Ahle sunnathwal Jamath, - Waseela

Share

It is the belief of the Ahl-as-Sunnah that it is permissible to supplicate to Allah with the Tawasul of good deeds. It is permitted to supplicate with the Tawasul of a living pious person and it is also permitted to supplicate with the Tawasul of the deceased pious person. It is this belief that we shall prove in this chapter. (Insha’allah)
The following is evidence that proves that it is permitted to seek the Waseela of the living and the deceased;
Proof from the Qur’an
Allah most High says in the Holy Qur'an:
O you who Believe! Do your duties to Allah and fear Him seek the means of approach unto him, and strive (with might and main) in His cause so that you may prosper. (Surah Mai’dah verse 35, Surah 5)
In this verse, Allah has informed us to seek ways of obtaining Waseela, a means to approach Him. Our Prophet (May Allah bless him and grant him peace), is our Waseela in this world and hereafter.
Allah Ta’ala says in the Holy Qur'an:
Before that, they were asking for victory over the infidels by means of the same Prophet. Surah Baqarah verse 89
Imam Tabari, Hafidhh Ibn ul Qayyum al Jawzi, Hafidhh Ibn Kathir and Qadi Shawkani write that before the birth of the Messenger of Allah (May Allah bless him and grant him peace), the Jews would make the Prophet, Allah's peace and blessings be upon him, a Waseela in their supplications, when asking Allah to defeat their enemies in battle. (Tafsir Ibn Jareer, Tafsir Ibn Kathir & Tafsir Fath ul Qadeer Shawkaani. Ibn Qayyum. Under, verse Baqarah 89 and Hadaya-tul-Hayara page 95 by Hafidhh Ibn Qayyum al Jawzi.
Someone may object to this by saying that this was an act of the Jews, hence it cannot be used as evidence for Muslims. However, Allah has mentioned this event in the Qur'an and did not condemn this, therefore this demonstrates that if it were impermissable the Holy Qur'an would not have mentioned it, nor left it unremanded
Proof from Hadith
Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes: When Adam (Alay hissalaam) made a mistake, he made Du'a like this: ' O Allah forgive my mistake with the Waseela of Muhammad, (May Allah bless him and grant him peace).Allah asked the Prophet Adam peace be upon him, (rhetorically) how he knew about Muhammad, (May Allah bless him and grant him peace)
Adam, peace be upon him, answered “when you created me, I lifted my head and saw: (LA ILA HA ILLALLAHU MUHAMMDUR RASU LULLAH) written on the throne. Therefore I knew that this person must be of a very high status. Other wise you would not have written his name with yours. Allah Ta'ala then said I have forgiven you. He will be the last Messenger in your children and I have created you because of him. The second narration is when Allah Ta'ala created the Sky, and the Earth. He wrote our Prophet Muhammad's, (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) name on the pillars of the throne and on the doors of paradise, and on the leafs of the trees in Paradise. It was written that Muhammad (My Allah bless him and grant him peace) would be the last Prophet. In addition to both of these narrations, are counter proofs for one another. They have the status as authentic narrations.
["Fatawa Ibn Taymiyya vol. 2 page 150" also Tareekh Ibn Kathir in Story of Adam]
Apart from Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyya, other Scholars have also written these narrations. Like Hafidhh Suyuti, Bayhaqi and Tabrani.
Qadi Ayad writes; Imam Malik was present at the blessed grave of the Messenger of Allah (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) where-upon the Caliph Haroon approached and asked him 'Which direction shall I face when I supplicate?' Imam Malik replied 'Why turn your face away from RasoolAllah [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] when the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]is a Waseela for you as he was for your Father Adam 'Alayhissalam. Turn your face towards the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]and make Istishfaa (request for Du'a).
[“Kitab As-Shifa, Chapter Ziyarat un-Nabi by Qadi Iyad” ]
Du'a was even made with the Waseela of our Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] when he was a child.
Ibn Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab Najdi states, when our Prophet Muhammad, (May Allah bless him and grant him peace), was a child, rain had not fallen upon Makkah for a long period of time. His Uncle Abu Talib, prayed for rain through the Waseela of our Prophet (Sallallahu’alihi wa sallam.)
“Mukhtasar Seeratur Rasul, By Ibn Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab al Najdi”
Imam Bukhari writes that there was a famine during the Khilafah of Umar, (Allah be pleased with him), who supplicated to Allah by presenting the Waseela of the uncle of the Messenger of Allah, Abbas, May Allah be well pleased with him. He prayed to Allah by saying: 'O Allah, we used to supplicate to you with the Waseela of the Prophet (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) and you would bestow us with rain. Now we present You the Waseela of (Abbas Allah be well pleased with him), the uncle of the Prophet So please grant us rain.'
[“Bukhari in Baab-ul-Istisqaa”]
Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah and Imam Ibn Sa’ad have both written that during the Khilafah of Ameer Mu'awiya RadhiAllahu 'anhu there was a famine. The people came out of their houses and Ameer Mu'awiya asked them "Where is Yazeed bin Aswad Jurshi?," where upon Yazeed bin Aswad RadhiAllahu 'anhu came to Ameer Mu'awiya who then supplicated in this way ‘Ya Allah we supplicate to you with the Waseela of one of the best of the people from this age'. Then he asked Yazeed bin Aswad to supplicate to Allah, for rain, and when he supplicated, it began to rain.
[“Tabqa'at Ibn Sa'ad biography of Yazeed bin Aswad & Ibn Tayymiah Al-Tawasul” page 276]
Both the above narrations prove that to supplicate with the Waseela of a pious person is permitted and is from the Ijma of the Sahaba.
The Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]himself said that make Du’a through my Waseela.
Hafidhh Ibn Tayymiah writes that Uthman bin Haneef RadhiAllahu 'anhu narrates that a blind person came to RasoolAllah [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]and said: 'Pray to Allah that He bestows me with sight'. RasoolAllah [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] replied: 'Perform ablution, pray two rak'at Salaah and then supplicate to Allah in this way: 'Ya Allah, I ask You through the Waseela of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]; Allah Subhana wa ta'ala returned his sight.
[“Al-Tawasul by Hafidhh Ibn Tayymiah page 80 he obtained information from these books Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Haakim, Imam Bukhari in Tareekh, Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and Tibraani”]
This Hadith proves that RasoolAllah [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] gave the permission to supplicate to Allah by presenting the Waseela of his blessed self.
Imam Bukhari writes that Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]said, “Help the poor, because the help and food that Allah has given to you is with their waseela.”
[Bukhari chap on Jihad]
Ibn Hajar Asqalani writes that Allah helps the Ummah and provides them with food because of the sincere du’as of the poor people.
[Fathul Bari chap on Jihad]
Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim writes that the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said, “A time will come when the non-believers will fight the Muslims. It will be asked, Is there anyone in the army who has seen the Prophet?
They will reply yes and will win the war. Another time will come when there will be another war with the kafirs and the Muslims and a question will be asked, have you anyone in the army who has seen the companions of the Prophet? They will reply yes and will win the war. Another time will come and a question will be asked, Is there anyone in the army who has seen the person who has seen the companions’ companions? They will reply yes, and will win the war. [Bukhari chapter on Jihad and Muslim chapter on Fada’il Sahaba]
Ibn Hajar Asqalani writes that these three wars will be won by the Muslims with the waseela of the Sahabah, tabi’ee and taba tabi’ee. This hadith is also verified by another hadith, where Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said: “My time is the best, then the companions time is the best, then the people who have seen the companions’ companions time is the best.”
[Fathul Bari chap on Jihad]
Hafidhh Ibn Kathir writes, that the Prophet said that seven people will always remain in my Ummah, and with their waseela, Allah will provide rain, help, and food for the Ummah. Another hadith states that the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said that thirty abdaal (saints) will always stay in my Ummah, and with their waseela, Allah Almighty will provide rain, help and food. Qattadah says, Hasan al Basri was one of them.
(Tafsir ibn Kathir Surah Al-Baqarah under Verse 252).
Hafidhh Ibn Kathir and Qadi Shawkani write, Uthman bin Haneef reported that a blind person came to the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace]. The blind person said, do du’a for me so Allah Almighty restores my sight. Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said if you really want to, I can do du’a for you or I can leave it. (This means that if the blind man leaves his sight as it is, he will be rewarded more on the Day of Judgement). But the blind man said insisted that the Prophet should do Du’a for him. The Prophet asked him to perform ablution and pray two rakah nafl and make following supplication: “O Allah! I ask You with the waseela of the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace]. Ya Muhammad! I am making du’a to Allah Almighty with your waseela, so that Allah Almighty may accept my du’a. O Allah! Make Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] as my interceder.”
This hadith is written by ibn Majah, Nasai, Tirmidhi, Ahmad, Haaqim, ibn Sunni, Tibrani and ibn Huzaima. Tibrani and ibn Huzaima said this hadith is authentic. This hadith proves that it is permissible to make supplication with the waseela of Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace].
(Tareekh ibn Kathir chapter on Mowjizaat and Tuhfah Al Dhakireen chapter Salaah ul Haajah).
Imam Bayhaqi has also wrote this narration but also included an additional element of the hadith that states Uthman bin Haneef reported that the blind man followed what the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said and when he returned, his sight was restored.
(chapter on Al-Mowjizaat).
It is proved from the above hadith that it is permissible to say “Ya Muhammad” and it is also permissible to make supplication to Allah with the waseela of the Prophet.
Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal writes that Sayyidna ‘Ali narrated that, the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said, “there will remain Forty Abdaal (Saints) in Syria. Through their Waseela, Allah will provide food, shelter, rain and victory over the Kaffirs. Whenever one dies, he is replaced by another.”
(Musnad Ahmed Ibn Hanbal, Musnad of Hadrat ‘Ali [Radi Allahu ‘anhu]
Hafidhh Ibn Kathir, Ibn abdul-Barr and Ibn Sa’aad, Ibn Athir writes: 'Whenever there was a famine in Rome, then the Romans would supplicate by presenting the Waseela of Abu Ayyub Ansari RadhiAllahu 'anhu'.
(Tareekh Ibn Kathir). Tabakat Ibn Sa’d, Usdool-Gabah, Isteyab by Ibn Sa’d, Ibn Atheer and Abdul-Barr)
Hafidhh Ibn Kathir made no critical comments with regards to this. When supplication was made through Abu Ayyub Ansaari Radi Allaho making him the waseela, it did rain.
Our Prophet is our Waseela even after his Death.
Hafidhh Ibn Taymyya writes: A person came to Uthman Ghani RadhiAllahu 'anhu with regards to seeking some assistance, but he was unable to attract the attention of the Khalifah on every attempt. The same person met Uthman bin Haneef, RadhiAllahu 'anhu, and told him his problem. Uthman bin Haneef gave him some advice which was: 'Perform Wudhu, pray two rak'at Nawaafil and then supplicate in this way: " Ya Allah, I ask You through the Waseela of Your Messenger Muhammad [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]The person again went to Uthman bin Affan RadhiAllahu 'anhu who helped him with his work and also said 'If you ever need my help in future, I will help you (with regards to work).
[Qay’da jaleelah Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyah page 96 Tabraani, Bayhaqi, Hakim]
Hafidhh Ibn Taymyya After writing this narration writes that, 'Maqdasi states that this narration is Sahih and Hakim declares that it fulfils the conditions of Bukhari, then Hafidhh Ibn Tayymiah goes on to say: 'The opinion of Uthman bin Haneef is that it is permitted to supplicate in this way even after our Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]passed away. But since this is not evident from any other companion it does not prove that it is Wajib.
[“Al-waseela Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyah page 98” ]
It is the belief of the Ahl-al-Sunnah that it is permitted, and has never been claimed that it is Wajib. Ibn Taymyyah further adds: 'It is evident from a group of the Salaf that they held the practice of supplicating with the Waseela of the Prophet (Sallallahu’alaihi wa sallam)' He then includes the following report: 'According to Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal it is permitted to supplicate with the Waseela of the Prophet (Sallallahu’ alaihi wa sallam.’) After writing all this Hafidhh Ibn Tayymiah makes the statement: 'If a person makes the obedience of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] the Waseela, then this is fine. But if he makes the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] himself the Waseela then this is something with which we do not agree with'.
[“Al-waseela Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyah page 100”]
Even in Hafidhh Ibn Taimiyyah's books, there are dozens of narrations, which show that the Salaf would present the Waseela of RasoolAllah [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] when supplicating to Allah. So it is a very strange phenomenon to deny the Waseela of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] after having full knowledge of these narrations, and the practice of the Salaf.
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahaab Al Najdi writes that scholars have different opinion about making supplication du’a with the Waseela of the pious people. Some permit it, while the others, do not. So it is not right to say some one is Kafir who goes to the grave of a pious person and make Waseela.
(Majmooah ul Mu’allifat Al Qism ul Salith pg 68 by Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahaab ul Najdi)
Qadi Shawkani writes that to supplicate with the waseela of the Prophet is permissible and evidence for that hadith is narrated by Uthman bin Hanif that states that the Prophet asked a blind man to pray with his Waseela. Tirmizi, Nasai, Ibn Majah, Ibn Khuzamah and Hakim narrate this hadith. To pray with a pious person’s Waseela is also permitted and Imam Bukhari gives evidence of that hadith as he writes that companions of the Prophet made du’a with the Waseela of Abbas during the time of famine in Madina.
(Tuhfa ul Dakireen chapter Adab ul Du’a by Qadi Shawkani)
These are all the proofs, that demonstrate that it is permitted to supplicate to Allah by presenting the Waseela of the pious, whether they are alive or have passed away. And success is from Allah.

Share

Welcome to Islam, - Islam and freedom of thought

Share

I was told:
"You are not liberal"
"Why?" I asked him.
"Do you believe in the existence of a God?" He enquired.
"Yes, I do."
"Do you pray and fast for Him?"
"I do".
"Well, then you are not liberal".
Thereupon I asked him:
" How do you say that I am not a freethinker?"
"Because you believe in nonsense that has no existence at all," he told me.
"And you? What do you believe in? What do you think created universe and life?" I asked him.
"Nature!"
"But what is Nature?"
"It is the secret power that is limitless but has got manifestations which can be perceived by the sense organs," he said.
At this I said: "I understand by this statement of yours that you prevent me from believing in an Unknown Power because you want me to believe in another equally unknown power. But the question is that why should I disown my God for the sake of another equally unknown but false god, especially in the one I find peace, tranquillity and comfort, whereas the false god of Nature neither answers my call, nor comforts me?"
This in short is the case of the 'progressives' who talk about freedom of thought. For them freedom of thought is synonymous to freedom of disowning one's God. This is, however, not freedom of thought but freedom of atheism. Starting with these premises, they accuse Islam of restricting the freedom of thought simply because it prohibits atheism. But the question is: Is freedom of thought and atheism one and the same, and is atheism really a necessary precondition to the freedom of thought?
Misled by the history of European liberalism they overlook the fact that if certain local circumstances necessitated the spread of atheism inEurope, this does not mean that the same thing should happen everywhere in the world.
There is no doubt that the image of Christianity as presented by the church in Europe with its suppression of science, torturing of scientists and passing on a set of lies and superstitions in the name of the word of God drove the free thinkers of Europe to atheism. The intellectuals ofEuropehad to choose between two irreconcilable attitudes: the natural belief in God or the belief in theoretical and practical scientific facts.
The European intellectuals found in Nature a partial escape from the dilemma. So they said to the church: 'Take back your God in whose name you enslave us and impose on us burdensome exactions and subject us to tyrannous dictatorship and superstitions. The belief in your God wants us to lead the ascetic life of hermits and recluses; we refuse to do your bidding. We shall, therefore, have a new God who possesses most of the qualities of the first God but who has no church to enslave us, nor does He impose on us any moral, intellectual or materialistic obligations as your God does'.
But in Islam there is no such thing as may drive people to atheism. There are no dilemmas which puzzle the mind. There is only one God; He has created all beings and all will return to Him. It is a clear and simple concept, which even the naturalists, and atheists may find hard to reject or doubt.
In Islam, there are no churchmen such as the European church had. Religion is the common property of all, and every Muslim is entitled to benefit from it as much as his natural, spiritual and intellectual equipment may permit. All people are equal and they are treated, as they deserve to be, in the light of their deed in life. The most honoured of all people are the God-fearing individuals whether they are engineers, teachers, workmen or craftsmen. Religion is not, however, one of these so many occupations. There are no professional churchmen in Islam, so that Islamic worship is observed without the intercession of a churchman.
Still, it is necessary that some people should specialise in the study of jurisprudence and law on which public order is based. The status such specialists in Islamic jurisprudence and constitutional law enjoy is not more than that which their counterparts in other countries do. They are not entitled to any authority or class prestige over the people. They are just the jurisprudents and counsels of the state. It may be pointed out here that Al-Azhar is a religious institute but it does not have, as the churchmen did, the authority to burn or torture people.
All that Al-Azhar can do is to challenge and criticise an individual's understanding of religion. On the other hand, anyone from outside can easily challenge and criticize Al-Azhar's understanding of religion, for Islam is not the monopoly of any individual or class. Only those persons are considered as an authority on questions of religion who, in the light of their deep understanding of it, apply it to practical life regardless of their own professions.
When the Islamic rule is established, the 'Ulamaa' )Islamic scholars( will not automatically become the governors or ministers or head of departments. The only change is that the system of rule will be based on Islamic Sharee'ah )law( - the law of God. The engineers will continue to be charged with the engineering works, the doctors will be responsible for medical affairs, the economists will direct the economic life of the community with the only change that the Islamic economy alone will then provide them with the guidelines.
History bears witness that neither the Islamic faith nor its system of rule ever came into conflict with science or the application of its theories. No scientist in Islam has ever been burnt or tortured for discovering or announcing a scientific fact. True science is not in conflict with the Islamic faith and the belief that God created everything. Islam calls on people to study space and earth and to meditate on their creation in order to discover the existence of God. It should be remembered that many Western scientists who did not believe in God came to discover His existence through proper scientific research.
There is nothing in Islam which may drive people to atheism. The advocates of atheism in the East are but blind followers of their erstwhile colonialist masters. They want to be given the freedom to attack the faith and all kinds of worship and to urge people to abandon their religion. But why do they want such freedom? InEurope, people sought to attack religion in order to liberate their minds from superstition and to free people from oppression and tyranny.
If Islamic faith already gives them all the freedom they need to have or they clamour for, why should they attack it? The truth is that these so-called liberals are not interested in the freedom of thought but are rather more interested in spreading moral corruption and uncontrolled sexual anarchy. They use freedom of thought as a mask to hide their base motives. It is no more than a camouflage in their hideous war against religion and morality. They are against Islam not because it restricts freedom of thought but only because it stands for the liberation of mankind from the dominance of its baser passions.
The advocates of "free thinking" allege that the Islamic system of rule is dictatorial because the state has vast powers. The worst of it, they say, is that the state enjoys immense power and authority in the name of the faith which has a very great attraction for the people. So they blindfoldly subject themselves to its tyrannical rule. Thus, they conclude, these vast powers lead to dictatorship and the common people are made slaves with no right to think for themselves. Freedom of thought is lost forever. None dare challenge the rulers and he who does is accused of rebellion against religion and God.
These false accusations are best refuted by referring to these verses of the Holy Quran; Allaah says what means:"…And their affair is ]determined by[ consultation among themselves…"]Quran: 42:38[ and:"…And when you judge between people to judge with justice..."]Quran: 4:58[
Abu Bakr, may Allaah be pleased with him, the first Caliph, said: "Obey me so long as I obey God and His Prophet. But if I disobey God or the Prophet I shall no longer be entitled to your obedience."
'Umar, may Allaah be pleased with him, addressed the Muslims saying: "Put me right if you discover any crookedness in me." One of the audience retorted: "By God Almighty! If we had found any crookedness in you, we will put you right with our swords."
It is true that oppression and tyranny ruled in the name of religion. It is also true that such oppression still dominates in some countries in the name of religion. But is religion the only mask used by dictators? Did Hitler rule in the name of religion? It is now admitted even inRussia, that Stalin was a tyrant and a dictator who ruled over a police state. But did Stalin rule in the name of religion? Do all tyrants and dictators including Mao Tse-tung, Franco, Malan inSouth Africa, Chiang Kai-shek in Nationalist China, dominate on behalf of religion? There is no doubt that the twentieth century which has managed to get rid of religious domination has witnessed the most monstrous dictatorships which beguile mankind by attractive names no less sacred than religion.
No one would defend dictatorship; no man of free intellect and conscience would approve of it. But any noble principle can be exploited and used as a mask to hide personal ambitions. The French Revolution witnessed the most heinous crimes being committed in the name of liberty. Hundreds of innocent people have been imprisoned, tortured or murdered on behalf of the constitution.
Should all constitutions be annulled then? Oppression and tyranny dominated some countries in the name of religion. Should we, therefore, abandon all religions? It would be right to abandon religion if religion as such were to advocate oppression and injustice. This cannot be said of Islam, which established the noblest examples of pure justice and equity, not only among the Muslims themselves but between Muslims and their fatal enemies as well.
Tyranny is best fought by teaching the people to believe in God and to respect freedom, which is defended and safeguarded by religion. Such people would not allow the ruler to commit injustice, but will keep him within the limits of his legal powers. I do not think that any system has ever aimed at the establishment of justice or the opposition of tyranny as much as Islam did. Islam made it a duty of the people to put the ruler right if he is unjust with the condition that no bigger calamity occurs as a result of trying to execute the change. The Prophetsallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallamsaid:"He who witnesses any vice should change it."He also said:"A word of justice uttered before an unjust ruler is the greatest of Jihaad )holy war(."
In conclusion, we would like to drop a word of advice to these "progressive free thinkers". The true way of liberation is not the abandonment of religion but in giving people the revolutionary spirit which abhors injustice and rectifies the unjust. This spirit is essentially the spirit of the

Share

Welcome to Islam, - The Muslim-Christian dialogue - II

Share

to allow Christians in Saudi Arabia to both perform their prayers and build churches in the same manner Muslim minorities are given such religious freedom, we would like to call your attention to a great deal of fallacy in this comparison:
1. Muslim minorities in the West are mostly indigenous. A significant part of their population acquired citizenship while the rest are permanently-residing landed immigrants. It is a fallacy, therefore, to compare work groups contracted for a limited period and subject to conditions of their contracts with the indigenous Muslims or those who have acquired citizenship in the West.
2. Muslim minorities in the West, excluding theVaticanof course, enjoy less freedom than the Christian minorities in most Muslim countries such asEgypt,Syria,Turkeyand others as they )Muslim minorities in the West( still suffer from harassment in the simplest of its religious privacy and practices such as veiling and education in schools and universities. You must have learned that some universities in the West have started to confine certain scientific fields of specialisation to indigenous Christians!
3. Another fallacy appears in your saying that the Muslims inRome, the cradle of the Catholic Denomination, were permitted to build a large mosque and cultural centre and this would require that Muslims would act in kind.Romeis the capital ofItalyand is neither a capital of theVaticannor a part of its geographical exclusivity. What is acceptable is a comparison betweenItalyandEgypt, for instance, where churches and Papal Councils are inCairoandAlexandria. Comparisons can be made also withIstanbul,Damascus,Morocco, and many Muslim counties.
4. You have also asked the following question: "Are some Gulf countries as well asYemennot but a part of theArabian Peninsulaand, therefore, a part of the geographical exclusivity of Islam? If the answer is in the affirmative, then why have Muslims of these countries accepted churches being built on their territory? Does this not mean that exclusivity is a Saudi understanding not shared by the rest of Muslims even in neighbouringArabian Peninsulacountries?"
IndeedYemenand the Gulf countries form a part of theArabPeninsulaand, thus, are included in the geographical exclusivity of Islam. These countries have the same firm belief as the Saudis in this principle but, unlikeSaudi Arabia, they at a certain time of their history were subjected to British and other imperialism and thus became unable to have their suzerainty over their own religious and political affairs. In such circumstances, imperialism, in a direct challenge to the will of their people, built these churches out of its wish to reaffirm its political presence through a reaffirmation of its religious presence.
Therefore, the people in these countries did not in reality permit the building of these churches. The real builder was in fact British imperialism, which contravened the norms, traditions and faith of these subjugated people. However, with the grace of Allah, the middle of the Peninsula, i.e.Saudi Arabiawas immune from any foreign imperialism. Throughout its history, it has remained governed by its own people, who are strict adherents of Islam, thanks to Allaah.Saudi Arabia, consequently, was not subject to the violations which beset the fringes of theArabPeninsula. We would like to confirm that it has beforehand been agreed not to tackle cases of certain countries but general cases.
5. Having replied candidly to your questions, we also have our own queries )regarding, inter alia(, the following issues:
1- You know that we always confirm, through crystal-clear texts from the Quran and the Sunnah, our firm belief in all the Prophets and Messengers of Allaah and all their Holy Books. This firm belief is part and parcel of our conviction in the Holy Quran and our Prophet. However, we have so far neither heard nor read any declaration from your side about your belief that Muhammadsallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam)may Allaah exalt his mention( is the Prophet of Allaah and Seal of Messengers, that the Holy Quran is a divine book which represents Allaah's complete religion, and contains what had been revealed before, to all Messengers.
The Second Ecumenical Lodge issued, however, a statement describing Muslims as people of faith and that, on the Day of the Hereafter, they are saved. But this is a general statement which is nowhere from real recognition of Islam and Muslims. Accordingly, you are asked to clearly proclaim your belief in Muhammad as a Prophet and Messenger, that he is the Seal of all Prophets and Messengers, that the Holy Quran is a true book of Allaah and that it is the ending Message containing all divine teachings to mankind.
2- You believe that the Jews harmed the Messiah, attacked him and, according to you, they even crucified him. They also harmed his mother, Virgin Mary, accused her of prostitution and of dishonour. Yet, we do not find a single Evangelist mission from you among the Jews! You even went as far as absolving them from Christ's blood and from crucifixion, which is against your own belief and religious emblem, the cross, symbol of Christ's tragedy with the Jews. Compare this attitude with the thousands of missions sent by you to Muslim societies with the view to proselyte Muslims or to keep them away from Islam! Is this how you have rewarded our belief in Jesus, and his blessed mother and our reverence to his divine message?
3- You very much highlighted news of Christian minorities in the Islamic and Arab World, and demanded more freedoms and rights for them. We, however, have not heard you uttering one single word concerning calamities from which the Christian Palestinians in occupiedPalestine)inBethlehem,Hebron,Jerusalemand others( are suffering. This takes place at a time when they are exposed to semi-genocide. Most of them have left their homes. Their churches have been destroyed. They have been deprived from practicing their rituals. Archbishop Kapuchi is now a refugee inRome, after being expelled fromPalestine. There are even others like him such as Archbishops Qarmash, Johan, and others. Is your overlooking of the tragedy of the Christians inPalestinenot a kind of sympathy with the Jews on the expense of the rights of Muslims and Christians inPalestine?
4- Jews have contravened the sacredness of Abraham's Shrine which is attributed to the father of Prophets, Ibraaheem )Abraham(, may Allaah exalt his mention. They have killed Muslims while performing their prayers, shed blood, torn and trodden Holy Quran books but we did not hear any word of condemnation from you or at least a journalistic query of condolences to Muslims regarding the most atrocious massacre and attack on the faith and faithful inPalestine!
Does this not demonstrate your sympathy with the Jews at the expense of Muslims and their religious and national rights inPalestine?
5- How do you justify the American Congress' decision of making Jerusalem an eternal capital for Israel as a result of the large demonstration organised by the American Churches including Catholic and non-Catholic ones? About one million of these churches' followers participated in the above demonstration. Consequently, how do you want us to understand this integration between the Church's attitude and that of the Congress? Is this not a clear demonstration of hatred to Islam and Muslims as far as their most immediate affairs are concerned? TheVaticandid not issue any denunciation regarding this damaging stance about the Muslims of the world, which constitutes a flagrant attack on the rights of Palestinian Christians and Muslims. Is this not a clear alignment with the increasing Jewish aggression and injustices?
6- Had it not been that you opened up this venue of dialogue, we would not have reacted in kind. However, we are fully prepared to present the many examples of wrongs in the Christians' stance about Islam and Muslims. We are equally prepared to answer all your written questions. We have no feeling of embarrassment vis-à-vis any query, be it religious, cultural or historical. We hope that you have same level of preparedness and non-embarrassment with regards to any questions addressed to you about your religious values or your past and present attitudes about

Share

Welcome to Islam, - The Muslim-Christian dialogue - I

Share

perfected for us our religion, and completed upon us His favour and has chosen Islam to be our religion. Our belief in His Oneness and in the Messengers whom He sent to His creation is a part of our Islamic creed.
For some time, Muslims and Christians lived together in harmony. Muslims have always been committed to the glorious principles laid in Islam and stated in the Holy Quran; Allaah says what means:"There shall be no compulsion in ]acceptance of[ the religion ..."]Quran: 2:256[, and"For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."]Quran: 109:6[ Unfortunately, the Jews succeeded in poisoning this cordial relationship and in instigating disorder whenever possible.
Discussions, argumentation, encounters and accusations arose, and this and other reactors led to the following well-known three expressions in this Muslim and Christian context: Dialogue, Christianisation, and persecution.
In its practice of Christianisation, or missionary work, the Christian West resorted to unlawful means crowned by western imperialism of Muslim states. This imperialism was effectively doing lip service to missionary work. Missionaries succeeded in camouflaging imperialists' goals. Their evangelism was introduced in combination with food, dress, medicine and book. In the aftermath of the collapse of communism in Muslim Albania, Muslims tired out therein by hunger, were handed the Bible together with food!
Military imperialism came to an end, only to be replaced by cultural and economic invasion. Many among us are now adopting the Westerners' mentality, priding themselves in speaking their languages, importing their way of life, modelling themselves after them and praising their culture!
Persecution is a big lie being an illusion created by those Christians who are hiding their real motives. However, Allaah says what means:"…And Allaah is predominant over His affair, but most of the people do not know ..."]Quran: 12:21[
The Vatican was so enthusiastic for an Islamic-Christian dialogue that it founded a special office in 1967 called: "The Papal Council for Inter-religious Dialogue."
Though the ultimate goal of this dialogue is to bolster the effectiveness of religion, deepening its spiritual hold in the family and society and bringing back absent principles and values, theVatican's Church totally missed the point of proper dialogue when it declared that dialogue serves at the end of missionary work. This meant opening up of new horizons to evangelise Muslim societies through dialogue!
Consequently, we, in the following, mention a specimen for Muslim-Christian dialogue showing vividly the extent of the Jews' control over Christian thinking in both the West and theUSA.
Dr.KhalidUksha, a Jordanian Christian responsible for Islamic affairs at the Papal Council – Vatican, said: "I request that the colleagues in the Islamic delegation be patient because of our repeated questioning of Saudi Arabia's prevention of building churches on its soil, in spite of the fact that there is now around half a million Catholics together with a similar number from other Christian denominations )in that country(. This prevention leads us to the belief that the Christian minority inSaudi Arabiais deprived from its religious rights and from performing its worship unlike Muslim Minorities in the Christian West."
The above query was replied to as follows:
1. "We assure our colleague, Dr.Khalid, and all other members of the Catholic delegation that repetition of this query neither embarrasses nor annoys us. The aforementioned prevention is non-negotiable, being a matter of principle. This is a case of faith which has been clearly expounded in our Islamic system according to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah.
2. In reply to this query, we have always confirmed that we Muslims, and you also at the Catholic Church, believe that each faith should have its geographical exclusivity, which no other faith would share. This is in order that complete freedom and independence would be guaranteed for such a faith on its soil.
For instance, you have geographical exclusivity for Catholicism within theVatican. Further, you have proclaimed that theVaticanis the state of Catholic denomination, and patron of its followers worldwide. To ensure the freedom and exclusivity of Catholicism, you prevented any coexistence within theVaticanof any other faith or denomination. Moreover, you even disallowed building of churches there affiliated to Protestants, Orthodox and others, let alone building a single mosque for Muslims.
Similarly, we Muslims apply this sound principle condoned by our Islamic law. In his traditions, our Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam )may Allaah exalt his mention( confirmed that the entireArabian Peninsularepresents geographical exclusivity for the Islamic faith. No other faith should coexist with it within the same area. This allows full freedom for our religion, whereas outside the peninsula, churches are built adjacent to mosques in the Muslim lands. Therein, Christians are enjoying their full religious and national freedom.
The Leader of the Faithful, the second Caliph 'Umar bin Al-Khattaab, may Allaah be pleased with him, refrained from entering the 'Resurrection Church' to pray in and said: "I fear that Muslims would say: here is the place 'Umar prayed… and turn this place into a mosque."
As you may know, this Church's keys are until now kept with a Muslim family as a result of an accord reached by Christian denominations regarding this matter to end the feud which ensued regarding who would be honoured with the possession of its keys.
We have no wish to argue with you concerning your claim that in Saudi Arabia there are one million subjects affiliated to different Christian denominations, out of which there are half a million Catholics. This figure is very much exaggerated and needs utmost accuracy. We, however, would like to confirm that inSaudi Arabiathere is not a single non-Muslim who acquires permanent residence.
All non-Muslims, including Christians and others, have entry visas to carry out temporary work. Their work contracts stipulate that they should respect norms and laws of the State. As it is known, all parties of the contract are bound by its context. Consequently, if a non-Muslim feels that the non-existence of a church is going to represent a religious problem for him, then he is free not to continue his work.
As far as performing his prayers privately, a Christian is fully free to do so whether at home or in embassies and consulates.Saudi Arabia's system allows opening private schools for the communities affiliated to embassies and

Share