Category Archives: Qabar Pujari Sect

Stance of Deoband on Observing Urs/Uroos of the Saints

Question: Hadhrat Shah Waliullah (rahmatullahi alayh) writes, “Sometimes Khwaja Khurd used to celebrate Urs/Uroos of his Shaykh, Khawaja Baqi Billah (rahmatullahi alayh)” [Anfaas al-Aarifeen pg 65] Why do Sunni scholars affiliated with Deoband then prohibit the customary URS death anniversaries of Sufi saints??

ANSWER (by Hadhrat Qari Tayyib rahmatullahi alayh): The basis of [Urs/Uroos] was that when a Shaykh of Tariqah from the ahlullah used to pass away, his affiliates would gather. One of the benefits of this was that people who had a weak spiritual afiliation (Dha’eef ul-Nisbat) would get [spiritual] power (quwwah) from people of strong spiritual affiliation (Qawwi ul-Nisbah) and this would strengthen their spiritual connection.

Another advantage was that they (the Khulafa) were assigned different “Wilaayats” (areas) to go and help in (people’s spiritual) reformation (Islaah) and spread Islam. The reality is that Islam was spread in India by the Sufis, and Urs was an annual opportunity for them to gather and make & assign groups (of people) which would then spread guidance and propagate Truth [tableegh i-haq].

This is the reason that there are graves of “Shah-e-Wilayat” in every district and village in Saharanpur, in Deoband and everyhwere. The reality was that when a group was sent for Tabligh, one person used to head it and this person was called the Shah-e-Wilayat. Wherever he used to die, he was buried as Shah-e-Wilayat. In short, there (in Urs, groups of) Wilaayats were divided, “You go and spread Islam” and this one “You go and help with spiritual reformation of Muslims”.

With regards to Hadhrat Khwaja Ajmeri (rahmatullahi alayh) even Christians bore witness, Sir Thomas Arnold in his “Preaching of Islam” says: “99 lakh people converted to Islam on the hands of Hadhrat Khwaja Moinuddeen Chisti (rahmatullah alayh) alone, and the number of people his khulafa converted is another amount”

Hadhrat Sultan-ul-Awliya Nizamuddeen Dehlwi (rahmatullahi alayh) had 900 of his Khalifah’s sent to Deccan, they converted thousands to Islam. If you visit there, you’ll see that its a very narrow area amongst the mountains difficult to traverse, there was no mosque or shrine there, (yet) these people went there. So this was the ACTUAL essence of Urs/Uroos, now, it has become a carnival event where women attend, dance on music, people set up stalls and trade, and every (type of) corrupt practice happens.

If you point these things out, they say, “Look, these people disrespect awliya, they are condemning Urs!”. This is not condemning Urs!!, this is condemning the reprehensive (things) which are not only against the Sunnah but are blameworthy innovations in the name of Urs/Uroos introduced by the ignorant people, I declare that if Urs/Uroos events are cleared of these abominable acts, and (instead) groups of Muballigheen are dispatched, scholars are called and Islamic speech are organised, recitation of the Qur’an is introduced etc…no one prohibits Urs/Uroos.

In fact, Hadhrat Mawlana Mufti Azeez ur-Rahman (rahmatullahi alayh), the senior-most Mufti of Dar’al Uloom Deoband (who) was a buzurg from the Naqshbandiyyah Order used to attend the Urs of Imaam Rabbani (rahmatullahi alayh) in Sirhind Shareef every year. Nobody from Deoband ever stopped him! Why? Because there were no such reprehensive practices there (in Sirhind Shareef)… Summarising, in reality Urs/Uroos is not condemned, but the unislamic acts (which have become) associated with it are.

The common people are steadfast on these customs and they say: “Look, these people are stopping Urs/Uroos, although it has been a custom of pious elders for centuries”. Tell me: Did these pious elders teach music and dance? Their basis (of comemorating death anniversary) was that it was a means for Tabligh & spreading the message of Islam. This aspect vanished, and (just) music and dance remained.”

[Malfuzat Hakeem-ul-Islam Hadhrat Qari Tayyib Qasmi, Vol. 7 pgs. 468-471]


Shah Waliullah (Rahmatullah Alayh)’s View on Shirk

Shah Waliyullah’s words on the Shirk of the Mushrik of Makkah and their similarity with grave worshippers

Below one can see that Shah Waliullah clearly explains the reality of the Shirk of the Mushriks of Makkah, their belief that Allah was their creator, yet they would dedicate some forms of worship to idols made from saints to get close to Allah. Also  Shah Waliyullah clearly said that many people do the same kind of  Shirk at graves, and they have turned the graves of saints into places of worship:

Shah Waliullah explained the different kinds of Shirk (polytheism) in his “Hujjatullah  Al-Balighah” (English translation done by Marcia K. Hermansen):


The Categories of Associationism (Shirk)

The true nature of associationism (shirk) is that a person should think that the amazing effects emanating from a revered personage only emerge due to his being characterized by an attribute of perfection which is unknown among humans, but which rather is restricted to the Necessary Being, may His magnificence be exalted. Rather he believes that this is not found in anyone else unless God bestows the mantle of divinity upon another, or annihilates this other in His essence, and makes him subsist through His essence, or something of this sort which the believer in these varieties of superstitions holds. An example is what was reported in the hadith, “THE POLYTHEISTS USED TO  UTTER THE FOLLOWING FORMULA OF `TALBIYYA’: `WE ARE AT YOUR SERVICE (LABBAIK), WE ARE AT YOUR SERVICE, YOU HAVE NO PARTNER EXCEPT AN ASSOCIATE OVER WHOM YOU POSSESS  SOVEREIGNTY WHILE HE DOES  NOT.” [Muslim, chapter of Hajj]” 

Thus they humbled themselves to the furthest extent before this  other, and they behaved toward this person in the way people  behave with respect to God, may He be Exalted.

This concept has various embodiments and forms, and the  divine law only discusses embodiments and forms of it  which people practice with the intention of associationism, so that they become anticipated  sources of shirk and customarily inseparable from it. This is similar to the practice of the divine law in establishing the causes that  entail good or evil actions as  being tantamount to those acts themselves. We want to alert you to those things which God, may He be Exalted, has made anticipated sources (mazinnat) of  associationism in the divine law brought by Muhammad, may there  be peace and blessings  upon the one who brought it, so that he forbade them.

1) Among them is their former custom of prostrating before idols and stars, so that prostration before other than God was forbidden. God said, may He be exalted, “Prostrate not to  the sun nor to the moon; but prostrate to Allah Who created them.”‘ [Qur’an 41:37]

Association (of others with God) in prostration necessarily entailed associationism with regard to the divine management, as we have alluded to. The matter is not as certain Theologians think, i.e., that being exclusively worshipped is one of the commands of God,  may He be Exalted, which may vary with the variation in religions and which cannot be pursued  through demonstrated proof. How could it be, for if it were thus, God, may He be Exalted, would not have required them (the associators) to consider Him unique in creation and management. As He, the Greatest  Speaker said, “Say: Praise be to Allah, and peace be on His servants whom He has chosen! Is  Allah better (or those others that  they  associate with Him)” [Quran 27:59] and so on for five verses.’ RATHER THE TRUTH IS THAT THEY HAD ACKNOWLEDGED HIS  EXCLUSIVE CLAIM TO CREATION  AND DIVINE MANAGEMENT IN IMPORTANT MATTERS and they agreed that worship is attendant on these two things, according to what we have indicated in the discussion of the meaning of belief in the unity of God.’ Therefore God held them responsible for what He enjoined  on them,’ and “God has the convincing argument.” [Qur’an 6:149]

2)  Among them (the types of  shirk) is that they used to request assistance with their needs such as in curing the sick and meeting the needs of the poor, from other than God. They would make vows to them, expecting the accomplishment of their purposes through these vows, and they would recite their names, hoping for their blessing. Therefore,  God, may He be Exalted, made incumbent upon them that they say during their prayers: “Thee alone do we worship, Thee alone do we ask for help.” [Qur’an 1:4] And He  said, may He be Exalted, “Call upon no one except God.” [Qur’an 72:18] The meaning of “calling upon”  (du’a) is not “worship” (‘ibada) as certain of the interpreters of the Qur’an said, it rather means “seeking help,” according to the saying of God, may He be Exalted, “No, but you call (tad’una) upon Him and He removes the thing because of which you call upon Him.”” [Qur’an 6:41]

3)  Among them are that they used to call some of the ones whom they associated with Him,  “daughters of God” and “sons of God.” They were then forbidden  this most strongly, and we have explained the secret behind this previously.

4)  Among them is that they used to think that “their rabbis and monks were lords besides God,”” may He be Exalted, in the sense that they used to believe that whatever things they declared permissible were permitted, and that there was nothing wrong with them in themselves; and they believed that whatever they declared forbidden was prohibited and that they Would be blamed for doing it. Then when His, may He be Exalted,  saying was revealed: “They have taken their rabbis and monks,”  [Qur’an 9: 31] ‘Adi ibn Hatim asked the  Prophet of God about  it.  He answered, “They used to  say that things were permitted for them, so that they regarded  them  as  lawful;  and  they  used  to  forbid  them  some  things  so  that  they considered them forbidden.”” The secret behind this is that  making something permitted or forbidden is an expression for a creative process (takwin) that is operative at the level of Malakut whereby one  will or will not be held accountable for a certain thing. Thus this creative process  (takwin) is the reason for a person being or not being held accountable for a thing, and this is part of the Attributes of God, may He be Exalted.” 

As for the attribution of permitting or prohibiting to the Prophet, it is in the  sense of his speech being a decisive  sign (imara) of God’s permitting or forbidding. As for the attribution of them (permitting and forbidding) to the legal interpreters (mujtahidun) of his community, this is in the sense of their transmitting this element of the divine legislation based on the revealed text of the lawgiver, or their inferring the meaning of his words.

You should know that when God, may He be Exalted, sends a Prophet and confirms his message by miracles, and  through him permits some things which had been forbidden to them, some people find in themselves a resistance to this, so that there remains in their hearts an inclination to forbid it due to the prohibition which had existed in their community. This (vacillation) may occur in two ways. If it is due to a hesitation in confirming this divine law, then the person who hesitates is a disbeliever in the Prophet. If it is due to a belief that the first ban took place in such a way as to render abrogation impossible because God, may He be Exalted, had bestowed on some human being a robe of divinity, or because this person was annihilated in God and subsisted through Him, so that his forbidding or disliking an act required that it would produce a loss in a person’s wealth and his family; then this one is a polytheist (mushrik) who affirms that there is a sacred wrath, displeasure, forbidding and permitting on the part of someone other than God.

5) Among them is that people used to seek to gain favor from idols and the stars by sacrificing to them, either through invoking their names during the sacrifice, or by sacrificing to idols designating them, which they were forbidden to do.

6) Among them are that in order to draw closer to those whom they associated with God, they would set free a Sa’iba and a Bahira. Thus God, may He be Exalted, said, “Allah has not made (any rule in the nature of) a Bahira or a Sa’iba.”” [Qur’an 5:103]

7) Among them was their belief that the names of certain people were blessed and exalted, and that to tell a lie while swearing by their name would incur a loss of wealth or an injury to family, so they refrained from doing this. They therefore used to make their opponents swear oaths by the names of those alleged “partners,” then this was forbidden to them. The Prophet said, “Whoever makes an oath by  other than God, commits shirk.”” Some of the scholars have interpreted this as being rigorous and a threat, but I do not hold this position. What is meant, in my opinion, is the oath made in the name of other than God that  one will do or will abstain from  doing something in the future, and an oath in which no exception is made by saying, “If God wills,”” according to the belief which we have mentioned.

8)  Among them is the  performance of a pilgrimage in honor of anyone other than God, may He be Exalted. This occurs when people go to visit spots sacred to those whom they worship other than God, and believe that by alighting in those places they will draw closer to these ones. This the divine law forbade. The Prophet said, “Do not saddle your camel except (to  travel) to three mosques. (Mecca, medina and Jeruslaem”, [Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi,  Nasai, darimi, ibn Hambal]

9)  Also among them was their practice of naming their sons “‘Abd al-‘Uzza … … Abd Shams,”  (Such names refer to being the slave of the pre-Islamic God al-`Uzza or the sun (al-shams)) and so forth. God said, “He it is who created you from a single soul,  and made from it its spouse that he might take rest in her, (then when he covered her, she bore a light burden, and she passed [unnoticed] with it, but when it became heavy they cried unto Allah, their Lord, saying: If thou givest unto  us a righteous son we shall be of the thankful.  But when He  gave unto them  a righteous  son,  they  ascribed  unto Him partners in respect of  that which He had given  them. But God is  high exalted  above all that  they  associate with him).”   [Qur’an 7:189-190]

It is reported in the hadith that Eve called her son ‘Abd al Harith’ (Tirmidhi) and that this was due to an inspiration from devil.  It  is confirmed  in  innumerable hadith reports that  the Prophet changed the names of  his companions ‘Abd al-‘Uzza and ‘Abd Shams and such like to `Abd Allah and ‘Abd al-Rahman and other similar names. (Ibn Hambal)
These are embodiments and forms of associationism, which the law giver forbade due to their being forms of it, and God knows better.”

Shah Waliyullah further wrote about the people of Jahiliyah p 361 and after:

“Chapter 74: 

The explanation of what had been the condition of the people of the Jahiliyya which the Prophet reformed

The Children of Ishmael had inherited the codes of their father Ishmael, and remained following that divine law until the time of ‘Amr ibn Luhayy, for he interpolated things into it according to his worthless opinion and thus was led astray, and led others astray. Part of his legislation was the worshipping of idols, allowing a bull to wander at will, and setting free a  she-camel, so religion was thereby falsified, and the sound was mixed with the corrupt, and ignorance, polytheism and unbelief overcame them. Therefore, God sent our master Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, to straighten their deviations and to reform their corruptions. Therefore he, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, examined their divine law and whatever in it agreed with the codes of Ishmael, may peace be upon him, or was from the rituals of God, he retained. Whatever in it was distorted or corrupted or adopted the emblems of polytheism and unbelief he nullified and recorded its nullification. When a thing fell under the topic of customary behaviors, and so on, he explained its proper manners and reprehensible aspects in such a way as to avoid the disasters of conventions, and he forbade the corrupt customs and commanded the sound ones. Whatever issue of principle or practice had been abandoned during the interval, he reinstated as fresh and as lush as it had been before, so that through this the blessing of God was fulfilled and His religion was made straight. The people of the Jahiliyya at the time of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, used to accept the possibility of the mission of the prophets, belief in requital, believed in the principles of the types of piety, and put into practice the second and third stages of the supports of civilization. 

AMONG THE PRINCIPLES AGREED UPON AMONG THEM (THE PEOPLE  OF THE IGNORANT AGE) WAS THE  BELIEF THAT GOD, MAY HE BE EXALTED, HAD NO PARTNER IN THE CREATION OF THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH AND THE SUBSTANCES IN THEM, AND THAT HE HAD NO PARTNER IN MANAGING THE GREAT AFFAIRS AND THAT NO  ONE COULD REJECT HIS ORDER NOR FRUSTRATE HIS DECREE ONCE IT HAD BECOME SETTLED AND DECIDED, and this is His saying, may He be exalted, “If you asked them who created the heavens and the earth they would answer Allah,”‘ and His saying, “No; upon Him you will call,”‘ and His saying, “All upon whom you call for help lose their way except Allah.”‘ But it was due to their deviance in religion that they held that there were personages among the angels and the spirits who could manage (the affairs of) the people of the earth except for the most major matters, by improving the status of a person who worshipped them in matters which involved his personal affairs, his children, and his wealth. They compared them to the situation of the kings in relation to the king of kings and to the situation of the intercessors and courtiers in relation to the Sultan administering the power. What gave rise to this were the pronouncements of the divine laws concerning the entrusting of affairs to the angels, and the answering of the prayers of those people who are closest (to God), so they supposed that this was an administration (of power) on their part like the administration of kings, by analogy of the unseen to the visible world, and this was false. 

Among (the accepted principles of the pre-Islamic world) was  God’s transcendence of what is not appropriate for His exalted state and the forbidding of heresy concerning His names, but among their heresies was their claim that God took the angels as daughters, and that the angels were made intermediaries so that God could acquire from them knowledge which He did not have, in analogy to the king and his spies.

Among their beliefs was that God decreed all events before they take place, and this is the saying of Hasan al-Basri, that the people of the Jahiliyya continued to mention pre-destination in their speeches and poetry and the divine law only added a confirmation to this…

(They also knew) that among the divisions of worship is purity, and taking a full bath after a major ritual impurity continued to be a usual practice among them and likewise circumcision and the other natural virtues. It is said in the Torah that God, may He be exalted, made circumcision a brand of Abraham and his descendants. The ablution (wudu’) was performed by the Magians, the Jews, and others, and the wise men among the Arabs used to do it. Prayer was also found among them. Abu Dharr, may God be pleased with him, prayed for three years before he became acquainted with the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, and Quss ibn Saida al-Iyadi used to pray.” What was preserved of the prayer among the religions of the Jews and the Magians and what was left among the Arabs were the respectful acts, especially the prostration, and saying petitionary prayers and litanies; and the alms tax was also found among them. A customary practice among them was the entertainment of the guest and the traveler, supporting the whole family, giving alms to the poor, keeping the bonds of kinship, and helping those struck by the calamities of God; they were praised for these things;  and they recognized that these constituted human fulfillment and happiness. Khadija said (to Muhammad), “By God, God will never debase you, since you honor the bonds of kinship, entertain the guest, support the family, and aid those struck by God’s calamities,”” and Ibn al-Daghina said something like this to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq.’ They also used to practice fasting from dawn to dusk and the Quraish used to fast in ‘Ashura’ during the Jahiliyya and retreat for devotions to the mosque, and `Umar once made a vow to do a night of devotions during the Jahiliyya and he asked the Prophet for advice about that,” and ‘Aas ibn Wa’il left a will that a certain slave should be freed. 

In summary, the people of the Jahiliyya used to perform various acts of religious piety. As for the pilgrimage to the house of God and respecting its rites and honoring the sacred months the matter is too obvious to be obscure. They had among themselves types of incantations and talismans and they had interpolated polytheism into this. Their method of slaughtering continued to be cutting the neck and piercing the throat, and they didn’t strangle the animal nor did they cut open its stomach. They preserved a remnant of the religion of Abraham, may peace be upon him, in abandoning astrology and the discussion of the intricacies of natural phenomena, except those things to which natural insight spontaneously forced them. The foundation of knowing about the future was the art of dream interpretation, and the good tidings of the prophets before them; then soothsaying entered amongst them and casting lots with divining arrows, and augury from the flight of  birds, although they recognized that this was not part of the original religion. This  is the saying of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, when he saw (in the  Ka`ba) a picture of Abraham and Ishmael, may peace be upon them, with divining arrows in their hands, “Indeed they (the Meccans) knew that the two of them never had recourse to divination.”” The descendants of Ishmael had kept the codes of their father until ‘Amr ibn Luhayy arose among them, and this was about three hundred years before the mission of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him.”

Shah Waliyullah wrote in his “Al-Fauz Al-Kabir Fi Usul Al-tafsir” p 4, as translated by GN Jalbani and published by Kitab Bhavan, India:


It means proving existence of attributes, as belong to God alone, in others also. For example, people generally held the belief that there did exist other beings besides God who possessed their own will to act freely as if to say “Be, and it happens”. Or they accepted the existence of beings who possessed personal Knowledge not attainable through sense-organs, rationality, a dream, or an inspiration. They had the wrong notion that these beings could heal a sick, hurl a curse on a person, and, by expressing their displeasure, make a person poor, sick and unhappy, or otherwise could bestow mercy on a person which enabled him to lead a healthy, happy and pleasant life. THESE POLYTHEISTS DID NOT ASSOCIATE ANYBODY WITH GOD IN THE CREATION OF SUBSTANCES AND ADMINISTRATION OF IMPORTANT AFFAIRS. THEY DID  NOT BELIEVE THAT THERE EXISTED POWER IN ANY CREATURE BY WHICH HE COULD  PREVENT GOD FROM DOING THE WORK, HE DECIDED TO  DO. THEIR  POLYTHEISM RELATED TO  AFFAIRS PECULIAR TO CERTAIN SERVANTS. They thought that just as a worldly lord could send his chosen officers to various parts of his country, vesting them with full powers to act  freely in specific cases as long as they did not receive fresh instructions from him and their recommendations for those who sought redress were  accepted by the worldly Lord, precisely in the same manner the Supreme Lord (God) conferred on some of His servants the role of divinity, and pleasure or displeasure of these servants of His had an influence on the fate of the people. Thus, they thought it was necessary to seek the nearness of these select so that their prayers become acceptable to the Absolute Ruler (God), also through the recommendations of these selected persons.

In view of this, the Polytheists decided to bow down before these beings, to offer sacrifices for them, to take an oath by their names, to seek help from their extraordinary powers (namely ‘Be and it becomes’). They would carve their images from stone, copper, glass etc, and make the spirits of the dead focus of their deep attention. With the passage of time, these stone images became semblances of Deity for the ignorant. This is how the great confusion took birth.

Anthropomorphism (Tashbih) 

This means to prove the presence of human attributes in God. They would thus say that angels were God’s daughters, and that He accepted intercession of His select servants made on behalf of the people  even though otherwise He might not find’ them acceptable, just as sometimes do the worldly Kings in relation to their responsible officers. When they could not comprehend the true attributes of God such as Knowledge, and power of hearing and seeing, they started judging them also in the context of their own knowledge, and capacity of hearing and seeing. And this was how they went astray, taking God as corporal and boundable. 

Change (Tahrif) 

The story of the Change is that the children of Prophet Ismail followed their grandfather Abrahim’s Shariah (law) till Amr b. Luhayy, may God curse him, appeared. He carved idols and made their worship compulsory for them. He also instituted superstitions, such as ‘Bahira’, ‘Saba’, ‘Wasila’, ‘Ham’, ‘Al-lqtisam lil Azlam’ and many others!’ This change took place three hundred years before the birth of the Holy Prophet. 

In addition to these evil practices, they adhered to the traditions of  their forefathers, and considered it as a decisive argument in their favour. The Prophets who had gone before had spoken about the Resurrection, and the Gathering, but they had given no details, nor stated it as distinctly with all particulars as given in the Qur’an (though rather very summarily). Since the Polytheists were not given detailed account of life after death, they considered the happening of Resurrection as impossible and far remote. 

Even though these people acknowledged the prophethood of Prophets Abrahim, Ismail, and also that of Prophet Musa, they felt confused about the existence of human qualities in these prophets, which constitute a veil on their perfect beauty, and thus entertained doubts about them. The trouble was that they did not recognise the reality behind the Divine Administration which required that prophets should be raised. What they thought — and were familiar with — was that the prophets should be like Him who has sent them. Therefore, they considered prophets in human forms something very remote and unbelievable, and to support their contention they talked of doubts, weak and not worth listening. For example they asked how a man who needed food and drink could be a prophet. Why did not God send an angel for this purpose? Why did He not send revelation to every person individually? If you ponder a little and take true the picture, which has been drawn of the conditions, creeds, and actions of the Polytheists, then  you better take into consideration the conditions of the people of these times, particularly of those living on the borders of the Muslim countries. THEY HAVE BROUGHT MANY CHANGES AND THINK EXCEEDINGLY HIGH OF THE CULT OF SAINTHOOD  (WILAYAT). Inspire of the fact that they recognise this trait in the ancient saints, they consider the existence of such saints an impossibility in the present age. THEY VISIT THEIR GRAVES AND TOMBS, AND INDULGE IN MANY  FORMS OF POLYTHEISM. Are they not considerably given over to Anthropomorphism and Change? It has been stated in a sound Tradition that ‘you will surely follow in the footsteps of those who have gone before you’, and it  appropriately applies to the Muslim community of the present days, involved as it is in various acts of evil and corrupt beliefs. May God, protect us from this.’”

Shah Waliyullah wrote in “Al-Budur Al-Bazighah” p 151, as translated by GN Jalbani and published by Kitab Bhavan, India: 
“There may be some who believe that God is most noble, He is the master and is effective in the universe but that He has put on one of His servants the robe of honour and deification and has made him effective, enabling him to act freely in a part of the world it is just as the chief king at times puts on some one of his slaves a robe of the king and appoints him as a ruler in some part of his country while he himself remains as the chief of kings and they remain as the kings. Similarly Allah is the God of gods, and they  are simply the gods, but they have a great rank before God and have free hand in His kingdom and can intercede for people with Him. Their tongues hesitate to name them the servants of God and make them equal to the people in general. Thus, they turned away from the reality and named them as the sons of God, His dear ones and His beloveds; and named the rest of the people as their servants. They accordingly named themselves the worshippers of Jesus, the  servants of such and such and of Isfandiyar (the Divine power, goodness) etc. This is the religion  of the Jews, the Christians, the Polytheists, and the extremists among the hypocrites in the religion of  the Holy Prophet in these days of ours. 


He further wrote in “Al-Budur Al-Bazighah” p 151 

“The Holy Prophet had spoken the truth when he had said “you will surely follow in the foot-steps of those before you span by span, arm by arm, to an extent that if they had ever entered in the hole of a lizard You will follow them in that as well” The Companions asked “O, Prophet  of  God,  you mean the Jews and the Christians”. Thereupon, he said, “May I not tell you what the hypocrites of the prophet’s community had invented namely, rigus of polytheism, and had aroused thereby his trustee to anger and had disquieted the heart of the bearer of his knowledge and his revelation”? VERILY WE HAVE SEEN PERSONS AMONG THE MUSLIMS WHO ARE SO WEAK IN THEIR FAITH, THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN THE RELIGIOUS CHIEFS AND HEADS AS THEIR LORDS AGAINST GOD, HAVE MADE THEIR TOMBS AS MOSQUES, ARE MAKING PILGRIMAGE TO THESE TOMBS, VESTIGES AND TRACES, JUST AS THE JEWS AND THE CHRISTIANS WERE DOING IT. We have seen  persons among them who change the words from their proper places saying “Good is for God and the bad is for us”. It is just as the Jews used to say, “The fire will not touch us but for a few days”, and used intercession and belovedness at the improper places, as it was done by those who went before them. They had picked up some things from the Hindu religion and some from the religion of the Magians. They continue to stick to them tenaciously with the result that they broke up into parties and consequently began to judge the text analogically. This is how they went astray and led others astray.

Have you searched out the truth as to why God had declared the Jews and the Christians as infidels for taking their bishops and monks as Lords against God? Have you not seen that they believed in the eternity of a person while they had acknowledged that such a one was his father and such a one was his mother or believed in the necessity of a person while they had acknowledged that yesterday he was not anything to  be mentioned, or the end of the series of the Being to a man while they had acknowledged, that many generations had passed away before him? Nay, but all these are contradictions and the worst is he who believes in them. Have you not seen them believing in the incarnation of God namely that the eternal one had entered into the temporal one, Then why do they say that God sent such and such and made such and such revelation to him nor such a one died or such and such will intercede before his Lord and that his intercession would be accepted and similar words? The truth is, that they had taken the tombs of their prophets as mosques. The devil had a sway over them and had made them forget the memory of God. Their tongues hesitate to certify that he is the master of something against God.  

The fact is, that if God was to intend to destroy Jesus Christ, son of Mary and his mother and all who are on the  earth, there is none to prevent Him. The belief in the nobility and deification of holy persons had entered into their hearts and impressed them deeply. But a holy person is a human being from among those He has created. His excellence lies in this, that the revelation was made to him and under God’s order he has commanded the people to follow what He has commanded him to do and refrain from what He has prohibited, telling them all this from the side of his Lord. Every nobility is derived from these things and from nothing else. Indeed, we  have brought before you clear proofs and after that no excuse is left for a person, even if he were to bring many an excuse. You, therefore, ponder over this.

Have you not seen the polytheists of Mecca that they acknowledged the termination of the series of Being with God, as God has said, “If you were to ask them who created the heavens and the earth, they will certainly say, Allah”. But it did not prevent them from associating others with God. You must have heard about the Tradition that “knowledge will be removed away before the Resurrection”. Two persons were quarrelling, one saying beware, sixty years and the other saying that beware, seventy years. They then referred the matter to one who was more learned than them. He told them beware, ninety years, and took an oath of Him in whose hand was his life that it had actually happened in the other verses. I do not find anyone but that there was polytheism in him, as God has said “Many of them will not believe but that they are the polytheists”. GOD HAS DECLARED THE POLYTHEISTS OF MECCA AS INFIDELS BY THEIR SAYING ABOUT A GENEROUS MAN WHO USED TO BRAY THE GRUEL OF PARCHED BARLEY FOR THE PILGRIMS THAT HE HAS BEEN PUT IN THE POSITION OF DEIFICATION. THEY, THEREFORE,  BEGAN  TO  CALL HIM FOR HELP AT A TIME OF HARDSHIPS.”

Comment: So for Shah Waliyullah, Al-Lat was a pious man, who used to make Sawiq, and people started to invoke him for help and this is how they put him in the level of deification and started to worship him. Also Shah Waliyullah repeated many times that Mushrik of Makkah did not make any equal to Allah in His creation of powers, rather they sought intercession of His close ones, the  saints. And nowadays people who build mosques on graves of saints and do pilgrimage to their graves (Urs) are similar to the Mushrik of Makkah. 

Mawlid/Meelad Queries


Question: The Ahlul Bid’ah in an article, backed up their moulood celebrations with sayings from some prominent scholars such as Ibn Hajar, Qustulaani, Ibn Jauzi and others, and even Haji Imdaadullah, the Shaikh of Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi. What answer is there for this proof which the Barelwis cite?

Answer (Mujlisul Ulama): We are not the muqallideen of ‘prominent scholars’. We are the Muqallideen of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh), and we follow the Shariah as it existed during the era of Khairul Quroon.

The Shariah is the Deen which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah taught and practised. Innovations having a façade of ibaadat, which were introduced centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), have no validity in terms of the Shariah.

Even if thousands of ‘prominent scholars’ support the bid’ah of moulood, it will remain bid’ah sayyiah (evil innovation). Ibaadat is what had existed during Khairul Quroon and substantiated by the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen and imparted to posterity by the Fuqaha of our Math-hab.

We are not awed by the names of the prominent scholars which the Qabar Pujaaris (grave-worshippers) cite in substantiation of their evil bid’ah of moulood which consists of acts of fisq, fujoor and shirk. The personal opinions of prominent scholars – opinions unsubstantiated by the Nusoos of the Shariah, remain the opinions of people, and regardless of the lofty stature of the prominent scholars, their opinions may not be hoisted on to the Ummah as if these acts are practices of the Sunnah or deeds commanded by the Shariah.

If a moulood practice is totally bereft of any of the rubbish actions with which the Qabar Pujaaris adorn their satanic exhibitions of merrymaking functions, such as the unadulterated personal practice of Haji Imdaadullah (rahmatullah alayh), then too, it does not constitute a Shar’i act of ibaadat which could be imposed on others. In fact, it is not permissible to invite others to personal acts of devotion even if such acts are devoid of any of the evil flotsam of the Bid’atis. Personal expressions of devotion and love for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are to be restricted to the privacy of the home by the individuals engaging in them. They should not be flaunted as acts of Masnoon ibaadat or presented to the Ummah as if they are deeds commanded by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and practised by the Sahaabah. 

Moulood is a baseless practice which has no origin in the Sunnah. The many acts of fanfare, fun, singing, clowning, feasting and merrymaking, render the function haraam and participation in these bid’ah practices is haraam. The moulood practices in vogue, as practised by the Grave-Worshippers, should not be confused with the simple and private act of Haji Imdaadullah (rahmatullah alayh).

It will be salubrious for the Qabar Pujaaris to understand that we are not members of Bani Israaeel whom the Qur’aan Majeed castigates: “They take their (prominent) scholars and their saints as gods besides Allah…” That was the practice of Bani Israaeel. We, the followers of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) acquire our Deen from the Sahaabah via the transmission Chain of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh). Our Islam does not begin 8 centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) with the advent of Shaikh Subki (rahmatullah alayh), for example, nor does our Islam begin with any of the prominent scholars who appeared on the scene centuries after the Sahaabah. These prominent scholars mentioned by the Qabar Pujaaris are not our arbaab (gods) who we are required to worship. The rulings of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen and the Fuqaha override such views and practices of centuries-later Ulama which lack Shar’i substantiation.

It will do the Qabar Puja mob well to reflect the following naseehat of Hadhrat Sayyid Ahmad Kabeer Rifaa’i (rahmatullah alayh) who was a ‘prominent scholar’ and a great Wali:

“Respected People! What is it that you are doing? You say Haarith said so; Baayazid said so; Mansur Hallaj said so. Instead of saying so, say that Imaam Shaafi’ said so; Imaam Ahmad (Bin Hambal) said so; Imaam Maalik said so; Imaam Abu Hanifah said so. The statements of Baayazid can neither lower nor elevate you. On the contrary, Imaam Maalik and Imaam Shaaf’i indicate the path of Najaat (Salvation) and the Shariah.”

So, we are not interested in opinions and practices of Ulama who appeared on the scene many centuries after the Sahaabah. Any of their practices which are alien to the Shariah as it existed during the era of Khairul Quroon have no Shar’i validity. Furthermore, we shall, Insha-Allah, dissect the statements of the prominent scholars in subsequent articles.


Question: What is the Shar’i ruling on Meelaad? Many early Ulama such as Allamah Suyuti, Ibn Taimiyyah, Allaamah Ibn Kathir, etc. said that it is permissible. In the UK some people march around the city singing naats (songs) when celebrating meelaad. Is this correct? A promoter of meelaad says that Thuwaibah was the slave of Abu Lahab. When she informed him that a son (Muhammad – sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was born in his brother’s house, he set her free. After the death of Abu Lahab he was seen in a dream in which he said: ‘I am in severe punishment, but this is lessened on Mondays.’ Then he showed his forefinger and said that he would suck it. It was with this finger that he indicated that Thuwaibah was free when she informed him of the birth of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Ibn Jawzi states: ‘Abu Lahab is the kaafir who is mentioned specifically in the Qur’aan.’ If such a person can be rewarded for celebrating meelaad of the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), then imagine how great the reward would be for a Muslim who celebrates it.”

Answer (Mujlisul Ulama0: Firstly, what the early Ulama understood of meelaad is in sharp contrast to the Hindu-type of meelaad rituals of fisq and fujoor which accompany the meelaad celebrations of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah and Qabar Pujaaris (Grave Worshippers). The meelaad celebrations in vogue are evil bid’ah – haraam bid’ah which shaitaan has adorned for the Qabar Puja sect. Such Hindu-type of celebrations are never permissible even according to those early Ulama who had participated in meelaad functions which have no basis in the Sunnah.

The episode pertaining to Abu Lahab has absolutely no relationship with the bid’ah milaad customs in vogue. He freed a slave woman. The claim that he had celebrated milaad will not be believed by even the baboons. To claim that Abu Lahab the kaafir was rewarded for celebrating milaad is a black lie fabricated by the people of bid’ah. Freeing a slave has no relationship with the stupid customs in which the bid’atis indulge.

To understand whether an act is ibaadat or not, one has to refer to the great authorities of the Khairul Quroon era (the first three ages of Islam). Whatever was ibaadat in that era is Islamic ibaadat. What was innovated 700 and 800 years after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is not ibaadat.

Proof for the validity of ibaadat is not Ibn Taimiyyah and Subki, etc. who came 7 centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They should cite the Sahaabah and the Taabieen as proof. But, they jump from the age of the Sahaabah and seek evidence for their innovations from the statements of Ulama who appeared 7 and 8 centuries after the perfection and completion of Islam. Their claims are absolutely baseless. They have no grounds on which to stand. They have nothing in the Qur’aan, Ahaadith and Fiqah to support their drivel haraam meelaad merrymaking functions.

Subki, Ibn Kathir and the other Ulama who appeared on the scene 7, 8 and 10 centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are not the Proofs of the Shariah. As far as Ibn Taimiyyah is concerned, he was a deviate who subscribed to views of shirk and kufr. The Sahaabah, Taabi-een and Tab-e-Taabieen are the Proofs of Islam. In this regard, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Honour my Sahaabah, for verily they are your noblest; then those after them (the Taabieen), then those after them (Tab-e-Taabieen). Thereafter will prevail falsehood.”

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) also said in this regard: “The best of ages is my age, then the next age, then the next age. Then after them (the Sahaabah, Taabieen and Tab-e-Taabieen) will come such people who will (hasten) to testify without being asked to testify. They will be treacherous people who cannot be trusted. They will take vows without fulfilling them. Among them will prevail obesity……Then will come people who will love obesity.”

Those who love the fun and merrymaking, the feasting and singing of these deceptive ‘religious’ functions of bid’ah meelaad in which numerous evils are committed, are the people among whom prevail falsehood and obesity (ugly fatness). Their stomachs are bloated with all the haraam food they devour in the name of the Deen. Their hollow ‘love’ vociferously professed for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is a canard – a dastardly false slogan designed for their own deception and the deception of the stupid public who indulges in the singing, dancing and merrymaking.

Refuting the ‘Proof’ for Kissing the Graves [Analysis Of the Hadith of Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (radhiyallahu anhu)]

Question: One of my relative who is a Barelwi justifies his grave-worshipping antics by posting this Hadith:

The Governor of Madinah, Marwan ibn al-Hakam one day saw a man placing his face on top of the grave of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

He (Marwan) asked: “Do you know what you are doing?”

We he (Marwan) came near him, he realized that it was the Sahaabi Hadhrat Abu Ayyub Ansari (radhiyallahu anhu).

He (radhiyallahu anhu) replied: “Yes I came to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and not to a stone.” [Mustadrak]

According to him, this proves the so-called “Sajdah Ta’zeemi” they do to the Graves of Awliya. How to answer this Hadith??

Maulana Sahib please comment on this issue.

Answer [By Maulana Ahmad Sadiq Desai of Mujlisul Ulama]:

The Barelwi qabar pujaari is a jaahil. No one has the right to digout hadith  narrations, subject these to opinion and formulate masaa-il. The Shariah has been formulated and finalized 14 centuries ago. The Fuqaha were the highest authorities of the Deen after the Sahaabah.  The rulings of the Fuqaha are  final and may not be
abrogated by juhala of this age who extract Hadith narrations and issue stupid ‘fatwas’ in terms of their crooked understanding.

It is not permissible to kiss graves. The people of today are not Hadhrat Ayyub Ansaari (radhiyallahu anhu) whose profound love for Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had delivered him into a state called ‘Istighraaq’ (total absorption beyond himself). Such isolated practices of Sahaabah do not constitute daleel in the Shariah. The Fuqaha understood the Ahaadith better than all the  people of these times.

The fact that Marwan prohibited the act, is evidence for the validity of the prohibition. Since he saw Hadhrat Ayyub (Radhiyallahu anhu) acting in conflict with the law, he (Marwan) prohibited him.

Ahmad Raza Khan Refutes the Qabar Pujaris
Defending their practice of making sajda to the graves of the Auliyaah, the Qabr Pujaaris explain that the sajda which they make to the graves is called ‘Sajda Ta’zeemi’ which is a prostration of respect and not a prostration of ibaadah. But, Molvi Ahmad Raza Khan has written a special treatise in refutation of the sajda made to the graves. The name of the treatise on this question is ‘Zubdatuz Zakiyyah Fi Tahreemis Sujoodit Tahiyyah’. In this treatise he vehemently rejects those who make sajda to their peers and to the graves of the Auliyaah. Molvi Naeemuddin Barailvi writes in Kitaabul Aqa’id:

“The sajda which the Malaaikah rendered to Adam (alayhissalaam) was a sajda ta’zeemi which was by way of the command of Allah. Sajda Ta’zeemi was permissible in previous Shari’ahs. It is not permissible in our Shari’ah.” Sajda Tahiyyah is most certainly haraam and a Kabeerah sin…” [Zubdatuz Zakiyyah, p.6]

On page 56 of Zubdatuz Zakiyyah, Molvi Ahmad Raza Khan says: “The ignorant make sajda to their rebellious peers and they call this practice ‘Paaygah’. According to some Mashaaikh it is kufr. It being a major sin is unanimous. Therefore, if he (the Mureed) considers the sajda for his permissible then he will be a Kaafir…..”

On page 65 of Zubdatuz Zakiyyah, Molvi Ahmad Raza Khan says: “Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) forbade graves to be made places of sajda.”

The Disease of Ghuluww [Committing Excess in Faith]

Mufti Muhammad Shafi’ Usmani

Excess  in  Faith

O  people  of  the  Book,  be  not  excessive  in  your  Faith and  do  not  say  about  Allah  anything  but  the  truth… [Qur’an  4: 171]

In  this  verse,  the  People  of  the  Book  have  been  asked  not  to  indulge  in  excess  in  matters  relating  to  their  Faith.  Lexically,  the  Qur’anic  word:  al-Ghuluww  means  to  cross  the  limits  or  transgress.  In  Ahkam  al-Qur’an,  Imam  al-Jassas says:

Excess  in  Faith  is  crossing  the  limit  set  therein.

The  People  of  the  Book,  that  is,  the  Jews  and  the  Christians  were  both  made  addressees  of  this  injunction  because  excess  in  Faith  is  the common  factor  between  them.  Both  groups  have  fallen  victims  to  nothing  but  excess  in  matters  of  Faith.  The  Christians  committed  excess  in  believing  and  honouring  Sayyidna  ‘Isa  (alayhissalaam)  when  they  went  on  to  the  extreme  of  taking  him  to  be  God  or  son  of  God  or  the  third  God.  As  for  Jews,  they  committed  excess  in  disbelieving  and  rejecting  him  –  not  simply  that  they  did  not  accept  him  even  as  a  prophet,  they  were  audacious  enough  to,  God  forbid,  impute  a  false accusation  to  his  revered  mother,  Sayyidah  Maryam  and  to  cast  a  slur  against  her  parentage.

Since  the  disastrous  deviation  of  Jews  and  Christians  in  matters  of  Faith  was  a  common  scene  of  the  time,  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  specially  instructed  his  community  to  be  very  careful  about  it.  According  to  a  report  from  Sayyidina  ‘Umar  (radhiyallahu anhu)  appearing  in  the  Musnad  of  Ahmad,  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  said:

Do  not  exaggerate in  my  praise  as  was  done  by  Christians  in the  case  of  ‘lsa  son  of  Maryam  (alayhissalaam).  Beware,  I  am  only  a  servant.  So,  call  me  a  servant  of  Allah  and  His  messenger.  [This  narration  has  also  been  reported  by  al-Bukhari  and  Ibn  al-Madini  rating  it  as  sound  and  authentically  reported] 

In  brief,  the  sense  of  what  he  said  is:  I  am  one  with  everyone  in  being  a  servant  of  Allah  and  a  human  being.  The  highest  rank  I  have  is  that  I  am  a  Messenger  of  Allah.  Raising  it  higher  to  the  limit  that  you  go  about  taking  me  as  partner  in  the  attributes  of  Almighty  Allah is  excess  and  I  do  not  want  you  to  fall  into  this  excess  like  the  Christians.  This  excess  in  Faith  practiced  by  the  Jews  and  Christians  did  not  remain  limited  to  prophets  only.  Once  used  to  it,  they  extended  this  attitude  of  theirs  to  the  apostles,  followers  and  deputies  of  the  prophets.  They  had  already  assigned  Godhood  to  their  prophet,  now  they  invested  the  followers  of  the  prophet  with  immunity  from  sin.  While  doing  so,  they  did  not  even  take  the  trouble  of  investigating  and  making  sure  if  such  followers  were  genuine  followers  of  the  prophet and  who  correctly  and  firmly  adhered  to  his  teachings,  or  they  were  no  more  than  hereditary  religious  scholars  and  guides.  This  resulted  in  the  emergence  of  a  leadership  which  was  astray  in  itself  and  could  do  nothing  but  keep  adding  to  the  strayings  of  others.  So,  they  ruined  their  Faith  by  practicing  it  erroneously  from  within.  The  Holy  Qur’an  has  described  this  very  condition  of  these  people  in  the  verse (that  is,  these  people  took  their  religious  leaders  as  objects  of  worship,  other  than  Allah). It  means  that  they  had  already  been  excessive  in  making  their  prophet  a  God,  then,  they  started  worshipping  later-day  religious  leaders  in  the  name  of  following  the  prophet!

The  lesson  to  be  learnt  is  that  excess  in  Faith  is  a  dangerous  attitude  which  has  destroyed  the  Faiths  of  earlier  religious  communities  all  in  the  fair  name  of  Faith.  So  serious  were  the  implications  that  our  noble  master  devised  perfect  defences  to  keep  his  community  safe  against  this  terrible  epidemic.

It  appears  in  Hadith  that  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  asked  Sayyidina ‘Abdullah  ibn  ‘Abbas  (radhiyallahu  anhu)  on  the  occasion  of  Hajj  that  he  should  go  and  collect  pebbles  which  he  could  use  to  throw  at  the  Jamarat.  He  returned  with  average-sized  pebbles  and  presented  them to  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  who  liked  them  very  much  and  said twice:  (a like  these,  like  these)  which  means  that  one  should  do   his  or  her  ramy  at  Jamarat  using  average-sized  pebbles  like  these. Then,  he  said: 

It  is  your  duty  to  avoid  excess  in  Faith  for  communities  before you  were  destroyed  because  of  being  excessive  in  their  Faith.  

Important  Rules  of  Guidance

Some  important  rules  come  out  from  this  hadith:

1.  The  masnoon  limit  placed  on  pebbles  thrown  at  the  Jamaraat  during  the  Hajj  is  that  they  should  be  average  in  size,  neither  too  small  nor  too  big.  Throwing  big  rocks  is  included  under  excess  in  Faith.

2.  The  legal  limit  of  everything  is  what  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  has  left  determined  by  his  word  and  deed.  Going  beyond  this  limit  is  ghuluww,  excess  in  Faith.

3.  Precisely  defined,  excess  in  Faith  is  the  crossing  of  the  masnoon  limit  set  for  doing  something.

The  Limits  of  Materialism

The  greed  for  worldly  wealth  and  luxury  beyond  the  level  of  need  is  considered  blameworthy  in  Islam.  Instructions  to  observe  restraint  against  such  urges  are  profusely  spread  out  in  the  Qur’an.  But,  the Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  while  prohibiting  attachment  to  wordly  life greedily,  has  set  its  proper  limits  by  his  word  and  deed.  He  declared  marriage  to  be  his  way  and  pursuaded  others  to  follow  his  example. He  explained  the  many-faceted  blessings  of  having  children.  To  live  nicely  and  wisely  with  the  family  and  to  fulfill  the  rights  of  everyone properly  were  things  he  prescribed  as  obligatory.  To  work  for  one’s  family  and  earn  a  good  living  was  what  he  called  an  obligation  after the  obligation  (Fareedhah ba’d al-Fareedhah). He  laid  stress  on  people  to  engage  in  business,  agriculture,  industry  and  labour.  The  establishment  of  an  Islamic  Nation  and  government  and  the  promotion  of  a  system  governed  by  Islam  was  something  he  declared  to  be  part  of  the  mandate  of prophethood.  Thus,  by  acting  in  accordance  with  it,  he  went  on  to  establish  a  state  system  throughout  the  Arabian  peninsula  which  was  later  extended  to  other  parts  of  the  world  in  the  East  and  the  West.  All  this  shows  that  being  engaged  in  these  pursuits  within  the  limits  of  need  is  not  counted  as  gross  love  of  the material  nor  as  greed  and  avarice.

The  Jews  and  Christians  did  not  realize  the  truth  of  the  matter  and  got  themselves  involved  in  monasticism.  The  Holy  Qur’an  has  refuted  this  uncalled  for  involvement  of  theirs  by  saying: 

It  means  that  they  took  to  ways  of  monasticism  which  were  not  prescribed  for  them  by  Allah  except  that  they  were  to  seek  the  pleasure  of  Allah  Then,  they  failed  to  fulfill  the  conditions  of  what  they  had  themselves  imposed.  [see Qur’an 57:27]

The  Limits  of  Sunnah  and  Bid’ah

By  his  word  and  deed,  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  has,  in  everything  such  as  religious  acts  of  worship  and  social  transactions  and  dealings,  demarcated  the  limits  of  moderation.  Any  deviation  from  these  limits,  whether  it  be  in  falling  behind  or  in  pushing  ahead  of  them,  is  forbidden  for  it  leads  a  believer  astray  from  the  right  path.  It was  for  this  reason  that  he  has  very  emphatically  blocked  the  incursion  of  bid’at (self-promoted  innovations  in  established  religion)  and  muhdathat:  (the  embracing  of  everything  appearing  recent  and  novel  in  a  given  time  as  if  a  part  of  established  religion  which,  in  our  time,  are  introduced  under  the  fancy  garbs  of  recension  and modernity).  Let  us,  therefore,  remember  what  he  said:

“Every  Bid’ah  is  straying  and  every  straying  ends  in Jahannam.”  

The  word  Bid’ah  used  In  the  hadith  refers  to  everything  (assumed to  be  a  part  of  religion)  which  is  not  there  in  the  word  and  deed  of  the Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  clearly  or  through  hint.  Hadrat  Shah Waliyyullah  has  said  that  Islam  condemns  Bid’ah  as  a  serious  offence because  it  opens  the  doors  to  alteration  in  religion.  This  is  what  happened  with  earlier  religious  communities.  They  added  up  things  on their  own  to  what  their  Book  said  and  their  prophet  taught.  Then came  another  generation,  and  the  generations  that  followed,  each  adding  its  share  to  the  original.  Finally,  everything  got  so  mixed  up  that  it  became  impossible  to  identify  the  true  religion  as  distinct  from  the  additions  introduced  by  its  adherents.

In  his  famous  book,  Hujjatullah  al-Balighah,  he  has  also  given details  of  circumstances  under  which  efforts  have  been  made  all  over the  world  to  inject  alterations  in  the  religion  of  Islam.  He  has  also  pointed  out  to  the  concern  shown  by  the  Shari’ah  of  Islam  which  has installed  defensive  mechanisms  on  all  such  doors  of  incursion  so  that  there  remains  no  single  outlet  through  which  this  disease  could  hit  the  Muslim  community  in  epidemic proportions.

The  Moderate  Course  in  honouring  and  following  religious leaders

One  such  cause  referred  to  above  is  the  practice  of  excess  in  Faith  (Ghuluww fid Deen). Two  factors  distinctly  contribute  to  the  emergence  of  this  attitude:  Firstly,  the  desire  to  undertake  deep  investigations  unnecessarily  or  to  be  involved  in  far-fetched  interpretations;  and  secondly,  the  choice  of  a  hardened  stance.  It  is  a  matter  of  great  regret  that, despite  so  much  elaborations  made  by  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  and  active  restrictions  placed  by  the  Shari’ah  of  Islam,  the  Muslim community  is  suffering  fatally  from  this  very  disease  of  excess.  Its  fallout  can  be  distinctly  noticed  in  all  departments  of  our  Faith.  Out  of  these,  the  field  most  affected  is  that  of  religious  leaders  where  the  question  is:  Whom  to  follow?

Stretching  between  two  extremes,  a  group  of  Muslims  has  gone  far  out  by  holding  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  religious  leader  or  teacher  or  ‘alim  or  Shaykh.  They  would  say:  ‘The  Book  of  Allah  is  suffi- cient  for  us  If  they  understand  the  Book  of  Allah  so  do  we  –  – ‘They  are  men,  so  are  we.’  The  result  was  that  every  ambitious  pseudo-intellectual  –  unlettered  in  Arabic  and  uninitiated  into  the  facts  of  and  insights  into  the  Qur’an  and  unfamiliar  with  the  exegetical  clarifications  given  by  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  –  considered  it  sufficient  to  look  at  translations  of  the  Qur’an  and  be  hoisted  as  a scholar  of  the  Qur’an!  How  can  a  tafsir  or  explanation  of  the  Qur’an  which  has  been  authentically  reported  from  the  Holy  Prophet  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  or  from  his  direct  disciples,  the  noble  Companions,  be  ever  ignored  or  bypassed?  But,  such  is  the  breed  of  these  dabblers  in  the  discipline  that  they  would  dismiss  anything  in  favour  of  their  brain  wave  and still  have  the  temerity  to  tie  it  with  the  Qur’an?  Although, had  a  book  without  a  teacher  been  enough,  Almighty  Allah  had  the  power  to  make  written  copies  of  the  book  become  available  for  people  at  their  homes  – there  was,  then,  no  need  to  send  a  prophet  to  teach.  A  little  reflection  would  reveal  that  this  is  not  something  peculiar  to  the  Book  of  Allah. No  one  can,  by  simply  looking  at  the  translation  of  any  book  in  the  arts  and  sciences,  become  an  expert  in  those  fields.  We  have  yet  to  find  a  physician  who  became  a  physician  through  a  familiarity  with  translations  of  medical  books.  No  engineer  became  an  engineer  by  browsing  through  engineering  texts.  Even  the  study  of  common  books  on  sewing  and  cooking  has  not  made  anyone  succeed  as  a  master  tailor  or  chef.  So,  the  truth  lies  elsewhere  –  the  system  needs  the  elements  of teaching  and  learning  under  a  teacher.  This  is  all  too  established  for  everyone.  But,  it  is  indeed  sad  to  see  that  the  Qur’an  and  Sunnah  alone,  of  all  things  around  us,  have  been  taken  so  casually  as  not  to need  any  teacher.  Thus,  a  fairly  large  group  of  educated  people  drifted  down  in  the  direction  of  serious  deficiency  when  they  took  the  lone study  of  the  Qur’an  as  all  sufficient  and  totally  dispensed  of  with  the need  to  consult  the  exegesis  and  interpretation  of  early  scholars,  and  to  be  guided  by  them.

On  the  other  side  of  the  extreme,  a  large  group  of  Muslims  got  involved  in  a  kind  of  excess  which  goaded  them  to  take  just  about  anyone  as their  religious  guide  almost  blindly,  and  blindly  it  was  that they  started  following  them.  They  never  took  the  trouble  of  finding  out  whether  or  not  the  person  they  were  taking  as  guide  came  up  to  the  standard  of  high  intellectual  achievement,  corresponding  personal  behaviour,  concern  for  the  good  of  people  and  the  genuine  sense  of responsibility  before  Allah.  They  did  not  even  care  to  apply  a  much  simpler test  by  looking  at  the  kind  of  teaching  such  a  person  was imparting  and  making  sure  that  it  was  not  against  the  Qur’an and  Sunnah.

The  Ideal  Solution

The  Shari’ah  of  Islam  has  wisely  shielded  Muslims  from  falling  into  the  trap  of  excess.  The  middle  course  In  between  the  two  extremes  it  has  suggested  is:  Learn  the  Book  of  Allah  (Kitabullah)  from  the  Men  of Allah  (Rijalullah)  and  recognize  the  Men  of  Allah  from  the  Book  of  Allah.  In  other  words,  one  should  first  recognize  those who are engaged  in  learning  and  communicating  the  true  knowledge  of  the Qur’an  and  Sunnah  through  the  all  too  well-known  teachings  of  these  twin  sources  of  Islamic  Faith.  Once  this  is  settled,  no  intricate  problem  relating  to  Qur’an  and  Sunnah  will  ever  bother  you  –  if  you  give  precedence  to  their  explanation  above  your  own  opinion,  and  follow  them.


Mujlisul Ulama

Tasawwuf  or  Sufi’ism  is  an  integral  constituent  of  Islam. Tasawwuf  which  has  been  erroneously  described  as ‘mysticism’,  is  the  product  of  the  Qur’aan  and  Sunnah. Tasawwuf  is  completely  subservient  to  the  Shariah.  Any  brand of  sufi’ism/tasawwuf  which  is  in  conflict  with  the  Shariah  is  Satanism. 

Elaborating  this  subject,  Hadhrat  Sayyid  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani  (rahmatullah  alayh)  classified  these  Satanists  into several classes.

1)  Hulooliyyah   or  the  Incarnationists:  They  believe  that it  is lawful  to  stare  at  a  woman  or  a  man  whether  they  happen  to  be wives  or  husbands,  daughters  or  sisters,  etc. They  intermingle and dance  together.

2)  Haaliyyah:  They  claim  to  be  in  ecstasy.  They  are  entranced  by  singing,  jumping,  shouting  and  clapping  hands. They  believe  that  their  sheikhs  are  above  the  laws  of  the Shariah

3)  Auliya-iyyah:  They  claim  to  have  achieved  divine proximity  of  the  loftiest  stage,  hence  all  the  injunctions  of  the Shariah  are  not  applicable  to  them.  They  also  claim  that  a  wali has  a  higher  status  than  a  Nabi.  They  believe  that  while knowledge  came  to    Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam) via  Jibraeel  (alayhis  salaam),  it  comes  to  the  wali  directly  from Allah Ta’ala.

4)  Shamuraaniyyah:  These  heretics  believe  that  the  world  is eternal.  It  never  had  a  beginning  nor  will  it  ever  end.  They  consider  themselves  above  the  ahkaam  of  the  Shariah  which  they  believe  do  not  apply  to  them.  There  is  nothing  such  as  haraam  and  halaal  in  their  belief  concept.  Musical  instruments  are  used  in  their  so-called  religious  rituals.  They  do  not differentiate  between  man  and  woman  regarding  them  to  be  the  same.

5)  Hubbiyah:  They  believe  that  when  a  person  attains  the stage  of  ‘love’,  they  are  freed  from  the  obligations  of  the Shariah.  They  also  believe  in  nudism.  They  expose  their private  parts.

6)  Huriyyah:  They  seek  to  gain  ecstatic  experiences  by  means of  shouting,  singing  and  clapping  hands.  They  claim  to  having  sexual  relations  with  the  houris  of  Jannat.

7)  Mutakaasiliyyah:  Laziness  is  a  cardinal  article  of  their  faith.  They  beg  from  door  to  door  for  their  sustenance.  While  they  rot  in  their  laziness  they  claim  that  this  is  renunciation  of  the world.

8)  Mutajaahiliyyah:  They  deliberately  feign  ignorance,  dress immodestly  and  emulate  non-believers  (They  resemble  the  modernists  of  our  age.  –  The  Majlis)

9)  Waafiqiyyah:  They  claim  that  no  one  can  understand  and know  Allah  Ta’ala,  hence  they  deliberately  abandon  the  Shariah  on  the  basis  of  this corrupt  assumption.

10)  Ilhaamiyyah:  They  believe  in  ilhaam  (inspiration). Thus  they  abandon  knowledge  and  forbid  its  acquisition.  They believe  that  the  Qur’aan  is  a  barrier  for  them.  Poetry  and  music are  their  Qur’aan.  (On  the  occasion  when  Allah  Ta’ala expelled  Iblees  from  the  heavens,  he  supplicated  for  a ‘qur’aan’.  Granting  his  supplication,  Allah  Ta’ala  informed  him that  his ‘qur’aan  will  be  poetry   and singing.  This  group  of  Satanists  follow  him  in  this  aspect.  They  receive  their  ‘ilhaam’ (inspiration) from shaitaan. – The Majlis)

Besides  these  sects  of  Satanists,  there  were  many  others  as  well  such  as  the  Qalandaris  (wandering  beggars),  Haydaris (those  who  pretend  to  be  heroes)  and  Adhamis  (those  who  fraudulently  pretend  to  follow  Hadhrat  Ibraahim  Adham’s  path  of  renunciation. He  had  abandoned  the  throne of  Balkh).

A  very  prominent  sect  of  Satanists  in  our  era  is  the  Qabar  Pujaari  sect.  They  worship  the  graves  of  dead  saints  and  claim  to  ascend  to  lofty  spiritual  stages  via  the  avenue  of  ecstasy  while  in  reality  their  ‘ecstasy’  is   nothing  but  pure  hallucination,  the  product  of  smoking  dagga  (hashish)  and  opium.  Their  headquarters  are  always  located  at  the  graves  of  Auliya  which  they  have  converted  into  haunts  of  shirk  and kufr.

Hadhrat  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani  (rahmatullah  alayh)  states  in his  kitaab,  Sirrul  Asraar  that  there  are  two  signs  of  the  people of  Truth  who  follow  the  Sunnah  of  Rasulullah  (sallallahu alayhi  wasallam).  One  sign  is  zaahir  (external).  They  follow  the  ahkaam  of  the  Shariah  meticulously.  They  are  firmly fettered  to  the  Shariah.  The  other  sign  is  baatin  (internal  spiritual).  They  follow  the  Akhlaaq-e-Hasanah  (Beautiful Moral  Character)  of  Rasulullah  (sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam). Thus,  they  are  firmly  anchored  to  the  Shariah  and  the  Sunnah. And,  this  is  the  Naaji  group  –  the  only   group  of  the  73  sects, which  will  attain  salvation in  the  Aakhirah.

Warning  Muslims  of  the  Satanist  trap  of  deception,  Hadhrat  Sayyid  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani  (rahmatullah  alayh)  says  in  his  kitaab:  “Beware, O  Traveller  in  search  of  the  Truth!  Beware of the  blind  leading  the  blind. Your  sight  should  become  so  fine  to enable  you  to  distinguish  between  the  slightest  particle  of  good  and  evil.”

Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani’s View On Ahle Bid’ah

[By  Hadhrat  Shaykh  Abdul  Qaadir  Jilaani  (Rahmatullah  alayh)  (Extract  from  Ghunyatut  Taalibeen  of  which  Hadhrat  Jilaani  is  the  author)]

Every  Person  of  Imaan  who  has  intelligence  and  insight  should  obey  the  Sunnat  of  Rasulullah (Sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  and    flee  from  Bid’aat  (innovations). Abstain  from mubaalaghah  and ghulu’  (excess,  extremism,  bigotry  and  the  like  for  it culminates  in  Bid’ah  –  The  Majlis)  in  the  Deen,  for  suddenly  you  will  slip  from  Siraatul  Mustaqeem  and  be destroyed. 

Hadhrat  Ibn  Mas’ood (Radhiyallahu  anhu)  said: “Follow  the  Sunnat  of  the  Rasool   (Sallallahu  alayhi wasallam).  This  is  sufficient  for  you,  and  do  not  approach  near  to Bid’ah.”  It  is  incumbent  for  every  Person  of  Imaan  to  follow  the  Sunnat  of  Rasulullah (Sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  and  the  Jamaa’t  (i.e.  Ahlus  Sunnah  Wal  Jamaa’t).  The meaning  of  Sunnat,  is  the  Way  of  Rasulullah  (Sallallahu  alayhi wasallam),  and  the  meaning  of  Jamaa’t  is  the  unanimous  issues  of  the  Offices  of  the  Khulafa-e-Raashideen  (which  in  our  era  are  confined  to  the  Four  Math-habs  –  The Majlis).

Refrain  from  debate  and  discussion  with  the  Bid’atis.  Salaam  to  them  is  not  permissible.  Imaam  Ahmad  Ibn  Hambal  (Rahmatullah  alayh)  said:  “Whoever  makes  Salaam  to  a  Bid’ati,  it  is  tantamount  to  loving  him  because  it  is  mentioned  in  the  Hadith:  ‘Spread  Salaam  and  love.”  (Thus,  making  Salaam  to  Bid’atis  is  tantamount  to expressing  love  for  them – The Majlis).

It  is  not  permissible  for  the  People  of  Imaan  to  have  any  association  with  the  Ahl-e-Bid’ah, hence  the  following  acts are  not  permissible:

•  To  mingle  and  fraternize  with them

•  To  congratulate  them  on  Eid  and  on  occasions  of  happiness

•  To  perform  their  Janaazah Salaat

•  To  laud  and  speak commendably  of  them.

For  the  Sake  of  Allah, have    aversion  and  enmity  for  them.  Believe  that  their  way  is  baatil  (false).  For  this  entire  attitude, the  intention  should  be  the  acquisition  of  great  and  abundant  Thawaab  (reward)  from  Allah  Ta’ala.

It  is  mentioned  in  the  Hadith  that  Allah  Ta’ala  will  fill  the heart  with  safety  and tranquillity  –  the  heart of  the  one  who  regards  a  Bid’ati  as  his  enemy  for  the  Sake  of  Allah  Ta’ala.  And,  on  the  Day  of  Qiyaamah  Allah  will  grant safety  and  peace  to  the  one who  harshly  rebukes  a  Bid’ati.

Allah  Ta’ala  will  elevate  by  a  hundred  ranks  in  Jannat  a  person  who  looks  with contempt  at  a  Bid’ati.  The  one  who  meets  a  Bid’ati  happily  and  pleases  him,  is  as  if  he  has  held  in  contempt  the  Qur’aan  which  Allah  Ta’ala  has  revealed  to  (Sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam).  Hadhrat  Abdullah  Ibn  Abbaas  (Radhiyallahu  anhu)   narrated  that  Rasulullah  (Sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  said that  as  long  as  a  Bid’ati  does  not  repent  from  his  Bid’ah,  Allah  Ta’ala  does  not  accept   any  of  his  good  deeds.

Hadhrat  Fudhail  Bin Iyaadh  (Rahmatullah  alayh)  said:  “Allah Ta’ala  destroys  the  deeds  of  a  man  who  has  affection  for  a Bid’ati.  The  Noor  of  Imaan  is  extinguished  from  his  heart,  (i.e. from  the  heart  of  the  one  who  has  affection  for  a  Bid’ati).  I  have  hope  that  Allah  Ta’ala  will  forgive  a  man  who  cherishes  aversion  and  animosity  in  his  heart  for  a  Bid’ati,  even  if  he  has  a  paucity  of  good  deeds.”

Hadhrat  Ibn  Uyainah  (Rahmatullah  Alayh)  said:  “A  person  who  accompanies  the janaazah  of  a  Bid’ati,  is  the  target  of  Allah’s  Wrath  and  Punishment  until  he  returns.”

Rasulullah (Sallallahu  alayhi  wasallam)  invoked  La’nat  (Allah’s  curse)  on  a  Bid’ati,  and  he  said: “Whoever  innovates  a  bid’ah  or  gives  refuge  to  a  Bid’ati,  the  La’nat  of  Allah,  the Malaaikah  and  of  all  people  descends  on  him,  and  Allah  rejects  his  Fardh  and  Nawaafil acts  ibaadat)”