Category Archives: Jamaat e Islami/ Maududi

Maulana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi & Jama’at Islami

Hadrat had first met Maulānā Maudūdī on a journey to Lahore. He had been reading his articles since 1934-1935. Hadhrat writes in this regard:

The basis of my interest and inclination to the Maulānā’s writings and his Jamā‛at were those distinguished articles which he wrote against Western civilization, its philosophy of life, and its materialistic outlook.

The Maulānā came to Lucknow in 1941 and stayed over at the Dār al-‛Ulūm guesthouse. During the same period, Hadrat rahimahullāh became a formal member of the movement which was initiated by Maulānā Muhammad Manzūr Nu‛mānī Sāhib rahimahullāh and was appointed as the person in charge for the Lucknow area. The Maulānā came to Lucknow a second time and, acting under the request of Hadrat rahimahullāh, he read a paper at the Dār al-‛Ulūm on the topic A New System of Education.

Hadrat travelled to Lahore in 1942 to attend the working committee meeting of the Jamā‛at. Also in the same year, a working committee meeting was held in Delhi which Hadrat attended. From Delhi, Hadrat accompanied the Maulānā to ‛Alīgarh and remained with him for one or two days. Hadrat writes in this regard:

I gauged the Maulānā’s popularity in the university environment. It was a reflection of the conditions of that time, the mental confusion of Muslim youth, and their spiritual thirst.

Hadrat remained attached to the Jamā‛at for about three years. He writes:

During this period, three perceptions developed within me. These compelled me to re-think and re-examine my affiliation with the Jamā‛at.

1. I noticed members of the Jamā‛at developing a fanatical and extremist mindset with regard to the personality of the Maulānā. They were becoming more and more distant from having noble thoughts about any other thinker, author and propagator; from having confidence in him and benefiting from his writings.

2. The element of criticism was increasing in them, and they were becoming audacious towards other ‛ulamā’ and religious circles.

3. I did not see in them any religious progress, enthusiasm to increase in good actions, no interest in rectification of the self, and no sound effort in trying to develop a bond with Allāh Ta‛ālā.

Note: We learn from this that if these three elements are found in any group or organization, then every perceptive person will have to rethink his affiliation with such a group or organization. If not, it will be classified as deceit. We seek refuge in Allāh ta‛ālā. (compiler)

Hadrat writes further: My meetings with Maulānā Ilyās Sāhib rahimahullāh increased my impressions about him because his temperament was closest to the temperament of Rasūlullāh sallallāhu ‛alayhi wa sallam, the life of Rasūlullāh sallallāhu ‛alayhi wa sallam, and the spirit of inviting towards Islam. This caused my mental conflict to increase to the extent that I informed Maulānā Maudūdī about it who then advised me to remain aloof from him.

Taken from MAULĀNĀ ABUL HASAN ‛ALĪ HASANĪ NADWĪ – HIS LIFE AND CONTRIBUTIONS compiled by his student Maulānā Muhammad Qamar az-Zamān Sāhib Allāhābādī db.


By Madrasah Islamia Arabia, Azaadville


(Translation of an Editorial appearing in “The Bayyinaat” by ALLAAMAH MUHAMMAD YUSUF BINNURI – R.A.)

To achieve mastery in any subject, it is incumbent to benefit from the company and association of a master of that particular subject. It is an accepted fact that for any simple or artistic occupation a teacher or even a guide is necessary. Without these even an intelligent and genius cannot reach the desired stage, be it in the fields of engineering, medicine, or any other subject for that matter. For every occupation or trade it is necessary and incumbent that one should atleast learn the basics from a teacher. In this mannet when it is necessary to seek knowledge and guidance in materialistic fields, how can it be possible to attain the Uloom of Nubuwwat- Teachings of the Ambiya Alaihissalaam – and the intricacies of the Shari’ah without the guidance of a tutor? The sciences of this nature are beyond the grasp of human intelligence. They have reached the Ummat through the wahi (revelation) of the Almighty, and continues through heavenly training, rearing, divine commands, instructions and guidance. Then in these Divine Sciences the attention and considerations of the tutor and guide; and the practical participation in his company has a more important bearing than words. The attaining of correct thinking, understanding and practical Tarbiyah (rearing) is more important than only attaining knowledge. On that ground, the longer the companionship of the master, the more benefit and experience one will reap. The more perfect the tutor, the more benefit and excellence will be attained. As the purpose of the Uloom-e-Nubuwwat is the guidance of the creation of Allah. In its understanding, there is a strong probability, through the enmity of the accursed Shaytan, to be led astray. The Shaytan does not interfere where one strives to attain perfection in material aspects. The Shaytan sits in comfort. He does not need to interfere, npr is it necessary for him to show his enmity. However, where the Hereafter and religion are concerned, the Shaytan becomes restless in creating mischief. He uses his strength in every possible manner, where success and Hidayah may be turned into ruin and cause deviation from the straight path. The greatest asset of the accursed Iblis is Talbis, that is to mix the truth with falsehood in such a manner, that where a thing outwardly appears to be beneficial, in reality it becomes a source of wrong doing and detriment. Then too, bearing in mind that the tricks of the human Nafs supercedes this, it is the human nature to be arrogant, haughty, deceptive, show-off and have love for rank and high-status. These are such diseases that it is difficult to eradicate them even after lengthy training and discipline.

For this reason, it is incumbent to remain in the companionship of a master for quite some time, in order to save oneself from the effects of the Shaytaan.

If Allah’s grace and mercy are present, then surely one reforms, otherwise, the human just wanders around in the deserts of knowledge and intellectualism. After studying the educational history of the world, this point becomes very clear that all the mischief and chaos that were created, were all at the hands of intellectuals and geniuses. During the period of ‘ilm (knowledge) a greater portion of fitnah (mischief) appeared by the way of ‘ilm. Even among the ‘Ulama-e-Haq, many geniuses due to their sharp intelligence and eccentricity became victims of their wrong thoughts and ideas. This fact became evident that by completely relying on their own acuteness and flowing intellect, they became entangled in ilmi kibr (educational arrogance), and self-conceited of their own views, they were not fortunate enough to undergo a beneficial amount of spritiual training. As a result, this led them to great lengths. In our time, there exists many such examples. Since they possess ilmi acumen and, as many a time they say or write excellently, they become a cause for additional fitnah. Those individuals who were not fortunate enough to attain a deep knowledge or a spiritual training, easily become their adherents and quickly begin supporting and endorsing their new ideologies. The Shaytaan is always busy in his occupation. A personality that may be of use to guide and direct the Ummah, becomes a means of deviation and ruin for the Ummah. There are examples of these in every era. Imam al-Ghazali (Rahmatullahi Alaih) has written in his “Maqaasidul Falaasifah” that after observing the correctness in the elementary and mathematical sciences of the Greeks, the people began to accept all their teachings as correct. The accepted the teaching of the Greeks even in the subjects of Theology and Natural Philosophy, which led them astray. Well, when the very learned, geniuses and capable people become entangled in such fitnahs, then those personalities who possess very little ilmi capabilities and have a tremendous ability to write, and are quick witted and intelligent, but void of a spiritual training under an accomplished master they very quickly become engulfed in self-conceitedness and begin to degrade the Ummah. All the scholarly reasearches of the Ummat are despised; all the great deeds of the Salaf Saaliheen are made a joke of and a laughing stock; and by criticising every personality from beginning till the end, falls in a deep and dangerous pit, becoming a means of leading all humanity into destruction. Among such people today is a famous personality by the name of Janab Abul A’la Maududi Saheb, who was acute and quick witted since childhood, but was troubled by economic difficulties. In the beginning he was employed by the Madinah Periodical at Bijnor. Thereafter, he was attached to the “Muslim”, a magazine of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind. After a few years he was employed by the “Al-Jamiat”, Delhi, a journal of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind, which was then probably published every third day. His articles captioned “Tarikh ke Jawahir Paaro” appeared with great lustre. In this manner Maududi Saheb was trained as a writer by Maulana Ahmed Saeed Sahib. After the death of his father, Maududi Sahib was unable to complete his studies, but had to leave studies during the early Arabic primary stages, nor was he fortunate enough to attain a secular education. He later studied English and attained some competence in it. He greatly benefitted from the books, magazines and writings of reputable authors of those days. His writing ability increased by the day. Unfortunately he was unable to benefit from any Religious institution, neither became a graduate of modern education, nor did he gain the company of an experienced and proficient aalim of the Deen. He has admitted this in an article published during the era of United India in reply to some questions posed to him by Maulana Abdul-Haqq Madani Moradabadi. He was unfortunate to experience the company of Niyaaz Fatehpuri, an atheist and infidel.

By this association and friendship many incorrect tendencies and inclinations were adopted. In 1933, he began publishing the “Tarjumaanul Qur’aan” from Hyderabad, Deccan, wherein he published splendid articles. Some ilmi and literary things began to appear using the best style and methods. At that time the political situation in the country was very shaky. The movement to free India was in its decisive stages. The best intellectuals of the country were involved in the freedom struggle of India from the British. Maududi Saheb adopted a different stand from the rest and engendered the cry of “Iqaamate Deen” and “Hukumate Ilaahiyyah”.

He strongly and forcefully criticised all the factions involved in seeking the freedom of India. His simple and innocent panygyrists thought that Maududi Saheb was the last straw for the valuable Deen. As a result very quickly praises began to be showered upon him from the pens of Maulana Sayyid Sulayman Nadwi, Maulana Manaazir Ahsan Gilani and Maulana Abdul Majid Daryabadi. Evidently at that time Maududi Sahib was only a name of an individual. As yet he had no missionary aim, nor an association or movement. Due to his forceful writings and statements, some among the Ahle-Haqq began having great hopes in him. By virtue of his preparedness and through the encouragement of Chaudri Muhammad Niyaaz, the foundation of ‘Darul Islam’ was laid in Pathankot. The Muslim League and Congress began to be degraded.

Such articles were written by him, as well as a book on the political turmoil of the time appeared whereby he began receiving praises from his followers. The political causes stimulated its acceptance. A meeting was held in Lahore, and the foundation of his Imaarat was formally laid. A speech prepared by him was read out, wherein the duties of the present-day Ameer was outlined. Among the participants were also such famous personalities as Janab Maulana Manzur Nu’mani, Maulana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi and Maulana Mas’ud Aalam Nadwi. Maududi Sahib was elected the Chief Ameer and the above-mentioned four personalities were elected deputy Ameers. The Jamaat Islami formally came into existence. Its constitution and charter were published. The public looked forward to it, and from every side hopes began to be attached. Six months had not passed by when Maulana (Manzur) Nu’mani Saheb and Maulana Ali Miyan Saheb (Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi) resigned.

They had observed his ilmi deficiencies and lack of sincerity. They were unable to continue their relationship. These gentlemen kept silent and did not inform the Ummah openly and clearly about their reason for disassociating themselves. I was at that time teaching at Jamia Islamia, Dabhel. I inquired from these two personalities about their reason for quitting. They said many things, but no satisfactory clarification was given. I understood the view of Maulana Marhum Mas’ud Aalam and Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi were quite similar as far as beliefs and conduct were concerned. Hence, they remained for sometime as Maududi Sahib’s right-hand men. Maulan Mas’ud Aalam assissted through the medium of Arabic literary writings and magnificently translated into Arabic the writings of Maududi Sahib. He also trained a few pupils in this field. Maulana Islaahi through his special style and way assissted the Maududi movement. As a result, many good writers and assistants joined the movement. A few excellent books were written on communism and a few other subjects, i.e. interest, alcohol, purdah, etc. A few good books were also written for the modern youth. Some worthy articles were published in the ‘Tahfeemat and Tanqeehat’. Ways and means were adopted to impress the Arabs, eapecially the Shaikhs of Saudi Arabia.

Successful strategies were adopted. All those writings that were contributed by Maududi Saheb’s associates were published in such a manner as if all these writers were indebted to him. As a result the personality of Maududi Saheb began gained fame. He reaped fame from the writings of his associates. He was incapable of composing in Arabic or English. The names of the translators do not appear on his book they are translated into other languages. It is not mentioned that this book is translated by Mas’ud Aalam or Aasim Haddaad. People get the notion that this literary intellectual of the Urdu language, is also an Imam of the Arabic language. A short period had passed when Maulana Gilani Saheb and Sayyid Sulayman Nadwi Sahib became aware and  foresaw its detrimental effect; that these writing were a means of creating a new fitnah. He (Maulana Gilani) ceased to address him by the titles conferred on him, such as Mutakallim-e-Islam etc. Maulana Gilani Saheb wrote critical articles under the heanding of ‘Khaarijiyat-e-Jadeedah’ in Maulana Daryabadi’s ‘Sidq-e-Jadid’. Maulana Syed Hussain Ahmed Madani was perhaps the first among the Ulama who pinpointed this fitnah in his correspondence. Gradually other Ulama began to air their views. Shaykhul Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakariyyah Saheb studied all the available printed Maududi literature and wrote a valuable booklet on this subject. It is regretted that this booklet has not been printed yet. In this connection, an Ustaaz of Mazahirul Uloom, Saharanpur, Maulana Zakariyyah Quddusi Saheb became inclined towards Maududi Saheb. Taking this into view and trying to correct him, Shaykhul Hadith Saheb wrote a letter to him, explaining all Maududi Saheb’s errors and incorrect interpretations of the Deen.

This letter has been published in a booklet form titled ‘Fitnah Maududiyyat’. (It is nor reprinted under the title ‘Jama’at Islamiyyah, ek lamha Fikriyyah’).

I admired many things about Maududi Saheb and detested many. For a long time I did not wish to degrade him. I felt that from his innovated style of presentation the modern generation would benefit. Although at time such compositions appeared from him that it was not possible to endure it, but taking into consideration the Deeni well-being, I tolerated it and kept silent. I did not foresee that this fitnah would spread worldwide and have a detrimental effect on the Arab world; that every day from his master pen, new bud would keep on blossoming, and indecent words would be used regarding the Sahabah Kiraam Ridhwaanullahi Alayhim and the Ambiya Alayhimussalaam. Later on, such things appeared daily in ‘Tahfimul Qur’an.’

Now it has become known without doubt that his writings and publications are the greatest fitnah of the present times, notwithstanding the few beneficial treatises that have appeared, it is the case of “and the sin of them is greater than its usefulness.” (Surah Baqarah, 219). Now that stage has been reached where to keep silent seems to be a great crime. It is regretted that for forty years an offensive silence was kept. Now the time has dawned, where without fear of rebuttal and censure all his writings from A to Z should be thoroughly studied with a view to fulfill the demands for the preservation of the Deen with Haqq and justice.

Wallahu Subhanahu Wallut Tawfeeq.


A literal translation of a letter titled: “Tanqeed aur Haqqe Tanqeed” which appeared in the Zul-Hijjah 1396 of the ‘Bayyanat’ Karachi

By Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhyanwi

(This translation has been shortened)


A letter to a pious friend



You have a high regard for Maulana Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi. This question maybe surprising and shocking to you that why the respected elders of the Ummah are up in arms against Janab Maulana Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi and his ‘Islamic Movement. I ask you that why did the Ulama oppose Sir Syed Ahmed Khan’s ‘Islah Islam’ Movement, Abdullah Chackralwi’s ‘Qur’aanic movement’, Ghulam Ahmed Pervez’s ‘Tulu Islam’ movement, Dr. Fazkyrragnab’s renewal of Islam movement and the progressive Islam movement of the socialists? In answer you will say that each of these, according to their understanding, created a blueprint in their minds and made this their basic understanding and foundation. Thereafter, whatever suited and met their standards from the Islam of Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was incorporated into it, and whatever was unsuitable or against their mode of thinking was either abused, ridiculed, jeered, made a joke of or explained away or far-fetched meanings and interpretations were given so that the original meaning was erased. Obviously their thoughts, senses, feelings and hearts were not aubordinate to Islam, but rather the acceptance or rejection of the tenets of ‘Islam’ was at the mercy of their set standards. It was incumbent upon the Ulama to tear apart this ‘Islamic Talisman’ abd bring forward the original Islam of Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi wasallam, which has been oreserved for the last fourteen hundred years in people against this new calamity of ‘Islamic Thinkers’. You know that the Ulama of this Ummah have carried out their duties whilst disregarding all obstacles. They have been sworn at; they have been painted with all types of labels; they have been ridiculed; they have been pierced with the arrows of accusations; but they (the Ulama) had to carry out their duty, and have verily tried to do so. As long as they have life and the power of speech in them, it must not be expected that they will refrain from committing the “offence” of calling a spade a spade or day a day and night a night.

Now listen! In the same manner Janab Maududi Saheb conceived and created a blueprint, which he presented as an ‘Islamic Movement’, and on which foundation the ‘Jamaat Islami’ came into existence. Today his ‘Jamaat Islami’ has an imprint on the big and small. Allah forbid, my intenion is not to convey this,  that the law that applies to the previously mentioned individuals also applies to Janab Maududi, as there is a difference in rank and grade. The reason for giving the example of ‘layer upon layer of darkness’ is only to stress that these people fail to understand the True Islam.

They are unanimous in creating a new path and a new map for Islam. It is a different question that the path of some are totally different from the teachings of Muhammad Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam and some have a few differences. What doubt is there in this that all of them have, through the medium of their understanding and thinking, put forward ‘their Islam’ to the masses. They have proclaimed it to be the truth and have invited the people towards it.

There is a proverb in Arabic: ‘For everything that falls, there is one who will find it.’ Everyone surely finds someone with whom one shares common ideas and thoughts. This is a brief answer to your question. But I feel that this will not satisfy you, hence I will have to elaborate on it. In today’s discussion I invite you to think and ponder on one point only. You must have read in the constitution of the Jamaat Islami this sentence from the pen of Janab Maududi Saheb:-

“No human should be made a ‘measure of truth’ besides Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam, no one should be regarded as free from ‘criticism’, no one should be engrossed in the ‘mental slavery’ of anyone. As Allah has shown, everyone should with a complete standard examine and inspect every person, and according to that measure, whatever grade befits a person, that person should be regarded as such”. [Maududi Madhab, p. 53]

In this constitutional belief, Janab Maududi Saheb has induced every member of the ‘Jamaat’ – whatever position one holds – not to think that any human is above criticism besides Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam, nor should one fall under the sway of another’s ‘mental slavery’, and with the examining powers that Allah Ta’ala has given Maududi Saheb and his ‘Jamaat’, everyone should be pecked at and examined. After attaining the results, whatever grade one attains should be conferred on that person. Now let us read from the ‘Maududi Mazhab’ and see that while criticizing, how Maududi Saheb has peeled and skinned the Salaf (pious predecessors). Listen, Maududi Saheb says that:

1. The example of Musa Alaihis Salaam is of the hasty victorious commander, who marches forward without strengthening and establishing his authority, and behind him mutiny spreads in the conquered lands like wild fire in a jungle. [Maududi Madhab, page 23]

2. The danger of the highway robbery of a mischievous soul also confronts the Ambiyaa. An illustrious prophet like Nabi Dawood Alaihis Salaam, was warned on that occasion that. ‘……..and follow not the desire that that beguile thee from the way of Allah.’ Surah Saad [ibid, page 21]

3. Dawood Alaihis salaam became influenced with the customs of the Israeli society of his time and requested Orya to give a divorce.   [Ibid, page 24]

4. Dawood Alaihis Salaam had a speck of carnal desire in his deeds. [Ibid, page 25]

5. Human weaknesses overcame Nuh Alaihis Salaam and he became a prey to the passion of the jahiliyyah. [Ibid, page 26]

6. Actually ismat (chastity) is not a requisite with the soul of the Ambiyaa. This is a lateef (delicate) point. Allah Ta’ala had intentionally lifted His protection at some time or the other from every Nabi, so that one or two trangressions are committed, hence the people may not regard the Ambiyaa as Gods, and will know that these are human too.   [Ibid, page 30]

7. The Ambiyaa trangressed too, they are even punished. [Ibid, page 31]

8. Younus Alaihis salaam committed a few deficiencies in the fulfilling of the faraa’id of risalat, and probably became impatient and left his position before time. [ibid, page 35]

9. The Sahabah were at time overcame with human shortcomings; they reviled one another (read the balance of this paragraph later on. I am ashamed of copying it further).

10. The Sahaabah Kiraam many a time erred in understanding the original spirit of Jihad fi Sabilillah.
[Ibid, page 59]

11. Once a humble person like (Abu Bakr) Siddique Akbar who was immersed in Lillahiyyat (the way of Allah) erred (blundered) in fulfilling a delicate demand of Islam.

12. Personal greatness overcame and made Umar Radhiallahu Anhu helpless for the few moments at a time of the demise of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam. [Ibid, page 60]

13. Hazrat Uthman, on whom the burden of this great duty (of Khilafat) was placed, did not possess the qualifications that were granted to his noble predecessors. Therefore, Jahiliyyah found an inlet to creep into the social code of Islam. [Ibid, page 65]

14. The verdict of the Khulafa Rashideen, which they issued as Qadis, did not become law in Islam. [Ibid, page 66]

15. Hazrat Uthman, one after the other, appointed his relatives to high posts, and gave them other such concessions, which generally became a source of criticism among the people. [Ibid, page 71]

16. For example he bequeated on Marwan (5 lakh Dinars) from the booty of Africa. [Ibid, page 71]

17. History reveals, and it truly shows, that Marwan and Yazeed are despised personalities among the Muslim Ummah. These are the softest words which can be said regarding Marwan and Yazeed.   [Faraan Monthly, September 1976, page 42]

18. These policies of Uthman Radhiallahu anhu are without doubt erroneous. A wrong will remain a wrong, irrespective of who commits it. To try and prove it correct by oratory and fabrications is not the demand of logic and justice, nor is it the requirement of the Deen, that an error of a Sahaabi should not be called an error. [Maududi Mazhab, page 73]

19. One very despicable Bid’ah began during the reign of Hadhrat Mu’aawiyah, that be he himself, and by his orders, all his governors, while delivering Khutbas on the mimbers reviled Hadhrat Ali Radhiallahu Anhu. To revile and swear a person after his demise, forger the Shari’ah, it was against human etiquette to do so, and especially to soil the Jum’ah Khutbah with such filth is a very debased act according to the Deen and etiquette. [Ibid, page 75]

20. The effort of joining together (Istilhaaq) Ziyaad bin Simayyah are also among those acts of Hadhrat Mu’aawiyah Radhiallahu Anhu, wherein because of political reasons he contravened an accepted law of the Shari’ah. [Ibid, page 76]

21. Hadhrat Mu’aawiyah Radhiallahu Anhu in trying to make him (Ziyaad) his supporter and helper took evidence on the adultery of his father (Abu Sufyan). And after concluding proof thereof made Ziyaad his (Abu Sufyan)’s illegitimate son, and on that source made him his brother and a member of the family. This act in whatever manner it may be despised morally, is evident. But according to law too this is an illicit thing, because in the Shari’ah paternity is not proven from adultery. [Ibid, page 77]

22. ‘Amr bin al-‘Aas committed two such acts, that there is no way out but to call it wrong.   [Ibid, page 84]

23. Hadhrat Ali appointed Maalik bin Haarith and Muhammad bin Abu-Bakr as governors, whereas, these two people had a hand in the murder of Uthman. This is known to everybody. During the entire reign of Ali Radhiallahu Anhu this is the only deed that it seems, cannot be called anything else but wrong. [Ibid, page 85]

24. Hadhrat Aysha Radhiallahu Anha and Hafsah Radhiallahu Anha became bold, and began to ‘stretch their tongues’ in the presence of Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam. [Ibid, page 88]

25. After studying history it is found that till now, no thorough Muhaddid was born. It was near that ‘Umar bin Abdul-Aziz attained that position, but he was not successful. [Ibid, page 91]

26. In the reviews of Imam Ghazali, there are a few ilmi and fikri flaws, and that may be distributed into three portions. One type is those flaws, that resulted in his work due to the poor knowledge of Hadith. The second type from among those flaws is due to the Aqliyyah overpowering his mind. And the third type from among these flaws is his leaning towards tasawwuf more than that which was necessary. [Ibid, page 92]

27. The first thing that rattles in me regarding the rival mission from the time of Hazrat Mujaddid Alf Thani to the time of Shah Waliyullah Saheb and his disciples, in this, that, in Tasawwuf they did not estimate the illness of the Muslims. They prescribed for them the same food from which they should have been completely kept away.

28. Neither Hadhrat Mujaddid Saheb nor Shah (Waliyullah) saheb was aware of this illness. Criticism regarding this is found in the writings of both. It is possible that they did not truly estimate the seriousness of this ‘disease’. For this reason these two venerable personalities gave these sick people the same food, which had proven to be fatal. The outcome of this was that gradually, both circle became influenced by the same disease.   [Ibid, page 94]

29. Although Maulana Ismail Shaheed R. Alayhi understood this reality well and adopted the same course as that of Ibn Taymiyyah, but, as this was present in the literature of Shah Waliyullah Saheb, the effects of which remained in the writing of Shah Ismail Shaheed R. Alayhi, the chain of the Peeri-Mureedi continued in the movement of Sayyid Saheb. Therefore, this movement could not be free from the germs of the ‘disease of  sufiyyat'” [Ibid, page 95]

30. And we note this ‘Jahalah’ – with the exception of a very small Jamaat – among the general Muslims from East to West, be they from illiterate public; or graduate Ulama; or mendicant Mashaa’ikh; or graduates of colleges or universities. The thoughts, ways and manners of all these are different, but they are unanimous in not knowing the truth and soul of Islam. [Ibid, page 19]

I have presented a few drops from the enraged ocean of Janab Maududi Saheb’s criticism. All this, according to his own assertion, is written after examining by the ‘standards’ shown by Allah, I do not wish to discuss or debate each point. Think for yourself that after all these criticism what picture is formed of Islam in the mind. Nevertheless, I feel that for your convenience a few basic points should be presented.

The instruction of Janab Maududi Saheb that besides Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam no human is above Tanqeed (criticism). Before thinking of its outcome, first ponder that what is Tanqeed (criticism)? (The Oxford Dictionary says that it is judging of merit; critical observation). Tanqeed is an Arabic word which means to gauge, assay, examine, inspect, teast and to ascertain truth from the untruth. In the Urdu usage it mean to be, seize on trifling faults, revealing shortcomings: i.e. Tanqeed will mean that after examining a thing, an error is ascertained, then its weak points are proclaimed. When we say that a certain person criticised someone, then nothing else will be understood besides that the weak points of the person criticised are brought to light. That person was examined and all faults and shortcomings were revealed.

Whatever thing or person that is the centre of criticism, the first picture that comes to mind regarding that thing or a person is that it of that person is not reliable, hence it or that person needs examining. Only after an examination could it be ascertained whether this thing or person is reliable, because that which is hundred percent reliable does not necessitate an examination. I am sure that you have not yet seen a wise person in this world, who goes around examining reliable things. It is an accepted fact that, there is no necessity to test or inspect reliable things or personalities. Those things that are worthy of criticism are not reliable.  For example, regarding weights and measures that are stamped by the government and used in commerce, one will not find people while purchasing articles going around, asking merchants: “Mister, are these measures and weights used by you correct or not?” After being stamped by the government these weights and measures are above criticism, and do not need any further examination. After all this, if one is found to do do, then what will be said of him?.

Now, when Maududi Saheb tells us that no human besides Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) is above criticism, then, nothing else is meant, but, that save Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam), no human is reliable before us. Janab Maududi Saheb labels this reliability as ‘mental slavery’, and that none should be influenced by the ‘mental slavery’ or any human besides Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam).

For this reason, according to his oen picture of Islam, he has not granted the verdicts of the Khulafaa Raashideen, as legally lawful, whereas, Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam has in strong terms advised his Ummah to strongly hold onto the Sunnahs of the Khulafaa Raashideen. You must have read this hadith in the Mishkaat Sharif:

Irbaad bin Saariyah (radhiallahu anhu) reports: Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam after leading the Salaah, turned his face towards us, and delivered a very dynamic lecture, (as a result of which) tears flowed from the eyes and hearts were moved. (Thereafter) a person said, “O Messenger of Allah!, this was like a farewell lecture, please advise us.” He said, “I advise you to fear Allah, and obey and accept (your leaders), even if he be a habshi slave, because the one among you who will live after me, shall witness many discords. It is incumbent upon you (to hold fast) unto my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly-Guided Khulafa Raashideen. Hold fast onto it, and keep it tight with the teeth. Beware and stay away from new (modern) ideas and acts. For every new acts (that is thought to be a part of religion) is Bid’ah and ever Bid’ah (leads) astray.” [Musnad Ahmad, Abu Dawood, Tirmizi; ibn Majah, Mishkaat page 29]

Do you know that when one criticizes another, what is meant by this? Listen, if the knowledge of a person criticised (even if it is regarding one mas’alah or an affair, it will mean that in this Mas’alah the opposite person’s view is incorrect, or the knowledge of the criticiser is superior. If the understanding of one is attacked, it will mean the criticiser’s understanding is superior. If the deeds of a person are attacked, it will mean that the deeds of the criticiser is of a higher standard. In short, for whatever reason the next person is criticised, it will mean that the knowledge, deeds, intelligence and understanding of the criticiser is superior.

At times the criticiser is truly better than the opposite, but the criticiser in self vain imagination and aggrandisement regards himself to be superior. In Islam this is called “Kibr” or “Takabbur”. This is the same “Kibr” which overtook Iblis, and through this wrong self aggrandisement, instead of being a “muallim Malakut”, he was cursed till the day of Qiyamah. Now put these Usul (principle) before you, and ponder over the criticism, and the Usul of Maududi Saheb’s criticism. He gives every Tom, Dick and Harry the right to criticise everybody from among the Salaf Saaliheen except Rasulullah (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam). You tell me what would this be called? According to Maududi Saheb,  does every member of his Jamaat have better knowledge and understanding than the Salaf Saaliheen? If not, then what else can his motive be besides self conceited imaginations and notions? When Maududi Saheb sayd that Younus alaihis salaam committed a few errors in fulfilling the Risalat, at that time his claim would tantamount to this, that he understood the responsibilities of Risalat more than Younus Alaihis salaam, and possibly (Na’audhubillah) more than Allah, because the least, expected from Maududi Saheb is that he will not confer an important post in his Jamaat to someone that he knows will not diligently carry out his duties. But according to Maududi Saheb, Allah Ta’ala conferred the Risalat on Younus Alaihis salaam and did not take this precaution. In like manner when he says that the passion of jahiliyyah overcame Younus Alaihis salaam, then it is, as if he is claiming that his foresight on the passions of Jahiliyyah is greater than that of Younus Alaihis Salaam, and that he has the strength to withstand the passions of the Jahiliyyah. He says regarding himself:

“It is Allah’s faith that I did not commit any deed or say any word under the influence of my passions, nor did I commit it. Every word that I uttered in my lectures, I measure each one of them before saying them, remembering that I would have to account for it before Allah and the creation. Therefore, I am assured in my position that I did not utter a word against Haq.”   [Maududi Mazhab, Page 29]

When he says that Dawood Alaihis Salaam was influenced by the customs of the Israeli society and committed certain acts, he forgets that the one that is captivated by the ‘mental slavery’ of one’s society can never be a Nabi. With all this, it gives one the impression that if Hazrat Maulana Abul Ala Maududi was in the place of Hazrat Dawood Alaihis Salaam, he would never had asked Orya to divorce his wife.

When he says that in certain matters Hadhrat Mu’aawiyah Radhiallahu Anhu did not even take into consideration human morals, at that time he thinks for himself as a greater Aalim in human morality than Mu’aawiyah Radhiallahu Anhu. When he says that Mu’aawiyah Radhiallahu Anhu openly disobeyed a certin fundamental of the Shariah, at that time he presents himself as a greater Aalim of the Shari’ah than Hadhrat Mu’aawiyah Radhiallahu Anhu

When he says that from the time of ‘Umar bin Abdul-Aziz Rahmatullahi Alaih till the time of Sayyid Ahmad Shaheed Rahmatullahi alaih, there was a shortcoming in the Tajdeedi missions of all the Mujaddids, at that time he tries to make believe that he understands Tajdeed and revival of the Deen more than all those pious elders. And when he very proudly claims this:

“Instead of understanding the Deen from the present or previous personalities, I have always tried to understand it from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Therefore, always when trying to know what the Deen of Allah wants from me and every Mu’min, I never try to see what the certain Buzrugs have said, but rather, I try to see what the Qur’aan says and what the Rasul says.” [Maududi Mazhab, page 98]

Who taught you the Qur’aan and the Sunnah? People of the present or the past? The angels of the Mala Aala?, or like Ghulam Ahmed Qadiani, he came with it from the stomach of his mother? It is the height of ungratefulness. Those through the Barakah of whom a few correct or incorrect words were learnt, are being rejected and discarded.

He is actually trying to show to the people that in the long history of the Ummah there was not born anyone besides himself who understood the Deen. Well, this is a different subject, on which Insha Allah, when time permits, I will say something. Briefly, I would say this, that the motive of criticism is always that one feels ‘Ana Khayrum Minhu’ (I am better than him). If one is really superior to another in knowledge, understanding, deeds and morals, then verily one has the right to criticise another who has a lower standard. If one on his own accord feels superior, and this is his motive, then every Mu’min should beseech Allah for His protection.

Now in reality if Janaab Maududi Saheb is superior in knowledge, deeds, understandings and taqwa etc than those whom he has criticised, then, without doubt, he has the right to criticise them. But if in comparison to these gentlemen, he really is lower, and has the urge to criticise, then what can be his motive be besides high-mindedness, arrogance, self-conceit and Takabbur?

According to the viewpoint of Janab Maududi Saheb, when no induvidual of the 1400 year old Ummah is above criticism, nor can anyone be relied upon, and according to the standards shown by Allah, it is incumbent to examine every person, then this question arises, that the Deen that has reached the Ummah of today through the Naql Riwaayah, knowledge and deeds of the Salaf Saaliheen, could it be relied upon? Do you know that the proofs and arguments  of our Deen are taken from four sources:

(a) The Kitaab of Allah

(b) The sunnah of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wa sallam

(c) The Ijmaa of the Ummah

(d) and the Qiyaas of the Mujtahideen

The Fiqhi Masaa’il of the A’immah Mujtahideen have been abrogated in such a manner, that Mashaa Allah, Maududi himself is a Mujtahid Mutlaq. He is not in need of benefitting from and past or present tutor to understand the Deen. When the whole Ummah is in need of a critical examination and are thought to be unreliable, then it is clear that ijmaa will be of no value. The dependence of the Kitaab and Sunnah are on Riwaayat and Diraayat, especially when according to the research of Janab Maududu Saheb, the Sahaab Kiraam Radhiallahu Anhum attacked one another and (Na auzubillah) called one another liars. If in reality Na auzubillah, the Sahaabah Kiram Radhiallahu Anhum were as pictured by the criticism of Maududi Saheb, then it is evident that the Ummah that will come after this will be even worse. The result will be that beginning from the Qur’aan and Hadith till the Ijmaa and Qiyaas, everything will be doubtful and will be regarded as unreliable, until Maududi Saheb will show us through the standards shown to him by Allah, that how reliable a certain thing is and how unreliable others are. In all fairness, please tell us, what else besides this did Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiani and Mr. Ghulam Ahmed Pervez say? Where did Maududi Saheb attained this ‘Allah’s Standard’, in the light of which every individual from the Salaf Saaliheen have been examined and graded? What! will Wahi be again revealed to him, or will he leap back fourteen hundred years and personally hear the Qur’aan and Sunnah from Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam? When he does not accept the connections of any personality of the past or present, nor is he prepared to shoulder the ‘mental slavery’ of anyone, then from which cave will he receive the ‘Standards of Allah’?

You may also know that Allah Ta’ala has taken upon Himself to safeguard this last Deen of ours till the Day of Qiyaamah. The Deen can only be safeguarded when the words of the Nusus of the Deen are preserved without any changes. Its meanings are also preserved. Then the manner in which Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam practised these in his presence, should also be preserved. Then through these deeds the proficiency in Islamic thought and pleasure; the path of ihsaan; and the understanding of the Deen that is created; should also remain preserved. Briefly, four things are mentioned here: words, meanings, deeds and Islamic thought. We who are engrossed in ‘mental slavery’ do not think, but it is our belief that Allah Ta’ala has without any break or interruption preserved these four things, and we are indebted to those through whom these were preserved. They are our guides and leaders. We have complete reliance on them. We are their ‘mental slaves’, and we are thankful for their kindness and benevolence. If hypothetically these great personalities are removed from in between, abd it is thought that in a cdrtain period of words, meanings, deeds and Islamic thought could not have been preserved, or it could not be relied upon, then, because of this, the entire structure of the Deen is being put into a negative light. But according to the viewpoint of Maududi Saheb, not one of the four things mentioned remains credible, because the disgrace of being ‘mentally enslaved’ to the personalities of past or present is totally unacceptable in his lofty court; nor will he accept in any way. Even if we give him the benefit of doubt, that the words of the Qur’aan and Sunnah are preserved, then too the stages of interpreting the words and giving them their proper meanings, and through practising them, for one to reach the stages of Islamic thought, will yet have to be covered. Since Maududi Saheb does not accept the ‘mental slavery’ of any human, therefore he will have to traverse this whole path on his own, and in the same manner he will also have to cover the path through his own intellect and understanding. The result that will ensue and the picture that will form of the Deen needs no comments. It is a fact that a person that wants to remain in the Deen of Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi wasallam, will have to become a ‘mental slave’ of those Salaf Saliheen who had upheld the Deen. The person that cannot withstand this ‘disgrace’ or does not want to follow it, cannot attain true Islam (The Islam brought by Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi wasallam), even if one reaches the highest of positions. After refuting the reliability of the sayings and conditions of the Salaf Saaliheen and not becoming engrossed in their ‘mental slavery’, if Janab Maududi Saheb has invented some scientific way, we will be looking forward to know about it, on condition that it is a bit different from the styles and modes of Mr Pervez and Mirza Qadiani.

I accept that Janab Maududi Saheb is a good author and has a flowing pen, but I feel that he in his lofty thoughts, sometimes uses such words that according to the situation are utterly out of context. For example, take the words ‘above criticism’ and ‘mental slavery’. These, according to their coherence are meaningless. Ponder, that if ‘mental slavery’ is not a shortcoming in the Islamic religion, but is a thing to be proud of a thousand times, then should one not be proud of following the path of the Salaf Saaliheen and those who have shouldered the burden of Islam? What shall be the meaning of this saying of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam:

“That my Ummah will never unite on falsehood.”

Picture a child of the grades who went to Madrasah or school for the first time. The Ustaaz began teaching him the alphabets, and taught him that this is ‘Alif’ this is ‘Baa’. In reply to this the pupil says: “Sir, I am the thinker of the fourteenth century (or nineteenth century A.D), why should I accept your ‘mental slavery’?”. It is apparent what type of education will this ‘thinker’ attain. We do not even hold this position in relation to the Sahaabah and the Salaf Saaliheen, as the relation of the modern ‘thinker’ had with his Ustaaz. We learnt the rudiments of Deen from these noble personalities. The result of the revolt against conforming to their ‘mental slavery’ is not different from that pupil who claimed to be a ‘thinker’. May Allah forgive me. I am of the opinion that those who severe their links from the Salaf Saaliheen, and throw off the yoke of their ‘mental slavery’, and are trying to map out a new path of ‘Islam’, in essence do not acknowledge Islam, but repeatedly use the words of the Qur’aan and Sunnah, but there is no other way to spread their Kufr and disbelief among the Muslim public. I do not regard Janab Maududi Saheb among them, but it is regretted that he has, by rejecting the ‘mental slavery’ of every personality of the Salaf Saaliheen, given preference to the ‘mental slavery’ of the orientalist western disbelievers, and he has adopted the ‘mentality of the free thinkers’ after whom the modernists of today are running.

Janab Maududi Saheb has satirized and ridiculed the following of the path of the Salaf Saaliheen as ‘mental slavery’ which the Qur’aan proclaims as ‘Sabilul Mu’minin’ (a way for the believers) and has warned those who disregard it of a severe punishment in Jahannam. This is the same ‘mental slavery’ that the Qur’aan describes as “As siraatul Mustaqeem” (The straight path), and instruts to supplicate for its guidance. Also, this is the same ‘mental slavery’ for which the Muslims rub their noses five times a day and make du’aa. What a bad and distasteful interpretation this is, that the path on which countless caravans of pious people have trodden, the following of whom is today  labelled as ‘mental slavery’.

If you have studied the emergence of all the false sects during the Islamic period, then this truth will dawn upon you that the Foundation of all these sects are on ‘Ana wala ghayri’ (Me and no one besides me). All these have felt ashamed of the ‘mental slavery’ of the Salaf Saaliheen, and have floated their lofty thoughts in the jungles of their on intelligence and understanding. Thereafter, whichever way their heads rose their thoughts began to float in that way.

The first fitnah in Islam was introduced by Abdullah bin Saba, a Jew, whose basic thinking was founded on that no one is above criticism besides the noble personality of Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam. Then from the stomach of this Saba’iyyah the fitnah of the Khawaarij was born, who exclaimed aloud that Ali Radhiallahu anhu and the Sahaabah did not understand Islam. “We understand more than them.” Then on the same basis the sects of Mu’tazilah, Murjiyyah, Qadariyyah, etc, took root. Each one of them portrayed the following of the Salaf as ‘mental slavery’. They went astray and led others astray. In our modern times the new sects that emerged, although their basis and viewpoints differ, you will find that they are more or less unanimous on the above point. It is fashionable today to satirize the Salaf Saaliheen; to extract worms from their deeds; injure their personalities; shoot arrows of criticism on them; and label their following as, revisionism, out modeled, obsolete, orthodoxy, mental slavery, etc, etc. It is sad that Janab Maududi Saheb also place his ‘Islamic Movement’ on these lines. When we read the history of the Khawaarij, we were surprised at their boldness. They claimed to understand the Deen more than such a personality wo had seen with his own eyes the Sun of Islam rise, and who had been an associate and confidant of Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam during his 23 years period of Nubuwwat; who had eye-witnessed every incident of the Nuzul Wahi; who had spent his whole life from childhood till old age in the service of Islam. We fail to understand that what has happened to their senses? They vehemently criticise his religious understanding. History repeats itself. Today the criticisms of Janab Maududi Saheb (his attack on Uthman Radhiallahu anhu and other Sahabah)  has removed our astonishment and surprise regarding the Khaarijis. Maududi Saheb tries to make us understand that Uthman Radhiallahu anhu was not able to upkeep the ‘Islamic System’, nor did anyone after him have the guidance and power to do so. Now Janab Maududi Saheb’s ‘Islamic Movement’ will spear the Islamic System. ‘In hiya Illa khaarijiyyatun Jadidatun’ (Verily it is a new Khaariji order).

The Angels of Allah are modest in the presence of Uthman Radhiallahu anhu.

Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wasallam says:

“Should I not feel modest before that person, in the presence of whom the Malaa’ikah feel modest” [Muslim, Mishkat Page, 562]

Maududi Saheb does not feel a jerk by this, but showers licentious criticism on him. Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam in recognising the great sacrifices of Uthman Radhiallahu anhu says:

“Whatever Uthman (Radhiallahu anhu) does after this, there shall be no accusation upon him.” [Mishkat, Tirmizi]

But Maududi Saheb feels it an honour to heap accusations on him. Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam advises the Ummah:

“Fear Allah regarding my Sahaabah (Companions), Fear Allah regarding my Sahaabah. Do not make them a source of criticism after me. That person who has loved them, has loved them because they love me, and those who hate them, have hated them because they hate me.” [Tirmizi]

But Maududi Saheb deems it important to criticise them by sifting them all through a sieve. It grants every Tom, Dick and Harry the right to criticise. By criticising them it instructs the Ummah to despise and hate them, so that people may keep away from becoming their ‘mental slaves’. This is a same Khaarijiyyah in a new colour, which surface during the time of Sahaabah. It is stated in the Hadith that the ‘Later one’s among this Ummah will curse its forebearers.’

I end this letter, by mentioning the command of the Faqihul-Ummah, Abdullah bin Mas’ud Radhiallahu anhu. You may compare the ‘standard of truth’ between that of this great Sahaabi and that of Maududi Saheb. He says,

“If you want to follow anyone, then follow the path of those who have passed away, because one is not safe from the fitnah of a living person. I mean those who are among the Sahaabah of Muhammad Sallallahu alaihi wasallam. They were the best among this Ummah; they possessed the clearest of hearts; they attained the deepest of knowledge; and had the least formalities. Allah Ta’ala had chosen them as the companions of His Nabi and to upkeep His Deen. Therefore, recognise their virtues, and follow their footsteps. As far as possible hold fast onto their characters and qualities, because they are on the straight path”.


May Allah Ta’ala give us and the entire Ummah the towfeeq of following this golden advice, and keep us on the straight path. (Aameen)

Muhammad Yousuf Ludhianwi.

The Fitnah of Maududism

In response to a letter by the Amir of the Jamaat Islami Hind, nearly 70 years ago (circa 1948), the Muhtamim of Deoband, Shaykh-ul-Islam Hazrat Husayn Ahmad Madani, elaborated at length on the satanism inherent in Maududism – a particularly virulent strain of modernism.

Those who have not yet been desensitized by the evils described by Shaykhul Islam, will be able to appreciate the fact that the contents of this letter holds even greater relevance and weight in this day and age, in closer proximity to the Hour, in which such evils have become far more pronounced and widespread.

A Letter from the Amir of the Jamaat Islami to Shaykhul Islam, Hazrat Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani (rahmatullahi alayh):

Muhtarami Assalamualaykum,

It is hoped that you are well. Some time back an invitation was sent to you to participate in the Annual Convention of the Jamaat Islami. Till now it is not known if you have accepted it or not. We realise well your commitments due to the Annual Convention of the Jamiatul Ulama, but there is such a gap between the dates of the two conventions that we hope you will favour us with a little of your time.

Insha-Allah our convention will begin on the 20th April. Since a long time I have been looking forward to meeting you. I had corresponded regarding this too, but unfortunately due to your heavy commitments a suitable time could not be found at that time. Thereafter I tried to fix a time through Hifzurrahman Maulana Saheb. This time too no suitable occasion could be found.

In any case, I feel it is of utmost importance that I exchange views with you on a few questions and would also be pleased to seek your advice on many matters. If it is possible for you to attend this convention of ours it will be deemed an honour, and the above mentioned aims will also be fulfilled. Allah forbid, if this is not possible, then it will be appreciated if you can avail me of some suitable time after the Hyderabad convention. Insha-Allah I will present myself in your noble assembly.

At present the most important question which I feel should be discussed is the Fatwa of the Darul Iftaa, Deoband, which has been published in Saharanpur under the following titles: ‘Wipe out the Maududi mischief’, ‘The Maududi movement is a killer and poison‘, ‘Those who think like Maududi have gone astray’, ‘Do not perform salaat behind the Maududi’s’.

I do not know if these Fatwas have come before you or not? These Fatwas are naturally a cause for heart-ache for all those who believe that the Jamaat Islami is on the Haq (truth) and have joined it, or for those who feel it is on the Haq. For such a Fatwa to be published from Darul Uloom, Deoband, where there are cautious personalities like yourself, is a cause of surprise and anxiety to us, especially in such circumstances, and regarding the questions on which the Fatwa is based.

Time and again clear explanations were published on our behalf on these matters regarding which the authorities of Darul Uloom have been directly contacted and which still is in progress. It is hoped that your excellency will favour us with a speedy reply.


Abul Lays

Amir, Jamaat Islami. [Hind]


Your letter was received. Before that, your invitation also reached me. You have correctly estimated my commitments due to the Annual Convention of the Jamiat. Besides this I have other similar commitments. At present there are even more important commitments, i.e. The Annual Examinations at Darul Uloom which will commence at the end of Rajab and end on the 23rd or 24th of Sha’baan.

As it is the end of the educational year at Darul Uloom, the kitaabs of Bukhari Shareef and Tirmizi Shareef have still to be completed, and must be covered by the 27th or 28th of Sha’baan. These commitments are of such a nature that they remain for the whole year, despite having other important matters to attend to as well.

The posters you have referred to have not come to my notice before you had mentioned this in your letter. Only a booklet titled ‘Revealing the Truth’, i.e. ‘The Maududi movement in its true colours’ published in Saharanpur was sent to me by some gentlemen.

My first impression about your movement was that it was limited to improving the Ilmi and Amali, worldly and Deeni, shortcomings and their impact on the Muslims. Although there was a difference of opinion in the way matters were promoted, I did not feel it necessary to raise a voice or write against it.

Although some members of the Jamaat Islami and its leaders at times wrote and made some indecent and improper statements, it was felt that it would be better to close the eyes regarding these matters. But now, many comments on the books of Maududi Saheb have been sent to me from all corners of India and Pakistan, and have piled up considerably. The water has already flowed over the head.

After perusing and understanding these comments I find myself forced to come to the following conclusion: Your Islamic movement is against the Salaf Saaliheen (Righteous elders of Islam), just like those old sects of the Mu’tåzilah, Rawaafid, Khawaarij, Jahmiyyah etc., and like the modern sects of Qadianis, Chakralwis, Mashriqis, Nechris, Mahdawis, Baha’is etc., who wish to establish a new Islam, and to which path they are trying to attract the people. It is based on such foundations, beliefs and practices that are contrary to the teachings of the Ahle Sunnat wal Jamaat and the Salaf Saaliheen.

I list them hereunder:

1. It believes in Tafseer Bir Raay (Interpretation according to personal opinion). Every professor who possesses the sciences of the modern free-thinking Europeans, and has also acquainted himself with the knowledge of a smattering of Arabic, has the right to commentate and interpret the Qur’aan according to his whims and fancies so that it may be a light for the Muslims. This is what is happening in your circles. It does not matter if it refutes the sayings of the Sahaaba and the Salaf.

Actually, this was the first Fitnah that crept into Islam. A Tafseer Bir Raay was made on the judgement of Hazrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) on the words ‘Inil Hukmu illa Lillah’. As a result twelve thousand Muslims revolted and separated themselves. Hazrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) says regarding this, “Haqqun Uridu bihil Baatil‘ (Truth through which is intended evil). Hazrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) sent Hazrat Ibn Abbas (radhiyallahu anhu)  to explain to the people that the Qur’aan is Zu Wujooh (of multiple meaning) hence he should explain them through the Sunnat.

Hazrat Ibn Abbas (radhiyallahu anhu) explained this to the people, and as a result of which eight thousand people repented. Four thousand remained adamant on their views and began killing and labelling people as non-Muslims. This movement became popularly known as the Khawaarij.

Thereafter this disease spread so widely that not only on the question of ‘Tahkeem’, but views were put forth on other matters too. Fierce squabbles were held on the questions regarding the one who commits a major sin, etc.

This was not limited to the Khawaarij sect. The disease of Tafseer Bir Raay spread and the mischief of new sects like the Mu’tazilah, Jahmiyyah, Rawaafid, Karramiyyah, Mujassimah, Murjiyyah etc. arose. The Ahlus Sunnat wal Jamaat at all times made the Sahaabah Kiraam and the Salaf Saaliheen their leaders and guides, fashioned their views accordingly, and kept on obtaining the certificate of ‘Maa Ana Alayhi Wa Ashaabee‘ (The path that I (Rasulullah sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and my Sahaaba radhiyallahu anhum are adopting).

These very same mischiefs (of new sects) took place in these latter times. The sects of the Nechris (materialists, atheists), Quraniyyah, Chakralwis, Qadiyaniyyah, Khaksaars, Baha’iyyah etc. also adopted the Tafseer Bir Raay by following their own whims and fancies.

They began to stretch and manipulate the Nusus (Quranic Verses) as they desired. Rasulullah (sallallaaahu alayhi wasallam) in forecasting this calamity said: ‘Man Fassaral Qur’aan Bira’yihi Faqad Kafar‘ (The one who interprets the Qur’aan according to his own thoughts has become a non-Muslim).

Is it not surprising that the interpretations of things according to those Sahaabah and their students whose mother tongue was Arabic; and of those who witnessed the Wahi (revelations) of Allah; and of those who had the honour of the company of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam); and had seen his deeds and Sunnats; and of the Taabi’een who were the students of those who witnessed the Wahi be shelved and labelled as incorrect.

Instead the views of those non-Arab Ajami speaking people who were born thirteen hundred years later and who do not possess a command over the Arabic language, its related subjects and the Usul of the Deen, or even possess a smattering command of these, are accepted as positive and correct, just because they are graduates of Cambridge, Oxford or some other university where they acquired only the basis of the Arabic language. Those who spend their lives studying and teaching Arabic and the Deen are labelled as backward and their Tafseer is rejected as incorrect. In its place the views of the free-thinking, ungodly professors of Europe are claimed to be superior and the ones that lead to the path of Allah.

Can any intelligent person or nation accept this, that a graduate of a military college or an engineering college, with whatever distinctions, will ever be permitted to work in a medical department or treat patients if he did not obtain a certificate from a medical school? Every person knows and understands that to do so is to cause chaos among humanity. Instead of benefit it will result in chaos.

This is the case of those who adopt Tafseer Bir Raay. By rejecting the Tafseer of the Salaf Saaliheen and the fundamentals of the Deen, they are turning away from the straight path and going towards their ruin.

2. It throws away the Saheeh and Hasan Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in the waste paper basket on the strength of the view of those who hold incorrect suppositions and theories of historical events whereas the Qur’aan and Hadith announce that every command and advice of the Rasul (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is divine revelation. On the contrary, to resort to suppositions and guesses on the basis of worldly advice and expediencies is to openly refute the Nusus Qat’iyyah (irrefutable and categoric Divine Commands). It is an open invitation to innovation in the Deen.

3. It accuses the Sabaabah (radhiyallahu anhum) – as the Rawaafid had done – because of some weak Hadith or a Saheeh Hadith that apparently does not conform to reason [or conflicts with authentic and mass-transmitted narrations]. Whereas those after them solely rely on their trustworthiness for keeping Islam alive. Allah forbid, if these doyens of the Deen are labelled as untrustworthy, then the whole foundation of Islam will crumble. (The orientalists have done the same to undermine our Deen).

The Qur’aan and Ahaadith have verified their truthfulness and trustworthiness in many places. Many old writings testify to this and also praise them in strong terms. They are regarded as the best and greatest among the human race. By opening this door every religious foundation will have no value.

4. It regards many Ahaadith of the Sahaabah, however Saheeh and correct they may be, as being based on sheer good-will (Husne Zann). This takes one away from the truth. If this door is opened all the Mu’jizaat, high and noble character etc. of the Rasul (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) will become meaningless. The free-thinking heretics will attain a strong weapon by this.

5. It accuses and claims that the narrators of the Saheeh Ahaadith are untrustworthy. It presents weak sayings as Saheeh, or accepts the sayings of the Ahlul Hawa (Followers of their own desires) and enemies of the Deen. The well-known A’immah are regarded as untrustworthy. By doing so the whole treasure of the Ahaadith will be wiped out. It becomes worthy of the saying of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam): ‘The later ones of this Ummah will curse the forebearers of this Ummah’.

6. It labels Taqleed Shakhsee (i.e. to follow one of the Four accepted Madh-habs) as going astray and towards ruin whereas this command is taken from the following Aayats of the Qur’aan:

“… and follow the path of him who repenteth unto Me…” (Surah Luqman: 15),

“Ask the followers of the Remembrance if ye know not.” (Surah Nahl: 43),

“And whoso seeketh as religion Other than the surrender (Islam) (to Allah) it will not be accepted from him, and he will be a loser in the Hereafter”.  (Surah Aali Imraan: 85)

In these times it is Waajib (because there do not exist those who qualify for Ijtihaad, as events from the 4th century Hijri show) for all Muslims to observe Taqleed. Those who do not observe it are in great danger and will go astray. Those who refute it are opening the doors of free-thinking which will eventually make one wary of the Deen. The least effect it has on one is that it makes one indulge in Fisq and Fujur (impiety and wickedness).

[NOTE (added): Trustworthy paragons of Ilm and Taqwa have testified to the Ijma’ (consensus) enacted on the obligation of Rigid Taqleed (Taqleed Shaksi) during the early centuries when the “illat” (cause, raison d’etre) for this ruling i.e. the fitnah of following one’s desires, of issuance of erroneous Fatwas, of Haraam Talfeeq, and of other evils, was far less acute than what it is today. For example, Shaykh-ul-Islam Qadhi Iyadh (476-544H) provides his explicit testimony that, “The consensus (Ijma’) of the Muslims in all places of earth has occurred on Taqleed in this fashion (i.e. Shakhsi).” 

Hujjatul Islam, Imam Ghazali (450 – 505H), states that “None of the scholars” permitted one to leave his Madh-hab and that “by Agreement (i.e. Ijma’) of the scholars” the one doing so is sinful. Other trustworthy Fuqaha, such as Imam Nawawi, have attributed this position to the early Usooliyyeen and Mujtahideen as a whole, corroborating the Ijma’ that was enacted in the early eras of the Ummah.

The Saheeh Hadith, “My Ummah will never unite upon error.”narrated in dozens of authentic compilations seals the stamp on the strength of this Ijma’, and assigns any contrary opinion to the same category as other anomalous rulings found in our tradition which invariably draw the attention of, and exposes the identity of the Ahlul Hawa (people of desires who desperately desire to escape the inflexibility of Rigid Taqleed in order to create sufficient flexibility to grant Deeni sanction to their desires) who instinctively recoil with abject horror at the very thought of submitting themselves to this clear-cut Ijma’ enacted by the early MujtahideenEnd of note]

7. It has given the verdict that the Taqleed of the A’immah Arba’ah (the four celebrated Imaams) Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullahi alayh), Imaam Shafi’ee (rahmatullahi alayh, Imaam Maalik (rahmatullahi alayh, Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal (rahmatullahi alayh) — is Haraam and leads one astray whereas these personalities were guiding lights of their times. They were pinnacles of guidance, Taqwa, Fiqh, religious knowledge and shone like stars.

8. It gives every professor and layman the license and right to free-thinking, and to practise what they feel is correct. They advocate that all Muslims should follow this path, and it does not matter if one’s views contradict those of the Salaf Saaliheen. Even those groups that deny Taqleed are against this. They have realised this after experiencing its ill-effects.

The late Maulana Muhammad Hussain Batalwi Saheb who was an ardent Imaam of the Ghayr Muqallids and an exponent and crusader of this group in India wrote in his book “Isha’atus Sunnah’ Vol. 2 Page 51, 52, 53:

“The experience Of 25 years has shown that those who, with rudimentary knowledge, act as a Mujtahid (one who interprets the Qur’an and Sunnah) and leaves Taqleed completely, in the end turn away from Islam. Some of them embrace Christianity, some become atheists. Impiety and wickedness are the simplest result of free-thinking. Among those Faasiqs, some openly disregard the Jumu’ah, Namaaz with Jamaat, Namaaz, Rozah etc. They do not keep away from interest and intoxicants. Some because of worldly benefits refrain from open sin, but heavily indulge in these in private. They illegally trick women into marrying them. Under false pretence they grab the wealth of the people, saying that it is the wealth of Allah. There are many other reasons in this world for people to turn apostate and commit sin, but for the pious to become irreligious, not having knowledge and discarding Taqleed is a major reason. “

[NOTE: Since many scholars during that age still exhorted Taqlid Shakhsi, it was very easy for this Ghair Muqallid Imam, and even the simple layman, to observe this clear connection between apostasy and abandonment of Rigid Taqleed. In contrast, today, with virtually every group encouraging abandonment of Taqlid Shakhsi, implicitly or explicitly, the “scholars” of all such groups are stupidly looking askance and coming up with their own pet theories on the unprecedented rate of apostasy today, all designed to deflect attention from the true cause as observed by this Ghair Muqallid Imam after decades of first-hand experience during an era when the abundance of Ulama who still exhorted Taqleed Shakhsi made the correlation far more easily discernible and observable.

In fact, many of these modernist “scholars” themselves are Kaafir at heart or harbour doubts regarding the truth of Islam, but maintain the façade of being a Muslim for worldly motives, some of whom are able to demand in excess of $100,000 dollars for just one speech. To cite just one example, the following statement (inadvertently leaked) from Yasir Qadhi, an extremely popular “scholar” whose beard and Sunnah appearance have been undergoing a typically Ghair-Muqallid burnout, rapid-reduction process, exposes the state of Imaan and Yaqeen of such “scholars”: “Wallahi I’ll be honest with you, the shubahaat I was exposed to at Yale [the “madrasah” in which he enrolled to acquire his “Islam” from atheistic teachers], some of those I still don’t have answers to.”

When Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) stated that even the “Subhat” (association and companionship) of camels and sheep have an effect on the shepherds herding them, then one can understand the unimaginably destructive spiritual damage being wrought by such faasiq “scholars” on the masses, especially since the form of Suhbat adopted by such masses is infinitely more potent than the mere herding of animals. Giving an attentive ear to the satanically embellished (zukhruf al-qawl) bleatings and mooings of such modernist “scholars” who harbour heresy in their hearts, which is the most powerful form of Suhbat, spells disaster to one’s Imaan, regardless of the superficial, pork-like “benefits” which deviates love to harp on about.

Furthermore, the catastrophic result, chaos, and anarchy that stems from abandonment of Rigid Taqleed are far more evident today. Take the example of the famous ruling espoused by prominent Ghair Muqallid and modernist Imams such as Ibn Uthaymin and his teacher Hamoud ibn Uqla, Naasir ibn Hamad al-Fahd, Anwar Awlaki and many others exhorting the mass-slaughter of women, children, babies, etc. using such modernist “Daleel” as rationale, logic, and Tafseer bir Ray – exercise one’s own Ijtihaad on the verses of Qur’an pertaining to Qisaas (equal retaliation), and on the Ahaadith.

Far worse than such abominable Fatwas is the satanic Usool (core principle) of ALL modernist, free-thinking Ghair Muqallids which exhorts abandoning Rigid Taqleed in favour of one’s own interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunnah. According to this satanic Usool, it is FARD (obligatory) for Ibn Uthaymin and Co. to follow what they sincerely believe to be the “stronger ruling” and what makes most logical sense to them i.e. it is FARD (obligatory) for them to exhort the mass-slaughter of women, children and babies. According to this satanic Usool, it is HARAAM (or discouraged at the least) for Ibn Uthaymin and Co. to abandon what they sincerely believe to be the “stronger ruling”, in favour of Rigid Taqleed to the ruling of the Four Madh-habs which unanimously prohibit the killing of male farmers, monks, and other non-combatants, leave aside the mass-slaughter of women, children and babies.

Ijma’ (consensus) has no meaning for such free-thinking Ghair Muqallids, since for each and every Ijma’ anomalous and marjooh rulings are available to give sanction to their abominations. The Ijma’ on 3 talaqs being 3, Taraweeh consisting of 20 rak’ats etc. are just a few of countless examples the free-thinking, modernist Ghair Muqallids have overturned in this age.

The term “Ghair Muqallids” also includes fake sufis and others who fraudulently claim to adhere to a Madh-hab, but who are similarly loose as the Salafis in their Taqleed of a Madh-hab – the salient feature (shi’ar) of all such deviate groups being the scavenging and adopting of anomalous and marjooh opinions found in our tradition.End of Note]

The laxity in practicing religious deeds described by Maulana Muhammad Husain Batalwi Saheb Marhum is generally found among the educated elite, especially the professors and those who attain a Western education. This group is as unaware of Islamic teachings, Arabic Arts and literature, as the ordinary uneducated Muslim layman. If any of them claim to have a little knowledge, it is in reality nothing. Generally this group make use of Urdu, Persian and English translations. Those among them who obtain an MA, or Honours in the Arabic language from an Indian or European University are like primary school children to those who obtain an Honours degree from an Arabic Madrasah. They are not capable of even reading a sentence correctly according to the laws of Arabic Grammar nor write or speak this language. If by chance some are found with these qualifications, they are surely lacking in the other necessary sciences on which rely the science of ljtihaad in the Deen and Arabic Iiterature.

It has been seen and experienced that in such cases these professors by observing ljtihaad and discarding Taqleed, and expounding this belief, destroy the roots of the Deen, spread falsehood and lead others astray. We have ourselves witnessed the outcome of the activities of such downright ‘Mujtahids’.

9. It has resolved that the orders of Tasawwuf and Suluk and its teachings are from the Jahiliyyah and is the worst form of Kufr. Tasawwuf is billed as Buddhism and Yoga whereas this path and its teachings complete one’s faith in Islam in our times. Without it, it is impossible to attain the desired lhsaan and complete devotion, just like, in our times, it is impossible to correctly recite the Qur’aan if it does not have diacritical symbols (Zabar, Zer, Pesh etc.), or if one does not know Tajweed.

In the same manner it is not possible to understand the Qur’aan, Hadith, Arabic poetry etc. if one has not learnt Sarf, Nahw, Ma’aani, Baýaan and books on language etc. In the early centuries, for reciting the Qur’aan and understanding it, these sciences were not necessary, but in our so-called ‘Modern’ times there is no alternative, but to study them. The Arabs themselves (whose mother tongue and daily language is Arabic) are in need of these sciences just as we need them. It is a different matter that they need them less than we do. They have become like the Ajamis because of their association with them.

In the early days and during the first century it was not necessary to follow the present-day path of Ihsaan and devotions because those were periods attached to the age of the Rasul (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). Today, without this, one cannot normally reach one’s goal. To bill it Buddhism and Yogaism is great injustice.

10. It stretches its tongue and literally uses abusive language rearding the Salaf Saaliheen and Awliyaa. It degrades these personalities among the common people. Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has said: ‘Those who insult and degrade my Awliyaa, I have declared war on them’. He has also said: ‘Remember your dead by their good deeds’. In yet another place he has said: ‘The modern ones from among this Ummah will curse its forebearers’. By all the above Ahaadith it is meant that one should exercise caution and refrain from such acts.

11. It has declared that the following personalities are the ones who have led the Muslims astray and have injected them with opium: Mujaddid Alf Thaani, Shaikh Ahmed Sirhindi; Shah Waliyullah Dehlawi, his followers and offspring; Khwaja Mu’inuddin Chisti; Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani; Shaikh Shahabuddin Sùhrawardi, etc. etc. These are those great giants who have rejuvenated Islam and kept the Sunnat alive. Through their guidance countless people gained true Taqwa and knowledge of Allah. History books are filled with their noble deeds and Barakaat.

12. It claims that the above Mashaa’ikh are the ones who by their teachings spread Buddhism and Yogaism. The teachings of Tariqat, be it of the Naqshbandiyyah, Chishtiyyah, Qadariyyah or Suhrawardiyyah etc. orders are heavens apart from the teachings of Buddhism or Yogaism. The teachings of Tariqat are a collection from the teachings of the Qur’aan and Sunnah, where in it is strongly stressed that every footstep of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) be followed. The writings of the Mashaa’ikh bear testimony to this. The books, Awaarful Ma’aarif and Futuhul Ghayb, should be read in this regard.

13. It uses derogatory remarks on the Ulama Zaahir and the guardians of the Shar’ee Uloom. The layman is incited to hate them. It practically degrades and taunts them and regards them as unreliable. It wants to lead the Muslims towards a new religion and wants them to make Taqleed and be loyal to its leader. In these turbulent times when open sinning, free-thinking, Kufr, arrogance and carnal greed are widespread in every corner of the world, people are becoming remote from the teachings of Allah and His Rasul (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), and are lax in practising the Deeni injunctions, the correct thing to do is to instil respect into the public for the teachings of the Shari’ah, its Muballigheen and guardians. Avenues and means of rebuilding the true Deen and bringing it back to life must be given priority.

To do the opposite, by creating hatred and disregard for the Salaf, is like wiping out the Deen. This is the manner which the innovators have always resorted to, and was also adopted by the Nechris (materialists, atheists), Qadiyanis. Khaksaars, etc. Mashriqi’s book “The fault of the Molvi” is an example on this subject. Every innovator and heretic has used this method to conceal his own faults and spread ignorance among the masses.

14. It comments on the Saheeh Ahaadith according to its own tastes and thinking, and is turning away the general Muslims from it. On the contrary the Salaf Saaliheen, Sahaabah Kiraam, the great Taabi’een and those of the Khayrul Qurun accepted these. Whatever grade we confer to our intellect, it still remains defective. Experience and incidents have proven this. The most dull and stupid person thinks that he possesses a good understanding and sound intellect.

5. Like the Khawaarij, it uses the labels of ‘Inil Hukmu illa Lillaah’ and ‘Wa mal lam Yahkum bimaa Anzalallaah’ to proclaim Muslims as heretics. This is the result of faulty interpretations, out of context explanations, and ‘A truthful word through which is intended evil’. It has rebelled against the accepted views of the Salaf Saaliheen.

16. It has proclaimed the Ahadith collection and literature as unacceptable just as the Chakralwis have done even though it does not contain Akhbaar Aahaad. From the beginning of Islam till this day it has been accepted as the foundation of the Deen and in relation to historical narrations it is accepted as more powerful.

17. Like the Qadiyanis it regards its Grand leader and Amir to possess such power, that if he wills, he shall reject any Hadith according to his taste or if he wishes may throw it in the waste paper basket. Such dictatorship was not experienced or accepted by anyone during the times of the Salaf Saaliheen or during the Khayrul Qurun nor can it be accepted in these turbulent times of Fitnah and Fasaad. Hazrat Ibn Mas’ud (radhiyallahu anhu) has said: ‘If anyone among you wants to follow anyone, let him follow those who are dead, because the one that is alive is not free from Fitnah’. The existence of such a state of affairs within the ranks of the people of these times is the beginning of a great calamity and a means of leading the masses astray.

18. It labels the Fiqhi treasure as incorrect and a collection of falsehood. It orders that this should be renovated and changed. The deeds of all the Muslims for the past 1300 years are regarded as a loss and a product of ignorance. It believes all those previous Muslims will not gain salvation. This is such a Fitnah that in whatever manner one mourns and laments, it will still not be enough.

19. Like the Mu’tazilah and Rawaafid they write on their signboards etc. “The office of Actual Tawheed; Jamaat of Muwahhideen; The complete and true Islam.” or other similar slogans. The Mu’tazilah called themselves ‘Ashabul AdI’ (People of Justice) and Ashaabut Tawheed (People of Tawheed). The Shi’ah (Rawaafid) call themselves the ‘Lovers of the Ahle Bayt’. This will mean that those who are not amongst them, and do not belong to their group are not from the People of Justice, or the People of Unity or from amongst those who have love for the Able Bayt.

The poison that these types of signboards spread in the past is evident from those historical incidents that took place between the Mu’tazilah, Khawaarij, Rawaafid etc. and the Ahius Sunnah. In the modern times too these types of incidents took place between the Ghayr Muqallids, Qur’aaniyyah, Nechris. Qadiyanis, Khaksaars etc. Each one of them used these types of signboards to attack the other group, indicating that they do not possess this quality. The Ghayr Muqallids call themselves Ahle Hadith wat Tawheed, and proclaim that the Hanafis are deprived of the Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and Tawheed. etc. Your organisation also makes the same claim, that those who do not belong to it are not faithful Muwahhids (unitarians, believers in the unity of Allah) and, as such, they do not possess complete Islam. By this the public is thrown into such confusion and disunity, that it is an open truth that the least effect it has is that those who do not join the Jamaat Islami are considered Mushriks, un-believers who will not gain salvation. It will become adamant on its own views, and will heat up the stock market of accusations, swearing, debates. Bickering, fighting, gang warfare. etc. Then the Muslim public will be beyond control and the Muslim Ummah will fall into chaos and face insurmountable difficulties.

Muhtaram, Muslim India is faced with great difficulties. The difficulties and trials that they are surrounded with and are experiencing emanate from the majority group. i.e. the communalistic mind of the Hindu Mahasaba: the anti-Islamic stand of the R.S.S.; the policy of the Arya Samaj to forcibly convert all Muslims to their religion; the spiritual and materialistic degeneration of the Muslims suffering from inferiority complex; the poisonous wind and materialistic flood that is engulfing the schools and, colleges fed by the non-believing heretics of the west. etc. etc.

These situations necessitate that Muslim organisations be cemented together and made stronger and stronger. A sound and accepted organisation should have been established to save the Muslims from fear, cowardice, terror, bewilderment, irreligiousness and laxity in practising religious deeds. We see that your movement is creating an air of religious and worldly degeneration. An order is created, as a result of which the whole community will become involved in this poisonous trend in the future. Therefore I feel it appropriate to advise Muslims to keep away from this movement, and refrain from reading the literature of Maududi Saheb.

As for your claim that we ‘are not concerned regarding the beliefs and thoughts of Maududi Saheb’ we have time and again clarified our stand. It is like Mashriqi Saheb’s announcement after seeing the people objecting and becoming an obstacle to his Khaksaar movement, that we “are creating the spirit of war and its tactics among the Muslims, and are trying to spread it and that Muslims should have nothing to do with our beliefs and publications’. What happened subsequently? Were the members of the Khaksaar movement free from the beliefs, morals, and filthy writings of its leader? This could be heard from the tongue of Maududi Saheb himself. See ‘Al-Furqaan’ No. 2 and 3, page 9 and 10. Safar and Rabiul Awaal issue on the subject of the Khaksaar movement and Allama Mashriqi.

Muhtaram, when a movement is àttributed to someone, that person will become its source of inspiration. The beliefs, morals and views of that person will surely have an effect on its members, especially when the literature of Maududi Saheb is being published with such abundance and members and non-members are induced to read it. At such times, the effects of the poisonous substances which have been included with such craftiness in such ‘inspiring’ writings cannot escape one’s thinking.

My Muhtaram, taking into consideration the above points it cannot be understood what benefit will be derived from a meeting with you. I am of the orthodox Muslims and a Muqallid Hanafi, who is also a servant of the Mashaa’ikh of Tariqat. You people are of the ‘enlightened new Islam’. I wish to guide the Muslims on the path of the Salaf Saaliheen (Pious predecessors) and believe their salvation to be in it. You people wish to lead the Muslims on to the ‘New Islam’ of Maududi Saheb and are trying to reform it, a task which Mujaddid Alf Thaani, Shah Waliyullah, Sayyid Ahmed Shahid, and others were not fortunate enough to achieve, and you proclaim it as the only way to salvation for the Muslims. You are trying to salvage the Muslims by leading them on the path of those ignorant ones who opposed the Salaf Saaliheen, the pious Imaams etc.

On such foundations it is possible that you may try to influence me, and I will not be able to guide you. You are running this movement for a long time and many years have passed. In this period you did not take the trouble to visit Deoband once, nor did you come to the offices of the Jamiat and exchange views with its workers so that a solution could be chalked out for the betterment of the Muslims. I am at a loss to understand today the reason for your thinking in such terms. Anyway, I am thankful for your kind attention. With all this, there is no hope of any benefit, especially when the Rampur convention has elevated your status.

I can now only say, ‘You have your Deen and I have my Deen’, and free you from any inconveniences. I cannot think of anything else.

Due to the Hyderabad convention and other commitments I could not complete this letter, when a second registered reply letter was received from you. I thank you for this letter too, as I thank you for the first one.

My Muhtaram, the above matter has been taken from many reviews which in themselves are disheartening. You have complained about the articles from the Darul lftaa and have ordered that they he stopped. Regarding this, I wish to state, that the Darul lftaa of Deoband is an independent department, the head of which is Maulana Mufti Mehdi Hassen Saheb. He is an elderly, experienced researcher. About thirty to forty, or even more Istiftaas come to him daily, the replying of which is incumbent on him. When people began asking about the Jamaat Islami and Istiftaas regarding this movement began to increase, it became necessary to study Maududi Saheb’s literature and write on it. He has a considerable volume of Maududi literature. It is not in my hands to stop it. May the grace of Allah be with us.

O Allah show to us the truth as the truth, and grant us the following of it. And show to us falsehood as falsehood, and grant us the strength to abstain from it’. (Aameen).

Nang Aslaaf (A disgrace to the Aslaaf)

Husayn Ahmed — May Allah forgive him 


Translated from Maktubaate Shaykhul islam — Part two.

[Translation taken from “The Majlis” Newsletter, Vol. 2, no.3, April 1977 with additional ‘notes’ from]

Refuting the Christian Lie that Prophet Considered Women as “Dogs and Donkeys”

WikiIslam & Christian Missionary Liars and ‘topic-changers’ attempt to prove that women are considered no better than dogs and donkeys by the Holy Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in the Ahadith by quoting various traditions. I will quote the website here:

“You have made us (i.e. women) dogs.”

Narrated ‘Aisha: The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, “Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people).” I said, “You have made us (i.e. women) dogs. I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away. for I disliked to face him.”
(Sahih Bukhari 1:9:490)

Narrated ‘Aisha: The things which annual prayer were mentioned before me (and those were): a dog, a donkey and a woman. I said, “You have compared us (women) to donkeys and dogs. By Allah! I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in (my) bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I disliked to sit and trouble the Prophet. So, I would slip away by the side of his feet.”
(Sahih Bukhari 1:9:493, See Also Sahih Bukhari 1:9:486, Sahih Bukhari Muslim 4:1032, Sahih Muslim 4:1034, Sahih Muslim 4:1038, Sahih Muslim 4:1039: 004:1039 adds “and the asses”

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: Ikrimah reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas, saying: I think the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) said: When one of you prays without a sutrah, a dog, an ass, a pig, a Jew, a Magian, and a woman cut off his prayer, but it will suffice if they pass in front of him at a distance of over a stone’s throw. (Abu Dawud 2:704)


The following tradition was left out by WikiIslam and other liars which proves a point besides the one made above:

Narrated ‘Aisha: It is not good that you people have made us (women) equal to dogs and donkeys. No doubt I saw Allah’s Apostle praying while I used to lie between him and the Qibla and when he wanted to prostrate, he pushed my legs and I withdrew them. [Sahih Bukhari, Book #9, Hadith 498]

Either way, the meaning of the above Ahadith has been misconstrued, since Hadhrat Ayesha (radhiyallahu anha) was explaining that women were not equal to dogs and donkeys, rather it was alright for a woman to be in front of a man when he prayed. Hadhrat Ayesha (radhiyallahu anha) knew the Prophet better than the people so she corrected their views on the subject of praying without a Sutrah. She lived with him in his own home, while the people only learned about what he did when they saw him on some occasions.

As for the third Hadith about praying without a Sutrah, it is better for someone to not pass in front of another who is praying without a Sutrah since it can be spiritually harmful to that individual:

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (radhiyallahu anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: When any one of you prays he should not let anyone pass in front of him (if there is no sutra), and should try to turn him away as far as possible, but if he refuses to go, he should turn him away forcibly for he is a devil. [Sahih Muslim, Book #004, Hadith #1023] 

The grievousness of passing in front of someone praying is given in the following Hadith:

Busr b Sa’id reported that Zaid b Khalid al-Juhani sent him to Abu Juhaim in order to ask him what he had heard from the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) with regard to the passer in front of the worshipper. Abu Juhaim reported that the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: If anyone who passes in front of a man who is praying knew the responsibility he incurs, he would stand still forty (years) rather than to pass in front of him.” Abu Nadr said: I do not know whether he said forty days or months or years.  [Sahih Muslim, Book #004, Hadith #1027]

Thus, the meaning of the above Ahadith are that it is better to not be in front of someone else while they are praying because of the sin one could get from being in front of someone. Hadhrat Ayesha slipped away when the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) prayed and she was in front of him because of her courtesy for him and his concentration during his (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)’s prayers.

The next time you come across an Islamophobe or their website, make sure that you research their claims and never blindly believe anything, because they are big time liars.

Refuting the Christian Lie of Prophet Muhammad having sex with a Dead Body


[This is a refutation to that moron (in the pic) who is throwing the filthy allegations on our beloved Prophet]

The allegation is that Prophet Muhammad had sex with Fatima bint Asad (radhiyallahu anha) when she was dead.

It is a nonsensical and a malicious claim which is gaining some popularity amongst the aberrations on the internet

The simplest way to disprove this allegation is to go to Islamic Jurisprudence.

As the charge is that of necrophilia (sex with a dead body) we can look into Islamic theology. If the allegation is true then the act of necrophilia would be allowed in Islam. So what does the expert (Ibn Hajar Haytami) say?

Well, he includes necrophilia in his list of sins [1]. Thus we can realise necrophilia is not allowed in Islam and the Prophet did not engage in such a deed.

In fact if we consult Fiqh we realise “it is unlawful to look at the nakedness of the deceased or touch it” [2].Thus further showing sex with the deceased (dead) cannot possibly be allowed. This further shows the Prophet did not engage in such a deed as if he did then the practice of necrophilia would have been allowed in Islam.

Now we know the claim of necrophilia against Prophet Muhammad is incorrect we can analyse the methodology used by the claimant (Zakaria Botros) and the narration he uses. This course of action will suffice for us to be fully conversant with this claim and able to explain why the claims are erroneous (false lie).

It is important to be able to explain it as there is a growing number of willing propagators of such falsehood, thus this false claim will only become popular if good people sit on their hands.

Analysing the Allegation: Authentic?

The narration which is used is from a book named Kanza ul Amal. This book contains fabricated and weak narrations, thus is not recognised as an authoritative source (individual narrations need to be checked).

Regardless of the authenticity let’s still look at the narration and context to gain understanding so we can realise the actual meaning of such a narration (regardless of authenticity)

The Narration

Narrated by Ibn Abbas:

“I (Muhammad) put on her my shirt that she may wear the clothes of heaven, and I SLEPT with her in her coffin (grave) that I may lessen the pressure of the grave. She was the best of Allah’s creatures to me after Abu Talib”… The prophet was referring to Fatima, the mother of Ali.

Looking at the narration alone one would not cry “necrophilia” or any wrong doing as “sex” is not mentioned. However, simply looking at the narration’s English translation one would find it odd. Sleeping with somebody in a coffin (grave) is an odd occurrence indeed. However, once the context is given we realise what actually happened.

The Context and Explanation

Firstly the translation of “I slept” does not best convey the meaning based on the context, the Arabic word translated as “I Slept” is Idtaja’ (اضطجع ). This word can either mean:
lie down, lie, recline, repose [3].

I hope you have noticed within the list of definitions (lie down, lie, recline, repose) the word “sleep” (or “sex”) does not appear. Lane’s Lexicon does indicate it can refer to sleeping too:

lay upon his side; or] he laid his side upon the ground; [and simply he lay; and he slept [4]

Though the word can refer to sleep, I have seen NO indication in Lane’s Lexicon nor the other dictionary which indicates the word means sex. (I will elaborate on this later on in this paper whilst discussing Father Zakaria’s bizarre and fallacious interpretation of the narration)

So we are left with the question: did Muhammad sleep or lie in the grave?

The context explains it all, as it was a grave we realise the word cannot possibly mean “sleep” but rather it means “lie/lay in the grave”.

This actually makes sense with the other bits of context we have at our disposal;“When the grave was prepared Muhammad himself examined it and placed her into the grave” [5].

Thus, it is reasonable to think the examination procedure also involved Prophet Muhammad lying in the grave. This would not have been at length in terms of duration (time). Therefore we realize Prophet Muhammad simply laid in the grave to make sure it was comfortable for his deceased foster mother as well as to honour the lady as it would be seen as a fabulous honor to be resting in a place where a Prophet of God had previously laid.

Did Muhammad Lie with his Foster Mother (Fatima Bint Asad) in the Grave?

It does not appear so as the process of investigating/examining the grave would have been PRIOR (before) lowering Fatima Bint Asad (radhiyallahu anha) into the grave. Therefore Muhammad would have reclined (lied) in the grave in order to check the grave before Fatima was placed in the grave, thus he would not have lied with her. Furthermore, there were two types of graves in vogue at the time of the Prophet which were Lahd and Shaqq (shiq) [6], [7].

The Shaqq type of grave is characterized by a niche within the grave for the dead body to be placed within. So it is impossible to lie with the body due to the niche. [8]

The Lahd form of grave is characterized by a lateral hollow which is dug into the side of the base of the grave for the body to be placed [8]. This type of grave makes lying with the deceased body risky as the earth could cave in on top of the body and the one who is lying with the deceased.

Thus, it seems the laying in the grave for examination purposes was done prior to Fatima (radhiyallahu anha) being lowered into her resting place. This is despite the Arabic phraseology used literally denoting “with”:

اضطجعت معها في قبرها

However, even if one takes it literally it does not mean wrong doing took place and it certainly does not refer to sex.

If Prophet Muhammad did lie with his foster mother whilst she was in the grave in order to check for comfort and honor her before the companions filled the grave it would only have been for a short time and this would have been witnessed by other people too. There is nothing wrong with lying in the grave to ensure comfort for your foster mother and honor; in fact it was an act of great compassion.

Having established all the above we can move on to discuss and deconstruct the misdirection of Father Zakaria (the one who initially made this fallacious claim)

This seems to be a transcript of Father Zakaria’s explanation to the narration:

The Arabic scholar Demetrius explains: “The Arabic word used here for “slept” is “Id’tajat,” and literally means “lay down” with her. It is often used to mean, “lay down to have sex.” Muhammad is understood as saying that because he slept with her she has become like a wife to him so she will be considered like a “mother of the believers.” This will supposedly prevent her from being tormented in the grave, since Muslims believed that as people wait for the Judgment Day they will be tormented in the grave. “Reduce the pressure” here means that the torment won’t be as much because she is now a “mother of the believers” after Muhammad slept with her and “consummated” the union.”

Firstly, who is “Demetrius”? Zakaria gives no introduction to this scholar. Why? I have had a look at Lane’s Lexicon and I did not get the inference the word meant sex. However, this is a smaller point in the deconstruction of Zakaria’s claim.

We will look at Father Zakaria’s unauthorised interpretation of the event and show the holes within his reasoning.

Have Sex with Her in Order to give her a Special Status?

Zakaria states:

“Muhammad is understood as saying that because he slept with her she has become like a wife to him so she will be considered like a “mother of the believers””

Zakaria’s premise is that Muhammad had sex with Fatima because he wanted her to attain special status as the “mother of the believers”. Well, Zakaria’s premise falls flat on its face because Fatima bint Asad (radhiyallahu anha) already had the special status of being Prophet Muhammad’s foster mother. [5]

In the transcript this information has been withheld (i.e. nobody is told of her special status as the foster mother of Prophet Muhammad). Why is this information not relayed to us in the transcript which is circulating the internet? It is because Zakaria’s premise is thrown into doubt immediately if we are told she already has a special status. Thus if she already had a special status then there would be no need for her to be given the special status of being “like a wife to him” as she was already like a mother to him (Prophet Muhammad).

So Father Zakaria’s reasoning is flawed from the start. However, it gets worse for the Zakaria.

“She has become like a wife to him”

Father Zakaria is trying to fool us (this is the case with all the other allegations too..lies upon lies -islamreigns). He is claiming Prophet Muhammad had sex with Fatima in order for her to have a status of a wife of Prophet Muhammad and thus the title of “mother of the believers”.

Zakaria is either ignorant or dishonest.

Prophet Muhammad could NOT possibly have taken Fatima Bint Asad (radhiyallahu anha) as a wife as Islamic Law dictates consent be given by BOTH parties in a marriage; of course marrying a dead person would not be allowed simply based on this injunction. Father Zakaria knows this but continues with his fanciful claim because it suits his agenda to besmirch the reputation of the Prophet Muhammad.

So the point here is that Fatima bint Asad (radhiyallahu anha) could never have become his wife through such an act, despite Father Zakaria’s nonsensical pleadings. Thus Father Zakaria is looking even more foolish in his claim. It gets more embarrassing for Father Zakaria

“Muhammad did this to save her from the torment of the grave”?

Father Zakaria is showing signs of a fertile imagination and utter ignorance.

If we consult Ahadith literature we will realise Prophet Muhammad’s PRAYER made the grave a better abode for people (Hadith) through the grace of God. This shows us if Prophet Muhammad seriously felt Fatima Bint Asad was in danger of the punishment of the grave he would have simply PRAYED for her grave to be a better dwelling. [9]

Thus we realise Zakaria’s debauched idea that sex (or marriage) is required to save a person from the punishment of the grave is warped and fallacious to say the least. It gets worse for Father Zakaria.

“Muslims believed that as people wait for the Judgment Day they will be tormented in the grave”

Zakaria is showing signs of clear ignorance. Muslims of course believe in the punishment of the grave but those whom Allah is pleased with are NOT punished. Fatima Bint Asad (radhiyallahu anha) is considered a saintly woman thus Muslims do not believe she is subjected to the punishment of the grave.

In fact the Muslim belief concerning pious people (such as Fatima Bint Asad) is that their graves will reflect Paradise and will be very comfortable and blissful indeed.

‘The grave is a garden of paradise or a pit of hell.” (Mishkat)

Rasulullah said, ‘The grave is a garden of paradise or a pit of hell.’ (Mishkat).

Concerning the pious people (such as Fatima Bint Asad) “A believer will answer all three questions and he will be honored with the clothing of Jannah. The window of Jannah will be opened for him and he will enjoy the sight of Jannah” (Mishkat) (appendix 1)

Thus we realise the grave of a saintly woman (i.e. Fatima Bint Asad) would not be one of torment but of splendour, peace and bliss. She will also see Jannah (Paradise).

This just illustrates Father Zakaria’s ignorance and shows his crackpot idea of Prophet Muhammad having sex with his foster mother in order to save her from torment is unadulterated nonsense and a product of a very strange mind indeed.

Father Zakaria’s Hypocrisy

The one making this odd claim is a Christian and it just goes to reveal his hypocritical nature because the same word (a construct of Idtaja) is used in the Arabic Bible and it is not translated as sex but is translated as “LAID”. Does Father Zakaria want to be consistent now and withdraw his silly claims?

Please also bear in mind the dictionary references (given earlier) which disprove Father Zakaria’s malicious claims, well the Bible is now disproving hm.

The same Arabic word is used in the Bible (2Kings 4:32) and it is translated as “laid” and not sex or anything of that nature:

وَدَخَلَ أَلِيشَعُ الْبَيْتَ وَإِذَا بِالصَّبِيِّ مَيْتٌ وَمُضْطَجعٌ عَلَى سَرِيرِهِ.

English Translation: And when Elisha was come into the house, behold, the child was dead, and laid upon his bed. (KJV)

This along with the dictionary references shown earlier just further indicates the narration in question has nothing to do with sex.

Clarification: Why Do You Say There Was No Sex?

I think this point needs reiteration and summarizing so nobody is in any doubt. It is a silly, unfair and false claim to say sex was involved, consider the following:

*The word used (Idtaja’) does not infer sex. It simply refers to lying down or sleeping. The meaning of lying down is further highlighted by the context. There is NO way it refers to sex. NO authority would consider it meaning sex. In fact if the narrator wanted to convey the idea of sex/marriage taking place he would have used a totally DIFFERENT Arabic word (i.e. a construct of nikah).

*The same Arabic word is used in the Bible (2Kings 4:32) and it is translated as “laid” and NOT “sex” or “sleep”.

*Islam does not allow sex with dead people (already mentioned above). Islam is based on the deeds and actions of the Prophet as well as the Quran. Thus if Muhammad did involve himself in this type of activity it would be allowed within Islam. This just goes to show Muhammad never committed such an act.

*Fiqh (Jurisprudence) tells us it is not allowed to touch the nakedness of the deceased, as most Fiqh is also based upon Muhammad’s actions we can realize Muhammad did not touch any deceased body in a sexual manner.

*Fatima Bint Asad was deceased, thus meaning a marriage between Muhammad and her or any subsequent conjugal (sexual) relations would be rejected by Islam

*The burying of a deceased person is a community effort thus Muhammad would not have been alone whilst at the grave side. Thus it would be absurd to suggest somebody had sex with a deceased woman whilst everybody sat and watched

* Prophey Muhammad’s enemies would have mentioned it and used it against him if he did commit such an act. Prophey Muhammad’s enemies never accused him of necrophilia. This further shows this allegation of necrophilia is false and baseless.

*As we have already mentioned, the dictionary references do not indicate sex but lying down/sleeping (the context of which simply refers to lying down). These references are further strengthened by the context.

*Also, the two grave types (Lahd/Shaqq) would physically render the grave as unsuitable for sex.

*The body of the deceased is meant to be handled with care [10] so much so that a bone of the body must not be broken. Of course it goes without saying this would mean sex would be out of the question.

*Fatima bint Asad was the foster mother of Prophet Muhammad. “When Muhammad heard Fatima Bint Asad had died, he immediately went to her house sat beside her body and prayed for her soul”

*“When the grave was prepared Muhammad himself examined it and placed her into the grave. Thus, she was one of the few people whose graves were examined by Muhammad”. Examination of a grave does involve lying down in a grave but does NOT involve sex. 

* It is dehumanizing and a disconnection from reality to believe a world religion of nearly 2 billion will be founded by a man who involved himself in necrophilia


Prophet Muhammad was doing what any loving and caring son should do; that was focussing on the well being of his relative (foster mother and aunt, Fatima bint Asad) ) both in this life and the hereafter. There was no sex or wrong doing involved.

This heart warming story of compassion and love for one’s family member is now being hijacked by the debauched and hateful mind of a few who are motivated by hatred and destruction.

Father Zakaria should be ashamed with himself; this man has a poor reputation in the Arab world, both Christians and Muslims will see him as a man looking for controversy and attention whilst viewing him as a crackpot figure.

I have had some dealings with the English speaking version of Father Zakaria and he, too, is seen as a man motivated by deviance and outright deception. This man’s deception extends to making up his own BIBLICAL verses up! (Appendix 2)

Fair people (both Muslims and Christians) should be wary of such characters and help fight their misinformation. If you happen to be somebody who dislikes Islam or a supporter of such perpetuators of outrage and dishonesty then I urge you to have a rethink and refrain from supporting such individuals financially as they will ultimately be laughing all the way to the bank at the expense of the truth.

There is no copyright restriction on this work so feel free to share it in order to further the truth

May Allah’s peace and blessings be upon Prophet Muhammad and may Allah send more good upon Fatima bint Asad. Aameen


1. Reliance of the Traveller, Ahmad ibn Naqib al Misri, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Amana Publications, 1994 [W52.1, 343]

2. Reliance of the Traveller, Ahmad ibn Naqib al Misri, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Amana Publications, 1994 [g2.7]

3. Online Arabic-English dictionary,

4. An Arabic-English Lexicon by Edward William Lane, Williams and Norgate, 1872


6. Bulug al Maram, compiled by Al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (with brief notes from Subul us Salam), Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, 2002 pg 186

7. Reliance of the Traveller, Ahmad ibn Naqib al Misri, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Amana Publications, 1994 g5.3

8. Ibid. g5.3

9. Bulug al Maram, compiled by Al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (with brief notes from Subul us Salam), Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, 2002 pg179 Hadith no 447 (see appendix 3)

10. Reliance of the Traveller, Ahmad ibn Naqib al Misri, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Aman Publications, 1994 w52.1/119

Appendix 1
Rasulullah said, ‘When a person is buried and the people go away, two angels approach the deceased and ask three questions, a) Who is your lord? b) What is your religion? and c) Who is he (Rasulullah )?. A believer will answer all three questions and he will be honored with the clothing of Jannah. The window of Jannah will be opened for him and he will enjoy the sight of Jannah. On the contrary, a disbeliever will express regret at not being able to answer the questions. Upon that, an angel who is blind and deaf is appointed to punish him. Blind so that the angel does not see the punishment and feel mercy and deaf so that the punishment is not heard. The hammer used to punish a disbeliever is so heavy that it can reduce a mountain to dust. The disbeliever screams with pain and every creation can hear him besides human and Jinns.’ (Mishkat)
Rasulullah said, ‘The grave is a garden of paradise or a pit of hell.’ (Ibid)

Appendix 2
The English speaking version of Father Zakaria makes up his own Biblical verse in order to fit in with a strange “mathematical code” idea:

Such is the disrespect for the truth people of this nature possess.

Appendix 3

Narrated Abu Huraira ®: Regarding the story of a woman who used to sweep the mosque. The Prophet (S) asked about her and they ( the Companions) told him she had died. He (S) then said, “why did you not inform me?” and it appeared as if they had considered her as of little importance. He (S) said, “show me her grave”, and when they did so he prayed on her. And Muslim added : He (S) then said, “these graves are full of darkness for their occupants, but Allah will illuminate them (the graves) for them (the occupants) because of my prayer on them”.

Appendix 4

Another example of Muhammad caring for people in the grave

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The Prophet once passed by two graves and said, “These two persons are being tortured not for a major sin (to avoid). One of them never saved himself from being soiled with his urine, while the other used to go about with calumnies(to make enmity between friends).” The Prophet then took a green leaf of a date-palm tree, split it into (pieces) and fixed one on each grave. They said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Why have you done so?” He replied, “I hope that their punishment might be lessened till these (the pieces of the leaf) become dry.” (See the foot-note of Hadith 215). (217)

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: Once the Prophet, while passing through one of the grave-yards of Medina or Mecca heard the voices of two persons who were being tortured in their graves. The Prophet said, “These two persons are being tortured not for a major sin (to avoid).” The Prophet then added, “Yes! (they are being tortured for a major sin). Indeed, one of them never saved himself from being soiled with his urine while the other used to go about with calumnies (to make enmiy between friends). The Prophet then asked for a green leaf of a date-palm tree, broke it into two pieces and put one on each grave. On being asked why he had done so, he replied, “I hope that their torture might be lessened, till these get dried.” (215)
Read more:

Appendix 5

Claim in full:

(Narrated by Ibn Abbas:

“I (Muhammad) put on her my shirt that she may wear the clothes of heaven, and I SLEPT with her in her coffin (grave) that I may lessen the pressure of the grave. She was the best of Allah’s creatures to me after Abu Talib”… The prophet was referring to Fatima , the mother of Ali.

The Arabic scholar Demetrius explains : “The Arabic word used here for “slept” is “Id’tajat,” and literally means “lay down” with her. It is often used to mean, “lay down to have sex.” Muhammad is understood as saying that because he slept with her she has become like a wife to him so she will be considered like a “mother of the believers.” This will supposedly prevent her from being tormented in the grave, since Muslims believed that as people wait for the Judgment Day they will be tormented in the grave. “Reduce the pressure” here means that the torment won’t be as much because she is now a “mother of the believers” after Muhammad slept with her and “consummated” the union.”

now, i know the same word اضطجع
is used in 2 king:4:32-34

the word
means lay dawn, it doesn’t mean he have sex with the boy.

Appendix 6

Lack of authenticity in Kanzal ul Amal

Appendix 7

More context:
Fatima looked after Muhammad during his youth.
Anas bin Malik says that when Muhammad heard Asad had died, he immediately went to her house sat beside her body and prayed for her soul.
“My dear mother, may God keep you under His Protection. Many times you went hungry in order to feed me well. You fed me and clothed me on delicacies that you denied yourself. God will surely be happy with these actions of yours. And your intentions were surely meant to win the goodwill and pleasure of God and success in the Hereafter.”

He gave his shirt to be used as part of her shroud. When the grave was prepared Prophet Muhammad himself examined it and placed her into the grave. Thus, she was one of the few people whose graves were examined by Muhammad. Fatimah is buried in Jannatul Baqee’ cemetery in Madinah, Saudi Arabia.

Refuting the Christian Lie that Prophet Muhammad was a Racist


We must first of all know that Allah Almighty in the Noble Quran loves us because of our Righteousness and not because of our race or gender: 

“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other. Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you.  And Allah has full knowledge and is well-acquainted.  [The Noble Quran, 49:13]

False Allegation on Prophet Muhammad being racist

This is a rebuttal to the Islam-haters lies against our beloved Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). Before we start, it is important to know the following story:

One of our beloved Prophet’s best friends was a black Ethiopian from Africa. His name was Bilal Al-Habashi. Bilal 8radhiyallahu anhu) used to be the slave of Prophet’s Muhammad’s Uncle Umayya, who was a Pagan. When one of our Prophet’s close companions, Ammar, was caught during the early times of Islam when Muslims used to meet in secret in Makkah, Umayya ordered Bilal to flog him. Bilal refused to accept the order because he heard from Ammar during the little dialog that happened between Ammar and Umayya and some other Pagans that Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“People are as equal as the teeth of the comb.”  The old Arabic combs had equal in height and width teeth for combing the hair.

When Bilal (radhiyallahu anhu) refused the order, Umayya punished him severely by flogging him on his stomach while he was laying on his back tied with ropes on the very hot sand in the middle of the day in what we call today Saudi Arabia.

When our Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) learned about this, he ordered for Bilal (radhiyallahu anhu) to be bought from Umayya.  So Abu Bakr, one of our Prophet’s close companions and the first Caliph in Islam went to Umayya and requested to buy Bilal. Umayya refused at first and kept insisting on refusing to sell Bilal. Abu Baker (radhiyallahu anhu) went as high as 200 Dinars to buy Bilal. This was way too much money at that time. Bilal was immediately set free by our Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)

Later on, when the Muslims migrated from Makkah to Madinah, and the first Mosque in Islam was built, our Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was Bilal’s best friend at that time.  He gave Bilal the job to be the caller for the daily prayers, which back then was one of the most honorable jobs to have.  Bilal, the black Ethiopian from Africa, was one of the few best friends of our beloved Prophet that we know about from our Islamic History.

Below are their comments and my responses:

Here is what they (the Christian liars) wrote:

“Muhammad the Racist against Black people!! 
Black skin and Creation:

“Abu Darda reported that the HOLY PROPHET SAID: Allah created Adam when he created him (sic). Then He stroke (sic) his right shoulder and took out a white race as if they were seeds, and He stroke (sic) HIS LEFT SHOULDER and took out a BLACK RACE as if they were coals. Then He said to those who were in his right side: Towards paradise and I don’t care. He said to those who were ON HIS LEFT SHOULDER: Towards Hell and I don’t care. – Ahmad” (Mishkat ul-Masabih, translated by Karim, v. iii, p. 117) 

FROM IBN ISHAQ’S “SIRAT RASULALLAH”, translated as, “THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD” by A. Guillaume, page 243. 

“I have heard that it was of him that the apostle said, “Whoever wants to see Satan let him take a look at Nabtal b. al-Harith!” He was a study black man with long flowing hair, inflamed eyes, and dark ruddy cheeks. He used to come and talk to the apostle and listen to him and then carry what he had said to the hypocrites. It was he who said: “Muhammad is all ears: if anyone tells him anything he believes it.” God sent down concerning him: “And of them are those who annoy the prophet and say he is all ears, Say: God ears for you. He believes in God and trusts the believers and is a mercy for those of you who believe; and those who annoy the apostle of God for them there is a painful punishment.” (Sura 9:61)”

The above doesn’t in anyway suggest that black people are destined for hell, nor the sayings come from the trustful resources such as “Sahih Bukhari”, “Sahih Muslim” and “Sunan Abu Dawud” volumes!  The quotes don’t at all come from reliable Islamic resources. I would like to see the above existing in any of the volumes that I mentioned.  Anyone can come up with a book and make up a lie against our Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

Let’s assume for a second that the above Saying is a valid one, even though as I said, it doesn’t come from a trustful resource.  The Arabic words for “Race” and “Group” are one word, and that is “Jama-aa”.  The Arabic word “Jinns” could also be sometimes used for “Race”, but “Jinns” means more “sex” than “race”. Anyway, the Saying above doesn’t at all suggest that Africans are going to hell. Islam is never ridiculous to make such a claim. Below you will see how Allah Almighty loves us for our good deeds and righteousness. Our genders and race don’t count when judged by Allah Almighty.

Important Note: When Adam (alayhissalaam) was created, no race or gender existed by him. He was every race and gender of Mankind. How can Africans or black people be taken into the offensive consideration if they didn’t even exist yet?  It is quite obvious that the word “Race” is a mistranslation.

Anyway, the translation above, which it is quite possible that the hypocrites of the Christian liars have twisted it a little bit suggests that a “race” or “group” will be black and the other will be white.  In Islam, we are taught that Angels mark bad deeds with “black” points.  It is clear that the Saying above suggests that the “black group” will go to hell, and the “white group” will go to heaven. 

Important Note:  In Islam, we are ordered to shake hands with the right hand, and to enter doors with the right foot. Does this mean that left-handed people are cursed?  Of course not!  Same thing with black or African people. Islam has no offense toward them.

As we all know, when one burns himself too much, his skin would turn blackish or black.  So, this Saying is suggesting that the people of Hell will eventually be burnt and blackened, and the People of Paradise will be lighter.

There is no racism in this Saying!  But again, it doesn’t come from an Islamic authentic resource anyway!

Many lies had been inserted in history against our beloved Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam); “A section of the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] say: Believe in the morning what is revealed to the believers (Muslims), but reject it at the end of the day; perchance they may (themselves) turn back (from Islam).  [The Noble Quran, 3:72]” 

The above false claims clearly contradict what Allah Almighty said in the Noble Quran in the following Noble Verse:

“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes [people with different cultures, races and religions], that ye may know each other. Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you.  And Allah has full knowledge and is well-acquainted.  [The Noble Quran, 49:13]”

Here is the answer by Abdal Hakim Murad:

“As-salamu alaykum. The key text is Qur’an 49.13, ‘and created you peoples and tribes that you might know each other. The most noble of you in Allah’s sight is the most pious.’ Imam Qurtubi explains that the ‘peoples’ (shu’ub) are those with unknown genealogies, unlike ‘tribes’ (qaba’il). Hence all human collectivities, of whatever race, are included in the verse, which moreover states that ethnic identity is a natural and legitimate thing, insofar as it does not obstruct religious solidarity.

There are many hadiths which indicate the prohibition of anti-African attitudes. In one, the pagan al-Harith ibn Hisham is shamed for expressing amazement that the honour of calling the adhan should have been conferred upon Bilal, an Abyssinian. In another hadith, we read: ‘A red-faced (i.e. white) man is not superior to a black one; superiority is only in piety. You are all from Adam, and Adam is from dust.’ (Bukhari and Muslim)

There is also the famous incident narrated by Ibn al-Mubarak in his Kitab al-Birr wa’l-Sila, in which Abu Dharr (radhiyallahu anhu) asks Bilal (radhiyallahu anhu) to put his foot on Abu Dharr’s head, because he fears that he has committed the sin of racism against his Abyssinian brother.

Finally, we note that in all four schools of fiqh, racial affiliation is of no significance in legal entitlements and duties.

The hadith you have cited (and which are only imperfectly translated) therefore refer to the Qur’anic use of the metaphor of darkness and light. Light is one of Allah’s names, and darkness refers to ignorance of His presence and acts.

Salams and best wishes,

Abdal Hakim

Also Read: BEAUTY

Mr Maududi’s View on Imam Mahdi (Alaihissalaam)

[Maulana Yusuf Ludhiyanwi Shaheed (rahimahullah)]

Moulana Maududi states in his  book “Tajdeed Wa Ahyaa-e-Deen”, regarding Imaam Mahdi (alaihissalaam):

“Those Muslims who believe in  Imaam Mahdi are not very far  behind in their misconception from those revivalists who do not  believe in him. They think that  Imaam Mahdi will be some kind of  future molvi or sufi who will  suddenly emerge from a certain  Madrasah or khanqah with a tasbeeh in his hand. Upon arrival  he will announce “I am Mahdi”.  The Ulama and Mashaaikh will  proceed to him with books in  hand and recognize him by  comparing the written signs with his external features. Then the  pledge will occur and the  announcement of Jihad will be proclaimed. The forty day sages  and the old-fashioned  predecessors will gather under his flag. They will use their swords as a mere formality to fulfil the  conditions of Jihad. The actual  work will be performed by  blessings and spiritual powers.  They will be victorious due to  incantations and wazifas. On  whichever kafir their sight falls, he will fall unconscious. By mere dua, tanks and aircraft will be infested with worms.”   [Page 55]

I cannot believe that such  disparaging fairy tales can  emanate from the pen of an Aalim. Maududi’s hatred for the  pious servants of Allaah has  driven him to mock and humiliate  them. Does he claim that any  victory can be achieved without  any Barakah (blessings)? Just as  he has mocked Imaam Mahdi,  how will Maududi react to  someone who mocks Nabi  (sallAllaahu alaihi wasallam) in a  similar manner (Nauthubillaah)?  Is he denying the Mu`jizaat of  the Ambiyaa (alaihi salaam) and  Karaamaat of the Auliyaa? Did  the battle of Badr, which was won by two horses, eight swords and three hundred and thirteen  dedicated soldiers against a well-equipped army lack in blessings?  On the occasion of Badr Nabi  (sallAllaahu alaihi wasallam) spent the entire night supplicating to  Allaah Ta`ala. He made the  following dua: “O Allaah! If you annihilate this little group (of  Sahaabah) there will be none to  worship You after this day.” Did the Assistance of Allaah Ta`ala descend without Barkat (blessings)? 

On the occasion when Nabi  (sallAllaahu alaihi wasallam) cast  the sand rearding which Allaah Ta`ala says in the Qur`aan  Majeed: “And you did not throw  when you threw, indeed it was Allaah who threw.”  In Moulana’s  estimation was this not Barkat?  When Moulana Maududi can poke fun and jest at the coming of Imaam Mahdi (alaihi salaam) it is not far-fetched for an atheist to go one step further and mock at the Battle of Badr.

Moulana Maududi goes on to say this about Imaam Mahdi:

“My estimate is that the person  will be a modern leader of the  times. He will have a deep insight into all the prevailing sciences of  the day. He will possess a proper understanding of all the important daily laws. He will have complete authority in mental leadership, political strategy and war-time expertise. He will be so much more modern than the others that I fear the molvis and sufis will be first to raise a hue and cry.” [page 55]

Are the statements of  Rasulullaah (sallAllaahu alaihi  wasallam) not sufficient  regarding Imaam Mahdi that  Maududi has to conjure up his  own predictions concerning a  personality that is to appear in the future? Predictions are either  formulated by means of divine  inspiration, correct intuition or  by stronomers who combine fact  with fiction. What is Maududi’s  “estimation” of Imaam Mahdi based upon?

Disregarding Maududi’s fear of  the molvis and Imaam Mahdi’s  ‘modernism’, I wish to ask him what quality he (Maududi) lacks  from amongst the qualities he has assigned to Mahdi? He possesses all the above-mentioned qualities but yet his  movement has not progressed.  Let alone the entire world, he has  not even been able to forge his  authority on Pakistan. Leave  aside Pakistan, he has failed to  create an Islaamic government  even in his own village. Imaam  Mahdi, according to Maududi will  not be super-human. Hence if all  blessings, Thikr, dua, tasbeeh and the musAllaah are taken away from him, will he be able to forge his authority with all his modernism? Has Maududi  pondered over these issues when  making his predictions. In reality, Maududi wanted only to mock  the saints, their khanqas and  their blessings in the shadow of Imaam Mahdi. In fact he falls short in his own logical deductions.