Nabi knew Qur’an before his Birth?

December 30, 2011

According to Mufti Ahmad Yaar Khan, Hakim al-Umma of Barelwis, our beloved Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) knew the Qur’an even before he was born.

He writes in his book Jaa al-Haq (Barelwis are very proud of this book),

“If the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) is not aware of all heavenly scriptures, so what is the point of expressing it and not expressing. The fact is that the Prophet knew the Qur’an from beginning, but he did not implement the Qur’anic commandments before their revelation. So, the first hadith of Bukhari says that Sayyidina Gabriel (may the peace of Allah be upon him), when appeared first time in Hira cave, said: iqra’ (read), he did not say: read so and so verse. ‘Read’ can be said only to one who already knows [so if it is said to a child, read, would that mean that child already knows?]. The Prophet replied: “I am not reader”, I am teacher, I have already learnt. The Qur’an is preserved in the Preserved Tablet (Lawh Mahfuz) and it is already in the memory of the Prophet. Before his birth, he was a prophet with Qur’an. How a nubuwwah (prophet-hood) without wahy (revelation)? [SubhanAllah at his logic here] Therefore, we will have to admit that he knew the Qur’an before his birth. Nowadays also, many children are born hafiz. Sayyidina Isa (may the peace of Allah be upon him) proclaimed just after birth: “He gave me Book.” It means that he already knew the book. Some prophets said: “And We gave him wisdom, while he was still a child”. The Prophet, just after his birth, prostrated and interceded for his Ummah [another baseless claim], whereas prostration (sajdah) and intercession (shifa’ah) are Qur’anic commandments. The Hudhur Ghaws Pak (Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jailani / may Allah have mercy on him) did not drink milk of his mother in the month of Ramadan. This is also Qur’anic commandment.”

Look, how he is talking about Holy Prophet in one breath and then right away jumps to Shaykh Jailani. How is Shaykh Jailani not drinking milk in Ramadan is a Qur’anic commandment?

How is the incident of Shaykh Jailani relevant to his claim?

They have surpassed all extremes in the name of love.

Original scan: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i72/khanbaba21/bachpan-muftiahmadyar.jpg


Icharwi distorting quotes about ilm al-ghayb

December 30, 2011

by Saad Khan

It is a well-known belief of the Barelwis that the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) was given complete knowledge of the unseen (ilm al-ghayb) from the advent of creation till people enter Paradise and Hell and even after that.

Famous high-ranking Barelwi scholar and debater Molwi Muhammad ‘Umar Icharwi (d: 1971), known as ‘Munazir-i-Islam’ in Barlewi circles, has tried in vain to prove that Holy Messenger had complete ilm al-ghayb. In this effort he goes as far as misquoting Shihab al-Din Qastalani al-Shafi’i (d. 923).

Molwi Muhamamd ‘Umar quotes from Irshad al-Sari which is a Sharh of Sahih al-Bukhari by Qastalani,

يرى ان صحة النبوة تستلزم اطلاع النبى صلى اللّه عليه وسلم على جميع المغيبات

“For the Prophethood to be valid it is required the Holy Prophet knows all of the unseen.” (Miqyase Hanafiyyat, p. 385)

He misquotes ‘Allamah Qastalani. Below is the accurate quote from Irshad al-Sari of Qastallani:

فإن بعض من لم يرسخ في الإيمان كان يظن ذلك حتى كان يرى أن صحة النبوة تستلزم إطلاع النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم على جميع المغيبات

“Some of those who are not firm in faith (Iman) believe to such a degree that they consider that for the Prophethood to be valid it is required the Holy Prophet (Allah bless him and hive him peace) knows all of the unseen.”

Notice how he left out the part in red as it demolishes their ‘aqidah.

This exact quote can also be found in Fath al-Bari, 13:364, of Hafiz ibn Hajr al- ‘Asqalani (may Allah have mercy on him).

فإن بعض من لم يرسخ في الإيمان كان يظن ذلك حتى كان يرى أن صحة النبوة تستلزم إطلاع النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم على جميع المغيبات

It is bold of him to leave out the first part of the sentence in which ‘Allamah Qastalani is attributing the ‘aqidah of complete knowledge of unseen to those who are not solid in faith and belief.

Scan from Umar Icharwi:

Original scan of Qastalani:


Bashariyyah of the Messenger of Allah

December 14, 2011

Bashariyyah of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)

By Hakim al-Umma Mawlana Ashraf ‘Ali Thanawi

Translated by Shaykh Muhammadullah Khalili Qasmi

[Heading] It is disbelief (kufr) to say that the Holy Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) was a human being in his outward appearance but not in his reality (haqiqah).

Question: That [certain] preacher also said that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)was human being (bashar) in his outward appearance, but in reality he was not a human being. He also said that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) is hadhir nadhir at all times and sees everything. You are requested to render solution of these matterswith your guiding attention that the heart can be contented and satisfied.

Answer: Those who claim[1] [these issues] to be right are responsible to answer the two matters, as the claimant issought to establish evidence; otherwise the first claim is disbelief (kufr) and the second is polytheism (shirk). 20 Shawwal 1346.

(Imdad al-Fatawa, 5:225)


[1] Ahmad Rida Khan, the founder of the Barelwi sect, writes in the translation of the verse ‘qul in-nama ana basharun mithlukum’, “Say, in my outer (dhahiri) human appearance, I am just like you.” (Kanz al-Iman, p.486)

The famous Barelwi scholar and debater, Muhammad ‘Umar Icharwi, wrote a book, Miqyas Nur, to prove that the reality (haqiqah) of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) was light (nur) while his outward appearance was human (bashari). He writes on p.24, “This verse establishes that the reality (haqiqah) of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was not human (bashari), rather his haqiqah was nuri …” He further writes on p.73, “It becomes evident from these hadiths that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was a superior nur and the moon was a nur of a lesser degree. The superior nur split the lesser nur into pieces. This power of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) is contradictory [at odds] with haqiqah bashariyyah and thus proves that the haqiqah of the Messenger was not bashari but it was pure nur.” And he writes on p.90, “Allah Most High described in this verse the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) as pure nur, which proves that he is in reality a nur and only has human attributes.”

Contrary to the Barelwi belief, Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi Mujaddid Alf al-Thani (d. 1034H) states: “O brother, Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), in spite of his lofty status, was a bashr characterized with mortality and transience.” (Maktubat, Letter 73, First Vol., p.177)

I.e. neither he was qadim and wajib (immortal and infinite) nor eternal and perpetual, rather he was a mortal human being.

Mujaddid says at another place: “Do not you see that the prophets (may peace be upon them) are equal to other people in being bashr and all are equivalent as per their haqiqah and person (dhat). Yes, they are superior in status as per their perfect attributes. (Maktubat, First Vol, part 4, p.128)

At another place, he writes: “However, there is a status of prophethood which cannot be accessed by an angel. The status was obtained due to the element of soil, so this is characteristic to human being.” (Maktubat, First Vol. Part 4, p.123)


Abd al-Hayy Lucknawi on Kissing Thumbs

December 1, 2011

The renowned Indian scholars Mawlana Abd al-Hayy Lucknawi called the kissing of thumbs, an innovation. The quote shows that scholars before the foundation of university of Deoband called this practice an innovation. The kissing of the thumbs remains up until today a sign of the Barelwis, who practice this innovation in their mosques:

“The fact is that kissing fingers while listening the name of the Prophet in Iqama and other places when his name is mentioned (may blessing and peace be upon him) is not proved by any hadith or athar. One who claims so is great fabricator.
 
So, this is abhorrent and henious bid’ah which has no base in the books of Sharia. One who claims agaist it, he has to produce evidence.” (Si’ayah vol. 1, p. 46)