of that person who alone defended the `Aqeedah of Islam at a time when all those around him had sold out, and to whom the Ummat of Rasulullah (Sallallahu `Alayhi wasallam) is eternally indebted, would be a very great Zulm (Injustice).

This person is none other than Imam Abu `Abdullah, Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Hambal ash Shaybani (Rahmatullah Ta`ala `Alayhi).

As my aim here is not to present a biography of the lives of these A’immah but merely to display to the readers their inherent quality of standing up for the Haqq, which is the result of nothing other than possessing a heart filled with Imaan and Yaqeen (Conviction), I will present here only such details of the life of Imaam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullah `Alayh) which have some relevance to the issue at hand.

During the last days of the Abbasid Khalifah, Ma’mun ar-Rasheed (born 13 September, 786 C.E.), he became a fanatical follower of the Kufr `Aqaa’id (Beliefs) of the Mu`tazili sect, which included their Shaytaani belief regarding “Khalq-ul-Qur’aan” (The Creation of the Qur’aan Kareem). As Ma’moon ar-Rasheed at this time was the Khaleefah of the Muslimeen, he was able to impose these Kufr beliefs upon the masses, and would persecute whoever dared to disagree with them. As a result,  all the `Ulama present in his time sold out their Imaan and their Deen in order to safeguard their lives.

At this devastating time of the formulation and imposition of Shaytaani Kufr beliefs, Allah Rabbul `Izzah selected from the Ummah of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu  `Alayhi wasallam) an `Aalim possessing such a remarkable degree of Imaan, `Ilm, Taqwaa and Shujaa`at (Bravery) the likes of which was unparalleled in the world, to establish the Haqq (Truth) and smash out the brains of the exponents of Baatil (Falsehood).

Imaam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi) alone stood up against this Kufr belief of “Khalq-ul-Qur’aan” (The belief that the Qur’aan is not eternal but created), and thereby became a target for persecution by the Zaalim Khalifah.

Ma’mun ar-Rasheed had his guards arrest Imam Ahmad (Rahmatullah `Alayh) and deliver him to his court. On arriving there, the Khalifah began questioning him regarding his `Aqeedah, and whether he accepted their Mu`tazili belief of “Khalq-ul-Qur’aan”. Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullah `Alayh) told him, “No. The Qur’aan is Kalaamullaah (The Speech of Allaah Ta`aalaa), how can it ever be regarded as a creation?”

At this, Ma’mun ar-Rasheed and his puppet `Ulama began arguing with Imaam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi) in the manner of the plastic `Ulama of today; with many Shaytaani “Dalaa’il” (Proofs), some of which Shaytaan has whispered into their ears and others which they have sucked out of their bestial Nafs.

Let the `Ulama-e-Soo’ of today understand that as they have formulated “Dalaa’il” (Proofs) for the Haraam which they have legalised, the corrupt `Ulama-e-Soo’ and deviants of the past had formulated and extracted “Dalaa’il” for their Kufr beliefs in the same manner.

Those who have studied the Taareekh (History) of Islam know that many deviated sects – some were deviated, others were outright Kaafir – had sprung up in the past; The Shi`ah (Kuffaar), Khawaarij, Mu`talizah, Jahmiyyah, Jabariyyah, Qadariyyah, Murji’ah, Mujassimah, Mushabbihah, Mu`attilah, etc. And each of these sects claimed that their deviated `Aqaa’id (Beliefs) were based upon the Qur’aan Kareem and the Ahaadeeth of Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam), and each of the followers of these Baatil sects had their “Dalaa’il” (Proofs) which their A’imma-tul-Kufr (Imaams of Kufr) had furnished for them.

Therefore, the ignorant Muslim should not be fooled into believing the deviated beliefs and opinions expressed by the corrupt `Ulama-e-Soo’ of today merely because they have presented a smattering of false “Dalaa’il” to appease their Nafs. On closer inspection, one will find all the “Dalaa’il” presented by the `Ulama-e-Soo’ to be nothing more than a smoke screen; once the smoke has been blown away by the Haqq, the true, hideous form of Baatil hidden beneath is exposed.

Continuing with the story of Imam Ahmad (Rahmatullah `Alayh);

After their long dispute with Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi) in which the Mu`tazili A’immah presented numerous false proofs in support of their Kufr beliefs, while Imam Ahmad (Rahmatullah `Alayh) continued to remain firm and unwavering upon the Haqq regardless of their “Dalaa’il”, Ma’mun ar-Rasheed had him imprisoned.

Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullah `Alayh) remained in prison for the entire duration of the reign of Ma’mun ar-Rasheed, until the latter’s death in the year 217 A.H. (9 August, 833 C.E.).

After the death of Ma’mun ar-Rasheed – who was the son of Harun ar-Rasheed – the Khilafat was assumed by Mu`tasim Billaah. Al-Mu`tasim was the same fanatical Mu`tazili as his predecessor, and brought Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullaah `Alayh) out of jail to ask him the same question as before; does he accept that the Qur’aan is created?

The A’immah-e-Mujtahideen were specially selected by Allah `Azza wa Jall; spending years in jail would not detract them from the Siraat-ul-Mustaqeem in the slightest. Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullahi `Alayh) replied to Mu`tasimah as he had replied to Ma’mun; The Qur’aan is the Uncreated Speech of Allaah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala.

Mu`tasim Billah became angry at this reply and had Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullah `Alayh) flogged and thrown back in jail. However, after a period of two years, he was allowed to return home.

Some time later, al-Mu`tasim passed away. This was in the year 226 A.H. (842 C.E.).

After the death of Mu`tasimah, his son, “Al-Wathiq” took control of the Khilaafat.

Al-Wathiq was slightly more lenient than Ma’mun and Mu`tasim; he continued to allow Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullah `Alayh) to live freely and did not put him back in prison. Thereafter, in the year 232 A.H. (847 C.E.), Al-Wathiq died and his brother, “Al-Mutawakkil” took over. Alhamdulillah, with the assumption of power by Al-Mutawakkil the Mu`tazili beliefs came to an end, as al-Mutawakkil rejected their `Aqeedah and instead followed the true `Aqeedah of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama`ah.

This was how the trial of Imaam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi) came to an end, after a tremendous amount of Sabr on his part. In Arabic, this trial was known as the “Mihnah” (Trial; testing), and refers to the imposition of Mu`tazili belief by Al-Ma’mun during the end of his life in 833 C.E., until it was revoked by Al-Mutawakkil in the year 848 C.E. So this was a period of fifteen years.

That is how Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala has created this Dunya; there will be Fitan (Trials; tribulations), but each of these has a set period of time. They are not everlasting; after it has run its course, Allah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala removes it.

For Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullah `Alayh), this Fitnah ended in the year 848 C.E. Thereafter Al-Mutawakkil welcomed Imam Ahmad (Rahmatullah `Alayh) to his court, and even requested him to impart Ahaadeeth to his son, al-Mu`tazz. However, Imaam Ahmad (Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi) declined due to ill health and old age.

Imam Ahmad bin Hambal (Rahmatullah `Alayh) passed away on the day of Jumu`ah in the month of Rabi`-ul-Awwal, in the year 241 A.H., at the age of seventy seven. His Janaazah Salaat was attended by 850,000 people; so many people were they that Saffs (Rows) had to be formed in the streets of Baghdad, in the bazaars, and even on boats in the Tigris River.

This was the honour bestowed to him by Allaah Subhanahu wa Ta`alaa in this Dunya and in the Aakhirah, and the Muslim Ummah will be indebted to him until the Day of Qiyamah.

There is a vast treasure of such stories regarding the sacrifices of the `Ulamaa-e-Haqq of the past from which I could continue to recount, however, I will suffice with only these narrations concerning such `Ulama who are accepted as being A’imma-tul-Hudaa (Imaams of Guidance) by all Muslims, even the deviants.

As one can see from the stories mentioned above, all of the `Ulamaa-e-Haqq of this Ummah were put through trials and tribulations regarding this Deen, however, none of them sold out or agreed to even compromise a single belief of Islam regardless of the amount of torture they were forced to endure on account of this. 

This is because they possessed the true Taqwallaah, and knew that in comparison to the `Adhaab which will be meted out by Allaah Rabbul `Izzah in the Aakhirah, the `Adhaab of this Dunyaa is paltry and finite. 

Out of fear of the enemies of Islam the `Ulama today have agreed to make Tahreef (Alteration) of the Qur’aan and Ahaadeeth from their true meanings, not realising that with every new “Halaal” Fatwa they issue to such things which have been known to be Haraam since the inception of Islaam, they are accumulating for themselves a mountain of `Adhaab in the Aakhirah.

Were these sell-out `Ulama to make Muraaqabah (Contemplation) and Tadabbur (Reflection) over the Aayaat of the Qur’aan Kareem and the Ahaadeeth of Hudhoor (Sallallaahu `Alayhi wasallam), they would come to realise that neither the greatest amount of worldly riches nor the greatest amount of worldly torment is worth selling out the greatest Ni`mah (Favour) which Allaah Subhanahu wa Ta`ala has bestowed upon them, which is the Ni`mah of Imaan.

Take this Kitaab with Quwwah

By Muhammad Huzaifah ibn Adam aal-Ebrahim

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيْمِ

There are five Aayats in the Qur’aan Kareem wherein Allah Ta`ala commands people to seize a particular thing with Quwwah. These Aayaat are:

“And (remember, O Bani Israa’eel) when We took your promise (that you would fulfil the injunctions of the Towrah) and We raised above you Mount Toor (saying): “Take what We have given you (the Towraah) with Quwwah (power), and heed what is in it (i.e. act upon it) so that you may attain Taqwa.” [Surah al-Baqarah, 2:63]

In this particular Aayah, Allah Ta`ala is addressing Bani Israa’eel, reminding them of how He had taken their oaths and covenants that they would have Imaan in Him Alone, not committing Shirk with Him, and that they would follow His Rusul. Allaah Ta`ala mentions that at the time of this Covenant being taken, He raised Mount Toor out of the earth from its root and suspended it over the heads of Bani Israa’eel, that they may realise the gravity of this Covenant and follow this Command that Allaah Ta`aalaa is giving them, of taking the Towrah with Quwwah (power), resolutely, with courage to carry out His Commands.

When Imaam Qataadah رحمة الله عليه gave the Tafseer of this Aayah, and he explained the meaning of “bi-Quwwah (with power),” he said: “(Allaah Ta`aalaa was saying to them) Take this Towrah with seriousness or I will hurl down this mountain upon you.”

Thus, out of fear of the `Adhaab of Allaah Ta`aalaa the Bani Israa’eel unanimously submitted, falling into Sajdah, and they pledged that they would take this Towrah with Quwwah.

Imaam Abu-l `Aaliyah and Imaam Rabi` ibn Anas explained that one meaning of this Quwwah mentioned in the Aayah is Taa`ah (obedience). Imaam Mujaahid gave another meaning to it, which is “bi-`Amalim bimaa Feehi” (by acting upon it).

The second time in the Qur’aan Kareem that Allaah Ta`ala mentions this Command of taking something “With Quwwah” is also in Surah al-Baqarah:

“And (remember) When We took a promise from you (that you will obey the commands in the Towraah) and (after you refused to carry out the promise, We) raised Mount Toor above you (saying): “Take what We have given you with Quwwah (power) and listen (to the commands, otherwise the mountain will be flung on you). They said, “We hear and we disobey (Your command).” Because of their Kufr, the (love of the) calf was soaked into their hearts. Tell them, “Evil indeed is that (worship of the calf and rejection of Muhammad ﷺ) which your belief (in the Towraah) orders you to do, if you really are people who believe (as you claim).” [Surah al-Baqarah, 2:93] 

In Tafseer Jalaalayn, “with Quwwah” is explained as “with Jidd (might/determination) and Ijtihaad (hard work).”

The third time that Allah Ta`ala mentions “with Quwwah” is in Soorah al-A`raaf. This time, the Command is addressed to Nabi Moosa عليه السلام:

“And We wrote for him (Moosa عليه السلام) on the tablets (of the Towraah) every type of advice and details of everything (that man needs to know). (We told him): “Take (this Towraah) with Quwwah (power), and command your people to hold fast to the excellent commandments it contains. I am going to show you the abode of the Faasiqeen.”   [Soorah al-A`raaf, 7:145]

Imaam ibn Katheer رحمة الله عليه in his Tafseer explains “with Quwwah” as being: “bi-`Azmin `alat-Taa`ah” (with determination to obey).

Hadhrat `Abdullaah ibn ‘Abbas رضي الله انهما, added:

Imaam Sufyaan ibn `Uyaynah narrates: Abu Sa`d narrated to us from `Ikrimah, from Hadhrat `Abdullah ibn `Abbas رضي الله انهما who said: “Nabi Moosa عليه السلام was commanded to take (upon himself) the severest (of the laws) which his people were commanded with.”

In other words, he was commanded to take the strictest view for himself, with regards to the commandments of his Shari`ah.

With regards to the Aayah: “I am going to show you the abode of the Faasiqeen.”, some of the Mufassiroon have said that it refers to the lands of the Kuffaar in this Dunyaa, i.e. that Allah Ta`ala is going to take it away from them and give it to the Muslims. The second view is that Allah Ta`ala was telling Nabi Moosa عليه السلام: “I am going to show you the abode in Jahannam of those who oppose Me and who are not obedient unto Me.”

The fourth time in the Qur’aan when Allah Ta`ala commands people to take something “with Quwwah”, it is also in Surah al-A`raaf:

“And (remember the time) when We uprooted the mountain (Mount Toor and suspended it) above them (the Bani Israa’eel) as if it were a canopy and they thought that it would fall on them. (We said to them) “Take what We have given you with Quwwah and remember what is in it so that you may attain Taqwaa.” [Surah al-A`raaf, 7:171]

Imaam ibn Katheer narrates in his Tafseer that when Allah Ta`ala had given the Towraah to Nabi Moosaa عليه السلام, he commanded them to obey it and carry out its injunctions, saying to them, “Accept everything that is in this Kitaab, for in it is an explanation of what Allaah has made Halaal for you and what He has made Haraam upon you, and what He has commanded you and what He has forbidden you from.” They said, “Open it up and show us what is inside it. If its injunctions are easy and its Hudood (prescribed punishments) are light, we will accept it.”

Nabi Moosa عليه السلام said to them: “Accept it regardless of what is in it.”

They said, “No. We will not accept it until we know what is inside it. What are its injunctions and prescribed punishments like?” They continued to refuse to accept it until Allah Ta`ala uprooted the mountain and raised it in the sky above their heads. Nabi Moosa عليه السلام then said to them, “Do you not see what my Rabb `Azza wa Jall is saying? He is saying, “If you do not accept the Tawrah with whatever is inside it, I will throw on you this mountain.”

Commenting on this event, Imaam Hasan Basri رحمة الله عليه said, “When Bani Israa’eel looked up at the mountain raised above their heads, about to be hurled at them, all of them unanimously fell into Sajdah, prostrating upon the left part of their foreheads and looking up at the mountain with their right eyes, out of fear that it would fall on them. Thus, there is no Jew in the world who does not prostrate upon the left part of his forehead. The Jews say: “This is the Sajdah which caused the `Adhaab (of Allaah) to be lifted.”

When the Tablets were spread open in which was the Kitaab of Allaah (the Towrah) which He had written, there was not a mountain, tree or stone upon the surface of the earth except that it shook. Thus, till today there is no Jew on the face of the earth, young or old, upon whom the Towraah is read except that he shakes and moves his head.”

This is another meaning of “take it with Quwwah”: the Jews were being commanded: “Accept everything within this Towrah without exception; that which you find easy and that which you find difficult, that which you like and that which you dislike, or I will hurl down this mountain upon you.”

Thus, to take it with Quwwah is to carry out every single injunction within it without exception, and to abstain from every single prohibition within it without exception, and to propagate everything in it without hiding anything. If they refused to accept, Allah Ta`ala would have crushed them with Mount Toor. 

The fifth and final time in the Qur’aan Kareem when Allaah Ta`aalaa commands taking something “with Quwwah” is in Surah Maryam, and this time it is addressed to Nabi Yahya عليه السلام. Allah Ta`ala says to him:

“O Yahya, take this Kitaab with Quwwah! And We granted him Al-Hukm (Nubuwwah) when he was still a child.” [Surah Maryam, 19:12] 

Allaah Ta`ala mentions in this Aayah that He granted Nubuwwah to Nabi Yahya عليه السلام when he was still a child. Mufassiroon say that Nabi Yahya عليه السلام was three years old at the time of being granted Nubuwwah. The norm was that Allaah Ta`ala would grant Nubuwwah to each Nabi at the age of 40, but the two exceptions we know of were Nabi Yahya Yahya عليه السلام and Nabi `Eesa عليه السلام – both of them were granted Nubuwwah when they were still children.

When Imaam ibn Katheer explains the meaning of “Take this Kitaab with Quwwah” in the Aayah, he says: “Learn this Kitaab (the Tawraah) with Quwwah, i.e. with Jidd (seriousness, resolve and determination), Hirs (zeal) and Ijtihaad (hard work).”

Imaam al-Baydhaawi رحمةالله عليه explains “bi-Quwwah” in his Tafseer, saying: “Take the Kitaab with Quwwah, i.e. with Jidd (seriousness, resolution, determination) and by strongly memorising it with the Tawfeeq (which We shall grant you).”

Thus, Nabi Yahya عليه السلام was also commanded to commit the Tawrah to memory, and this too he did “bi-Quwwah” (powerfully).

Hadhrat `Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak رحمةالله عليه narrates from Ma`mar, who said: The children used to say to Nabi Yahya ibn Zakariyyaa عليه السلام: “Come and play with us.” He would say: “I was not created to play.” For this reason Allah Ta`ala revealed:

“And We granted him Al-Hukm (Nubuwwah) when he was a child.”
Allah Ta`ala further praises Nabi Yahyaa عليه السلام, saying:

“And (We granted him the quality of) compassion (towards others) from Ourselves (and We granted him) purity (therefore he never committed any sins). And he was always a Taqi (person of great Taqwa).” [Surah Maryam, 19:13] 

From the Tafseer of all of these Aayaat, we come to know that the meanings of “Take this Kitaab with Quwwah” are:

1) To learn it thoroughly. The Salaf used to say that when it comes to `Ilm, if you do not give it your all, it will give you nothing. Thus, for a person to “take the Qur’aan with Quwwah” means he must first of all devote his time and exhaust his efforts in properly acquiring `Ilm (Knowledge) of this Qur’aan. The kind of three-day “Tafseer workshops” prevalent nowadays do not count as learning the Qur’aan. People attend such “seminars” and “workshops” and come out knowing nothing. `Ilm of Deen is not acquired in two or three days. The person has to devote his life to `Ilm. `Ilm is إلى اللحد من ال عهد “from the cradle to the grave”. These “workshops” are a travesty and a satanic mockery of the Qur’aan and the Deen.

Most of the graduates of the Darul Ulooms these days are lacking in this very first quality. During their student days they do not pay attention to their lessons, they do not do mutaala`ah, they take the study of Deen “lightly” and thus they emerge from the Darul Ulooms as “graduate” devoid of `Ilm and Tafaqquh of Deen. For this reason they are incapable of adequately refuting any of the numerous Baatil groups in the world today. If they even get into a debate with a Shia Kaafir, they are dumbstruck, whereas, if you have studied the Deen properly, there is no Kaafir on the surface of the earth who can silence you, because the Haqq will always defeat Baatil.

2) By memorising it. The Fadhaa’il (virtues) of memorising the Qur’aan Kareem and the Ahaadeeth are well-known. 

3) When it comes to the Qur’aan Kareem and `Ilm of Deen, the Taalib-e-`Ilm should have a serious attitude and should not take it lightly. The Deen is not to be taken as a joke. If this person does not cultivate within himself the qualities of `Azm (strong resolve) and Istiqaamah (constancy), he will fail. 

Imaam ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri رحمة الله عليه said:

“Whoever seeks to acquire `Ilm all at once will lose it all at once; `Ilm is acquired over days and nights.” 
The serious attitude the Taalib-e-`Ilm should have is not only with regards to studying the Deen, but also with regards to acting upon it and defending it. The `Ulama are supposed to be Islaam’s “shield for the flak”. They are supposed to be the defenders of the Deen. Thus, it is necessary that they be powerful in their defence of the Deen. 

These days, unfortunately, the Ulama (of Soo) are the first to sell out the Deen, the first to grovel at the feet of the Kuffaar, the first to twist the Qur’aan and Ahaadeeth, the first to reject aspects of Islaam which the Kuffaar are not pleased with, the first to cower and tremble when the Kuffaar make any threats. As a result of this weak, feeble, deluded sell-out attitude of the “scholars” of today, the ones who have become “Tujjaar-ud-Deen” (people who sell the Deen to make money), the people have lost their respect for the Ulama. With many of the “Ulama” today, their purpose of becoming an “Aalim” is to learn how to please America and the allies of America. They become a “scholar” for the sake of the Kuffaar. They have made it their goal in life to undermine the Deen. Daily they attempt to break down the edifice of Islam, one brick at a time.  

The `Ulama of the past died for “Laa Ilaaha Illallaah” and the Ulama of today eat bread with it.

4) Carrying out all of the commandments of the Shari`ah and abstaining from all of the prohibitions.

A Muslim must live his entire life “in the Shade of the Qur’aan”. His life must be governed by the Qur’aan Kareem and be in conformity with the Sunnah of Rasoolullaah ﷺ. The purpose of acquiring `Ilm is to act on it.

العلم للعمل

In the Battle of Yamaamah which Sahaabah-e-Kiraam fought against Musaylamah al-Kadh’dhaab, Hadhrat Saalim Mowlaa Abi Huzaifah رضى الله عنه had been placed in charge of the right flank of the army. The Muhaajireen came to him and said, “O Saalim, we fear that the Muslims may be overtaken from your side.”

Hadhrat Saalim رضى الله عنه said:

“What a terrible Haamil-ul-Qur’aan (Carrier of the Qur’aan) I will be if you are overtaken from my side!”

Hadhrat Saalim رضى الله عنه then fought the Kuffaar until his left arm – which had been holding the flag – was cut off. He picked up the flag with his right hand, and that arm too was cut off and he fell to the ground, the flag falling down as well.

Moments prior to him passing away, Hadhrat `Abdullaah ibn `Umar رضى الله عنه heard him reciting the Aayah:

“And how many a Nabi (from amongst the Ambiya) fought and along with him (fought) many pious men, learned (in Deen). Never did they lose heart over what befell them in the Path of Allaah. Never did they weaken or surrender themselves, and Allah loves those who have Sabr.” [Surah Aal-e-`Imraan, 3:146]

Thereafter, he became Shaheed. 

This is “taking the Kitaab with Quwwah”. 

In this battle, Hadhrat Abu Huzaifah called out to the Huffaaz who were present, saying:

“O People of the Qur’aan! Beautify the Qur’aan with your actions.” 

These days, people feel that the Qur’aan was revealed simply to be “sung”. They will organise “Jalsahs” to have some beardless, Faasiq “Qaari” who is a “Taajir-ud-Deen” (someone who has sold the Deen for a measly price) come to the Masjid and recite, and the Molvis who organise these events tell the Musallis, “It is important for us to attend, to establish a connection with the Qur’aan.”

To them, the extent of “establishing a connection with the Qur’aan” is to sit in a Masjid listening to some Qaari (who has to be paid afterwards) recite, and thereafter having a feast.

In this battle, Hadhrat Abu Huzaifah says to them, “Beautify the Qur’aan with your actions.”

More important than to beautify the Qur’aan simply with your voice is to beautify it with your a`maal.

There is a preponderance of Qurraa’ nowadays but the Qur’aan has no place – for most of them – in their practical life. It is simply to be “sung” in order to receive payments and gifts, and some recite simply for women to listen to them. Ikhlaas has disappeared from the Dunyaa.

5) To teach and convey the entire Deen, not a partial Deen, or a “watered down” Deen.

Allah Ta`ala says to Rasulullaah ﷺ in the Qur’aan Kareem:

“O Rasul ﷺ, convey everything that has been revealed to you from your Rabb (and do not fear the reaction of the Kuffaar). If you do not do so (if you hide something), then you have not conveyed His Risaalah (Message). Allaah will protect you from the people. Surely, Allaah does not guide the nation of Kaafireen.” [Surah al-Maa’idah, 5:67]

The particle used in this Aayah, “ما“ gives the meaning of “everything”. Everything that Allaah Ta`aalaa had revealed, Rasoolullaah ﷺ was to convey to the people, without omitting a single thing and without fearing anyone.
ولا يخافون لومة لائم

“They do not fear (for the Pleasure of Allaah) the blame of any blamer.” [Qur’aan]

The majority of Ulama today fail to carry out this Command of Allaah Ta`ala. They convey parts of the Deen and conceal other parts. This is known as “Kitmaan-ul-Haqq” and is Haraam. Severe warnings have been sounded against those who conceal the Haqq. Worse than this are those who not only conceal the Haqq, but they also propagate Baatil. They twist clear Aayaat and Ahadeeth from the meanings intended by Allah Ta`ala and Rasulullaah ﷺ, interpreting them away in a manner which they think their Kuffaar masters will be pleased with.

There are so-called “Ulama” (in reality, Kaafirs) in America who have issued a “Fatwa” that certain Surahs of the Qur’aan must not even be recited in Salaah – Surahs such as Surah al-Anfaal, Surah at-Tawbah, etc. According to them, even in Salaah these Surahs must not be recited.

فإلى الله المشتكى وهو المستعان

Any “Aalim” who is propagating a “partial” or “diluted” Deen is not conveying the Deen at all. This Deen of Allaah Ta`ala is not a game to be played with. The Fardh duty of the `Ulama is to convey the entire Deen as revealed by Allaah Ta`aalaa, not to change it or dilute it. Let alone being the “Defenders of the Deen”, the Ulama of today have become the “Destroyers of the Deen”.

If a person is not conveying the entire Deen, then he has not “taken this Kitaab (Qur’aan) with Quwwah”. Instead, he has taken this Kitaab (Qur’aan) and sold it.

اللهم أرنا الحق حقا وارزقنا اتباعه وأرنا الباطل باطلا  وارزقنا اجتنابه

آمين يا العالمين

والله تعالى أعلم و علمه أتم و أحكم

‘Ilm & Holidays

QUESTION:

In western countries, Maktabs co-incide their holidays with the school holidays so that parents and children can have time together and can go on family trips.

However some of these holidays co-incide with Easter and Christmas; the rationale being that during other times in the year, children are at school and if they are not given a holiday during the Christmas and Easter period, they don’t attend maktab as they are using these school holidays to go away with their families.

This is true in the majority of cases. However, some parents do see the value of Islamic education & they will send their children to Madrassah during the kuffar’s “religious” holidays.

My issue with this approach is that by granting holidays during kuffaar festivities, we are impliedly indoctrinating innocent children into according value to other religion’s festivals. Ulama, however, protest to the contrary stating that if the right tarbiyah is provided, the children will not be indoctrinated in to this way of thinking.

This ignores the fact that children are highly impressionable and do imbibe subtle messages. In addition, schools provide 6 weeks’ holiday once a year and these holidays are unrelated to major religious festivities. Maktabs could give 2 or 3 weeks off during this period.

In light of the above, what’s The Majlis’s view of giving children time off from maktab during Easter & Christmas?

ANSWER (by Mujlisul Ulama):

The real issue is that the Deen has become a hobby or a pastime activity for most Muslims, even for today’s ‘ulama’ who are not genuine Ulama. They are morons and signs of Qiyaamah. Besides the many stupid kuffaar holidays, even the holidays of the Madaaris are excessive. Holidays and true Taalibeen of Ilm are two opposites which really cannot exist together.

The genuine seeker of Ilm does not know what holidays are. The Madaaris have also become like secular institutions with the primary goal being the dunya, not the Aakhirat. The lessons in Madaaris should continue during all kuffaar holidays. Ilm must not be made the handmaid of kuffaar holidays. Whoever attends the Madrasah during the holidays will gain. Whoever is absent will be the loser.

The concern of the Asaatizah should be to impart Ilm to those who are keen in their pursuit. Those who subject the Ilm of the Deen to mundane demands should be ignored. The Madrasah should cultivate the ethos of Ghaar-e-Hira, not that of kuffaar secular institutions as is the case with almost all the Deeni institutions of the age. The glut of holidays, especially kuffaar holidays, is destructive for the Students of Deen. In fact, true students of the Deen should be fully engrossed with their kutub even during the official Madaaris holidays.

ILMUL GHAYB AND THE KUFR OF BARELWIS

The extreme deviance of the Barelwis and the crooked lie of their deceptive claim of being authentic adherents to the Hanafi Madh-hab and the generality (Jumhoor) of the Fuqaha, are exposed thoroughly by their attribution of detailed (tafseeli) knowledge of “everything that was and everything that will be” to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

This belief is summed up, in very clear terms, as follows by their arch-idol, Ahmad Raza Khan:

“It is without a doubt that the Almighty has given His Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace) the complete knowledge of everything from the first till the last. From the east to the west, from the Throne till the earth, everything was shown to him. He was made witness to the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth. From the very first day till the last day all of the knowledge of what was and what shall be (ma kana wa ma yakun) has been shown to him. From all of the above, not even an iota is outside the knowledge of the Prophet. Great knowledge has been encompassed by the Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace). It is not just of a summary type but what is small and big, every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness of the earth are in their entirety known to him individually and in detail. Much praise to Allah. In fact, that which has been discussed is not, never, the complete knowledge of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace and send peace on his family and companions, all of them); but this is a small part of the Prophet’s knowledge.” (Inba al-Mustafa, p.486)

To illustrate better what is meant by the detailed knowledge of “every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness”, let us consider the example of a Nikah (wedding). According to this perverted Barelwi creed, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) possesses the knowledge of every single one of the billions of Nikah that had ever taken place in the past, is currently taking place, and the billions more that are due to take place in the future.

Furthermore, according to this twisted creed, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) possesses not only the knowledge of the general arrangements of each and every Nikah, but also every single paraphernalia attached to each Nikah, from the food items, the guests, the clothes worn by the guests, to every other minute detail connected to the Nikah, even the detailed knowledge of each and every leaf that falls in the vicinity of the Nikah and the detailed knowledge of each and every grain that is consumed during the Nikah.

The leafy and grainy detail of the knowledge attributed to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is made clear in unambiguous terms:

From all of the above (i.e. all that has occurred and all that will occur – including obviously every single Nikah) not even an iota is outside the knowledge of the Prophet….It is not just of a summary type but what is small and big, every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness of the earth are in their entirety known to him individually and in detail.”

Similar statements affirming detailed (tafseeli) knowledge of everything to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), as opposed to a summary overview (ijmaali) of all significant events relevant to the creation, can be found in other books of Ahmad Raza Khan such as ad-Dawlat ul-Makkiyyah, Khaalis ul-I’tiqaad, al-Malfooz al-Shareef, and also in the books of other arch-idols of the Barelwis such Jaa al-Haq and Shane Habeebur Rahman of “Hakeem ul-Ummat” (The quack doctor of the Ummah), Ahmad Yaar Khan.

Now compare and contrast this belief, O Barelwi worshippers of Ahmad Raza Khan, against THE Fatwa of the Hanafi Madh-hab regarding a person who attributes to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the knowledge of a single and solitary Nikah for which there is no apparent means for him (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to gain the knowledge of.

The Hanafi Mujtahid from the 5th Century, As-Sadr ush-Shaheed Husam ud-Deen, who was the senior teacher of numerous other pillars of the Hanafi Madh-hab, including the famous authors of al-Hidaayah and al-Muheet al-Ridawi, narrates the following ruling from his pious predecessors:

من تزوج امرأة بشهادة الله و رسوله لا يجوز لأنه نكاح لم يحضره الشهود، وحكى عن أبو القاسم الصفار أن هذا كفر محض لأنه اعتقد أن رسول الله يعلم الغيب وهذا كفر

“Whoever marries a woman, taking Allah and his messenger (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as witnesses – it is not permissible because witnesses are not present for the Nikah. It is related from Abul Qaasim as-Saffaar that this is Kufr Mahd (pure, unadulterated disbelief that expels a person from Islam) because he believed that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows the unseen (ghayb) and this is Kufr.” [Al-Waaqi’aat, page 70 of the manuscript]

Imam Abul Qaasim as-Saffaar as-Soofee (326H) was a Hanafi Mujtahid with only three links between himself and Imam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullahi alayh). This fatwa has been accepted and transmitted in every age by the Hanafi Fuqaha. The very same Fatwa or similar versions to it were accepted and quoted approvingly by the early Fatwa manuals which constituted the Hanafi Madh-hab such as al-Fataawa ul-Walwaalijiyyah (Vol. 5, pg. 422), Khulaasat ul-Fataawa (Vol. 4, pg. 385), al-Muheet ul-Burhaani (Vol. 7, pg. 407), al-Fataawa al-Bazzaaziyyah (Vol. 6, pg. 325), al-Fusool ul-Imaadiyyah, al-Multaqat (pg. 244), Fataawa Qaadhi Khaan (Vol. 2, pg. 517), and other authoritative texts.

Again, compare and contrast the statement, “this is pure Kufr because he believed that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows the unseen (ghayb)”, with the Barelwi Aqeedah as exemplified by another one of their arch-idols, Muhammad Umar Icharwi, who commits the greatest act of Kufr and Gustakhi (demeaning Allah and his Rasool sallallahu alayhi wasallam) by making Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) prophethood wholly dependent on an attribute exclusive only to Allah Ta’aala: 

For the Prophethood to be valid it is necessary that Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows ALL OF THE UNSEEN.” (Miqyase Hanafiyyat, p. 385) 

Let us now relate a few of the different versions of the same Fatwa related by all the authoritative Hanafi texts, in order to aid in acquiring a better understanding of the import of the Fatwa and the severity of the issue at hand.

The following version is found in the authoritative compendium of the Hanafi Madh-hab, Fataawa ul-Hindiyyah, which was the product of a collaborative effort involving hundreds of Ulama from around the Ummah who were commissioned by Hadhrat Alamghir Aurangzeb (rahmatullah alayh) to record those rulings upon which there is consensus or a general agreement amongst the Hanafi Fuqaha:

“A man marries a woman while witnesses are not present. He says: “I make Allah and His Rasul witness”, or he says, “I make Allah and His Angels witness”, he becomes Kaafir; but if he says: “I make the angel on the left shoulder and angel on the right shoulder witness”, he does not become a Kaafir.” [Vol. 2 pg. 288]

As in most of the other authoritative Fatwa manuals, no ikhtilaaf on this particular issue is cited, while in the very same chapters, multiple other beliefs or statements are often listed  regarding whose Kufr there exists an Ikhtilaaf. For example, regarding the anthropomorphic statement, “Allah is looking from the throne“, Fataawa al-Hindiyyah states that this is Kufr (with no attention paid to the intention of the utterer) “according to the majority” i.e. a minority refrained from doing Takfeer for this crime.

The same version of the Fatwa narrated by Fataawa al-Hindiyyah is found in earlier compilations such as Khulaasat ul-Fataawa, al-Fusool ul-Imdaadiyyah, Fataawa al-Bazzaaziyah and al-Muheet ul-Burhaani. 

Explaining why the one who invokes the two writing angels (Kiraaman Kaatibeen) as witnesses does not become a Kaafir, as opposed to the one who attributes the knowledge of the very same Nikah to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the author of al-Muheet narrates from an earlier Fataawa compilation:

He does not become Kaafir because those two (i.e. the writing angels in the right and left shoulders) do know that (i.e. the Nikah), since they are not absent from him (i.e. the man making the statement).” [Vol. 7, pg. 407]

This succinctly answers the moronic question posed by Bidatis and Mushriks today, “If it’s not Kufr to ascribe such knowledge to the two writing angels, how could it be Kufr to ascribe it to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)???”

The Hanafi authority of the 6th century, Qaadhi Khaan, while narrating this Fatwa, added:

He (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) didn’t have knowledge of the unseen while alive, so how would he after his death?” [Vol. 2, pg. 517]

The terrible crime of the apostate which caused his instantaneous exit from Islam, is mentioned in absolutely unambiguous terms by Imam Abul Qaasim as-Saffaar, in one of numerous transmissions of his Fatwa:

“…since he believes that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows this Nikah…”

O Barelwi, if the authentic belief of Ahlus Sunnah is that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has detailed knowledge, leaf and grain, of EVERYTHING that was and that shall be (maa kaana wa maa yakoon), then on what grounds did all these Fuqaha attribute Kufr to the man who believes that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has knowledge of just the one Nikah?

Isn’t this one Nikah automatically and by default included in the“detailed knowledge of everything that was and everything that will be” which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) supposedly has according to your religion?

Were the Fuqaha all guilty of Haraam Ghuloo’ (extremism) and Gustakhi – demeaning Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) –  by denying for him (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the knowledge of billions and billions of Nikah ceremonies?

Or is it not you, O Barelwis, who are guilty of the most abominable degree of Ghuloo’ and Gustakhi – of the degree of Kufr – by fabricating upon Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the multitude of categories of knowledge which can be termed  “Ilmun Laa Yanfa’” (knowledge which serves no beneficial purpose) from which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would repeatedly and earnestly seek refuge?

Is it not you, O Barelwis, who are guilty of the most abominable level of Gustakhi by mutilating beyond recognition many of the supreme and sublime attributes of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), such as the noble quality of “Ummi” – defined as “unlettered” by the consensus of the Fuqaha whom you fraudulently claim to follow – which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) proudly proclaimed for himself and his (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) noble Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum)?

Is it not you who commit the dastardly Gustakhi crime of implying deficiency in Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) by propounding the perverted idea that the consensus of the Fuqaha on the definition of Ummi (unlettered), and the consensus of the Fuqaha on negating for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the multitude of categories of knowledge that isIlmun Laa Yanfa’ (such as billions of Nikah ceremonies) from which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) himself repeatedly sought refuge, results in a diminishing of the perfections of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), Na’oozubillah!?

Did the Salafi arch-idol, Ibn Abdul Wahhab, perform a spectacular and unprecedented miracle (istidraaj) by time-travelling back to the third century and injecting “wahhabism” into the books of all the Hanafi Fuqaha whose books are replete with Fatwas such as the above – Fatwas which condemn unequivocally numerous beliefs and acts that have become the Sha-aair (salient identifying features) of the Barelwis today, such as attributing knowledge of the Hour to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and a chronic addiction to building and plastering over graves – which when cited faithfully by the Ulama-e-Haqq tend to elicit violently allergic reactions and irrational allegations of “wahhabi influence”?

We interject here to point out that while we accept the Hanafi ruling that this particular aspect of Barelwi creed is Kufr, we refrain from doing Takfeer on the Barelwis in general, just as we refrain from doing Takfeer of the Salafis despite the very same Hanafi texts cited above declaring as Kaafir the one who attributes a place or direction to Allah Ta’aala as the Salafis do. We shall dilate on this point in the complete article, to be published in future, which will contain, insha-Allah, a demolition of the Ghutha (trash) arguments employed by the Barelwi arch-idols to befool their followers.

For now, we release this much information, which we believe to be sufficient for most sincere seekers of truth, to warn the Barelwi masses of the potentially eternal doom that awaits them – the status of a Kaafir according to the Jumhoor Fuqaha of the Hanafi Madh-hab – should they persist in clinging onto their deviant religion.

Source: https://reliablefatwas.com/ilmul-ghayb-and-the-kufr-of-barelwis/