Schools of Thought and Sects, Dought & clear, - * Refutation of the Shi‘ah’s distortion of a saheeh hadith that they use to cast aspersions upon the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah

Share ::-

Did the prophet alayhe salaatu wa salaam say apostasy was going to come from this house and point to our mother Aishas(RA) house?
-
Praise be to Allah
Perhaps one of the main confusions that control the minds of some Muslims is that of focusing on some historical events and using them as justification for altering beliefs and ideas; they become completely obsessed with these events, as if they have just happened or are happening right now, even though they are over and done with, and now we are going through major events that are no less important or significant than those historical events. So such feebleminded individuals remain prisoners of the past, and they forget the present and all that it contains of pain and hope, thus living a life that is lacking in vision and believing in a faith that is distorted, to the extent that history is subject to distortion or fabrication.
Based on the above, it is very important for us to point out to you that you should understand that it is not right to make history – even if it is real history – something that distracts you from the main aims of Islam that were brought by the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). Islam is a system of aims and goals that are based on great pillars and centred on affirming the Oneness of the Creator, may He be glorified and exalted, and worshipping Him alone, within the framework of the six pillars of faith and the five pillars of practice on which Islam is based, and also on the moral and ethical values which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was sent to complete and perfect for all of humanity. All of that is the focus of the verses of the Holy Qur’an and the hadiths of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and is the purpose for which he was sent. All of that was summed up by Ja‘far ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) in his famous words before the Negus when he said to him:
“O king, we were an ignorant people, worshipping idols, eating the meat of animals found dead, committing shameful deeds, severing ties of kinship, mistreating neighbours, and the strong among us devoured the weak. We were like that until Allah sent to us a Messenger from among ourselves, whose lineage, honesty, trustworthiness and chastity we knew well. He called us to affirm Allah’s Oneness and worship Him alone, and to renounce that which we and our fathers used to worship instead of Him of stones and idols. He instructed us to speak the truth, be faithful to trusts, uphold ties of kinship, treat neighbours kindly, and to refrain from that which is prohibited and from bloodshed. And He forbade us to commit shameful deeds, speak falsehood, consume orphans’ wealth and slander chaste women. He instructed us to worship Allah alone and not ascribe anything as a partner to Him, and He instructed us to pray, give zakaah (obligatory charity) and fast – and he enumerated the commands of Islam. – So we accepted him and believed in him, and we followed him in what he had brought. So we worshipped Allah alone, not ascribing any partner to Him. We regarded as forbidden that which he forbade, and we regarded as permissible that which he permitted to us..
Narrated by Ahmad inal-Musnad(3/266) with a hasan isnaad.
Is it not a sign of failure to regard these events as a cause of division and dispute among us today, when Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, has sufficed us and saved us from being present at that time of turmoil, and has spared us the great turmoil that occurred among the noble Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them all)?
Even though Ahl as-Sunnah believe that ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) was in the right, yet they do not choose to join the side of those who impugned the honour of others or cast aspersions upon their religion and faith. Rather they defend the right of the one who is in the right by using gentle words, and they ask Allah to pardon and forgive those among the noble Sahaabah who made mistakes; they think positively of all of them. When the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) died, he was pleased with all of them. In fact Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And the first to embrace Islam of the Muhajiroon (those who migrated from Makkah to Al-Madinah) and the Ansar (the citizens of Al-Madinah who helped and gave aid to the Muhajiroon) and also those who followed them exactly (in Faith). Allah is well-pleased with them as they are well-pleased with Him. He has prepared for them Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise), to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success”
[at-Tawbah 9:100].
Today you see many significant events occurring and we cannot reach any certain conclusion about what is really happening and the details of some stories we hear, despite all these very modern means of communication and advanced ways of verifying events, and despite the fact that there are so many researchers and specialists who study these events in depth. Yet despite that we cannot come to know the true nature of some events and what really happened. So how about when we study events in the distant past having to do with the fitnah (turmoil) and the details of what exactly happened among the noble Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them)? We may note that documentation of events and writing down of details was very rare at that time, and there has been a great deal of distortion and fabrication on the part of narrators and writers later on, not to mention conflation and confusion of events. Is it rational to make the events of those days our obsession, thinking of them morning and evening, and taking them as the criterion for judging people or regarding it is permissible to speak against others, and even to regard the honour and lives of one side or another as permissible?
Secondly:
Nevertheless, we say clearly in response to the events mentioned in the question: it was never narrated from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he said: “Apostasy or disbelief will emerge from my house” and he pointed to the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). In fact none of the scholars of hadith narrated that, and there is no known isnaad for it. This is sufficient evidence that it is false and deserves to be rejected.
But what happened is that some of those who bore resentment and hatred towards the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) distorted the meanings of some hadith reports, and misinterpreted them in a manner that is completely baseless. The ones who were the main promoters of this fabrication were a number of Shi‘i authors, such as al-Majlisi inBihaar al-Anwaar(31/639), Daamin al-Madani inWaq‘at al-Jamal(p. 46), ‘Abd al-Husayn inal-Muraaja‘aat(p. 424), and at-Tijaani as-Samaawi inFas’alu Ahl adh-Dhikr(p. 105-106) andThumma Ahtadaytu, and others.
The explanation for that is that the books of the Sunnah are filled with narrations of the hadith of Ibn ‘Umar, according to which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “O Allah, bless us in our Shaam (Greater Syria) and in our Yemen.” They said: And in our Najd? He said: “O Allah, bless us in our Shaam and in our Yemen.” They said: And in our Najd? He said: “There there are earthquakes and tribulations, and there the side of the head of the Shaytaan will emerge.”
Narrated by al-Bukhaari (1037) and Muslim (2905).
Other saheeh reports clearly state that what he meant was the eastern direction, which is Najd or Iraq, both of which are to the east of al-Madinah al-Munawwarah.
It was narrated that ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: I saw the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) point towards the east and say: “Oh, tribulation is there; oh, tribulation is there; oh, tribulation is there, from where the side of the head of the Shaytaan will appear.”
Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3279) and Muslim (2905).
The scholars and commentators on hadith have discussed in detail the meaning of this hadith, and how the Najd of Arabia or the Najd of Iraq [Najd refers to highlands] were places of evil and turmoil. Some of them interpreted it as referring to the appearance of Musaylimah al-Kadhdhaab in Bahrain, and others interpreted it as referring to the turmoil that occurred in Iraq and the major events in which al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali and others among the noble Sahaabah were killed. See answer no. 99569.
As the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was standing on the minbar, facing the noble Sahaabah, and pointing towards the east, the apartment of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) would be to his right, so it would also be towards the east. Some haters exploited this fact and distorted all the clear reports mentioned above, saying that what was meant was ‘Aa’ishah herself (may Allah be pleased with her), and that she was the cause of the turmoil and evil that would befall the people. The Shaytaan made this misguidance fair-seeming to them, by means of a report of which they failed to understand the meaning. The hadith is well-known from the narration of Naafi‘ from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him); it was taken from Naafi‘ by many of his companions, namely: ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn ‘Ata’, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Awn, ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Umar and al-Layth ibn Sa‘d. All of them narrated it in a context which clearly indicated that what was meant was the eastern direction, from which the side of the head of the Shaytaan would appear. For information on all these isnaads, please seeal-Musnad al-Jaami‘(10/789).
There is another report which was narrated only by Juwayriyah from Naafi‘, which says: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stood up to address the people. He pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah and said: “There is fitnah (turmoil) – three times – from where the side of the head of the Shaytaan will appear.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3104).
If a fair-minded, smart researcher examines this hadith, he will realise that the gesture referred to was simply pointing towards the east, but because the apartment of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) was to the east, the narrator expressed it by saying that he pointed in the direction of ‘Aa’ishah’s dwelling; i.e., he meant the direction of the east, not of the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) herself. This is supported by the fact that the report saysnahwa(in the direction of, towards) and notila(to or at) ‘Aa’ishah.
It says in the report of ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Umar from Naafi‘ that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stood at Hafsah’s door and pointed towards the east – according to another version, he stood at ‘Aa’ishah’s door and pointed towards the east – as it says inSaheeh Muslim(2905). Thus it is clear that what is meant is the direction. As for the apartments (of the Prophet’s wives), it does not mean the apartments themselves.
Does it make sense to say that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) would pray for blessing for Shaam (Greater Syria) and Yemen, then when the noble Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) asked him to pray for Najd, he would respond by telling them that the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah would be a source of fitnah and the place from which the side of the head of the Shaytaan would emerge? What rational mind could accept this nonsensical idea? What connection could there be between the beginning and the end of the hadith according to this weird distortion of the meaning
Apart from Naafi‘, the hadith was also narrated by a number of the students of ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), including ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar, Saalim ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, Bishr ibn Harb and others, all of whom narrated it with the wording “he pointed to the east.” This was narrated by al-Bukhaari (3274, 3511), Muslim (7400), Ahmad and others. See:al-Musnad al-Jaami‘(10/833-834);as-Silsilah as-Saheehah(no. 2494).
Shouldn’t he – the one who understands the report in this weird manner – wonder how come none of the noble Sahaabah understood it in this distorted way, even though the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said this to them as he addressed them from the minbar.
If it was the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) to whom the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was referring in this hadith, how could he have continued to live with her and died with his head in her lap (may Allah be pleased with her), when she was supposedly the source of turmoil and the place from which the side of the head of the Shaytaan would appear – Allah forbid?
Wasn’t the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) the most caring of people towards his ummah and the most eager to protect them from evil and turmoil? So how could he have kept quiet about what he knew of what his wife, the Mother of the Believers, ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) was supposedly going to do?
Indeed, how could the noble Sahaabah – including ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) and others of the family of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) – have kept quiet about that, and not questioned him (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) concerning her, or ask him for permission to rid the Muslims of the fitnah (turmoil) that would emerge from her house!
Did any historian or scholar of hadith narrate that anyone who was present at that speech understood that what was meant was ‘Aa’ishah herself (may Allah be pleased with her)?
Moreover, would any rational Muslim agree to the notion that the best of creation and leader of mankind, Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) would suggest that the house of his wife, who was the dearest of his wives to him, a place which was his own home, would be a place where the side of the head of the Shaytaan would appear, instead of it being a beacon of light for all humanity until the Day of Resurrection, as indeed it truly is. Is there anything that could undermine the status of our noble Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) more than this distortion which cast aspersions on his family and his honour (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)?
The revelation used to come down in her apartment (may Allah be pleased with her), when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was with her under the same cover. Can it make sense to suggest that this apartment would become a place where the Shaytaan would emerge, on the basis of a distorted interpretation of some historical events?
Wasn’t the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) buried in that apartment, where his blessed body will remain until the Day of Resurrection, and the Prophets are alive in their graves, yet despite that he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) allegedly described his resting place during his life and after his death as being a place from which fitnah and the side of the head of the Shaytaan would emerge?
‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir (may Allah be pleased with him) – who was one of the most prominent among those who fought on the side of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) – said that the Mother of the believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) would be the wife of our Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in Paradise, as is narrated by al-Bukhaari (3772) from al-Hakam who said: I heard Abu Waa’il say: When ‘Ali sent ‘Ammaar and al-Hasan to Kufah to seek their support, ‘Ammaar addressed them, saying: I know that she is his wife in this world and in the hereafter, but Allah is testing you to see whether you will follow Him or her. If the apartment of the Mother of the believers is the cause of turmoil, then how could ‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir have said that she would be the wife of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in Paradise?
Indeed those who narrated the hadith from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) understood the hadith correctly and interpreted it as referring to the Najd of Iraq, as in the report narrated by Imam Muslim in hisSaheeh(2905) from Saalim ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, who said: O people of Iraq, how often you ask about minor issues when you are committing major sins! I heard my father, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, say: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “Tribulation will come from there,” and he pointed with his hand towards the east, “where the side of the head of the Shaytaan will appear.” And here you are now, striking one another’s necks…
Where did these distorters come up with this weird manner in which they interpret this hadith, that was not narrated from any of the family of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), or from any of those who fought alongside ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) when he fought ‘Aa’ishah, Talhah and az-Zubayr?
Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The versions of the hadith all indicate that the direction to which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) pointed was the east, specifically Iraq, as I have seen in some reports that state that clearly. This hadith is one of the signs of his Prophethood (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), because the first turmoil came from the east, and that was the cause of division among the Muslims. Similarly, innovations started from the same direction, such as the innovations of the Shi‘ah, Khaarijis and others.
Al-Bukhaari (7/77) and Ahmad (2/85, 153) narrated that Ibn Abi Na‘eem said: I was with Ibn ‘Umar when a man from Iraq asked him about a muhrim (pilgrim in ihram) who kills a fly. He said: O people of Iraq, you ask me about a muhrim who kills a fly, when you killed the son of the daughter of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “They [al-Hasan and al-Husayn] are my two fragrant plants in this world”! Some of this turmoil is the Shi‘ah’s impugning the senior Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them), such as Sayyidah ‘Aa’ishah as-Siddeeqah bint as-Siddeeq, whose innocence was revealed from heaven. The fanatical Shi‘i ‘Abd al-Husayn, in his bookal-Muraaja‘aat( p. 237), wrote several chapters impugning her and rejecting her hadiths, and accusing her of all kinds of things with all audacity and shamelessness, basing his arguments on weak and fabricated hadiths, some of which I [Shaykh al-Albaani] have highlighted inad-Da‘eefah(4963-4970), in addition to distorting the meaning of saheeh hadiths and interpreting them in a far-fetched manner. Similarly he – may he be silenced and may his hand be paralysed – interpreted the saheeh hadith as referring to Sayyidah ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and claimed that she is the fitnah mentioned in the hadith.“Monstrous is the word that comes out of their mouths (i.e., that He begot (took) sons and daughters). They utter nothing but a lie” [al-Kahf 18:5]. They based that on the two reports mentioned above:
The first report is the report of al-Bukhaari which says: … and he pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah. The other report was narrated by Muslim: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came out from the house of ‘Aa’ishah and said: “The head of kufr (disbelief) is there.” This evildoer tried to give the wrong impression to his readers that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was pointing to the house of ‘Aa’ishah herself, and that what was meant by fitnah was ‘Aa’ishah herself! Our response to that that his approach is akin to what the Jews did when they distorted and twisted words. The Shi‘ah understood the words in the first report – “and he pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah” – as it the text said “and he pointed at the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah”! The fact that it saysnahwa(in the direction of/towards) and notila(at/to) definitively indicates that this understanding is incorrect, especially since most reports clearly state that he pointed towards the east, and in some reports it says that he pointed towards Iraq. And historical reality testifies to that.
With regard to the report of ‘Ikrimah, it is munkar (odd), as stated above. Even if it was suggested that it is sound, it has been summarised to the point of undermining its meaning, so this Shi‘i exploited it greatly, as is indicated by other versions of the hadith. What is meant is: the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came out of the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and prayed Fajr, then he stood beside the minbar (or – according to one report – at ‘Aa’ishah’s door, turned to face towards the sunrise and pointed towards the east. According to a report narrated by al-Bukhaari, he pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah. According to another report narrated by Ahmad, he pointed towards Iraq. So the fair-minded person who is free of any whims and desires with regard to all these versions of this hadith will definitely realise the falseness of the aspersions that this Shi‘i cast upon ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). May Allah deal with him as he deserves.
End quote fromas-Silsilah as-Saheehah(no. 2494, 5/655)
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qaadir Sufi said, concerning this distortion of the hadith, that it is an incorrect understanding:
It may be refuted by the fact that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was standing on his minbar, which was to the west of the houses of his wives (may Allah be pleased with them) and to the west of the house of his daughter Faatimah (may Allah be pleased with her), as these houses were all to the right of the minbar, towards the east. This is something that cannot be disputed or argued about. Just as the Raafidis themselves decided to interpret the easterly direction as referring to the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), the Naasibis [those who oppose Ahl al-Bayt] could decide to interpret the easterly direction as referring to the house of Faatimah (may Allah be pleased with her)! That is foolishness on the part of both sides.
End quote fromas-Saa‘iqah(p. 151)
Dr Ibraaheem ar-Ruhayli (may Allah preserve him) said:
Some reports mention some of the tribes who lived in the land, and described the situation of its people:
It was narrated that Ibn Mas‘ood said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) pointed with his hand towards Yemen and said: “Faith is there, and harshness and hardheartedness are among the uncouth owners of camels, where the side of the head of the Shaytaan rises, Rabee‘ah and Mudar.” These reports definitively indicate that what the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) meant when he said “Fitnah is there” was the eastern lands, as the reports clearly state that, and in some reports there is a description of the people of that land and some of its tribes are identified by name. This clearly proves the falseness of what the Raafidi claimed about him pointing to the house of ‘Aa’ishah. This is a false and invalid view; no one ever understood it in this way and no one ever said that except this hateful Raafidi.
End quote fromal-Intisaar li-s’Sahb wa al-Aal min Iftiraa’aat as-Samaawi ad-Daall(p. 323)
Shaykh Shahaatah Muhammad Saqar said:
The words of the Shi‘ah can only mean one of two things:
Either they are saying that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) meant ‘Aa’ishah herself when he pointed, or they are saying that he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) meant her dwelling itself.
If they are saying the former, then this is obviously false, on the basis of the linguistic usage in the hadith, because it can only refer to a specific place, not a person, such as when he said “from where” and “fitnah is there”, referring to the place where fitnah will reside.
If they are saying the latter, which is that he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) meant her dwelling itself, then that could not have been the case during the lifetime of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family), because he lived there himself, and he would come to it every time it was ‘Aa’ishah’s day (may Allah be pleased with her); in fact he would come there twice as often as the houses of his other wives, because ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) had two days, her own day and that of Sawdah bint Zam‘ah (may Allah be pleased with her), as she gave her day to ‘Aa’ishah because she knew that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) loved her.
What’s more, when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) was dying, he wanted to be tended in the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), not in the houses of his other wives, and he stayed there until he passed away (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) in the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), and he was buried there even though this may annoy the Raafidis.
There is no other possible interpretation left except for them to say that what was meant was the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) after the death of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family). If they say this, then they are calling for their own doom, because the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) became the grave of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) after his death, and it was no longer her house that could be described as hers. How can any rational person think it possible that Allah, may He be exalted, would be pleased for His beloved slave Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) to be buried in a place from which fitnah would emerge, according to the claim of the Raafidis?!
It is indeed one of the miracles of Allah, may He be exalted, that He caused the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) to become the place where His slave and beloved Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) would be tended during his illness, then He caused it to become His grave, then He completed it by causing his two companions and advisers, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) to be buried beside him.
If this fabricated view propagated by the Shi‘ah was valid or possible in any way, we would have learned about someone who said it or quoted it or used it as evidence among those who differed with the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and were of the level of the Taabi‘een or those who came after them. As for the Sahaabah, it is definitely not possible to think that any of them held such a view. As we have not found anyone who suggested that interpretation, we may conclude that it is pure lies and fabrications against the Mother of the believers (may Allah be pleased with her) on the part of the Shi‘ah, along the same lines as what their earlier predecessors (i.e., the hypocrites) did in the case of the slander against her (al-ifk).
from Ummuna ‘Aa’ishah(91-94).And Allah knows best.

PUBLISHERM.NajimudeeN. MD,IRI

Schools of Thought and Sects, Dought & clear, - * Beliefs of Farrakhanism or the Nation of Islam

Share ::-

My question has to do with a group that calls itself the Nation of Islam, which is led by a man whose name is Louis Farrakhan. This group has misled many people with its ideas and beliefs which it propagates and spreads in their midst, especially those who embrace Islam. There are many Christians here in America who have left Christianity, and even people from other religions, who have embraced Islam, but unfortunately the ideas of this group are the first that they encounter. Among the main activities and ideas of this group is that they venerate racism and deny the Prophethood of Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). In fact there is a group among them who claim to be divine, and they apply to themselves names and attributes that are only befitting for Allah, may He be glorified and exalted. They strive to spread these toxic ideas among their followers by means of what they possess of eloquent language and powers of persuasion. I have some people I know who believe in the ideas of this group, and I want to convince them that what they are following is the essence of misguidance, but I am not one of those who can argue and debate well. All I want to do is to show them the correct path, supported by evidence from the Qur’an and saheeh Sunnah. I hope that you can help me to do that.
-
Praise be to Allah
The Nation of Islam was founded by Wallace D Fard who appeared suddenly in Detroit in 1930 CE, calling black people to his beliefs. He disappeared mysteriously in June 1934 CE.
He was succeeded by Elijah Poole or Elijah Muhammad (1898-1975 CE). The movement passed through distinct ideological stages, one of which was the Farrakhan stage, as we shall see below.
Inal-Mawsoo‘ah al-Muyassarah fi’l-Madhaahib wa’l-Adyaan al-Mu‘aasirah(1/360), it says:
It should be noted that the ideas of this movement developed gradually, under the influence of the leader who ran its affairs. Hence the development of the movement may be divided into three periods:
1. The era of Wallace D Fard:
From the beginning the movement was known as the Nation of Islam, and was also known by another name, the Lost and Found Nation of Islam. Its most important aims were as follows:
· Calling for freedom, equality, and justice, and striving to elevate and develop the group.
· Focusing on the superiority of the black race, which they claimed was the original race; they emphasised their African roots, and showed hostility towards whites, whom they described as devils.
· Striving to divert their followers from the Torah and Gospel (the Bible) to the Qur’an, whilst continuing to take some ideas from the Bible.
2. The era of Elijah Muhammad
· Elijah Muhammad declared that God is not something unseen; rather He must be embodied in an individual, and that individual is Wallace D Fard in whom God is incarnated, and he is worthy of supplication and worship. Thus esoteric concepts entered the thought of the group.
· He claimed to be a Prophet, and gave himself the title of Messenger of Allah.
· He forbade to his followers gambling, drinking alcohol, smoking, overeating, and adultery. He banned mixing of women with men to whom they are not related, and he encouraged his followers to only marry people within the movement. He banned them from frequenting places of entertainment and cafes.
· He persisted in the belief that the black race was superior, and regarded it as the source of all that is good, and continued to demean the white race and describe it as base and inferior. Undoubtedly only Blacks were allowed to join the movement; whites were definitely not allowed to join at all.
· Elijah Muhammad only believed in that which is tangible. Therefore he did not believe in the angels or in the physical resurrection. In his view the resurrection was no more than the intellectual revival of black Americans.
· He did not believe that Prophethood ended with the Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and he declared that he was the final messenger, because no messenger came but he spoke the language of his people, and he – namely Elijah Muhammad – had come as a Prophet to whom revelation came from Wallace D Fard in the language of his people, the blacks.
· He believed in the divinely revealed Books, but he believed that a special book would be revealed to his people, the blacks, and this would be the final Book to be divinely revealed to mankind.
· Prayer at his time consisted of reciting al-Faatihah or some other verses or supplications whilst facing towards Makkah and keeping in mind the image of Wallace D Fard. This was done five times a day.
· They fasted the month of December every year, instead of fasting Ramadan.
· Each member had to give one tenth of his income to the movement.
3. The era of Warith Deen Muhammad
On November 24, 1975 CE, Warith Deen chose a new name for the organisation, which was the Bilalians, after Bilaal al-Habashi, the mu’adhdhin of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).
On June 19, 1975 CE Warith Deen repealed the rule banning whites from joining the movement, and on February 25, 1976 CE, a number of whites who had joined them appeared side-by-side with blacks in the convention hall.
On August 29, 1975 CE, he issued a statement that it was required to fast Ramadan and celebrate Eid al-Fitr.
On November 14, 1975 CE, the name of the newspaper was changed fromMuhammad SpeakstoThe Bilalian News, then it becameThe Muslim Journal.
He announced that his title would be Chief Imam instead of Supreme Minister, and he changed the title “minister of the temples” to “imam”. He focused his attention on religious matters, and delegated other matters to the leaders of the movement.
He prepared the temples to become suited to holding regular prayers (salaah).
On October 3, 1975 CE, he issued instructions that prayer should be offered in the correct manner as known to Muslims, five times daily.
He addressed the Islamic concepts that had been wrongly embraced by the movement since the days of Wallace D Fard and Elijah Muhammad, and tried to correct them.
The things that we have mentioned above do not indicate that the movement has taken a completely correct Islamic direction, but they do indicate that there has been an improvement in the thinking of the movement compared to how it was under previous leaders. It still needs corrections in ideological and practical terms in order to be Islamically sound. End quote.
These are the stages through which this group has passed. Undoubtedly in the second stage – the stage of Elijah Muhammad – it was a disbelieving group that was outside of the framework of Islam, because of the beliefs mentioned above.
Unfortunately Louis Farrakhan has adopted the deviant ideas of the group as they were at the time of Elijah Muhammad.
In the source quoted above –al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Muyassarah(1/368) – it says: Farrakhanism is one of the esoteric groups in the USA that still follows the way of Elijah Muhammad.
Foundation and prominent figures:
Its founder was born Louis Wolcott to a family that worked in acting and music and had roots in the Caribbean islands.
In 1956 CE he joined the group of Elijah Muhammad, who claimed to be a prophet and said that his teacher Wallace D Fard was God incarnate. When Malcolm X opened Temple Number 11 in Boston, Louis X was appointed to help him as a preacher and administrator.
When Elijah Muhammad expelled Malcolm X, he appointed Louis as the primary spokesman of the group, and gave him the title Farrakhan. Then he made him a preacher in one of the biggest and most important temples, Temple Number 7, which had been run by Malcolm X before he was expelled from the group.
The beliefs of Farrakhanism:
Farrakhan affirmed all the teachings of Elijah Muhammad, apart from a few simple changes. On the last page of every copy of the group’s newspaper,The Final Call, there is a statement under the twin titles of What Do The Muslims Want? and What Do The Muslims Believe?, which includes the aims and beliefs of Elijah’s group, exactly as they were stated in every single copy of theMuhammad Speaksnewspaper at the time of Elijah, and as they are mentioned in every copy of theStatements of Elijahwhich are quoted from old copies ofMuhammad Speaks.
Some of the basic beliefs of Elijah’s group that were revived by Farrakhan include the following:
· That Allah created Himself.
· That all black people are gods and among them a real god is born every 25,000 years.
· One of the black gods, who was called Yakub, created the white man as a result of some genetic experiments.
· That Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was sent to the Arabs only, and Allah sent Elijah to the blacks of America, and he is the last of the messengers.
· Farrakhan believes that he is the person meant by the disciple Peter who is known in Christianity, and he believes that he does not possess the power to give life, but through the voice of Elijah Muhammad, he will revive the Nation of Islam in its entirety.
· That the white man is a devil.
· That the black man is the one who composed all the divinely revealed books.
· Most of the teachings of the Qur’an are addressed to the messenger Elijah Muhammad and the blacks in America.
· There will be no bodily resurrection after death; resurrection refers to the spiritual awakening of the blacks who are asleep in illusory graves, and that awakening can only come about by learning of Elijah and his god, and believing in them.
· They say that if the Arabs really believed that Muhammad was the final Prophet, then we can meet and debate the evidence until we reach an agreement. But, you Arabs are racists and can never overcome this aspect of your nature which is similar to the nature of the white man, who is a devil. You and the Jews and the white men are all devils.
Additions of Farrakhan:
With regard to the new beliefs of Farrakhan about Elijah, he regards Elijah as God, just as the Christians regard Jesus as God. In fact Farrakhan believes that Elijah is Jesus Christ.
He claims that Elijah did not die; rather He was resurrected and is alive, even though Elijah emphatically and absolutely denied the physical resurrection.
End quote fromal-Mawsoo‘ah al-Muyassarah.
From these beliefs it is clear that these notions constitute disbelief and have nothing to do with Islam.
What must be done is to call these people to affirm Allah’s oneness and believe in Him, and that must be done by scholars and seekers of knowledge. Not everyone can expose himself to specious arguments and listening to falsehoods, when he is unable to refute them and highlight their falseness. Hence in calling these people, you must seek the help of those who can debate and argue with them, or give them books and material that explain true Islam, without indulging in argument with them when you are not skilled in arguing, for your failure to prove your point and refute their arguments could make them cling more firmly to their ideas and beliefs.
We are happy to remain in touch with you through this website, and we hope that you will pay attention to the times when you could send your questions, so that we will be able to answer them.
We ask Allah, may He be exalted, to help you and take care of you, and to bless your efforts. And Allah knows best.

PUBLISHERM.NajimudeeN. MD,IRI

Shirk and its different forms, Dought & clear,- * Does the hadeeth “I am not afraid that you will worship others a long with Allah after my death” mean that shirk will never occur among this ummah?

gb

Share ::-

Narrated 'Uqba bin 'Amir:
Bukhari - Volume 2, book 23, number 428: Narrated 'Uqba bin 'Amir: One day the Prophet went out and offered the funeral prayers of the martyrs of Uhud and then went up the pulpit and said, "I will pave the way for you as your predecessor and will be a witness on you. By Allah! I see my Fount (Kauthar) just now and I have been given the keys of all the treasures of the earth (or the keys of the earth). By Allah! I am not afraid that you will worship others along with Allah after my death, but I am afraid that you will fight with one another for the worldly things." This hadeeth is often used by those comitting bidah as justification for some of the acts which can be labeled as "shirk" (such as calling out on others besides Allah, grave worshipping, etc.). The claim is that the Ummah of the Prophet (SAW) are not at risk of comitting shirk. What is the correct interpretation of this hadeeth.
-
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
The hadeeth was narrated by al-Bukhaari (1344) and Muslim (2296) from ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir, and says that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came out one day and prayed for the people of Uhud as he used to pray for the dead. Then he went to the minbar and said: “I will be there ahead of you, and I will be your witness. By Allaah, I can see my Cistern now. I am given the keys to the treasures of the earth, or the keys to the earth. By Allaah, I do not fear that you will associate others with Allaah after I am gone, but I fear that you will compete with one another for them (the treasures of the earth).”
What is meant by his praying for them (the people of Uhud) as he used to pray for the dead is his offering supplication for them with the du‘aa’ that is recited in the funeral prayer. This was seven years after they were martyred (may Allah be pleased with them).
There is nothing in the hadeeth to say that shirk (association of others with Allah) will not happen in this ummah; rather it may be understood that he did not fear it for the entire ummah, based on the fact that it has occurred among some of them, as is indicated in other texts in which he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stated that some of his ummah would fall into shirk.
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on Muslim (Sharh Muslim): In this hadeeth we see the miracles of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), because what it means is a foretelling that his ummah would be given the treasures of the earth, which did indeed come to pass; and that they would not all apostatise because Allah, may He be exalted, protected them from that; and that they would compete with one another for worldly gain. And all of that came to pass. End quote.
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqallaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The words “I do not fear that you will associate others with Allah” mean: (I do not fear that you will do that) en masse, because that happened with some of them – may Allah protect us. This hadeeth is one of the miracles of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), hence the author narrated it under the heading of the signs of Prophethood.
End quote fromFath al-Baari, 3/211
Secondly:
The saheeh Sunnah indicates that among this ummah will be some who associate others with Allah, may He be exalted.
1.
al-Bukhaari (7116) and Muslim (2906) narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The Hour will not begin until the backsides of the women of Daws wobble (as they go) around Dhu’l-Khalasah.”
Dhu’l-Khalasah was a false god of Daws that they used to worship during the Jaahiliyyah.
2.
Muslim (2907) narrated that ‘Aa’ishah said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “Night and day will not cease until al-Laat and al-‘Uzza are worshipped.” I said: O Messenger of Allaah, when Allaah revealed the words“He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikoon (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allaah and in His Messenger Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) hate (it)” [al-Saff 61:33], I thought that that had been fulfilled and would never be undone. He said: “As much of that as Allaah wills will happen, then Allaah will send a pleasant wind which will cause everyone in whose heart is faith the size of a grain of mustard seed to die, then there will be left those in whom there is no good, and they will revert to the religion of their forefathers.”
Thus it becomes clear that some of the Muslims will fall into shirk and apostasy, without that affecting the entire ummah, for it is protected against uniting in misguidance.
How can the Muslim doubt that calling upon the dead, beseeching them at times of calamity and asking them to relieve distress are acts of shirk? In fact this is the essence of what the earlier mushrikeen used to do, seeking to draw close to Allah or seeking intercession with Him, as Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And those who take Auliya (protectors and helpers) besides Him (say): "We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah." Verily, Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ. Truly, Allah guides not him who is a liar, and a disbeliever.”
[az-Zumar 39:3]
“And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: ‘These are our intercessors with Allah.’ Say: ‘Do you inform Allah of that which He knows not in the heavens and on the earth?’ Glorified and Exalted be He above all that which they associate as partners with Him!
Mankind were but one community (i.e. on one religion - Islamic Monotheism), then they differed (later), and had not it been for a Word that went forth before from your Lord, it would have been settled between them regarding what they differed”
[Yoonus 10:18, 19]
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The one who makes the angels and Prophets mediators on whom he calls and in whom he puts his trust, and asks them to bring benefits and ward off harm, such as asking them for forgiveness of sins, guidance of hearts, relief of distress and meeting his needs, is a kaafir according to the consensus of the Muslims.
End quote fromMajmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 1/124
This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars who affirmed it, see:al-Furoo‘by Ibn Muflih, 6/165;al-Insaaf, 10/327;Kashshaaf al-Qinaa‘, 6/169;Mataalib Ooli’n-Nuha, 6/279. These are the essential reference books of Hanbali fiqh.
InKashshaaf al-Qinaa‘it says, after mentioning this consensus under the heading of the ruling on the apostate: Because this is like the action of the idol worshippers who say, ‘We only worship them so that they might bring us closer to Allah.’
End quote.
More than one of the scholars has clearly stated that what some of the ignorant Muslims do of focusing their devotion on graves is the essence of what the earlier mushrikeen used to do.
Ar-Raazi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on the verse from Soorat Yoonus quoted above, explaining the explanations that the mushrikeen gave for their worship of idols:
Fourthly: they made these idols and statues in the image of their Prophets and great men, and claimed that if they devoted themselves to worshipping these statues, those great men would be intercessors for them with Allah, may He be exalted. The equivalent to that in our own times is the devotion of many people to venerating the graves of great men, in the belief that if they venerate their graves, they will intercede for them with Allah.
from Mafaateeh al-Ghayb, 17/49
And Allah knows best.

- -

-
-
:: Share ::

- - - -

-