Miscellaneous Answers Regarding Sects & Deviation

Question:

Our imam does so many bida’ and even some sunni imams say that he commits shirk in some of his activities. Do I have salaat if I follow him in salaat (if he really commits shirk)?

Answer:

If the imam commits shirk, then Salaat behind him is not valid. Ascertain properly from the other Imaams if your imam really practises shirk. If he does, then do not perform Salaat behind him.

Question:

Is it not better to advise people to study the commentary of Yusuf Ali’s Qur`aan translation until a worthier or more authoritative commentary is available in English? At least something could be learned from Yusuf Ali’s commentary regardless of the “errors” pointed out by the Mujlisul Ulama.

Answer:

Your suggestion is tantamount to advocating that a child be allowed to eat poison which it happens to be holding until a sweet or toy could be given to it as a substitute. It is an incumbent duty of every Muslim to abstain and ask others to abstain as well from all such things which despoil one’s faith and beliefs. Yusuf Ali’s “commentary” contains many views and teachings which are contradictory to the teachings and opinions of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) How then is it possible for us to maintain silence or advise Muslims to pursue the study of a book which conflicts with Allah Ta`ala’s Shariah?

Question:

Why does “The Majlis” indulge in controversial subjects. I feel that instead of creating controversy, “The Majlis” should concentrate on positive preaching to remedy time ills in our community.

Answer:

The greatest “controversy” which sparked off the greatest revolution on earth was created by Muhammadur Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) when he opposed all mankind to proclaim the Glory of Allah — to proclaim the Unity of Allah. If the proclamation of the Kalimah Shahaadat and all its ramifications (i.e. the Laws, teachings, etc. attendant to this Declaration of Faith) is described as “controversy” then we are proud to be the perpetrators of such “controversy”. Remedying the ills of the community cannot be achieved by appeasement, sidestepping of issues and raising false slogans of unity. If there is no cure for the cancer, for the rot, then the affected part must be amputated. We pray that Allah Ta`ala grants us the ability, time, resoluteness and the courage to proclaim the HAQQ — the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wasalam) regardless of time remonstrations and the trumpeting of the enemies of the Sunnah. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has said:

“Whoever clings to my Sunnah at the time of my Ummah’s corruption, he will receive the reward of a hundred Martyrs.”

Question:

Why is “The Majlis” adopting such a negative attitude — I mean always emphasising on things like miswaak, beard, dress, etc?

Answer:

On the Day of Qiyaamah when you will be seeking the intercession of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) then do direct this question to him (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). If Rasulullah’s beloved Sunnah is “negative” to you then to even attempt an explanation would be, in the words of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)):

“…like stringing a garland of pearls around the neck of a swine.”

We voice our total inability to explain the Sunnats of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to an avowed enemy of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)). The one who describes the beloved practices of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as “negative” and “out of touch with modern times” is truly speaking a munaafiq of the first order. We have no truck with such misguided ones. May Allah Ta`ala preserve us from uttering such infidelity.

Question:

Certain individuals are of the opinion that it is not necessary to adhere strictly to one particular Madh-hab because according to them all four Madh-habs are based on the Qur`aan and the Sunnah. In this regard, they say that the Ulema and the community are sectionalists. Could you please explain?

Answer:

Sectionalists? The individuals who are so scared of this term betray their gross sense of inferiority. Western influence or some other form of diabolic influence have afflicted these individuals with a kind of mob-mentality. If the mobs regard “sectionalism” as bad then it does not mean that the term is necessarily bad and to be avoided. What do these individuals understand by the term, “sectionalists”? What is their definition of this term? If sectionalism in their definition refers to those who are firm adherents of the Madh-habs, then we must loudly proclaim that we are proud to be labelled as “sectionalists”, for Islam commands this very “sectionalism” which these individuals so much loathe.

The safety of our Deen, the safety of our lmaam is embedded in following a PARTICULAR Madh-hab – or a particular form of “SECTIONALISM” initiated by the great Sahaabah of Muhammadur Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). There is absolutely nothing wrong with a “sectionalism” based on the Qur`aan and the Ahadith. The followers of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullahi alayh) constitute a “section” of the Ummah; the followers of Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullahi alayh) are a “section” of the Ummah; the followers of Imaam Maalik (rahmatullahi alayh) are a “section” of the Ummah and so are the followers of Imaam Ahmad lbn Hambal (rahmatullahi alayh). All these sections of Haqq unite to form the Ummah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

Strict adherence to a particular Madh-hab is of fundamental importance to combat the dictates of the wayward nafs of man. If every person had to be granted the latitude to flit from Madh-hab to Madh-hab then there would be no Deen left. The Deen would then become the victim of one’s whimsical fancy. Instead of FOUR Madh-habs we then have thousands of petty Madh-habs based not on the Qur`aan and Hadith, but on the dictates of nafs, desire and ego. Our modernist luminaries who are so vociferous in their clamour for an interchange of Madh-habs fail to discern the anarchy and chaos concomitant to such a move. They hopelessly fail to realise that not a single one of the great lmaams (Jurists) whose Madh-habs even the modernist concedes to be based on the Qur`aan and Sunnah, advocated or gave permission to flit from Madh-hab to Madh-hab. The Deen is the product of Wahi (Divine Revelation) and not the product of human intelligence. The Fuqahaa (Jurists of Islam) formulated their respective viewpoints and issued their rulings believing implicitly that these were correctly deduced on the firm basis of the Qur`aan and Sunnah, hence their verdicts carry the full force of the Shariah, and the Shariah cannot be subjected to our opinions and fancies.

It is only a person whose practical life is lax and who is grossly negligent of his Islamic duties who has a strong inclination to jump from Madh-hab to Madh-hab. Those in search of loopholes for escaping the restrictions of the Shariah usually attempt to flit from one Madh-hab to another. This constitutes a mockery of the Deen, a mockery of what is sacred and divine. For example: A man committed fornication and as a result, the law of Musaaharah will apply according to the Hanafi Madh-hab, i.e. this person who is a Hanafi will not be able to marry this woman’s mother, daughters, aunts, etc.. However, according to the Shaafi Madh-hab the law of Musaaharah is not established if one has committed fornication. Musaaharah is established only by means of marriage according to the Shaafi Madh-hab. Now this Hanafi Muslim because he now wishes to marry the daughter of the woman with whom he fornicated argues that all the Madh-habs are based on the Qur`aan and Sunnah, hence he can get married to this woman’s daughter on the basis of Imaam Shaafi’s ruling. This is indeed trifling with the Law of Allah Ta`ala. The Shariah has been made the victim of one’s carnal desires.

Adherence to a particular Madh-hab will ensure that the nafs and shaitaan do not make the Muqallid (follower of a particular Madh-hab) a victim to the devellish snares of desire and egos. Those who are given to the rejection of Taqleed are trodding along a perilous path a path which leads to the finality of one’s Imaan

Question:

What is the condition of a Muslim who says that he believes and follows only the Qur’aan. He rejects the Hadith.

Answer:

Such a man is a kaafir. He becomes a murtad by rejecting the Ahadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

Question:

Are Shiahs Muslims?

Answer:

Shiahs subscribe to beliefs of kufr, hence they are not Muslims. Among their corrupt beliefs are:

* That the Qur’aan Majeed is fabricated. 

* That the Sahaabah, the overwhelming majority of them, became murtadd after the demise of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

* That their imaams are appointed by Allah Ta’ala and that they transcend even the Ambiya.

* That wahi comes to their imaams.

* That Hadhrat Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) committed adultery.

Besides these, there are also other corrupt beliefs propagated by Shi’ism.

Question:

What exactly is a modernist Muslim? Are all Muslims who shave their beards and wear western clothing modernists? In the context in which The Majlis uses this expression, does it mean that a modernist is a kaafir?

Answer:

Commission of sins does not expel a Muslim from the fold of Islam. Even if a Muslim commits kabeerah (major) sins he remains a Muslim as long as he does not deny or reject the laws of the Shariah. A Muslim does not become a kaafir if he shaves his beard and dons kuffaar garments as long as he believes that what he is perpetrating is sinful. If he says that shaving the beard is permissible, then he ceases to be a Muslim. In view of his denial of a law of Islam, he becomes kaafir.

Rejection of any proven law, belief, teaching or custom of Islam is kufr which expels the denier from the fold of Islam. The term modernist is used sometimes for those who emulate the ways and styles of the kuffaar. Such modernists while imitating non-Muslims do not reject Islamic Culture. They remain Muslims.

Then, there are others who don Islamic garb, but they deny essential teachings and practices of Islam. This type of modernist is a kaafir. The dress-style and the sin committed do not make a person a kaafir. His rejection and denial of Allah’s Shariah or any aspect thereof render him a kaafir. But generally kaafir modernists display their kufr with their external appearance as well. They shave their beards, dress like kuffaar and have disdain for the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). o­n the other hand, faasiq Muslims who don kuffaar dress, shave their beards, listen to music, etc., inspite of committing these sins, do not hold in contempt the style of the Sunnah.

Question:

The newly developed Deobandi-Salafi trend of revisiting many masaail subject to a process which discards the legacy and input of the early Fuqaha, is gaining popularity in some quarters. Do they have any basis for moving in this direction. They incline towards talfeeq. Does the fact that these Ulama have sanads (certificates) somehow legitimise these methods and leanings?

Answer:

In all our Madaaris there is a strong undercurrent of adam-e-taqleed. The disease of abandoning the Taqleed of the Mathaahib is endemic. This disease is not new. It had already set in several decades ago even in Daarul uloom Deoband where some Ustaadhs were followers of Maudoodi. Their sanads do not entitle them to abandon Taqleed or to mellow the rigid stand of our Akaabir on this issue. Liberalism inherited from westernism is the root of this disease.

It is quite simple to understand that the quality of knowledge of present-day Ulama in comparison to the Uloom of the Akaabireen of several decades ago is exceptionally poor and defective. As far as Taqwa is concerned, present-day Ulama are completely bereft in relation to the high standard of Taqwa of our Akaabireen. When the great Ulama and Muqallid Fuqahaa of earlier times were staunch Muqallideen, never adopting talfeeq, how can it then be accepted that the present-day Ulama with all their deficiencies in Ilm and Taqwa, have the right of talfeeq and slackening the ties of Taqleed. The ‘Deobandi-Salafi’ trend described by you is a nafsaani trend. It is the teaching of Iblees. It is shaitaan’s trap to deviate the Ulama from the Path of the Sunnah.

The Muqallid Ulama have no right to look beyond the Rulings and Principles of the Fuqaha and Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen of the Mathaahib. In exceptional cases of difficulty and need, the principles of our Math-hab can be employed to extract a ruling of another Math-hab of the Sunnah. But such cases are rare. But nowadays, quasi molvis who have no proper understanding of even the text books, and who lack in entirety in Taqwa, consider themselves on par with the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen. They consider themselves qualified to deduct and formulate masaa-il and issue fatwa directly from the Qur’aan and Hadith. They are blind and dwell in deception and deviation. Shaitaan has adorned their evil manner and has succeeded in leading them by their noses.

Q. There are conflicting reports about Louis Farrakhan of America and his movement of Black Muslims. Is his movement part of the Ahlus Sunnah?

Louis Farrakahan is not even a Muslim. His movement is not Islam. The following are some of his beliefs of kufr which put him far beyond the pale of Islam:

• The belief that Allah Ta’ala appeared in human form (Nauthubillaah!) in the form of one Syrian trader called Fard Muhammad.

• Elijah was the last Messenger of Allah, who according to Farrakhan was the human being, Fard.

• He denies Qiyaamah.

• His month of convoluted ‘fasting’ is in December.

These are merely some of his beliefs and statements of kufr.

Q. Are all Shiah sects non-Muslim due to their outrageous beliefs?

Some centuries ago there were some Shiah sects who were Muslims despite their deviation. They did not subscribe to the kufr beliefs which Shi’ism in general propagates. We are not aware if members of such sects still exist or not. But, Shi’ism as we see it today is kufr.

Question:

Many modernists claim that there is no evidence in the Hadith for the prohibition of music. On what is the prohibition based?

Answer:

The prohibition is based on the Qur’aan, Sunnah and Ijma’ of the Ummah from the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) down to the present time. The views and claims of the modernist juhhaal (ignoramuses) who are the slaves of kuffaar are of no substance. Simply discard their views in the trash can. This prohibition is so crystal clear that it requires no substantiation whatsoever. The views of stupid modernists do not affect the validity of the Ahkaam of the Shariah. Since music, according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) cultivates nifaaq (hypocrisy) in the heart, these modernist Munaafiqeen are hell-bent in their endeavours to promote their kufr belief.

 

Q. Is it permissible to allow members of the Nation of Islam (NOI) sect to join Muslims in the Salaat ranks (sufoof)? They believe that one Fardh Muhammad is the personification of Allah Ta’ala – Nauthubillah! According to Shaikh Abdullah Al-Bukhaaras it is permissible. The Shaikh’s fatwa states as follows: “They believe that they are Muslims even though they are not. So they should be treated as the Munaafiqoon were treated at the t ime of Rasulul lah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The hypocrites prayed in the ranks of the Muslims and they were all known to the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as well as to Hudhayfah (radhiyallahu anhu). They should be taught and allowed to pray with the Muslims.” Please guide us. Presently we do not allow them into our Salaat ranks.

ANSWER

The honourable Shaikh Abdullah has erred in his fatwa in ruling that it is permissible to allow members of the Nation of Islam to join Muslims in Salaat. Members of NOI are not Muslims nor are they munaafiqoon. They believe that a human being, namely one Fard Muhammad, is Allah incarnate – Nauthubillah min thaalik. May Allah Ta’ala save us from such vile kufr. Their beliefs of shirk and kifr are publicly expressed and vigorously propagated. It is therefore not permissible for Muslims to freely permit such mushriks to perform Salaat in the same saff. The Shaikh basis his fatwa of permissibility on the fact that the munaafiqeen during t he a ge o f Ra s u l u l l a h (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would perform Salaat in jamaa’t with the Muslims. Despite Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) being aware of the identities of the munaafiqeen, he did not prevent them from joining in the ranks of Salaat. Thus, on this basis the honourable Shaikh has structured his fatwa. However, this analogy is erroneous. The munaafiqeen were not known to the Ummah. They were officially Muslims. Allah’s wisdom dictated that the identities of the munaafiqeen be concealed, not exposed. Thus, it was only Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and Hadhrat Huzaifah (radhiyallahu anhu) who had the knowledge of the identities of the munaafiqeen, but they were not allowed to divulge this secret. The very fact that Allah Ta’ala had prohibited the exposure of the munaafiqeen, is the clearest evidence that leads to the conclusion that Allah Ta’ala wanted them to be considered as Muslims by the Ummah at large. Whatever the divine reason may have been, Allah Ta’ala wanted and allowed the munaafiqeen to masquerade as Muslims, and He decreed with His prohibition on exposure that the Ummah at large believes and accepts them as Muslims. Hence, as far as the Sahaabah were concerned, whoever was in the saff was a true Muslim. The Muslim community therefore believed that these people were Muslims, that they believed in Tauheed in the same way as all the Sahaabah did. The Muslims with whom the munaafiqeen performed Salaat did not know that these persons standing alongside of them in the saff were not Muslims. The munaafiqeen professed to be Muslims of the same kind and belief as the rest of the Sahaabah. They professed the very same Shahaadat of Islam in the very same way as the rest of the Sahaabah. They did not call themselves ‘Muslims’ with another set of beliefs. H a d h r a t H u z a i f a h (radhiyallahu anhu) did not have the right to expose them. Thus, their identities remained concealed, and they passed off as ‘true’ Muslims. This very same ruling applies today. A munaafiq’s kufr/shirk is hidden. Today too there are innumerable munaafiqeen in our ranks, but they are unknown. They do not profess beliefs of kufr and shirk. They claim to believe in what Islam teaches. Therefore, during the time of the Sahaabah, and even today in our time, there was/is no way of ascertaining the true beliefs of the munaafiqeen. Hence they are accepted and treated as fully-fledged Muslims. On the contrary, members of the Nation of Islam, are not munaafiqeen. They are selfproclaimed mushrikeen like the mushrikeen of Makkah and all other open and avowed mushrikeen. Their professed beliefs of kufr and shirk set them apart from Muslims, as well as from munaafiqeen. They are known entities. Just as the mushrikeen of Makkah did not join Muslims in Salaat, so too has it to be with the members of NOI. It is not permissible to voluntarily allow them to join Muslims in Salaat. They should be allowed to sit in ta’leem classes just as all non-Muslims may be allowed. The reason for disallowing them should be politely explained to them. If Allah Ta’ala wills hidaayat for them, they will rectify their evil belief of kufr and shirk. In fact, numerous members of NOI have reformed and accepted true Islam.

 

Q. Is it mandatory to follow one of the Four Math-habs? Why can’t we mix the Math-habs since all four are correct and constitute the Ahlus Sunnah?

A. Following one of the Four Mathhabs is mandatory. Without following one of the Four Math-habs, it is not possible to follow the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The entire Deen of Islam is encapsulated in the Four Math-habs. Mixing Math-habs (Talfeeq) is not permissible. All Math-habs are unanimous in condemning Talfeeq. When Math-habs are mixed, one begins to follow the nafs (desire and fancy). While we believe all Four Mathhabs are the Haqq, we do not say that all are correct. Deen is a serious issue. Its teachings may not be subjected to whimsical fancy, desire and convenience. For example, the Hanafis believe that it is not permissible for the Muqtadis to recite Qiraa’t in Salaat behind the Imaam. On the contrary, Shaafis believe that it is compulsory to recite Surah Faatihah in every raka’t regardless of the Imaam reciting. Now this is a major difference, and there are many such issues of major differences among the Math-habs. It is quite logical that both these opposite views cannot be correct. Only one view is correct. However, since all Math-habs base their rulings on the Qur’aan and Hadith as interpreted and taught by the Sahaabah, we say that they are all on the Haqq.

 

Consider the example of performing Salaat in the plane. This issue did not exist during the early eras of Islam. The Ulama in this era therefore have formulated their rulings on the basis of the Principles of their respective Math-habs. Now according to us, the Salaat should be performed on time in a plane, but on landing, the Salaat should be repeated on the ground. Other Ulama have ruled that there is no need to repeat the Salaat as it is valid in the air. Since both groups have valid Shar’i basis and their respective arguments are based on sound Deeni premises, we shall not proclaim the different view to be baatil. Both groups are on the Haqq while it is just logical that one view will be incorrect. However, the ordinary people who lack academic knowledge have to follow someone. They are not permitted to practise on the basis of their fancy and their reasoning. Now what is the procedure for them? Obviously they will follow those Ulama from whom they generally acquire their guidance in Deeni issues. It will not be permissible for them to sometimes follow one group and at another time another group merely because of convenience. If they do so, it will mean that they are following baseless desire. It is therefore necessary to follow one particular Mathhab.

 

Q. What is the reason for the 4 Math-habs?

A. The reason for the four Math-habs is Allah’s Will and Wisdom. Since Allah Ta’ala willed that the acts of the Shariah be followed in different ways, we find Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) acquitting himself in different ways in the same acts. If Allah Ta’ala had not desired these differences, He would have ordered His Nabi to discharge all acts of the Deen with uniformity. Furthermore, there are not only four Math-habs. There are numerous Math-habs. However, the Four Math-habs constitute the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah while all other ways are deviant and crooked.

 

Q. Are Bahais a sect of Islam?

A. Bahais are not Muslims. They are among the worst kuffaar. The founder of the Bahai religion was a murtad who claimed that he was the incarnation of Allah Ta’ala – Nauthubillaah! All the Aqaaid and Ahkaam of Islam are rejected by these shayaateen in human form.

 

Q. In the Hadith Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) condemned the Rawaafidh? Who are they?

A. The Rawaafidh are the Shiahs. The Ahaadith also mention the salient features of the Rawaafidh: Claiming love for the Ahl-e-Bait and reviling Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhuma) in particular.

 

Q. The Shia justify their belief of Taqiyah on the basis of Yaasir Ammar’s action. They also claim that the Qur’aan allows Taqiyah. Is their argument valid?

A. Their argument is fallacious. The relevant Qur’aanic verse allowing verbal denial of Imaan while concealing it in the heart as Hadhrat Ammaar (radhiyallahu anhu) had done under severe torture is never a basis for Shiah Taqiyah. Shiah’s practise Taqiyah as a doctrine of great virtue. For them it is a doctrine of holy hypocrisy. Torture is not a condition for Taqiyah in Shi’ism. They will lie and deceive the Ahlus Sunnah without there being the slightest threat to them. Without any torture whatsoever, they practise Taqiyah on just any issue. For example, they will tell us that they believe in the same Qur’aan as we do while their official kitaabs of their greatest ayatollahs emphatically deny the authenticity of the Qur’aan Majeed. There is no basis in the Qur’aan and Sunnah for the Shiah doctrine of Taqiyah (Holy Hypocrisy).

 

Q. A Maulana, Waris Mazhari from Daarul Uloom Deoband has written an article advocating assimilation with the Hindu community. He claims that it is permissible for Muslims to participate in Hindu customs and festivals. He says that the Hindus are not like the pagan mushriks of Arabia. He has come out as a strong supporter of integration with the Hindu community. His views has caused much concern to Muslims. Please comment.

 

A. The character, ‘Maulana Waris Mazhari’ appears to be another crude specimen of ghabaawat. He needs to renew his Imaan for promoting a range of kufr acts and attitudes. His article is riddled with inconsistencies and baatil interpretations. His bootlicking of the mushrikeen is disgusting and disgraceful. We are sure that the views of ghabaawat and kufr of this latest moron and jaahil cannot be the stance of the present Ulama of Deoband. May Allah Ta’ala save this Ummah from the predations of the Ulama-e-Soo’. This Waris character appears to be a cog in the sinister plots of the kuffaar to neutralize the Ummah by means of severing the ties of Muslims from the Islam of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). There is a concerted global plot to neutralize the Ummah by eviscerating Islam of its spiritual power and emasculating Muslims of their moral fibre, hence the U.S.A. is engineering a variety of pernicious schemes to achieve its evil objective. The latest trap is ‘women’s rights’. Towards the attainment of this goal, morons such as Qardawi, the Dumb female who advocates Eidgah for women and her Saudi handlers and others, known and unknown, have been harnessed into the conspiracy by the enemies of Islam. The latest addition to the list of morons is this Waris Mazhari character.

 

Q. Amina Wadud has called for a reformation and reinterpretation of the Deen. What is the Shar’i hukm for making such a call? Is it not kufr? In the same way some MPL Project Committee members have also made such calls. Some members of the public accept that by means of the Muslim Marriages Bill (MMB), the Deen will be contaminated. However, despite their acknowledgment of this contamination, they still want MMB to be legislated. Is this not tantamount to kufr or irtidaad?

 

A. It is not ‘tantamount’ to kufr and irtidaad. It is clearcut kufr and irtidaad. Many years ago we had written in detail in The Majlis on the kufr of Amina Wadud. Without the slightest vestige of doubt the call for reinterpretation and reformation of the Deen is kufr – kufr which expels the proponent from the fold of Islam. Such a person is a confirmed murtadd. Those who accept that the Deen will be contaminated by MMB, but despite this fact, promote or condone the MMB or want it to be legislated, lose their Imaan. They are guilty of kufr. They become murtadd. In fact, one becomes murtadd with even Istikhfaaf (the belief of insignificance) of the Miswak or of even kadoo (marrow). What then will be the fatwa when the issue pertains to reinterpretation / contamination of the Deen?

 

Q. Is Sheikh Qardawi an Aalim?

A. Qardawi is among the Ulama-e-Soo’ (evil ulama).

 

Q. I have read in The Majlis that Sheikh Qardawi is a deviate. What about the books he has written? Can I read his books?

A. One should not read/study the books of deviates and the people of baatil even if what they write is 100% in conformity with the Shariah. The reason for this is that the evil of their dhalaal and baatil permeates their pens, and this exercises a detrimental spiritual effect. Although it is not sinful to read such writings of the people of baatil, which are not in conflict with the Shariah, nevertheless, the spiritual effect is detrimental.

 

Q. Is Shaikh Yusuf Qardaawi a reliable Aalim?

A. Yusuf Qardawi is a deviate. Ibn Hajar (rahmatullah alayh) had describes the likes of Qardawi with the epithet Ghabi (Moron). Ibn Hajar said that only a jaahil and ghabi calls for women to attend the Musjid. On this basis Qardawi is a ghabi. We had criticized him in The Majlis sometime ago. Last year we severely criticized him when he visited South Africa. He was campaigning for women to attend the Musjid. Furthermore he is a statepaid establishment sheikh who was one of the group of Ulama who had signed the fatwa for the Saudi Arabian king to allow America to stage the attack and invasion of Iraq from Saudi Arabia. Thus, Qardawi had made halaal the invasion of Iraq by America, and the butchering of thousands of Iraqi Muslims. View Qardaawi’s reflection in this mirror of treachery.

 

Q. Is it permissible for me as a layman to speak ill of Sheikh Qardawi?

A. There is no need for a layman to speak ill of even the Ulama-e-Soo’. The furthest you may go in this regard, is to warn your associates, relatives, etc. to refrain from reading his books. But it will not be permissible for you to insult or speak bad about him for no valid Shar’i reason. Since we have the obligation to warn Muslims in general to beware of deviates, we feel obliged to criticize the Ulama -e-Soo’ in order to protect the Deen and the Imaan of people.

 

Q. Is it permissible to study the kitaabs of Ulama who shave their beards if the kitaabs are authentic?

A. It is not permissible to study the kitaabs of fussaaq unless the intention is to refute their baatil. The fisq of the writer permeates his writings.

 

Q. Who was Maulana Abul A’la Maudoodi? Which Mathhab did he follow? I have heard conflicting accounts about him. Please enlighten us of his status in terms of the Shariah.

ANSWER

Hadhrat Mufti Mahmudul Hasaan Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) discussing Mr. Maudoodi says: “Many of the books written by Sayyid Abul A’la Maudoodi are in conflict with the maslak of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah. He has his own maslak (way) in Kalaam and Fiqh. He did not follow any of the Aimmah among the Salf. Teachings of the Mu’tazilah and Khawaarij are also found in his writings. Therefore it is harmful from the Deeni aspect to study his books. His words are extremely deceptive. The effect of his words is liberalism which in turn induces people to deduct their own rules from the Qur’aan and Hadith. Thus, they rely on their own personal understanding. In this process they ignore the understanding of the Mufassireen, Muhadditheen, Fuqaha-e-Mujtahideen and the senior authorities of the Deen. Frequently the effect of his writings leads to abandonment of reliance on the understanding of even the Sahaabah. On this basis he has extremely baseless criticism levelled against even the Sahaabah and the senior authorities of the Shariah. He accepted such Ahaadith which placated his heart, and claimed them to be authentic. On the other hand, Ahaadith which militated against his disposition, he would refute by saying it is incompatible with the disposition of the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the way of Islam. (This is a baseless principle fabricated by Maudoodi – The Majlis). The attempt to erode reliance on the Salf-e-Saaliheen is extremely dangerous. It is destructive for the deen and manifest deviation. Hence, the general public should be discouraged from reading his books. Sayyid Abul A’la Maudoodi is a writer and an editor. He is not a mustanad (qualified) Aalim. He is self-taught. In fact he himself has conceded that he is not among the Fraternity of the Ulama. His primary objective was to convince people that since the time of the Sahaabah no one has correctly understood the Deen. Thus Maudoodi and those influenced by his writings have severely criticized even the Sahaabah. His criticism did not spare even those senior Sahaabah whom Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) mentioned by name to be the inmates of Jannat (the Ten Sahaabah whom were given the assurance of Jannat). Maudoodi has presented a new brand of Islam which is based on his personal ‘ijtihaad’. In his writings, Maudoodi has specifically targeted Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) and Hadhrat Muaawiyah (radhiyallahu anhu) for his criticism despite the fact that both these seniors are Sahaabah whose virtues the Ahaadith confirm. He searched for defects and faults in the blessed lives of the Sahaabah Kiraam. He proudly publicized such criticism (of the Sahaabah) whereas Rasulullah (sallaallahu alayhi wasallam) had warned against making his Sahaabah a target for criticism, and emphasized love for them. Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) equated love for the Sahaabah with his love, and hatred for them with his hatred. (Those who love the Shaabah, do so because of their love for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), and those who bear animosity for them, do so because of their animosity for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). According to Maudoodi no one has hitherto understood Islam properly. All the Sufiyah, Mutakallimeen, Mufassireen, Muhadditheen, the Sahaabah and the Taabieen had misunderstood the Deen. He accused Hadhrat Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) of being unqualified for the Khilaafat.” —Extracts from Fataawah Mahmudiyah, Vol. 1 Mr. Maudoodi was among the worst deviates of this era. He rejected the authority of the Sahaabah whose authority Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) affirmed. Regarding the Sahaabah, our Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Honour my Sahaabah, for they are the noblest among you; then those after them, then those after them. Thereaf- ter will be falsehood.” There are numerous Ahaadith stating the authority of the Sahaabah. The entire edifice of Islam is structured on the narrations and interpretations of the Sahaabah. Minus the Sahaabah, there is no Islam. When Maudoodi had targeted this very first wrung of Authorities of the Shariah, and had endeavoured to downgrade and destroy their authority, then his deviation, in fact kufr, is conspicuous. Maudoodi went astray – was led astray by shaitaan. His brains became infected with a kind of insanity which blinds intellectual comprehension of reality. When a man fails to understand the authority of the Sahaabah – those who were educated by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) – those whose obedience Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) imposed on the Ummah – it is a confirmation of his Satanism which completely destroys a person’s intellect. His kufr had calcified his brains depriving it of straight thinking and comprehension of simple realities of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Maudoodi’s crime is not restricted to fisq (he used to cut his beard shorter than the mandatory fist length). His rejection and criticism of the Sahaabah and their authority are in fact kufr. It is therefore not permissible to study his writings. Laymen are bound to go astray by the deceptions preponderating his books.

 

Q. Is Salaat valid in a church, behind an interfaither, Salafis and Barelwis?

A. Salaat is not permissible in churches. Salaat behind Barelwis is valid. However, if there is a non-Barelwi Musjid nearby, one should not perform behind the bid’ati. If the Salafi imaam is wearing socks, the Salaat will not be valid because Salafis make masah on ordinary socks. If one is caught up in such a situation, the Salaat should be repeated. Salaat behind a man who believes in interfaith is not valid. An interfaither is a murtad.

 

Q. Please comment on the growing number of ‘Islamic’ scholars who are clamouring for the re-interpretation of the Shari’ah.

A. Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) narrated the following Hadith: “There will dawn an age over people when they will gather in their Musaajid and perform Salaat whilst not a single one will be a Mu’min.” How is it possible for all the musallis in the Musaajid to be kuffaar – not Muslims despite attending Jamaa’t Salaat in the Musjids? Regardless of the paradoxical appearance of this scenario, Rasulullah’s predictions are the divine Truth. In fact, this particular prediction is the situation which is unfolding currently in the Ummah all over the world. ‘Muslims’ – those who were born Muslims – jettison and destroy their Imaan without even realizing the awful calamity of kufr which befalls them as a consequence of their ideas, interpretations and beliefs of kufr. Such professed Muslims are of the Zindeeq category of kuffaar. A Zindeeq is a kaafir who neither understands his kufr nor acknowledges that he has become a kaafir. When a Muslim rejects any established belief, teaching or practice of the 1400 year Shariah of Islam by way of interpretation, he loses his Imaan. Even without flagrant renouncement of Islam, he becomes a kaaifr and this type of renegade is termed Zindeeq. The Hadith narrated by Hadhrat Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) refers to this category. All the musallis will be kaafir of the Zindeeq order without realizing that their Imaan has been eliminated. ‘Muslims’ are advocating and promoting a deluge of kufr in a variety of forms. The objective of these kufr forms and reforms is the ultimate elimination of the 14 century old Shariat of Islam. While it is not possible for the Zindeeqs to achieve this nefarious goal since Allah Azza Wa Jal has declared the assurance of protecting the purity and originality of this Deen, nevertheless, the contest between Haqq and baatil will continue in this dunya which has in fact been created for the fight between Truth and falsehood. Among the propagations which transform Muslims into Zindeeqs are MPL kufr, regulation of polygamy, destruction of Hijaab, immoral ‘emancipation’ of women, assigning ‘equal’ status to females, condemning Qur’aanic commands such as chastisement of wives by husbands, tampering with the Shariah’s laws of inheritance, the call to open up the Musaajid for women, giving women the right of talaaq using the subterfuge of ‘khula’, etc., etc. These are merely by way of sample. There are numerous issues of kufr which the misguided juhala advocate. Every Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane and Jenny who lack expertise in even the masaa-il of Tahaarat and Salaat, and who is totally ignorant of Aqaa-id and the other Departments of the Shariah, considers himself/ herself competent to gnaw and nibble at the masaa-il of the Shariah. In fact, morons sporting secular qualifications engage in the ultimate kufr of digging up the foundations of Islam in preparation for a new, U.S.A. brand of a ‘shariah’ which could be slipped into the Ummah in the name of Islam. Thus, there are calls by munaafiqeen parading as Muslims for re-interpretation of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Some brazenly call for an alternative ‘shariah’. Re-interpretation of Islam or a new ‘shariah’ implies denial of the Finality of Nubuwwat and the Finality and Perfection of Islam, both concepts expressly declared by the Qur’aan. The effect of the finality of Nubuwwat and the perfection of Islam is the immutability of the Shariah which is cast in an unalterable mould – in the Tablet of Noor which is guarded in Looh-e- Mahfooz in the seventh Heaven. Re-interpretation and the call for an alternative ‘shariah’ presuppose the denial of the finality of Nubuwwah and the perfection of the Deen. Both these imperative doctrines are stated in the following Qur’aanic verses: “This day have I (Allah) perfected for you your Deen, and completed for you My Favour, and chosen for you Islam as Deen.” — Al-Maaidah, aayat 3 “Muhammad is not the father of any of the males among you. But he is the Rasool of Allah, and the Khaatam of the Ambiya.” — Al-Ahzaab, aayat 40 Khaataam means Seal. There is a gigantic difference between the desert life of 1400 years ago and the life of the present space and technological era. But, Allah’s wisdom demanded the termination of the long Chain of Nubuwwat whose links are the 124,000 Ambiya from the time of Nabi Aadam (alayhis salaam). Since the inception of Nubuwwat, there was a continuous process of evolution of the Divine Law. Laws were amended, abrogated and substituted with new laws. With every new Nabi, came some change in the Shariah. But, this process ended 14 centuries ago in the Camel Age. Only a devil will suggest that Allah Ta’ala was unaware of the vast changes which would overtake and totally change life from its simple, primitive, desert form into what it is today. Allah Ta’ala is the All- Knowing Khaaliq. Despite the mind boggling changes which life would undergo from the inception of Islam in the desert era, Allah Ta’ala terminated Nubuwwat and finalized the Shariah. This Divine Decision is the strongest and clearest evidence for the immutability of the fourteen century Shariah which has an inherent mechanism to encompass all developing situations until the Day of Qiyaamah. Therefore, those vile miscreants advocating ideas of kufr, should understand that this Shariah of Islam cannot change. It shall not change. It shall remain immutable, and Allah Ta’ala has created Guards – the Ulama-e-Haqq – to protect His Shariah until the Day of Qiyaamah. We assure the agents of shaitaan, the glut of Zindeeqs of this age, that they will not succeed in their vile mission to displace this Deen. “Among people are those who dispute in (the Laws of) Allah without any knowledge, without any guidance and without a radiant Kitaab (A divine law which directs to Noor). He (this type of miscreant) turns away (with pride) to mislead (others) from the Path of Allah. For him on earth is disgrace, and We shall cause him to taste the Fire of the Blaze (Jahannum) on the Day of Qiyaamah.” (Al-Hajj, aayat 8) This is the fate awaiting these Zindeeqs who call for the re-interpretation of the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and for an alternative ‘shariah’. Their disputes are nothing but ghutha — rubbish, flotsam, nafsaani muck, and the coprolillic effluent disgorged by deranged intellect suffering under the la’nat of Allah Azza Wa Jal Who says in His Qur’aan: “He guides whomever He wishes, and He misleads whomever He wishes.”

 

Q. Is Sheikh Imran Nazar Hosein Al-Hanafi an authentic Aalim of the Hanafi Math-hab?

A. The sheikh, Imran Nazar Hosein is a deviate. While he may claim to be a Hanafi, some of his beliefs are even kufr, e.g. his theories about Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj. He is a modernist liberal who lacks understanding of the Deen.

 

Q. An author of many da’wah book, Molvi Wahiduddun Khan of India, has propagated the following ideas and beliefs in his writings: * That the blessed Uswah (Character) of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is not kaamil (perfect). * Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is the final model only with regards to the Deen, but not with regards to minhaaj. * The minhaaj (way) of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) is more appropriate for Muslims in this age than the Uswah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). * Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) will not be returning to earth in a physical form. * Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) is the same person as al-Mahdi. They are not two different persons. * Dajjaal is not a physical being. He is an ideology. What is the status of a person who holds the above beliefs?

A. Undoubtedly this person is a confirmed kaafir masquerading as a Muslim. In fact, he is a shaitaan in human form. It is haraam to read and distribute his books. His ‘da’wat’ is an invitation to Jahannum.

 

Q. In prison, we are a mixed group of different Math-habs including Salafis. Is it permissible to sit in a ta’leem class conducted by a Salafi?

A. It is not permissible to participate in a Ta’leem session of the Salafis or of any deviant sect.

 

Q. What is Mushaf-e-Fatimah Zahra which the Shiahs say they have?

A. The Shiahs believe that the Qur’aan which the Ahlus Sunnah have is not the true Qur’aan. They have their own ‘qur’an’ which they call mushaf Faatimah Zahra.

 

Q. Some intellectuals say that we should follow only the Qur’aan, not the Hadith.

A. Those who say that only the Qur’aan should be followed, are ignoramuses and deviates. They are not intellectuals. The Qur’aan only mentions the broad principles and makes reference to Islamic rites without giving a detailed explanation. For example, the Qur’aan commands the performance of Salaat (the five daily prayers), but no where in the Qur’aan is it mentioned that five Salaat are daily compulsory nor are the number of raka’ts or the numerous other details pertaining to Salaat mentioned in the Qur’aan. The same applies to all the other acts of Islam. The details are in the Hadith which have been explained by the Sahaabah and the great authorities of the Shariah. These morons – the so-called intellectuals – have been predicted by Ra sulul lah ( sa l la l lahu a layhi wasallam). Warning such deviates, Ra sulul lah ( sa l la l lahu a layhi wasallam) said: “Soon will there dawn a time when an obese (fat) man reclining on his couch will say: ‘I don’t know this. Whatever you find to be halaal in the Qur’aan, regard it to be halaal, and whatever you find haraam in the Qur’aan, regard it as haraam.’ Howe v e r , that whi ch Rasulul lah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has made haraam is just as Allah has made haraam.” The Shariah is not confined to the Qur’aan. The Qur’aan mentions the laws in brief.

 

Q. Question regarding how a newly qualified molwi should conduct himself after finding himself caught up in the baatil of his community whose Imaam is from a deviant sect.

A. It should be abundantly clear that it is not permissible to join people of baatil. Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy anil Munkar is Waajib. It is your bounden duty to offer naseehat and point out the bid’ah and baatil of the community regardless of whether they accept or reject or criticize you. If you as a learned person maintain silence in the face of all the baatil you have mentioned, then you will come within the scope of the Hadith: “He who maintains silence regarding the Haqq, is a dumb shaitaan.” Your obligation is only to offer naseehat and to point out what is the Haqq. You need not dispute with them. Don’t enter into arguments with the Bid’atis. Only explain the Haqq and maintain silence. Don’t criticize the present Imaam. If anyone says that the Imaam says the opposite of what you are saying, tell them that you are not interested in what the Imaam says. You speak what the Shariah says. Furthermore, tell them to follow whomever they wish. Your duty is only to proclaim the truth of the Deen. Don’t become involved in any argument with the current Imaam. Only state the truth without ambiguity. Remember that whenever the Haqq is proclaimed, there is bound to be criticism and insult. You should take this in stride, and not be concerned what they say. Don’t respond to personal criticism. Only state the Haqq whether they accept or reject. With ikhlaas and istiqaamat Allah Ta’ala will aid you. Haqq will ultimately triumph. You must expect criticism, but ignore it. If they refuse to heed the Haqq, resign from the organization. It is not permissible to remain a member and maintain silence when the ahkaam of the Deen are so grossly being violated. You will not be able to prevent the spread of salafi’ism or of any other baatil. Allah Ta’ala decides these issues. Everything runs its course. We are living in a world which Allah Ta’ala has decreed to be the arena for the conflict between Haqq and baatil. Conflict, clash and controversy are therefore natural consequences of proclamation of the unadulterated Haqq. If you understand this Divine Mystery, you will never be cowed down by opposition nor become dejected if the community does not accept the Haqq you propagate. Your duty is only to state the Haqq. Until Maut claims you. The Ambiya all said: “Upon us is only to deliver the clear Message.” Only Allah Ta’ala can give hidaayat. You can only proclaim the Haqq, and that is your only obligation. Distribute books and articles on Salafi’ism, and if you are able to give bayaan on these issues, then do so. The one who described Fadhaail A’maal as ‘rubbish’, has lost his Imaan. He, himself is a rubbish. He has in fact proclaimed the Words of Allah Ta’ala to be ‘rubbish’ Nauthubillaah. You should sever ties with him such a rubbish coprocreep. Don’t become  embroiled in argument with such a jaahil whose brains have been ‘sterilized’ and fossilized with stercoral substances. Regarding Ibn Taimiyyah, despite his notorious beliefs pertaining to the Attributes of Allah Azza Wa Jal, Our Ulama have not made takfeer of him nor of his followers, the Salafis. We are not aware of any among our Akaabir Ulama of Deoband who have declared Ibn Taimiyyah and his followers kaafir. There may have been among the Arab Ulama who had made takfeer of Ibn Taimiyyah. Hadhrat Allaamah Anwar Kashmiri (rahmatullah alayh) although an expert on Ibn Taimiyyah, and despite his very clear and strident criticism of him, has not made takfeer of him. The reason for this we believe is the possibility of making ta’weel (valid interpretation) of the corrupt statements of Ibn Taimiyyah. Perhaps it is not conclusively proven that he believed Allah Ta’ala to be a body located in a specific space/place. Whilst we should explain the error of Salafi beliefs, it is not necessary to embark on takfeer of Ibn Taimiyyah. It serves no beneficial purpose. The Mu’tazilah (an extremely deviated sect with extremely corrupt beliefs) subscribed to some very clear-cut beliefs of kufr, but we have as yet not seen any of the Ulama of any age making takfeer of them. They confined their criticism to the beliefs of kufr, pointing out that these are beliefs of kufr. Undoubtedly, it may be said and should be proclaimed that a certain belief is kufr. Therefore, if you can categorically and with certitude point out any belief of kufr of Ibn Taimiyyah, then you may say that such belief is kufr. But as mentioned above, there is no need for pronouncing him a kaafir.

 

Q. Please comment on the Tijaani Tariqah.

A. The Tijaani religion of West Africa is a religion of shirk and bid’ah. Some of the kufr of this misguided sect is as follows: (1) Ahmad Tijaani said: “Thus isma has been guaranteed to the prophets and with them the qutbs. The Prophet has not mentioned them (the qutbs) when he said ‘there is no infallibility except for a prophet, because he wanted to keep them concealed since their rank had not been revealed„…. (Jawaahir) The Ijma’ of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah is that only the Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) are Ma’soom, i.e., they only enjoy the attribute of ismah (sinlessness), not Auliya even if they are qutbs. (2) Hajj Umar al-Futi, the disciple of Ahmad Tijani, says in Rimah of Umar Bin Said: “….that walis never sin, and any breach of the Shariah in which they may become involved is only apparent but not real, and is always designed by the walis themselves to test the faith which their followers have in them.” It is baseless to claim that walis never sin. Walis are not like the Ambiya. (3) “After Ahmad al-Tijani started his order he relinquished his affiliation with the four orders which he had joined, asserting that he did not achieve spiritual realization through the aid of any of the founders of these orders and he owed fealty to none of them.” This is a vile attack against the illustrious Mashaa-ikh of the Four Sufi Orders. A man who has strayed from Siraatul Mustaqeem will find fault with the great Auliya of former times. (4) Ahmad Tijaani produced no Silsilah. Unlike the four Silsilah which all trace their origin to Hadhrat Ali or Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Tijaani claims that his link with Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is direct. He has no Mashaa-ikh before him in his silsilah. Stating this, Jamal Abdun Nasr says: “Contrary to the usual practice among the Sufis, Ahmad Al- Tijani produced no silsila, or perhaps it would be truer to say that he produced a one-link silsila which went directly from him to the Prophet. (Jawahir).” The greatest defect in the claim of wilaayat made by Tijaani is that he has no silsilah. (5) The following statement of Ahmad Tijaani is recorded in Jawahir “None of the men (i.e. Walis) can admit his followers to Paradise without my reckoning or punishment, no matter what sins and acts of disobedience they may have committed, except I alone.” In this statement Tijaani regards himself as the pivot of Najaat (salvation) whereas this is baseless. The Pivot of Najaat is the Kalimah Shahaadat. Furthermore, no wali can ensure anyone’s admission to Jannat. This is the function of only Allah Ta’ala. Intercession (Shafa’ah) will be with the permission of Allah Ta’ala. No wali and no Nabi has the right to admit anyone into Jannat. (6) Among the beliefs of bid’ah and even shirk of the Tijanis is that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the four Khulafa-e-Raashideen attend their special thikr sessions where their litany, Jawaharatul Kamal is recited. There is absolutely no Shar’i basis for this claim. Furthermore, the logical conclusion of this belief is that if there are 100 groups of Tijanis reciting this thikr in different places at one and the same time, then Rasulullah and the Khulafa are present at all the gatherings at one and the same time. This is the conference of the attribute of omnipresence to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Khulafa. But, only Allah Ta’ala is omnipresent. (7) The Tijanis give greater importance to their prayer than to the Qur’aan Majeed. They claim that their Salatil Faatih, in addition to a long list of outrageously exaggerated benefits is 6,000 more meritorious than reciting the Qur’aan. They also assert that if a person is unable to take wudhu then he may not recite the Jawaharatul Kamal with Tayammum. But, the Shariah allows one to touch and recite the Qur’aan with Tayammum if water is not available. Salaat for Allah Ta’ala can be performed with tayammum, but the prayer of the Tijaanis cannot be recited with tayammum! This is outrageous to say the least. (8) Tijaanis during their wazifah sessions spread a white cloth. The purpose of this is to reserve the place for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the four Khalifas who, they believe, attend their sessions. This is utterly baseless. While this sect masquerades as an authentic Sufi Tareeqah, in reality it is a baatil sect which has no link with the Mashaaikh of Tasawwuf. The Tijaani religion was established relatively recently, in the year 1815, less than 2 centuries ago by its founder, Ahmad Tijaani who had claimed that he had acquired the Tijaani Faith directly from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). He has no Silsilah (Chain) such as the other authentic Sufi Silsilahs who all link up to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) via the Sahaabah. That the Tijaani religion came into existence 12 centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) should be ample evidence for its falsehood. This sect subscribe to beliefs and practices of kufr and shirk. Salaat behind them is not valid.

 

Q. What is the status of Ithna Ashari Shiahs?

A. The Ithna Ashari Shiahs are not Muslims. They entertain clear beliefs of kufr.

 

Q. Is it proper for me, a layman, to study the writings of Sayed Qutib, Hassan Banna, Maududi and Jalaluddin Afghani?

A. Syed Qutub was not a follower of any Math-hab. Avoid reading his writings. He was not a follower of the Sunnah. The same applies to Hassan Banna, Maudoodi and Afghaani.

 

Consider the following example: According to the investigation of Scholar Zaid, a certain food item contains pig fat. According to Scholar Bakr the item does not contain pig fact. Both Zaid and Bakr have their respective followers who refer to their respective guides for rulings of the Shariah. Zaid proves to his followers that Bakr’s investigation was defective, hence he failed to discover that the item does contain pig fact, hence haraam. Both Zaid and Bakr are uprighteous Aalims. Now if Zaid’s followers consume the haraam item on the basis of Bakr’s fatwa, then it shall be said that they are making a mockery of the Deen because they do so to satisfy their nafs. It will be wrong for the followers of Zaid to aver that since both Zaid and Bakr are Aalims, anyone’s fatwa may be adopted. Regarding the Math-habs, we follow one particular Mathhab because despite our belief that all Four Math-habs are the Haqq, we do not believe that they all are correct. We are Hanafis because we believe that the Hanafi interpretation of the Qur’aan and Hadith is correct with the possibility of there being error, and the possibility of the other Math-habs being right. But essentially we believe that the other Mathhabs have incorrectly interpreted the Qur’aan and Hadith, hence we follow Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh). This very stance of the Hanafis is also the principle of the other Math-habs. They too believe that their interpretation is correct while the other Mathhabs have erred despite them being the Haqq. We do not make a joke of the Math-habs. Treating lightly adherence to a Math-hab, is to treat Islam as being an insignificant ideology which could be bent and made compliant with our desires at whim and fancy.

 

Q. It appears that some of the Ahaadith on which the Fuqaha base the masaa-il are dhaeef (weak) according to the later Muhadditheen. What is the explanation for this?

A. The Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen/Fuqaha are not subservient to the Muhadditheen. They are not bound by the rules of the later Muhadditheen. Every Hadith which constitutes a Mustadal (Basis for the formulation of a mas’alah/hukm) enjoys the highest category of authenticity regardless of the classification of the later Muhadditheen whose function was not formulation of masaa-il. The later Muhadditheen’s function was to categorize Hadith narrations in terms of the standards which they had formulated. Their function was not to test the mustadallaat of the Fuqaha. The Muhadditheen in practical life followed the Fuqaha. Thus, even if a Mustadal of the Imaam of the Math-hab is ‘weak’ in terms of the criterion of the Muhaddith, he (the Muhaddith) continued following the Imaam of his Math-hab. He did not cancel the mas’alah which stemmed from the Mustadal of his Imaam despite the ‘weak’ classification of the Hadith which constitutes the Mustadal. A Hadith could have been of the highest category of authenticity when it reached the Mujtahid Imaam, but the isnaad became weak a century later when it reached the Muhaddith.

 

Q. Question regarding how a newly qualified molwi should conduct himself after finding himself caught up in the baatil of his community whose Imaam is from a deviant sect.

A. It should be abundantly clear that it is not permissible to join people of baatil. Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy anil Munkar is Waajib. It is your bounden duty to offer naseehat and point out the bid’ah and baatil of the community regardless of whether they accept or reject or criticize you. If you as a learned person maintain silence in the face of all the baatil you have mentioned, then you will come within the scope of the Hadith: “He who maintains silence regarding the Haqq, is a dumb shaitaan.” Your obligation is only to offer naseehat and to point out what is the Haqq. You need not dispute with them. Don’t enter into arguments with the Bid’atis. Only explain the Haqq and maintain silence. Don’t criticize the present Imaam. If anyone says that the Imaam says the opposite of what you are saying, tell them that you are not interested in what the Imaam says. You speak what the Shariah says. Furthermore, tell them to follow whomever they wish. Your duty is only to proclaim the truth of the Deen. Don’t become involved in any argument with the current Imaam. Only state the truth without ambiguity. Remember that whenever the Haqq is proclaimed, there is bound to be criticism and insult. You should take this in stride, and not be concerned what they say. Don’t respond to personal criticism. Only state the Haqq whether they accept or reject. With ikhlaas and istiqaamat Allah Ta’ala will aid you. Haqq will ultimately triumph. You must expect criticism, but ignore it. If they refuse to heed the Haqq, resign from the organization. It is not permissible to remain a member and maintain silence when the ahkaam of the Deen are so grossly being violated. You will not be able to prevent the spread of salafi’ism or of any other baatil. Allah Ta’ala decides these issues. Everything runs its course. We are living in a world which Allah Ta’ala has decreed to be the arena for the conflict between Haqq and baatil. Conflict, clash and controversy are therefore natural consequences of proclamation of the unadulterated Haqq. If you understand this Divine Mystery, you will never be cowed down by opposition nor become dejected if the community does not accept the Haqq you propagate. Your duty is only to state the Haqq. Until Maut claims you. The Ambiya all said: “Upon us is only to deliver the clear Message.” Only Allah Ta’ala can give hidaayat. You can only proclaim the Haqq, and that is your only obligation. Distribute books and articles on Salafi’ism, and if you are able to give bayaan on these issues, then do so. The one who described Fadhaail A’maal as ‘rubbish’, has lost his Imaan. He, himself is a rubbish. He has in fact proclaimed the Words of Allah Ta’ala to be ‘rubbish’ Nauthubillaah. You should sever ties with him such a rubbish coprocreep. Don’t become  embroiled in argument with such a jaahil whose brains have been ‘sterilized’ and fossilized with stercoral substances. Regarding Ibn Taimiyyah, despite his notorious beliefs pertaining to the Attributes of Allah Azza Wa Jal, Our Ulama have not made takfeer of him nor of his followers, the Salafis. We are not aware of any among our Akaabir Ulama of Deoband who have declared Ibn Taimiyyah and his followers kaafir. There may have been among the Arab Ulama who had made takfeer of Ibn Taimiyyah. Hadhrat Allaamah Anwar Kashmiri (rahmatullah alayh) although an expert on Ibn Taimiyyah, and despite his very clear and strident criticism of him, has not made takfeer of him. The reason for this we believe is the possibility of making ta’weel (valid interpretation) of the corrupt statements of Ibn Taimiyyah. Perhaps it is not conclusively proven that he believed Allah Ta’ala to be a body located in a specific space/place. Whilst we should explain the error of Salafi beliefs, it is not necessary to embark on takfeer of Ibn Taimiyyah. It serves no beneficial purpose. The Mu’tazilah (an extremely deviated sect with extremely corrupt beliefs) subscribed to some very clear-cut beliefs of kufr, but we have as yet not seen any of the Ulama of any age making takfeer of them. They confined their criticism to the beliefs of kufr, pointing out that these are beliefs of kufr. Undoubtedly, it may be said and should be proclaimed that a certain belief is kufr. Therefore, if you can categorically and with certitude point out any belief of kufr of Ibn Taimiyyah, then you may say that such belief is kufr. But as mentioned above, there is no need for pronouncing him a kaafir.

 

Q. If a Muslim neglects the daily 5 Salaat will he be branded a kaafir? According to the Salafis he is a kaafir. What are the differences between Salafis and Hanafis? Is it permissible for a Muslim woman to marry a Salafi?

A. Salafis are a deviated group. It is vile and absolutely erroneous to believe that a Muslim who abstains from Salaat whilst believing Salaat is Fardh is a kaafir. These Salafis make takfeer of any Muslim who differs with their corrupt opinions. There is not much difference between the Takfeeris and the ‘moderate’ Salafis. There are substantial differences between them and Hanafis on a range of issues. Life with such people becomes very difficult. They eat anything. Any meat coming from Europe and other Christian countries is halaal for them because they say it is the meat of the Ahl-e-Kitaab. In short, the differences are numerous and even great. It will not be pleasant staying with a Salafi despite the marriage being valid. They are spiritually barren. They lack in Akhlaaq (Morality), hence taking life is a simple issue to them. It is lawful to kill any non- Muslim in their corrupt ideology. Their concept of Jihaad is also corrupt.

 

Q. The Salafis are saying that there are words of shirk in Qasidah Burdah, hence it is not permissible to recite it. The virtues narrated of this Qasidah are also said to be spurious. In some khaanqas they have special sessions for reciting Qasidah Burdah. Please comment.

A. Qasidah Burdah is a qaseedah (song/poetry) in which the author expresses his spiritual love for Allah Ta’ala and His Rasool (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Qasidah Burdah is not a thikr or an act of Ibaadat. It has no Shar’i significance. It is just a qaseedah as are all other good qaseedahs/nazams. The words quoted by you are not shirk. The supplication is directed to Allah Ta’ala. The word: ‘Rabbi’ means: ‘O My Rabb!’. The khanaqas where Qasidah Burdah o r o the r q ase edahs are systematically sung are in error. They have lost the Path of Islaah. They are unaware of the goals of a Khaanqah, hence they indulge in trivialities which ultimately culminate into hard-core bid’ah. Instead of reciting the Qasidah as an act of ‘ibaadat’, they should rather recite the Qur’aan Majeed or engage in Durood or any other form of real Thikrullaah.

 

Q. The Salafis say that to make dua with the waseelah/tawassul of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) or any buzrug who has died is shirk. Is this correct?

A. The misguided Salafis do not believe in the concept of Tawassul. They brand it as ‘shirk’ while Tawassul in which the limits of the Shariah are observed is permissible and meritorious. We have a detailed explanation of Tawassul. Anyone interested, may write for it.

 

Q. Was Ibn Taimiyyah and his student, Ibn Qayyim followers of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah?

A. While they had their own concept of the Sunnah, Ibn Taimiyyah and his student, Ibn Qayyim were not of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah. They deviated from the Path of the Sunnah with their own views in conflict with the views of the Four Math-habs which constitute the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah.

 

Q. Is it proper for a Hanafi Madrasah to employ a Salafi teacher who will not teach Salafi’ism?

A. It is not permissible. It is unwise and dangerous for a Madrasah to employ as an Ustaadh a Salafi. He is bound to influence the students.

 

Q. Does the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah believe in the Zaat and Sifaat of Allah Ta’ala?

A. Yes, the Ahlus Sunnah believes in the Zaat and Sifaat of Allah Azza Wa Jal. Anyone who does not, is a kaafir. However, in the interpretation of these issues Ibn Taimiyyah and his followers differ with the Ahlus Sunnah. They do not believe in the Omnipresence of Allah Ta’ala, while we do. They assign a confined space to the Presence of Allah Ta’ala, viz, the Throne, while the Ahlus Sunnah does not confine Allah Ta’ala to any dimension.

 

Q. A person who has read a translation of Bukhari Shareef, quotes several Hadith narrations as proof for his claim that ghusl is not Waajib if semen is not discharged during sexual relations. This is what is said in the narrations he has quoted from Bukhaari Shareef. Please clarify the issue. It has created doubt and confusion.

ANSWER

For fourteen centuries since the inception of Islam, has the Ummah understood and believed that ghusl of janaabat is the compulsory consequence of sexual relations even if mani (semen) is not discharged. The act of sexual relations renders ghusl Waajib. It is haraam for morons to read translations of Hadith kitaabs. Morons are usually accompanied by shayaateen who become their ustaadhs (teachers). These devil teachers whisper into the fossilized brains rubbish and kufr such as this moron has blurted out without thinking of the consequences of his kufr. In effect the moron is implying that the Sahaabah, the Aimmah Mujtahideen, the Ulama and Fuqaha of the Taabieen, Tabe Taabieen and of all ages had not understood the Ahaadith which the moron has cited from the translation of Bukhari Shareef. In fact the moron displays conspiculously his jahaalat by saying ‘Buhary’. He is not aware of even the proper name of Imaam Bukhari (rahmatullah alayh), hence he says ‘Buhary’. The moron denies the validity of the Consensus (Ijma’) of all Four Math-habs and of even deviant sects on this issue. The Sahaabah, Taabieen, Tabe Taabieen, the Fuqaha-e-Mujtahideen, the Muhadditheen, Mufassireen and the illustrious Four Imaams – all of them – according to the moron wallowing in the darkness of kufr, have failed to understand the Ahaadith which he has cited for his corrupt and haraam opinion which is the product of his jahaalat, and only he who excels in the attribute of sensorial density has understood this mas’alah today, in this belated century – fourteen hundred years after the inception of Islam. The entire Ummah according to the stupid supposition of the moron had laboured in error and deviation for 14 centuries while he (the jaahil) has appeared as the ‘mujaddid’ to unravel a ‘mystery’ which had remained locked on the Sahaabah and the entire Ummah. There is no need to present an academic exposition for the Ahaadith cited by the moron. This is neither the occasion for it nor is the audience equipped with the necessary knowledge for comprehension. There are numerous Ahaadith which no longer – that is from the age of the Sahaabah – have practical application. For example, there are Saheeh (authentic) Ahaadith which clearly state that wudhu is necessary after eating cooked food. Such narrations are not meant for morons. In fact, it is haraam for morons to read translations of the Hadith books, and even of the Qur’aan Majeed. They lose their Imaan in the process of their stupid reading.

 

Q. During my Umrah I met some Arab brothers from Taif who rejected the notion of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) being alive in his Grave. Provide proof which I could share with them

A. The Salafis do not believe in the concept of Hayaatun Nabi – that Rasulul lah – sal lal lahu alayhi wasallam and the Ambiya –alayhimus salaam- are alive in Barzakh. All the Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) enjoy a lofty degree of life in Barzakh. In the Qur’aan Majeed Allah Ta’ala states very clearly about the Shuhada (Martyrs): “Do not say about those who have been slain in the Path of Allah that they are dead. On the contrary, they are alive, and they are being given rizq by their Rabb.” The status of the Ambiya is far superior and much more elevated than the status of the Shuhada. The Hayaat (being alive) of the Ambiya is of a higher level than the hayaat of the Shuhada The Salafi denial of this belief is denial of the belief which the Ahlus Sunnah subscribe to. You will not be able to share with them any proof nor convince them. Great Ulama have written kitaabs on this subject. The arguments of the Salafis have been refuted by Ulama, but they (the Salafis) remain adamant in their erroneous belief. It is therefore futile to engage in any discussion with them on this topic. [See Do the Ulama-e-Haqq Say That the Prophets (alayhimus salaam) Are Alive?]

 

Q. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) used to perform Salaat in different ways. Why can we also not do so?

A. Brother, you are occupying an insignificant stratum in an epoch which is separated from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) by a chasm of about 14 centuries. The greatest authorities of Islam, viz., the Sahaabah and the Aimmah-e- Mujtahideen of the first era of Islam, have taught this Ummah the Islam which was perfected in the very age of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). These illustrious authorities imparted to the Ummah the teachings of Islam as they had understood, and the Math-habs have come down to us reliably from great authorities. These Math-habs are as old as Islam because they are in fact Islam. You and us in this belated age in proximity to Qiyaamah are non-entities which could be equated to morons. You and we possess no licence for digging out from the kutb Hadith narrations, then subjecting the Ahaadith to our personal, wildly fluctuating opinion to formulate masaa-il. Such a methodology will be the inspiration of shaitaan who is adept in the art of deceiving and entrapping Muslims via ‘deeni’ channels. Our function is only to accept, believe and practise the teachings of Islam as they have reached us from Khairul Quroon (the First three Noblest eras of islam). There is no scope now for fabricating another math-hab for achieving some sort of corrupt unification of math-habs. Allah Ta’ala, in His Infinite Wisdom, has willed the presentation of Islam in the form of the existing Four Math-habs.