Alusi and Knowledge of the Hour

August 30, 2012

Barelwis love to quote a part of Alusi’s Tafsir regarding the hypothetical possibility of knowing the Hour, like Ghulam Rasul Sa’idi has done, but they neglect the other parts of his tafsir where he clearly mentions that the Prophet did not know the moment of the Hour.

He says under the tafsir of 7:187:

وظاهر الآيات أنه عليه الصلاة والسلام لم يعلم وقت قيامها.

And the apparent meaning of the verses is that he (peace and blessings be upon him) did not know the time of the hour.

Answering those who say Holy Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) had no shadow

August 28, 2012


Iman Jalaluddin Suyuti (d. 911 AH) writes: “Hakim Tirmidhi narrated from the chain of ‘Abdur Rahman bin Qais Za’farani, from ‘Abdul Malik bin ‘Abdullah bin al-Walid, from Sayyidna Zakwan that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) had shadow neither in sunlight nor moonlight. (Khasa’is al-Kubra, 1:71)

This narration proves that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) had no shadow and when he did not have shadow he was not bashar.


This hadith is not acceptable and reliable. First, because one of its narrators is ‘Abdur Rahman bin Qais Za’farani, he is called liar by Imam ‘Abdur Rahman bin Mahdi. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal says: his hadith is weak, he is abandoned. Imam Abu Zur’ah calls him kadhdhab (liar). Imam Muslim bin al-Hajjaj says that his hadiths are unacceptable. Imam Abu ‘Ali says he used to fabricate hadiths. Imam Nasa’i calls him as matruk al-hadith (one whose hadiths are abandoned), while Imam Saji says that he was dha’if (weak). (Tarikh al-Baghdad, 10:251-252)

All these comments are reported by Hafiz Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib. He added that according to Imam ‘Adi, most of his hadiths are not supported by other reliable narrators and Hakim Abu Ahmad says that his hadiths were forsaken, while Imam Abu Na’im Asfahai says that he was nothing. (Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, 6:259)

Secondly, Mulla ‘Ali Qari says: “Hakim Tirmidhi narrated this hadith in Nawadir al-Usul from ‘Abdur Rahman bin Qais, who is criticised. ‘Abdur Rahman narrated it from ‘Abdul Malik bin ‘Abdullah bin Walid, who is unknown. (Sharh al-Shifa’, 2:282, Egypt) So along with a fabricator narrator, this hadith was narrated by a majhul (unknown) narrator too.

Thirdly, Zakwan is a Tabi’i, he did not directly meet the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace). Had it been any derivative (far’i) issue, it would have been treated so, but since it is a matter of belief; therefore how one can accept baseless narrations compared to Qur’anic verses and sahih hadiths and how can one found his religion over them. Interesting enough, Imam Suyuti himself writes, at other place, about ‘Abdur Rahman bin Qais al-Za’farani that he was kadhdhab (big liar) and wadhdha’ (fabricator). (Manahil al-Safa fi Takhrij Ahadith al-Shifa‘, p.7) This narration was mentioned in Nawadir al-Usul which was written by ‘Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin ‘Ali al-Hussain (d. 255 AH). Imam Shah Abdul ‘Aziz Muhaddith Dehlawi states: “Most of the hadiths mentioned in Nawadir al-Usul are unreliable.” (Bustan al-Muhadditin, p. 68)

(Taken from: Nur wa Bashar: ‘Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar)

Prophet Can’t Perform Miracles on their Own

August 27, 2012

A story of the great Ash’ari scholar al-Baqillani:

The Qadi said, “Then the emperor asked me in another gathering, ‘What do you say about the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, peace be upon him?’ I replied, ‘He is the Spirit of Allah and His Word, His slave, Prophet and Messenge. He is like Adam, whom He created from dust, and then Allah said to him, ‘Be!’ and he was.’ (3:59) I recited the text to him.’ He said, ‘Muslim, do you say that the Messiah is a slave?’ ‘Yes,’ I replied, “That is what we say and it is our deen.’
“He said, ‘You do not say that he is the son of God?’ ‘I seek refuge with Allah!’ I replied, ‘Allah has no son and there is no other god accompanying Him.’ (23:91) You are saying something terrible. If you make the Messiah the son of Allah, who then is his father, brother, grandfather, paternal uncle, and maternal uncle?’ listing possible relatives, and he was confused.
“He asked, ‘Muslim, can a slave create give life, heal the blind and leper?’ I replied, ‘He cannot do that. That was all the action of Allah Almighty.’ Then he asked, ‘How could the Messiah be the slave of Allah and create what he created?’ He mentioned all these signs and asked, ‘How could he do all of that?’ I replied, ‘I seek refuge with Allah. The Messiah did not bring the dead to life nor heal the blind or leper.’ He was confused and impatient. He said, ‘Muslim, do you deny this when it is well-known among people and people accept it?’ I replied, ‘None of the people of understanding and knowledge state that the Prophets performed miracles from themselves. Rather a miracle is something which Allah Almighty performs at their hands to confirm them. It is like testimony.’

Fatwas on Bashariyyah of the Holy Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)

August 27, 2012

The fuqaha and the ‘ulama have clarified that believing in the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) as a bashar is a necessary part of the religion. If anyone, let alone denying him as a bashar, express his ignorance about the matter, he will turn kafir because he did not learn a fundamental belief, as the reliable and authentic books of the Hanafi Fiqh state: “One who says that he does not know whether the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was a human being or a jinn, he will turn kafir.” (Fusul Imadiyyah, 1350, India; Fatawa Alamgiri, 2:291, Egypt)

This is because acceptance of his bashariyyat is a fundamental belief and this individual  is unaware of it.

‘Allamah Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Baqi al-Zurqani al-Maliki (d. 1122 AH) writes in Sharh al-Mawahib: “If you ask whether having knowledge of his being a bashar and an Arab is a precondition for belief (iman) to be valid or it is fardh kifayah (obligation if performed by some will be considered for all) on parents, for example, if one teaches it to his mature son, his other partner will not be questioned about.

Shaykh Wali al-Din Ahmad bin ‘Abd al-Rahim al-Iraqi al-Hafiz ibn al-Hafiz replied that it is precondition for iman to be valid. So, if a person says: I believe in Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) as Messenger to all creation, but I do not know whether he is from amongst the bashar or angels or jinn, or he says: I do not know whether he is an Arab or ‘Ajam (non-Arab), he will undoubtedly become a kafir as he rejects the Qur’an where Allah says: ‘He is the One who raised amidst the unlettered people a messenger from among themselves.’ (62:2) and ‘nor do I say to you that I am an angel’ 96:50). Such a person also belies what was received by the Muslims generation to generation and it is known fully to all the classes and masses. According to me, there is no difference of opinion in this matter. (Sharh Mawahib, 2:68, Egypt)

وقد سئل الشيخ ولي الدين العراقي هل العلم بكونه صلى الله عليه وسلم بشراً ومن العرب شرط في صحة الإيمان أو من فروض الكفاية؟ فأجاب بأنه شرط في صحة الإيمان، ثم قال: فلو قال شخص: أومن برسالة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى جميع الخلق لكن لا أدري هل هو من البشر أو من الملائكة أو من الجن، أو لا أدري هل هو من العرب أو العجم؟ فلا شك في كفره لتكذيبه القرآن وجحده ما تلقته قرون الإسلام خلفاً عن سلف وصار معلوماً بالضرورة عند الخاص والعام ـ ولا أعلم في ذلك خلافاً ـ فلو كان غبياً لا يعرف ذلك وجب تعليمه إياه فإن جحده بعد ذلك حكمنا بكفره انتهى

‘Allamah Sayyid Mahmud al-Alusi al-Hanafi (d. 1270 AH) writes: “Shaykh Wali al-Din al-Iraqi was asked whether having knowledge of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) being bashar and an Arab is a condition for iman to be valid or is it fardh kifayah? So, he replied that it is necessary for iman to be valid. He further said: if a person says: I believe in Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) as Messenger to all the creation, but I do not know whether he is from amongst the bashar or angels or jinn, or he says: I do not know whether he is an Arab or Ajam, then there will no de doubt in his kufr as he rejects the Qur’an and denies what was received by the Muslims generation after generation and was essentially known to all the classes and masses. According to me, there is no difference of opinion in this matter. If someone is ignorant and unaware of it, he should be informed of it, and if he denies it afterwards, we will declare him kafir.” (Tafsir Ruh al-Ma’ani, under vers 3:164, 4:101, Egypt)

(Taken from: Nur wa Bashar, ‘Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar)

Seeking aid from the pious is a despicable act – Bughyat al-Mustarshidin

August 23, 2012

In Ba’Alawi’s Bughyat al-Mustarshidin p. 308, 369, it is related from ‘Allamah Muhammad b. Sulayman al-Kurdi al-Shafi’i [d. 1194 H] that he said,

وأما التوسل بالأنبياء والصالحين فهو أمر محبوب ثابت في الأحاديث الصحيحة وقد أطبقوا على طلبه، بل ثبت التوسل بالأعمال الصالحة وهي أعراض فبالذوات أولى، أما جعل الوسائط بين العبد وبين ربه، فإن كان يدعوهم كما يدعو الله تعالى في الأمور ويعتقد تأثيرهم في شيء من دون الله فهو كفر، وإن كان مراده التوسل بهم إلى الله تعالى في قضاء مهماته مع اعتقاده أن الله هو النافع الضارّ المؤثر في الأمور فالظاهر عدم كفره وإن كان فعله قبيحاً

“Regarding tawassul through the Prophets and pious, it is a liked matter, established in authentic hadiths. Its desirability is agreed-upon. In fact, tawassul is established through good deeds, and they are a’rad (fleeting accidents); thus, with dhawat (substances) a fortiori.

“Regarding making intermediaries between the slave and His Lord:

“If he asks them [i.e. the intermediaries] like he asks Allah in matters [i.e. directly], believing that they bring about effects in a matter and not Allah, then that is disbelief.

“And if the intention is tawassul through them to Allah, the Exalted, in the fulfilment of important matters, while believing that Allah is He who causes all benefit and harm in matters, and the one who brings about effects in matters, then apparently this is not disbelief, although his action is despicable.”

From…-intermediary/ with slight amendments: