For children, - Ultimate Reality of Material World - Old Sock Story

Share

A wise and saintly rich man, sensing his approaching death, called his son to his side and gave him these instructions:
'My son, I shall be leaving you very shortly. On the day when I die and they have washed my body and come to wrap it in the shroud, I want you to put one of my socks on my foot. This is my final request of you.'
Soon after this, the old man did indeed die, leaving behind his goods and property, his children and his dependents. Family, friends, acquaintances and neighbours attended his funeral. The body had been washed and was almost completely wrapped in the shroud, when the son remembered his father's wish. Finding one of his old socks, he handed it to the washer of the dead, saying, 'In accordance with my father's last request, please put this sock on his foot.'
'That is quite impossible:' Said the washer of the dead. 'Such a thing is utterly impermissible in Hindu religion. I cannot act against the Sacred Law.'
Despite this valid objection, the son insisted, 'That was my father's final request; it must certainly be carried out.'
The washer of the dead was unmoved. 'If you won't take my word for it,' he said, 'go and ask the elder men. They will confirm what I tell you, that it is not permissible.'
Holding up the funeral, they consulted the elder men, religious head and scholars, all of whom declared that this was not permissible in Hindu religion.
Just then, an aged friend of the deceased interrupted the debate with these words to the son: 'My boy, your late father entrusted me with a letter which I was to hand over to you after his departure. Here, this letter belongs to you.' So saying, he gave him an envelope.
Taken by surprise, the boy opened the envelope and read out the contents of his father's letter. 'My son, all this wealth and property I have left to you. Now you see: at the last moment, they won't even let you give me an old sock to wear. When you yourself come one day to be in my condition they will also refuse to let you keep anything. Naked body that, all you will be able to carry over from this fleeting world into the Hereafter. So pull yourself together and be prepared. Spend the fortune I have left you, not for the satisfaction of vain desires, but in ways pleasing to Almighty, that you may achieve honor in both worlds.'
Qullu Nafsin Za Iqatul Maut! Everything that lives shall taste Death! Noble Qur'an, Surah Al-Imran, Verse 185
Imam Ali (as)said: "Every creature who walks on the earth has to go inside one day."
Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (as)said: "Death is like sleep; the only difference is that while sleep is of a short duration, death continues till the Day of Resurrection."
Imam Muhammad at-Taqi (as)said: "Some of the faithful dislike the pangs of death, because they are not fully aware of the comfort after death. Just as children and the insane dislike to take bitter medicine and make a wry face, though the bitterness of the medicine is a forerunner of benefit (to health)."
What a beautiful advice and guidance for those who can understand! May the mercy of Almighty be upon us all.

Share

Ahle sunnathwal Jamath, - Wahabi & Salafi

Share

Muhammad bin ‘Abdal Wahab and the “Wahabis.”
The reason why this Sect are often called Wahabis boils down to the name of one of their main leaders; Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab. It is often believed, that Abdul Wahab started the “crusade” against the Sunni Muslims, but In reality, he did not start this, it was started in the time of Ali RadiAllao-unho. Throughout history there have been different names for this Sect, but in the eighth century, one of their leaders use to call himself Salafi. Even today, this Sect has four names SALAFI, WAHABI, NAJDI and AHL-HADITH - although today they prefer to call themselves Salafi.
This Sect would not have been as famous as it is but at the time of Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab. Even today, if a person or a number of people were to petition the country of Saudia Arabia, they would receive funds or grants if they promise that a Masjid or Madrassah would be built - to teach the Wahabi cirriculum. Or if a magazine would begin to circulate then, it too would receive funds to propogate the Wahabi beleifs. It is in this way, and by currently owning large, well equipt publishing houses, that the Wahabis have been able to mass distribute and mass circulate misinformation about the Ahle As Sunnah Wal Jammat and propogate their own beliefs passing them under the guise of “Salafi” Islam. Many, if not all, of their publications are beautifully designed but, this cannot hide the fact that they are continually trying to break Sunni Muslims from a scholarship this has flourished for over 1400 years. The head office of this “organisation” is in the Najd region, that was where Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab was born.
He was born at the beginning of the 12th century (Hijri) In Jazeera tul Arab, the name given by the Prophet (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) to which has been changed by the Saudi Royal family to that of their grandFathers to Saudi Arabia. He was born in Najd so that is why often he was referred to as Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi in his time.
Shaytan came in the form of the Najdi Shaykh
Hafidhh Ibn Kathir writes: when the Kuffar of Makkah had a meeting concerning the Prophet Sallal laho alihi wasalam, an old man came claiming
“I am a Najdi, what ever you want to know, I will be helpful”. This Najdi Shaykh then gave his view against the Prophet (Sallallahu’ aliahi wa sallam), through out the meeting.
[Tareekh Ibn Kathir. Volume 4]
The Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] stated: I fear from the Najdi’s.
[Bukhari Chapter on Jihad]
The Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] stated: That the Fitnah will emerge from the east. [Bukhari, Kitab-ul-Fitnah]
Abdullah Ibn Umar narrates:
The Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] made Du’a for Syria and Yemen, some people asked him: “Ya Rasoolallah (Sallallahu’ aliahi wa sallam) pray for Najd.” The Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] again repeated Dua for Syria and Yemen. They again requested for Najd. Upon the third time the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] said: “There will be earthquakes there, tribulations will emerge there and a horn of Shaytan will emerge from there”. [Bukhari, Kitabul Fitan]
The brother of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab al Najdi, Shaykh Sulaiman bin Abdul Wahab, said about his brother, “The horn of Shaytan which the Prophet (Sallallahu’ aliahi wa sallam) referred to is you.”
[Sawaa’iqul Ilahiya]
The false Prophet, Musailima Kadhab was also born in Najd. After reading the history of Najd, you will see that this is a place of Sh’yateen. Secondly the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] predicted earthquakes and tribulations for this place indeed there occurred such an earthquake that we can still hear its bang over 2 centuries later.
Many people say that Najd is high land and that the Dua was not made regarding the high land. However in this Hadith the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] mentioned the places Syria, Yemen and not the type of land, therefore the word Najd in this Hadith refers to the place Najd itself which is in Saudi Arabia not in Iraq.
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab’s Education
He was educated in the Najd, Basra and Damascus, his brothers and parents were of the Aqeedah of Ahl-e-sunnah but, through reading Ibn Taymiyyah’s books, he chose to differ in belief with the rest of his family, who were not pleased with him. His brother Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Sulaiman wrote a book against him called ‘Suwaa’iq-ul-Ilahia’, in which he gives the answers to all Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab’s objections.
Shaykh Uthman Bin Basheer & Shaykh Juhri takes all the information we will provide here from Tareekh-e-Najd, in the book called Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Some Najdi says that Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Sulaiman, during his lifetime, converted to Wahabism, however there is no evidence to prove this.
Shaykh Najdi started a conspiracy against Ahl-as-Sunnah. This movement is called Al-Wahhabiyyah. (“Shaykh Juri in Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Page 13”)
There are four names by which Wahabis are famous, Wahabis, Najdi, Salafi, & Ahl-e-Hadith. Ah-l-Hadith was at the time when the British were ruling in India, and the followers of Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi were called Wahabis but Maulana Muhammad Hussain Batalvi made an application to the viceroy of India that they be called Ahl-e-Hadith rather than Wahabi, this application was granted. That is the reason why Maulana Muhammad Hussain wrote: It is Haram to do Jihad (War) against the British. [“Iqtisaad-fi-Massaiil-Jihad”]
Mirza Hairat from Delhi in his book Hayyat-e-Tayybiyah writes that Moulana Ismail from Delhi a founder of Wahabi in India, said in his speech in Calcutta “ It is Harram to do Jihad against the British.” These people are so loyal to the British so how could the British not accept their application.
Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi influenced the spouse of the Amier of Dur’iyaa, Muhammad bin Sa’ud, to his movement and later the Amir also followed. Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi asked him to aid his movement with his power. Muhammad bin Sa’ud assisted with spreading their reign over boundaries beyond Duri’yaa. Lawrence of Arabia was a spy for the British in Arabia and pretended to be a Muslim. He promoted Arab Nationalism and always said to the people, ‘O Arabs, Islam started in Arabia, so to rule is your right, why do you live under the Uthmanni Khilaffat? This brainwashing worked well and helped in destroying the Uthmaani Khilaffat. Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi and Muhammad bin Saood were attracted to this nationalistic movement. Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi labelled this to be Jihad and said: “In Hijaz, the people are worshipping other than Allah”.
“Tareek Najd-Uthman bin Bashir”
Muhammad Hasni wrote that Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi said: “When I went to study in Basra, mushriks would ask me questions and I would leave them very surprised with my answers”. “Tareek Aal-e-Saood”
Shaykh Juri states: “Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab Najdi called The Ahl-e-sunnah Muslims Kafirs & Mushriks apart from himself and his (blind) followers”. The proof for this is that Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab himself said that in Basra, Mushriks would come and ask me questions, these people were Muslims and thus Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab only considers himself and his followers to be Muslims.
[“Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab”]
Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab wrote. Those people who ask for intercession from Prophets and Angels and make Du’a through their Waseela, to become closer to Allah, are commiting sins. Due to this crime it is permitted to kill them and to take their possessions.
[“Kashf-u-Shubhaat”]
Shaykh Attar wrote that Shaykh Najdi said: “I declare war on these people as the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] declared war on the Kuffar of Makkah, against those people with corrupt beliefs”. Corrupt beliefs refers to those people who seek intercession from Anbiyah, Awliyah, and they make their Dua through them (Waseela) and those people who travelled to the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]’s grave with the intention to seek help other than Allah’s.
[“Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab’ page.55”]
The people who leave their corrupt beliefs and join us then, their blood will be saved, and those people who do not do ‘Tasuba’ (Repent) or pay jiz’eiya get ready to do battle. Then Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Attar says: “To spread the good, It is in Islam as to do Jihad, who can refuse this.”
[“Shaykh Ahmed Attar”]
Mas’ood Aalam Nadwi wrote that Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab Najdi has called only those Muslims kafir who make Du’a with the Waseela of Prophets and Awliya, and he made jihad against them. [“Mas’ood Aalam Nadwi”]
All these statements prove that Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab Najdi’s Jihad was not against kafirs but against those Muslims who held the Aq’aid of Ahl-e-Sunnah, like the Khawarij, he considered all other Muslims to be kafirs.
Khawarji’s are those people who consider all other Muslims to be non-believers apart from themselves. They are supposed to kill people who have trust in pious people, as they did with Khabab for saying that he loved Ali radi-allah-ho-unho. Also they would call any person who has committed a major sin a non-believer. Even for anything small they would call the Sahabas non-believer’s as they did with Uthman, Talha, and Zubair Radi allahu taala unhu ajmaeen.
The Khawrij’s would only take the literal meaning of the Holy Qur’an and that would be it they would take it no further. They would call the Sahee (true) Hadith fabricated, such as Hadith-e-Rajm, (stoning the Adulator to death), they would label their opponents non-believers and consider it right to take their belongings and their wives as slave girls. When the Khawarij spoke they would try to refer to the Qur’an or the Hadith as much as possible.
It has been said by Abdullah bin Umar radi-allah-hounho that Khawarij’s are so mischievous that they fit those Qur’anic verses that were revealed about the non-believers.
“Bukhari chap, Al-murtadeen”
For further details please consult books by Ibn Hazam Sharastani, Abu-Mansoor Ma’tirdi, Abu-Zahra Misrei and Mazhabe Islamiyah This was a strange thing as even Abdul Wahab’s blind followers could not digest it. Shaykh Juhri wrote: ‘I think that Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi apart from himself and his followers has labelled all other Muslims as kafir; while not all Muslims have worshipped graves and especially the Ulama. At the time no Muslim’s worshiped grave’s but that was an excuse by Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi so that he could kill the Muslims.
[“Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab page 36”]
Shaykh Juhri says: “I cannot find any reason why they should all have been labelled Kafirs”. Juhri was a strong follower of Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab but even he was surprised at this action by [Muhammad Bin Abdal Wahab ]
Now returning to the movement of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab Najdi, with the help of Amir-e-Duriya He destroyed the shrines. (Graves of Companions) Companions who were in the Najd.
He killed those people who were leaders of the Ahl-e-Sunnah and took their properties and possessions. With the support of those Arabs that were nationalist. They continued increasing their reign, coming out of Najd until Hijaz was taken by them and they managed to win control over the whole of Jazeerat-ul-Arab.
During this time the Ottoman Khilafah was busy engaged in international battles and was therefore unable to respond in a swift manner. In 22 June 1792, Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab Najdi died upon which Qadhi Shawkaani wrote a poem with regard to this incident; one sentence was: “Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab was that son, with whose Noor the Hijaz and its surrounding places became enlightened”. See how the person who sought help from the Kafirs is being praised!!!
For some time after, the rule was in the hands of Ahle-Saud. It was during this time, during the reign of the son of Muhammad ibn Saud, that the Ottomans sent Muhammad Ali Pasha against him, who defeated him, finished their influence in the reign. Again’ Jazeeratul Arab became part of the Islamic Caliphate, the royal family fled to Kuwait. Some time later, the Ahl-e-Saood managed to re-gain control over Jazeeratul Arab and changed its name to Saudi Arabia. Grants were given from abroad to spread Wahabi’ism. Initially it was spread by the sword but now it is through money. The Saudis came to Europe and spent the wealth from the Bait-ul-Maal as though it were their Father’s wealth. In front of the guilty Saudi Ulamas all this Haram and Bid’ah goes on but they say nothing, but will still give Fatwa’s against Milad-un-Nabi.
An interesting story: When Shaykh Faisal was deputy prime minister of Saudi Arabia, he toured India, and put flowers upon Mahatma Ghandi’s grave:
[“News, 11th May 1955”]
In 1957 Shah Sa’ud went on a tour to America, with him was the defence minister Fahad bin Sa’ud, who put flowers on the grave of George Washington. [“Kohstaan 2nd February 1957”]
When Saudi Shaykhs go to Muslim countries they do not place flowers on any of the graves of the Awliya because it may dent their Aqeedah, but by placing flowers upon the graves of Mahatma Ghandi & George Washington maybe this strengthens their Aqeedah.
Shah Sa’ud whilst on tour in India said, “I am satisfied with Indian government that they are treating the Muslims with justice”. This was at the time when Muslims were being sacrificed in Kashmir.
Shah Sa’ood invited the Indian Prime Minister, Pandat Jawahar Nehru to tour Saudi Arabia, When he arrived, the newspaper ‘Al-Balad Sa’oodia Makkah’ reported thus:
“When Nehru arrived in Riyadh, the Indian national anthem was played, the women of the royal family left their homes in the cars to welcome him.” Every thing we have written about Nehru is taken from Tareek Najd-wa-Hijaz by Allma Ghulam Rasood Sa’idi and Safar Nama by Muhammad Asim Najdi who was with Maudoodi when he toured in 1960.
Al-Balad Sa’oodia then wrote an article: We welcome Nehru as he is a peaceful and sensible person, and it is our prayer that he lives thousands of years. Shah Sa’ood secretary colonel Sadat said: ‘Mr Nehru soft voice has more effect than the bang of guns’ and called him the angel of Asia and also called him a Rasool’ our assumption is that he did not mean Prophet but messenger just as many Muslims use the name Abdul Mustafa, meaning not a worshipper but a follower.
When they received Nehru, they called him Aman-ur-Rasool. He toured a school where the rulers studied, where the Geeta was sung. We have a right to ask: “why do not the Saudi Ulama say that these things are Haram, to sing Geeta, for Muslim women to come out of their homes to welcome Kafir rulers, to put flowers on the graves of kaafirs, to call the person who slaughtered uncountable Muslims in India a messenger of peace (Amman)? Oh those who ask for authentic proof for Milad-un Nabi, by Allah show us even a da’eef (weak) hadith to justify these actions”.
When they welcomed Nehru in such a way, back. In India and Pakistan marches and rallies were organised in protest. The King was sent a telegram in 1960 by Saiyed Maududi, who came from Hajj to Saudi, he was invited on Royal order to Riyadh. Delivering his speech he said: “If we were to invite the Prime Minister of Israel to Pakistan and welcome him like you welcomed Nehru, how would you feel? You called the enemy of Muslims the messenger of peace”. The whole world criticised them for this, but no Saudi Ulama made any objections.
In the west people do Dhikr in Masjids, and do Na’at Khanni, once a month they read the Qur’an and convey the reward to Muslims who have parted from this world, especially Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilanis. The Najdi students who come to the west Write piles of books against this and ask for authentic proofs but the people and leaders of their own countries they were to put flowers on the graves of kaffirs they would quietly digest it .

Share

Ahle sunnathwal Jamath, - Taweez

Share

The defenition of a Ta’weez is simply ‘a written Du'a,’ which is from the Qur’an or Ahadith, and is for the one who cannot read or has not memorized that particular Du'a. It is written on a piece of paper and is worn around the neck.
We, the Ahle Sunnah believe, to wear a Taweez around the neck is permissible if the du’a contained in it is written from the Qur’an or Ahadith. Prophet Muhammad [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] used to recite du’a and then blew onto the sick person. The companions of the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] also did this and the companions wrote the du’a on a piece of paper and placed it around the neck of that person if they could not read it. Of course, the du’as from the Qur’an and Ahadith have the power to heal the sick. Some people say, if you wear the Taweez you are commiting shirk, but we will prove, with the help of Allah Almighty, that it is permissible to wear a Taweez.
The Qur’an has the power of healing
Allah Almighty says in the Qur’an,
“…We send down in Qur’an that which is a healing and a mercy to the believers…”
(Surah Bani Israeel Verse 82).
Qadi Shawkani writes, if the Qur’an’s du’as are recited and blown on the sick, they will be cured. When the non-believers recite the Qur’an, their blasphemic disease will be cured. (Tafsir Fathul Qadir under Verse 82 Surah Bani Israeel).
Proof of wearing the Taweez
Hafidhh ibn Kathir and Qadi Shawkani write:
Amr Ibn Shu’aib RadhiAllahu ‘anhu says, that ‘RasoolAllah (Sallallahu’ alaihi wa sallam) taught my Father and grandFather a Du'a which we would read before going to sleep, to protect us from fear and anguish. We told our elder children to recite this Du'a before going to sleep as well. But for those children who were not yet literate, we would write it and then put it around their necks.
[Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal vol.2, Abu Dawud in Chapter of Medicine, Tafsir by Hafidhh Ibn Kathir of verse 97 of Surah Al-Mu’minoon and Qadi Shawkaani in Fath-ul-Qadeer under the same verse]
It is permissible to read du’a and blow upon the sick
Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim write:
When a person who was sick or in some distress they would go to the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] who would then place his hand on the area of the pain and recite a du’a and then blow onto him.
(Bukhari, Muslim chap on Tibb).
Imam Muslim writes:
When the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] was ill for the last time, angel Jibreel [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] came and recited du’a and blew on to the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace]. (Muslim chapter on Tibb)
Imam Muslim writes:
Aisha (Radiall hu anhua) said when the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] was ill the last time, she recited Surah Al-Falaq and Surah Al-Naas and then blew on to the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace]’s hands. The Prophet then blew this onto his own face and body because his hands had more blessing then Aisha’s (Radiall hu anha).
(Muslim chap on Tibb)
From the above narrations, it proves that to blow after reciting du’as onto the sick is Sunnah and the more pious the person is, the more healing power he has because he is blessed more than the less pious.
Hafidhh ibn Taymiyyah writes:
It is permissible to [to recite du’as, and then] blow upon the sick in Islam, but the words must be from the Qur’an or Ahadith. If the words are not then it is not permissible.
[Al-Tawasul chapter on Blowing onto the Sick by Hafidh ibn Taymiyyah]
Q) Some people say, “How is it allowed to blow dua’s onto the sick, when some Hadith say this is forbidden?”
Allama Sa’idi has written the answer to this question in great detail he’s also put the opinion of all the other great scholars, and we will present this here.
Allama Gulam Rasool Sa’idi writes:
Imam Nawawi Rahmatullah in Sharh Muslim states: ‘there are two types of Ahadith concerning blowing. (Reciting a Du'a and then blowing onto a person.) One of the types is transmitted in Bukhari: ‘There will be people who will enter Paradise without any questioning, who have never been blown upon’. Imam Muslim Rahmatullah has also written a hadith in support of those who do not ask to be blown upon. Imam Bukhari Rahmatullah in the chapter on Tibb (Medicine) has written Du'as, which our Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] recited when doing ‘Damm’ (Reciting a Du'a and then blowing onto a person). Imam Muslim Rahmatullah states in the Chapter on Virtues of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] that: when our Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] was ill, the Angel Jibreel came to him and performed the blowing. The above types of Ahadith apparently seem to contradict each other but in reality there is no contradiction.
The former type of Hadith refers to the prohobition of having read something that is not from the Qur’an and Sunnah [ie, something that has pictures, diagrams and words not from the Qur’an] and then blow upon someone. The latter types of Ahadith which permit Damm refer to those Kalimaat (words or verses) which have been taught by the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]. In the same way as above there are two types of Ahadith concerning Ta’weez. There are many narrations that forbid the use of Ta’weez and also many permitting their use. Imam Qurtubi Rahmatullah wrote in detail about both types of Ahadith concerning Ta'weez: ‘The Ta’weez that are forbidden are those Ta’weez from the time of ignorance, those which are Satanic and contain an element of Shirk'. (Mantar, Voodoo and Magic etc.) The Ta’weez, which are permitted are those written with Du'as, which are evident from Qur’an and Ahadith only. Here are the narrations, which show that it is permitted for a person to put a Ta’weez around his/her neck.
Allama Alusi Hanafi in his Tafsir of the Qur’an writes: According to Imam Malik Rahmatullah ‘It is permitted to put around the neck the Ta’weez written with the name of Allah? Imam Baqir also stated that it is permitted to put such a Ta’weez around the neck of a child. [Rooh-ul-Ma’ani, chapter 15" under verse 97 of Surah Mu'minoon]
Allama Shami Hanafi Rahmatullah writes:
It is permitted to write a Ta’weez and put it around the neck. He further adds that it would be better if a person recites the Du'as taught by the Prophet (Sallallahu’ alaihi wa sallam.) But if a person cannot read or is too young to recite then it is permitted for that person to put it around the neck
[Rud-ul-Mukhtar chapter Qirat, Sharah Sahih Muslim chapter on Tib by Allama Sa’idi].
To conclude it can be said that those verses that oppose the Qur’an, Shari’ah, or the Sunnah are forbidden to read and also forbidden to put around the neck. But as for the Du'as and verses from the Qur’an and Sunnah it is permitted to be written and put around the neck of a small child or an illiterate or a sick person.

Share

Welcome to Islam, - Misrepresenting Islam

Share

One of the problems raised by missionaries and orientalists is the imposition of the Jizyah on all non-Muslims. This institution has been so misinterpreted and misexplained that even the non-Muslims feel that it is some kind of religion-based discrimination against them. This is not the case. All the Jizyah amounts are to be a financial obligation placed upon those who do not have to pay the Zakaat. As the ratio of these two taxes is the same, it is obvious that the Jizyah is simply a technique used by Islamic governments to make sure that everyone pays his fair share. If the term 'Jizyah' is too offensive to non-Muslims, it can always be changed: ‘Umar bin Al-Khattaab, may Allaah be pleased with him, levied the Jizyah upon the Christians of the Bani Taghlib and called it Sadaqah )alms( out of consideration for their feelings.
The noted historian Sir Thomas W. Arnold in his Call to Islam, states:
"This tax was not imposed on the Christians, as some would have us think, as a penalty for their refusal to accept the Muslim faith, but was paid by them in common with the other Thimmies or non-Muslim subjects of the state whose religion precluded them from serving in the army, in return for the protection secured for them by the arms of theMussalmans, )i.e. the Muslims(. When the people ofHirahcontributed the sum agreed upon, they expressly mentioned that they paid this Jizyah on condition that: 'The Muslims and their leader protect us from those who would oppress us, whether they be Muslims or others.’"
In his covenant with the people of certain cities near Al-Hayrah, Khaalid bin Al-Waleed, may Allaah be pleased with him, recorded: “If we are able to protect you, we deserve the collection of Jizyah; otherwise, we shall not offer you protection."
The seriousness with which the Muslims took their covenants with the non-Muslims is well illustrated by the following incident. During the reign of the second caliph, ‘Umar bin al-Khattaab, may Allaah be pleased with him, the Roman emperor, Heraclius, raised a huge army to repel the Muslim forces. It was, thus, incumbent upon the Muslims to concentrate their efforts on the battle. When the commander of the Muslims, Abu ‘Ubaydah, may Allaah be pleased with him, heard this news, he wrote to his officials in all conquered cities inSyriaand ordered them to return the Jizyah which had been levied in those cities. He also addressed the public saying; “We are returning your money because we know that the enemy has gathered troops. By the terms stipulated in the covenant, you have obliged us to protect you. However, since we are now unable to fulfil these conditions, we have returned to you what you paid to us. We shall abide by the terms agreed upon in the covenant, if Allaah helps us to rout the enemy”. Thus, a huge amount was taken from the state treasury and returned to the Christians, making them very happy. They prayed for and blessed the Muslim commanders. They exclaimed: “May Allaah help you to overcome your enemies and return you to us safely. If the enemy were in your place, they would never have returned anything to us, rather they would have taken all our remaining property!"
The Jizyah was also imposed on Muslim men who could afford to buy their way out of military service. If a Christian group elected to serve in the state’s military forces, it was exempted from the Jizyah. Historical examples of this abound: the Jarajima, a Christian tribe living nearAntioch)now inTurkey(, by undertaking to support the Muslims and to fight on the battle front, did not have to pay the Jizyah and were entitled to a share of the captured booty. When the Islamic conquests reached northernPersiain 22 A.H., a similar covenant was established with a tribe living on the boundaries of those territories. They were consequently exempted from Jizyah in view of their military services.
Other examples are to be found during the history of the Ottoman Empire: the Migaris, a group of Albanian Christians, were exempted from the Jizyah for undertaking to watch and guard the mountain ranges of Cithaeron and Geraned )which stretch to theGulf of Corinth(. Christians, who served as the vanguard of the Turkish army for road repairs, bridge construction and so on were also exempted. As a reward, they were also provided with some lands, free of all taxes. The Christians of Hydra were exempted when they agreed to supply a group of 250 strong men for the )Muslim( naval fleet. The Armatolis, Christians from southernRomania, were also exempted from the tax, for they constituted a vital element in the Turkish armed forces during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Mirdites, an Albanian Catholic clan who lived in the mountains of northern Scutari, were exempted on the condition that they would offer an armoured battalion in wartime. The Jizyah was also not imposed on the Greek Christians who had supervised the building of viaducts, which carried water to Constantinople, nor on those who guarded the ammunition in that city, as just compensation for their services to the state. However, Egyptian Muslim peasants exempted from military service were still required to pay the

Share

Welcome to Islam, - How was Islam spread? - II

Share

individuals
Besides many other reasons which are responsible for the spread of Islam, it is the exemplary life-style and unceasing efforts of individual Muslims to transmit the message of Islam throughout the world which lie at the root of the conquest of the hearts by Islam. Islamic universalism is closely associated with the principle of Amr Bil-Ma'roof )enjoining the good( for Islam is to be spread by Muslims by means of Amr Bil-Ma'roof. This principle seeks to convey the message of Islam to all human beings in the world and to establish a model Islamic community on a world-wide basis. The Islamic community is introduced by the Quran as a model community:"Thus, We have made of you a nation justly balanced, that you might be witnesses )models( for the peoples, and the Messenger has been a witness for you."]Quran, 2:143[
A Muslim or the Muslim community as a whole thus has a goal to achieve: This is the spread of Islam, conveying the truth to the remotest corners of the world, the eradication of oppression and tyranny and the establishment of justice all over the world. This requires the Muslim to lead an exemplary life, and thus the moral and ethical values of Islam have usually played an important part in the spread of Islam. Here follow the impressions of the influence of Islamic ethics on black Africans had by a Western writer of the nineteenth century:
How does Islam change the nations that have accepted it?
As to the effects of Islam when first embraced by a Negro tribe, can there, when viewed as a whole, be any reasonable doubt? Polytheism disappears almost instantaneously; sorcery, with its attendant evils, gradually dies away; human sacrifice becomes a thing of the past. The general moral elevation is most marked; the natives begin for the first time in their history to dress, and that neatly. Squalid filth is replaced by some approach to personal cleanliness; hospitality becomes a religious duty; drunkenness, instead of the rule, becomes a comparatively rare exception...chastity is looked upon as one of the highest, and becomes, in fact, one of the commoner virtues. It is idleness that henceforward degrades, and industry that elevates, instead of the reverse. Offences are henceforward measured by a written code instead of the arbitrary caprice of a chieftain - a step, as everyone will admit, of vast importance in the progress of a tribe. The Mosque gives an idea of architecture at all events higher than any the Negro has yet had. A thirst for literature is created and that for works of science and philosophy as well as for commentaries on the Quran. )Quoted from Waitz by B. Smith, Muhammad and Muhammadanism, pp.42-43(
The tolerance of Islam
The tolerance of Islam is another factor in the spread of Islam. The British historian Toynbee praises this tolerance towards the People of the Book after comparing it with the attitude of the Christians towards Muslims and Jews in their lands. )A Historian's Approach to Religion, p.246( T. Link attributes the spread of Islam to the credibility of its principles together with its tolerance, persuasion and other kinds of attractions. )A History of Religion( Makarios, Orthodox Patriorch of Antioch in the seventeenth century, compared the harsh treatment received by the Russians of the Orthodox Church at the hands of the Roman Catholic Poles with the tolerant attitude towards Orthodox Christians shown by the Ottoman Government and prayed for the Sultans. )T. Link, A History of Religion(
This is not the only example of preference by the followers of the religions for Muslim rule over that of their own co-religionists. The Orthodox Christians of Byzantium openly expressed their preference for the Ottoman turban inIstanbulto the hats of the Catholic cardinals. Elisee Reclus, the French traveler of the nineteenth century, wrote that the Muslim Turks allowed all the followers of different religions to perform their religious duties and rituals, and that the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Sultan were more free to live their own lives than the Christians who lived in the lands under the rule of any rival Christian sect. )Nouvelle Geographie Universelle, Vol. IX( Popescu Ciocanel pays tribute to the Muslim Turks by stating that it was luck for the Romanian people that they lived under the government of the Turks rather than the domination of the Russians and Austrians. Otherwise, he points out, "no trace of the Romanian nation would have remained." )La Crise de L'Orient(
How did Muslims behave towards the people of the conquered lands?
The Muslim's attitude towards the people of the conquered lands is quite clear in the instructions given by the rightly-guided Caliphs, may Allaah be pleased with them:
Always keep fear of God in your mind; remember that you cannot afford to do anything without His grace. Do not forget that Islam is a mission of peace and love. Keep the Noble Prophet, sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, before you as a model of bravery and piety. Do not destroy fruit-trees nor fertile fields in your paths. Be just, and spare the feelings of the vanquished. Respect all religious persons who live in hermitages or convents and spare their edifices. Do not kill civilians. Do not outrage the chastity of women and the honor of the conquered. Do not harm old people and children. Do not accept any gifts from the civil population of any place. Do not billet your soldiers or officers in the houses of civilians. Do not forget to perform your daily prayers. Fear God. Remember that death will inevitably come to everyone of you some time or other, even if you are thousands of miles away from a battle field; therefore be always ready to face death. )Andrew Miller, Church History(
A historical episode which Balazuri, a famous Muslim historian, tells about how pleased the native people were with their Muslim conquerors is of great significance:
When Heraclius massed his troops against the Muslims, and the Muslims heard that they were coming to meet them, they refunded the inhabitants of Hims the tribute they had taken from them, saying: "We are too busy to support and protect you. Take care of yourselves." But the people of Hims replied: "We like your rule and justice far better than the state of oppression and tyranny in which we were. The army of Heraclius we shall indeed, with your help, repulse from the city." The Jews rose and said: "We swear by the Torah, no governor of Heraclius shall enter the city ofHimsunless we are first vanquished and exhausted." Saying this, they closed the gates of the city and guarded them. The inhabitants of other cities - Christians and Jews- that had been capitulated did the same. When, by God's help, the unbelievers were defeated and Muslims won, they opened the gates of their cities, went out with the singers and players of music, and paid the tribute.

Share

Welcome to Islam, - How was Islam spread? - I

Share

century, was the main religion, or at least, the religion of the majority of nations in an area covering more than half of the civilized world stretching over three continents from the Pyrenees and Siberia in West and North Europe to the farthest end of Asia, up to China and New Guinea in the East; from Morocco in North Africa to the southern tip ofAfrica, covering two-thirds of the African continent. It is one of the most striking facts of human history that the spread of Islam over such a vast area took place within three centuries. Most striking of all, within half a century after the Hijrah )Prophet Muhammad's Migration from Makkah to Al-Madeenah(, Islam had already conquered the whole of North Africa from Egypt to Morocco, all the Middle Eastern lands from Yemen to Caucasia and from Egypt to the lands beyond Transoxiana )portion of Central Asia corresponding approximately with modern-day Uzbekistan and southwest Kazakhstan(. It was during the reign of the third Caliph 'Uthmaan, may Allaah be pleased with him, that the Muslim envoys reached the Chinese Palace, where they were welcomed enthusiastically, an important event marking, according to the historians, the beginning of Islam's entry into this country. There are many reasons why nations have been, from past to the present, so ready to embrace Islam, what is pointed out by Muhammad Asad, a Jewish convert to Islam, probably being the foremost:
Islam appears like a perfect work of architecture
Islam appears to me like a perfect work of architecture. All its parts are harmoniously conceived to complement and support each other, nothing lacking, with the result of an absolute balance and solid composure. Everything in the teaching and postulate of Islam is in its proper place. )Islam at the Crossroads, p.5(
Islam was spread by force of the sword
Most of Western writers, especially under the influence of the Church, have never failed to accuse Islam of spreading by force of the sword. The causes of this prejudice lie mainly in the fact that the spread of Islam has often occurred at the expense of Christianity. While Islam has, for centuries, obtained numerous conversions from Christianity without much effort or organized missionary activities, Christianity has almost never been able to achieve conversions from Islam in spite of sophisticated means and well-organized missionary activities, and it has always been at a disadvantage in its competition with Islam for fourteen centuries. This has caused its missionaries and most of the orientalists to develop a complex within themselves by depicting Islam and introducing it as a regressive, vulgar religion of savage people. The same attitude has unfortunately maintained toward the Holy Prophet of Islam. This is clear in the confessions of some unbiased writers of the West: According to P. Bayle,
Muslims, according to the principles of their faith, are under an obligation to use force for the purpose of bringing other religions to ruin )probably he means Jihaad which is not for the purpose he suggests(; yet, in spite of that, they have been tolerating other religions for some centuries past. The Christians have not been given orders to do anything but preach and instruct, yet, despite this, from time immemorial they have been exterminating by fire and sword all those who are not of their religion ]…[ We may feel certain that if Western Christians, instead of the Saracens and the Turks, had won the dominion over Asia, there would be today not a trace left of the Greek Church, and that they would never have tolerated Muhammadanism as the 'infidels' have tolerated Christianity there. We )Christians( enjoy the fine advantage of being far better versed than others in the art of killing, bombarding and exterminating the Human Race." )Bayle P., Dictionary, 'the article Mahomed', 1850(
To what is Islam indebted its unequaled spread?
Islam is indebted its unequaled spread to its religious content and values, which is confessed by all objective Western intellectuals:
Many have sought to answer the questions of why the triumph of Islam was so speedy and complete? Why have so many millions embraced the religion of Islam and scarcely a hundred ever recanted? Some have attempted to explain the first overwhelming success of Islam by the argument of the Sword. They forget Carlyle's laconic reply. First get your sword. You must win men's hearts before you can induce them to imperil their lives for you; and the first conquerors of Islam must have been made Muslims before they were made fighters on the Path of God. Others allege the low morality of the religion and the sensual paradise it promises as a sufficient cause for the zeal of its followers: but even were these admitted to the full, no religion has ever gained a lasting hold upon the souls of men by the force of its sensual permissions and fleshy promises...
In all these explanations the religion itself is left out of the question. Decidedly, Islam itself was the main cause for its triumph. Islam not only was at once accepted )by many peoples and races( by Arabia, Syria, Persia, Egypt, Northern Africa and Spain, at its first outburst; but, with the exception of Spain, it has never lost its vantage ground; it has been spreading ever since it came into being. Admitting the mixed causes that contributed to the rapidity of the first swift spread of Islam, they do not account for the duration of Islam. There must be something in the religion itself to explain its persistence and spread, and to account for its present hold over so large of a proportion of the dwellers on the earth... Islam has stirred an enthusiasm that has never been surpassed. Islam has had its martyrs, its self-tormentors, its recluses, who have renounced all that life offered and have accepted death with a smile for the sake of the faith that was in them. )Stanley Lane-Poole, Study in a Mosque, pp.86-89(
A. J. Arberry has also pointed out that the reason for the spread of Islam is Islam itself and its religious values. )Aspects of Islamic Civilization, p.12( He states:
The rapidity of the spread of Islam, noticeably through extensive provinces which had been long Christian, is a crucial fact of history ]…[ The sublime rhetoric of the Quran, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy". )M. Pickhtal, The Meaning of the Glorious Quran, p.vii(
Arberry continues:
This, and the urgency of the simple message carried, holds the key to the mystery of one of the greatest cataclysms in the history of religion. When all military, political and economic factors have been exhausted, the religious impulse must still be recognized as the most vital and enduring.
Brockelman, who is usually very unsympathetic and partial, also recognizes the religious values of Islam as the main factor for the spread of Islam. )History of the Islamic Peoples, p.37( Rosenthal makes his point as follows:
The more important factor for the spread of Islam is religious law of Islam )Sharee'ah which is an inclusive, all-embracing, all-comprehensive way of thinking and living( which was designed to cover all manifestations of life. )Political Thought

Share

Dought & clear, - Wearing silver rings inthe month of Rajab

Share

In our family we give each brother and sister silver rings, and each ring has some Arabic numbers engraved on the inside, and they are made specifically in the month of Rajab only. I would like to know whether wearing such rings is part of Islam or not?
Praise be to Allah.
It is permissible for a man to wear a silver ring, as it is also permissible for a woman to do so.
Al-Bukhaari (65) and Muslim (2092) narrated that Anas ibn Maalik (may Allah be pleased with him) said: When the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) sent a letter or wanted to send a letter (to the non-Arab rulers), it was said to him: They will not read any letter unless it has a seal on it. So he had a ring of silver made, and engraved on it Muhammad Rasool Allah (Muhammad the Messenger of Allah). It is as if I can see its brightness on his hand.
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) aid in al-Majmoo ‘ (4/340):
it is permissible for a woman, married or otherwise, to wear a ring of silver as it is permissible for her to wear a ring of gold. There is consensus on this point. There is nothing makrooh about that, and there is no difference of scholarly opinion concerning this matter. Al-Khattaabi said: It is makrooh for her to wear a ring of silver, because that is one of the symbols [?] of men. So if she cannot find a friend of gold, let her colour it yellow with saffron and shabaha [?]. But what he said is wrong and there is no basis for it; the correct view is that it is not makrooh.
Then he said: It is permissible for a man to wear a ring of silver, whether he holds a position of authority or otherwise. There is scholarly consensus on this point. With regard to what has been narrated from some of the earlier scholars of ash-Shaam, that it is makrooh for anyone other than a ruler to wear it, this is an odd view and is to be rejected on the basis of the texts and the consensus of the earlier generations. Al-Anbari and others narrated that there was scholarly consensus on this matter. End quote.
It is also permissible to engrave or write things on a ring, but there is no basis for doing that specifically in the month of Rajab, or for wearing the ring in the months of Rajab in the belief that it will bring one close to Allah, or that there is a particular virtue in wearing it during this month. This is an innovation and is wrong.
You should be aware of writing anything on the ring that it is claimed will bring good luck or ward off the evil eye, envy and the jinn, and so on.
To sum up:
in principle there is nothing wrong with wearing rings and engraving things of them. What is for beginners is seeking to draw closer to Allah by doing that, or singling out a specific time for wearing it, or seeking barakah (blessing) from the ring, or using it as an amulet.
And Allah knows best.

Share

Dought & clear, - The hadeeth “Whoever says in Rajab ‘I ask Allah for forgiveness, there is no god but He’…” is fabricated and is not saheeh

Share

This hadeeth came to me on my phone, and I want to know how sound it is:
it was narrated that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever says in Rajab ‘I ask Allah for forgiveness, there is no God but He alone, with no partner or associate, and I repent to Him’ one hundred times, and ends it with charity, Allah will decree for him mercy and forgiveness. And whoever says it four hundred times, Allah will decree for him the reward of one hundred martyrs.”
Praise be to Allah.
There is no basis for this hadeeth in the books of Sunnah and reports, and no narration is known for it with any of the scholars. Similarly, we could not find it in the books which deal with false and fabricated hadeeths.
Rather we found it in some of the books of the Shi‘ah that are filled with fabricated reports that are narrated without any isnaad or proof. It was mentioned by Ibn Tawoos – ‘Ali ibn Moosa ibn Ja‘far (d. 664 AH) – in his bookIqbaal al-A‘maal(3/216). But we did not find any basis for this hadeeth in any earlier book of the Shi‘ah. Ibn Tawoos mentioned it in a comment without any isnaad, and said:
Chapter on what we have mentioned about the virtue of seeking forgiveness, repeating Laa ilaaha ill-Allah and repenting in the month of Rajab. We found this narrated from the Prophet (may Allah send blessings upon him and his family), that he said: “Whoever says in Rajab ‘I ask Allah for forgiveness, there is no God but He alone, with no partner or associate, and I repent to Him’ one hundred times, and ends it with charity, Allah will decree for him mercy and forgiveness. And whoever says it four hundred times, Allah will decree for him the reward of one hundred martyrs, and when he meets Allah on the Day of Resurrection, He will say to him: You affirmed My sovereignty, so wish for whatever you want so that I may give it to you, for there is none who prevails but Me.”
It was transmitted from him in some of the other books, such asWasaa’il ash-Shi‘ah(10/484) by al-Hurr al-‘Aamili (d. 1104 AH) and others.
Thus the signs of fabrication in this hadeeth become clear:
Firstly:
The hadeeth is devoid of any isnaad.
Secondly:
It is only the books of the Raafidah that mention this hadeeth. From their books the hadeeth has become well known in some Internet chat rooms and websites. Hence it is essential to be cautious about many of the hadeeths that are quoted in chat rooms when their sources are the fabricated books of the Raafidis.
Thirdly:
The hadeeth has to do with the virtues of the month of Rajab. We must be cautious about all reports that speak of this matter, because there are so many fabricated reports concerning it that some of the scholars wrote books dealing specifically with that, such as al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) in his bookTabyeen al-‘Ajab bima wurida fi Fadl Rajab. He (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
No saheeh hadeeth that is fit to be used as evidence has been narrated concerning the virtue of the month of Rajab or of fasting that month or any specific part of it, or praying qiyaam al-layl specifically during that month. This has been stated categorically before me by Imam Abu Ismaa‘eel al-Harawi al-Haafiz, and we have narrated it from him with a saheeh isnaad as we also narrated it from others. But it is well known that the scholars are deviant in narrating hadeeths about virtues, even if they are da‘eef, so long as they are not fabricated. Nevertheless we should stipulate that the one who does that should believe that the hadeeth is da‘eef and he should not make it well-known, lest people act upon a da ‘eef hadeeth and prescribe something that is not prescribed, or lest some of the ignorant see that and think that it is a saheeh Sunnah.
End quote fromTabyeen al-‘Ajab(p. 11)
Fourthly:
Exaggeration about the reward, whereby a small deed in the month of Rajab is said to bring the reward of one hundred martyrs and more. Such as it is not narrated in the saheeh reports.
And Allah knows best.

Share

Dought & clear, - There is no contradiction betweenthe fact that Allah is more merciful to His slaves than a mother to her child and the fact that the disbeliever will abide in Hell for eternity

Share

How are we to understand the words of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), “Allah is more merciful than this woman to her child”? For the Muslim woman is merciful towards her son, even if he is a disbeliever, so will Allah show mercy to His disbelieving slave? Does the fact that Allah will never bring the disbeliever out of Hell contradict the mercy of Allah?
Praise be to Allah.
Undoubtedly Allah, may He be exalted, is the most merciful of those who show mercy; His mercy encompasses all things, and He is more merciful to His slave than a mother to her child; indeed He, may He be glorified, is more merciful to a person than he is to himself.
For more information, please see the answer to questions no. 10127and 20468.
This does not contradict the belief that the disbeliever will be punished and will be doomed to Hell for eternity on the Day of Resurrection. Discussion of this matter is based on three points:
Firstly:
Differentiation between the general mercy of Allah in this world, and His specific mercy in the Hereafter. In this world He, may He be glorified, bestows mercy in a general sense upon all His slaves, believers and disbelievers, obedient and disobedient. Thus He bestows provision upon them, gives them food and drink, heals them and grants them well-being, and other, innumerable types of mercy. Were it not for the mercy of Allah, no one would find air to breathe or water to drink, or any food or clothing. When he falls sick, were it not for Allah, he would never recover. In such terms people, in general, are equal. This is mercy in a general sense, which He grants to both His friends and His enemies.
As for His specific mercy in the Hereafter, it will be only for the believers, and the disbelievers will have no share of it.
Secondly:
The One Who made the mother merciful must inevitably be more merciful than her. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Allah is more merciful to His slaves than the most merciful of mothers to her child, for the One Who made her merciful must be more merciful than her.
End quote fromMajmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 16/448
Reason dictates that Allah should be more merciful than every merciful individual among His creation, no matter how great a person’s mercy may be, because He, may He be glorified, is the One Who instilled mercy in their hearts. Al-Bukhaari (6000) and Muslim (2752) narrated that Abu Hurayrah said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “Allah made mercy in one hundred parts; He kept ninety-nine parts with Him and He sent one part down to earth. By virtue of that part, all creatures show compassion to one another, and even the mare lifts her hooves lest she harm her foal.”
Thirdly:
There is no contradiction in the names and attributes of Allah, may He be exalted; rather they affirm one another and some imply others.
As He is merciful, He is also just. If someone were to say that He must show mercy to the disbeliever, for He is the most merciful of those who show mercy because mercy is His attribute, our response is: that would imply that He should not be just, but justice is also His attribute. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Or do those who earn evil deeds think that We shall hold them equal with those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah Islamic Monotheism) and do righteous good deeds, in their present life and after their death? Worst is the judgement that they make”
[al-Jaathiyah 43:21]
“Shall We treat those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah Islamic Monotheism) and do righteous good deeds, as Mufsidoon (those who associate partners in worship with Allah and commit crimes) on earth? Or shall We treat the Muttaqoon (pious), as the Fujjar (criminals, disbelievers, wicked, etc)?”
[Saad 38:28]
“Shall We then treat the (submitting) Muslims like the Mujrimoon (criminals, polytheists and disbelievers, etc.)?
What is the matter with you? How judge you?”
[al-Qalam 53:35, 36].
By His perfect wisdom and justice, Allah, may He be glorified, differentiates between His friends and His enemies, those who obey Him and those who disobey Him, those who worship Him and those who worship something other than Him. Otherwise, treating all of these people as equals would come under the heading of injustice that is contrary to justice and wisdom. If people do not treat their enemies and their friends equally, and they regard that as foolishness, ignorance and injustice according to human understanding, concepts and customs, then how about in the case of Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, may He be glorified?
Allah, may He be exalted, the most merciful of those who show mercy, created mankind, granted them provision and bestowed upon them innumerable blessings, then He sent the Messengers to them, and He sent down the Books, and guided them to faith and guidance; undoubtedly this is far greater than the mercy of a mother to her child.
When the believer obeys Him and the disbeliever disobeys Him, it is impossible for Him to treat them equally, because of the dictates of His wisdom, His knowledge, His justice, His promise (of reward) and His warning (of punishment); the disbeliever puts himself beyond the bounds of deserving this mercy which is only for some in the Hereafter.
Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“He said: (As to) My Punishment I afflict therewith whom I will and My Mercy embraces all things. That (Mercy) I shall ordain for those who are the Muttaqoon (pious), and give Zakat; and those who believe in Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs and revelations, etc.)”
[al-A‘raaf 7:156].
“Surely, Allah’s Mercy is (ever) near unto the gooddoers”
[al-A‘raaf 7:56].
Ibn al-Jawzi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
One of the signs of the general nature of His mercy is His sending the Messengers, and giving respite to the sinners. When the disbeliever denies Him, he displays stubbornness and so he is not deserving of mercy.
With regard to the specific nature of His mercy, it is for His believing slaves; He shows kindness towards them at times of hardship and of ease, which is greater than the kindness of a mother towards her child.
End quote fromKashf al-Mushkil, 1/94
To sum up: The special mercy of Allah in the hereafter will only be for His close friends and loved ones among those who to affirmed His oneness. As for those who died in a state of disbelief, stubbornness and arrogance, they will have no share of the mercy of Allah; rather they will be subject to His justice. And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice (cf. 6:115), the disbelievers will be surrounded by the very thing that they used to deny and mock at (cf. 6:10).
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Allah, may He be exalted, will say to them – i.e., the disbelievers – when they ask Allah to bring them forth from the Fire, and they seek to appeal to Allah, may He be exalted, by virtue of His Lordship and their admission against themselves,“Our Lord! Bring us out of this; if ever we return (to evil), then indeed we shall be Zalimoon: (polytheists, oppressors, unjust, and wrong-doers, etc.)” [al-Mu’minoon 23:107], no mercy will reach them; rather justice will catch up with them, and Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, will say to them:“Remain you in it with ignominy! And speak you not to Me!” [al-Mu’minoon 23:108].
End quote fromMajmoo‘ Fataawa wa Rasaa’il al-‘Uthaymeen, 8/28
And Allah knows best.

Share