The Signs Of Ahlul-Bid’ah – The People Of Innovation

Imaam Abu ‘Uthmaan Ismaa’eel ibn ‘AbdurRahmaan as-Saaboonee [d.449AH]
Taken From His Great Book ‘Aqeedatus-Salaf As.Haabul-Hadeeth
Published By: Masjid Ibnu Taymeeyah

148. The signs of Ahlul-Bid’ah are not hidden but are apparent. Their most apparent sign and trait is their intense enmity and hatred for the carriers of the ahaadeeth of the Prophet, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam). They look down at them and they name them Hashwiyyah, Jahalah, Dhaahiriyyah and Mushshabihah because of their different beliefs regarding the ahaadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam) ; that it does not contain knowledge, and that knowledge which the shaytaan gives them as a result of their corrupt minds, the whisperings of their darkened breasts, the misgiving notions of their hearts which are devoid of any good and their speech and invalid proofs. In fact they are nothing more than untenable and false doubts.
“They are the ones who Allaah has cursed. So He has made them deaf and blinded in their vision.”[1]

“And whomsoever Allaah disgraces, none can honour. Indeed Allaah does what He wills.”[2]

149. Al-Haakim Aboo ‘Abdullaah al-Haafidh, informed me from Aboo ‘Alee al-Hussain ibn ‘Alee al-Haafidh, who heard from Ja’far ibn Ahmad ibn Sinaan al-Waasitee, who heard from Ahmad ibn Sinaan al-Qataan, who said:

“There is no innovator in the world except that he hates the People of Hadeeth. Whenever a man innovates, the sweetness of the ahaadeeth is removed from his heart.”[3]

150. Al-Haakim informed me from Aboo al-Hussain Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Handhalee, who heard from Aboo Ismaa’eel Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel at-Tirmidhee, who said:

“I and Ahmad ibn al-Hasan at-Tirmidhee were with the Imaam of the Religion Aboo ‘Abdullaah Ahmad ibn Hanbal when Ahmad ibn al-Hasan said to him, ‘O Aboo Abdullaah! They mentioned to Ibn Abee Qutailah, in Makkah, about the People of Hadeeth. So he (Ibn Abee Qutailah) replied, ‘The People of Hadeeth are a bad people’.’

Ahmad ibn Hanbal stood up and shook the dust off his clothes and left, saying, ‘Zindeeq (heretic), Zindeeq, Zindeeq,’ until he entered his home.”[4]

151. Al-Haakim Aboo ‘Abdullaah informed me from Aboo Nasr Ahmad ibn Sahl al-Faqhee in Bukhaara, who heard Aboo Nasr ibn Salaam al-Faqhee say:

“There is nothing more difficult upon the heretics and more hated to them than the listening and transmitting of ahaadeeth, with their asaaneed.”[5]
152. I heard al-Haakim say, that he heard the Shaykh Aboo Bakr Ahmad ibn Ishaaq ibn Ayyoob al-Faqhee say whilst he was debating with a man:
“‘Such a person related to me…’ (i.e. he related a hadeeth to the man).
The man replied, ‘Leave this relating business, up to where will you relate from.’ So the Shaykh responded by saying:

‘Stand O unbeliever, it is not allowed for you to enter my home after this.’

He turned to us and said:
‘I have never said this to anyone before him, not to enter my house, except him.’”[6]
153. I heard Aboo Mansoor Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullaah ibn Hamshaad the scholar az-Zaahid, raheemahullaah, say that he heard Aboo al-Qaasim Ja’far ibn Ahmad al-Muqree ar-Raazee say that it was read over ‘Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Abee Haatim ar-Raazee and I was listening, that he heard his father the Imaam of his country Aboo Haatim Muhammad ibn Idrees al-Handhalee ar-Raazee say:

“The traits of Ahlul-Bid’ah are that they battle with the people of narrations. A trait of the Zanaadiqah is that they name the people of narrations as Hashwiyyah, intending by that the relegation of the narrations. A trait of the Qadariyyah is that they name AhlusSunnah as Mujabbirah. A trait of the Jahmiyyah is that they name AhlusSunnah as Mushshabihah. A trait of the Rawaafidhah is that they name the People of Hadeeth as Naabitah or Naasibah.”[7]

154. It is all from party spirit, as there is no name for Ahl us-Sunnah except the name Ahlul-Hadeeth (The People of Hadeeth).

155. I see that the Ahl ul-Bid’ah, by attaching these names to Ahl us-Sunnah, are following the behaviour of the unbelievers, may Allaah curse them, who were present in the time of the Messenger of Allaah, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam). They sought to harass him by calling him names. Some of them would say that he is a magician. Some would say a sorcerer. Some would say a poet. Some would say a madman, a charmer, a fabricator or a liar. The Prophet, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam), was far and free from those abuses. He was merely a Messenger, Mustapha, and a Prophet, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam).
“See how they can make similitudes for you. So they have gone astray and they will not be able to find the (straight) path.”[8]
156. Also the innovators, may Allaah destroy them, seek to attack and try to cause controversy over the carriers and transmitters of his ahaadeeth, those who seek to follow him and seek guidance through his Sunnah. They are known as the People of Hadeeth. They labeled them as Hashwiyyah, Mushshabihah, Naabitah, Naasibah or Jabariyyah. The People of Hadeeth are far (protected) from these labels, being free, pure and clean from them.
They are not anything, other than the people of the complete Sunnah; the approved way; the level path and the decisive proofs. Allaah, The Most Majestic, has given them the tawfeeq to adhering to His Book, His Revelation and His Message, they follow the Messenger of Allaah, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam), through his narrations in which he ordered with good for his Ummah, by way of speech and actions, and in which he kept them from evil. He (Allaah) helped them to follow his, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam), Seerah and achieve guidance by attaching themselves to his Sunnah. He made the ones who adhere to it his closest allies.
He (Allaah) opened their hearts to love him and the aa’immah of His Sharee’ah and the scholars of the Ummah. One who loves a people, then he will be with them on the Day of Resurrection, as the Messenger of Allaah, (Sallallaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam), said:
“A man will be with those whom he loves.” [9]


f o o t n o t e s
1 Sooratul-Muhammad (47):23
2 Sooratul-Hajj (22):18
3 Related in al-Ma’rifah (p.4) and also related by al-Baghdaadee in Sharf Ashaab ul-Hadeeth (p.7) with a Saheeh isnaad.
4 Related in al-Ma’rifah (p.4) and also related by al-Baghdaadee (p.74)
5 Related in al-Ma’rifah (p.4) and also related by al-Baghdaadee (p.73-74)
6 Also related by as-Subkee in at-Tabaqaat (3:10). Its isnaad is Saheeh
7 [Ibn Abee Haatim also mentions it in his Usoolus-Sunnah wa ‘Itiqaad ud-Deen (p.21-22), al-Laalakaa’ee (2:179) and adhDhahabee in Mukhtasir al-‘Uloom (256). The isnaad is Saheeh.
8 Sooratul-Furqaan (25):9
9  Related by al-Bukhaaree (6168), Muslim (2640), Aboo Daawood (5127) and at-Tirmidhee (2505-2507).]

Al-‘Allaamah Saalih ibn Muhammad ibn al-‘Uthaymeen on Sayyid Qutb (May Allah Pardon him)

SHAIKH MUHAMMAD IBN SAALIH AL-‘UTHAIMEEN – Rahimahullaah – said: “My study of the book of Sayyid Qutb has only been scant, and I do not know about his condition; however the scholars have written about his book in tafseer ‘Fee Zilaalil Qur’aan’ – they have written critical comments about it:
such as what Shaikh ‘Abdullaah ad-Duwaysh – Rahimahullaah – wrote, and our brother
Shaikh Rabee’ al-Madkhalee wrote some points of criticism upon him – upon Sayyid Qutb with regards to his tafseer and other things. So whoever wishes to refer to that then let him do so.” *

Source: [A lecture entitled ‘Liqaa ma-‘ash – Shaikhain: Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaimain & Rabee’ al-Madkhalee’ in Jeddah, on 20/11/1413H]

Question: “What is your saying concerning a man who advises the Sunni youth to read the books of Sayyid Qutb, especially ‘Fee Dhilaal il-Qur’aan’ and ‘Ma’aalim Fit-Taareeq’, without warning about any of the errors and deviations present in these books?”

Answer: “My statement – may Allaah bless you – is that whoever gives sincerity of purpose to Allaah, His Messenger, and his brother Muslims, that he should encourage the people to read the books of those who have preceded us from the books of tafsir and other than tafsir. These books contain more blessings, are more beneficial and are much better than the books of the later ones. As for the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb – may Allaah have mercy upon him – then it contains great calamities, however we hope that Allaah pardons him. In it are great calamities, such as his tafsir of Istiwaa and his tafsir of “Qul Huwallaahu Ahad”, and similarly, his description of one of the Messengers with something unbefitting.”

Source: From the Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Ibtaal Qawaa’id wa Maqaalaat Adnaan Ar’oor, and checked by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen himself on 24/4/1421H, with one slight revision who changed the phrase “Anaa Ra’yee…” to “Anaa Qawlee…”.

Muftee of the Ummah Al-‘Allaamah Abdul Azeez Ibn Abdullah bin Baaz on Sayyid Qutb

 
We begin with the Name of Allaah

Shaikh ‘Abdul-Azeez Ibn Baaz [Rahimahullaah]
Some parts of the book of Sayyid Qutb ‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’ were read to him such as his speech about Moosaa – ‘alaihis-Salaam – upon whom he said: “Let us take Moosaa – as the example of the leader of excitable nature – and this excitable impulse quickly passes away and he regains his composure, as is the case with the excitable folk.” Then he said with regard to the Saying of Allah – the Most High – “Fa as-ba-hu fil madinati kha bi fan…” :- “This is the description of a well known state: the restlessness or fear of one expecting evil at every turn – and this is the characteristic of the excitable folk.” [‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’: p.200,201,203. 13th ….]

So the Shaikh replied to this: Mockery of the Prophets is apostasy in its own.”[*]

And is was said to him that Shaikh Rabee’ al-Madhkhalee has written a refutation of Sayyid Qutb, so the Shaikh said: “Rebuttal of him is good.”

[*] And unfortunately the Qutubi movement clothing itself as Salafiyyah, has not only gone to the extremes in Takfir but has also fallen into the extremes of Irjaa’ in that it seeks to defend, nay even promote, the books and writings of their leaders and mentors which contain statements of disbelief and apostasy (examples will be given in Part 2, inshaa’allaah). Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee said, commenting upon Imaam al-Albani’s description of the Qutubiyyah as “The Khawarij of the Era”, that “it is more befitting that they be called Murji’ah of the Era before they are called Khawarij of the Era”. Refer to al-Asalah (Vol. 24)

Source: During a lesson of Shaikh ‘Abdul – ‘Azeez ibn Baaz – hafizahullaah – in his house in Riyaadh 1413H, ‘Minhaajus-Sunnah tapes of ar-Riyaadh

A section of the book “Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat” (p.242) was read out to the Shaikh and in which Sayyid Qutb accuses of Mu’awiyah and Amr Ibn al-Aas of lying (kadhib), deception (ghish), treachery or trickery (khadee’ah), hypocrisy (nifaaq), and taking bribes (rishwah).

So he replied: “These are repugnant words!! These are repugnant words. Revilement of Mu’awiyah and of Amr Ibn al-Aas. All of this is repugnant and evil words. Mu’awiyah and Amr and whoever was with them made ijtihaad and erred[*], and those who perform ijtihaad and erred then may Allaah pardon us and them.

[*] Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan in checking through this made the comment, “Being resolved that they erred is not clearly apparent, but if it was said, “They were mujtahidoon, if they were correct they have two rewards and if they erred they have one reward, yet their error is forgiven”, it would have been much better and more just.”

The questioner then said, “What about his statement that there is hypocrisy (nifaq) in them both, is that not takfir of them?”

Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, “This is an error and a mistake which is not disbelief. For his revilement of some of the Companions or just one of them is evil (munkar) and sinfulness (fisq) and he deserves to be given exemplary punishment for it – we ask Allaah to pardon him – however, if he reviled most of them and declared them sinners then he would become an apostate, because they are the Carriers of the Revelation. When he reviles them then this means that he is reviling the legislation.”

The questioner then said, “Should not these books in which these statements exist be forbidden?”

Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, “It is necessary for them to be torn to pieces”.

Then the Shaikh said, “Is this in a newspaper?”

The questioner said, “In a book, may Allaah be benevolent to you.”

The Shaikh asked, “Whose book?”

The questioner said, “Sayyid Qutb…”.

The Shaikh said, “These are repugnant words”.

The questioner, continuing, “… in ‘Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat’”

Source: The cassette ‘Sharh Riyaad us-Saaliheen’ dated 18/7/1418H.

Summary: Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) was asked, “The one who praises Ahl ul-Bid’ah, is he to be counted amongst them?” So he replied, “Yes, there is no doubt about this, the one who praises them is one who actually calls to them”.

Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb

The Danger of ‘Fee Dhilaalil-Qur’aan (In the Shade of the Quran) of Sayyid Qutb

 
We begin with the Name of Allaah

The Inflexible Ruling Concerning Reading the Writings of Sayyid Qutb
By the Destroyer of Innovation, The Late Scholar of Yemen
Al-’Allaamah Muqbil Ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee

Bismillaah, wal-hamdulillaah, was-salaatu was-salaamu ‘alaa rasoolillaah, wa ba’d,

[Question]: ‘What is your statement concerning the student of knowledge requesting the beginners to read Fee Dhilaalil-Qur‘aan, and to place it in their houses? So when the student excuses himself as being a beginner who is incapable of distinguishing between the fat and the thin from whatever the writer possesses of wahdatul-wujood (oneness of existence between Allaah and His creation), they seek as evidence the fact that the book Fathul-Baaree, Sharhul-Muslim and Riyaadus-Saaliheen contain errors as well. So how can you read those books, yet you do not read this particular book? So he answers their statement by stating that Sayyid Qutb had wahdatul-wujood. So he answers, ‘What else is there?’ It is as if he does not even see that as a point of censure. So is it correct to perform the following actions: [i] requesting the students to read that book; [ii] placing Sayyid Qutb amongst the ranks of the Imaams such as an-Nawawee (d.676H) and Ibn Hajar in terms of his errors in creed and his rank in knowledge?’

[Answer]: “As for the book adh-Dhilaal and the writings of Sayyid Qutb – rahimahullaah – then we advise that they not be read at all, because some people from Jamaa’atut-Takfeer and some of the youth who were conceived by Jamaa’atut-Takfeer were a direct result of the writings of Sayyid Qutb (rahimahullaah). [2] And Sayyid Qutb was merely called a writer, he was not called a mufassir (explainer of the Qur‘aan). So his tafseer is the tafseer of someone who lived in apostasy for eleven years, as he himself admitted. So how can that be a tafseer?! However, these issues were there before the Ikhwaanul-Mufliseen (the Bankrupt Brotherhood) came along. So they were the ones who raised the individual, even though he was not at the level where he could be referred to as ‘Dr.’ He was an activist, not a Dr. So when we were in the Islaamic University, if you were prominent in knowledge and it was said to you, ‘Have you read the books: Allaah, ar-Rasool and al-Islaam by Sa’eed Hawwaa?’ So if you said that you had not read them, they would say, ‘You do not possess anything of knowledge.’ So I praise Allaah that I accepted the search for knowledge upon beneficial knowledge. I ask Allaah the Magnificent to preserve our brother, Rabee’ Ibn Haadee, since he has clarified the beliefs of Sayyid Qutb and what he possesses of deviations. Likewise, may Allaah bestow mercy upon our brother, ’Abdullaah Ibn Muhammad ad-Duwaysh – the muhaddith (Scholar of hadeeth) and haafidh (hadeeth memorizer). I have not seen anyone with these two eyes of mine one who was similar to him in memorization. So he has recorded many of the errors of Sayyid Qutb in his book al-Mawridul-’Adhabiz-Zalaal fee Bayaan Akhtaa‘idh-Dhilaal. So Sayyid Qutb is not to be referred to as one of the mufassireen, nor is he from amongst the elite. Rather, he is a person who has zeal for Islaam, without any insight.

So we advise the brothers to return back to Tafseer Ibn Katheer, about whom ash-Shawkaanee (d.1250H) said that his tafseer is from amongst the most beautiful tafaaseer, having no equal. And as-Suyootee (d.911H) stated in Tabaqaatul-Huffaadh that Tafseer Ibn Katheer is from amongst the most beautful of tafaaseer. So Tafseer Ibn Katheer is a tafseer of the Qur‘aan by the Qur‘aan and by the Prophetic ahaadeeth and by separating the authentic Sunnah from its weak, and its defective narrations from its sound ones, and by falsifying the Israa‘eeliyyah stories. And likewise, I advise that the tafaaseer of our Salaf be read, such as Tafseer Ibn Jareer, Tafseerul-Baghawee and whatever is present from Tafseer Ibn Abee Haatim and Tafseer Ibn Mardawayh, since there is abundant goodness in them. So we are not in need of adh-Dhilaal, since we fear that we will fall into ad-Dalaal. So if it is absolutely necessary that you read adh-Dhilaal, then I advise him to read what the brother, ’Abdullaah Ibn Muhammad ad-Duwaysh and what Shaykh Rabee’ Ibn Haadee – hafidhahullaah – wrote.”

[Question]: ‘So is it correct to place Imaam an-Nawawee and Ibn Hajar upon the same level as the author of this book that contains erroneous creed, whilst knowing that there those who distribute the books of Hasan al-Bannaa, ’Abdullaah ’Azzaam, Fathee Yakin and the fataawaa of al-Ghazzaalee? So if we accept this book, then we must also accept these books, because even Imaam an-Nawawee and al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar have errors, as has been widespread amongst us in Bahrain and in the Emirates in the cassette of Shaykh al-Albaanee: Justice Concerning Sayyid Qutb?’

[Answer]: “The Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) said, “If you feel no shame, then do as you wish.” [3] So I did not used to think that it was insolence for a person to place Sayyid Qutb upon the same level as al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar who served the Sunnah with a service that was never seen before him. And his book Fathul-Baaree is referred to a treasure of knowledge and a small library by itself. So the people had been deceived, then these deceptions were unveiled. So we say to them: Look after yourselves, since you were deceived by the Qaadiyaaniyyah, the Teejaaniyyah, the Shee’ah, the Soofiyyah, the Baatiniyyah, the Jahmiyyah and the Mu’tazilah. Then their deceptions were unveiled for you whilst you were alive. So comparison between Sayyid Qutb and al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar and an-Nawawee is as it was said,

‘So where is the ground and where is the plateau,

And where is Mu’aawiyah from ’Alee?’

Endnotes:

[1] Fadaa‘ih wa Nasaa‘ih (p. 63-67) of Aboo ’Abdur-Rahmaan Muqbil Ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee

[2] Translator’s Note: An example of the statements of such youth who were nurtured upon the books of Sayyid Qutb can be seen in what was stated by the Grand Muftee of Qutubiyyah Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-Munajjid, “Reading the books of those who passed before us has created a strong attachment in our souls for this Religion, because they write from a position of strength and superiority. And for this reason, we also encourage the people to read the modern books, those which were written by the Muslim with the spirit of superiority; such as the books of Sayyid Qutb. May Allaah bestow mercy upon him,” from the audio cassette, Kayfa taqra‘a Kitaab. He also stated in an-Naseehah li Islaahil-Buyoot (p. 23), “And here my brother reader, are some suggestions in this regard: In TafseerFee Dhilaalil-Qur‘aan of Sayyid Qutb.” And he later continued (p. 24), “Just as there are a number of good books on a variety of different issues, amongst them the books of the teacher, Sayyid Qutb – rahimahullaahal-Mustaqbal li Haadhad-Deen, Haadhad-Deen, Ma’aalim fit-Tareeq, Khasaa‘isut-Tasawwuril-Islaamee…”

Stated Muhammad Ibn Sa’eed al-Qahtaanee, “And some of the Noble Scholars from the Scholars of the Muslims have written on this subject with that which is healing and sufficient,” and then he adds the following footnote to this statement, “I shall make mention of some of them, Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, al-’Allaamah Ibnul-Qayyim, Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ’Abdul-Wahhaab and his students, and from the contemporaries, Abul-A’laa Mawdoodee and Sayyid Qutb.” This is found in the book al-Walaa‘ wal-Baraa‘ (p. 215), which has been translated into english, published by al-Firdous Ltd. and it has become widely distributed in the West due to booksellers who are either deviant or utterly ignorant. Rather, al-Qahtaanee’s praise of Sayyid and Muhammad Qutb does not end there – nor does the ignorance or deviance of those who sell the english translation of his book – but it continues, as he states on (p. 237), “And there are some noble writers who have brought about benefit, from them the teachers: Dr. Muhammad al-Bahlee, the teacher Sayyid Qutb, the teacher Muhammad Qutb and the teacher al-Mawdoodee.” And on (p. 347) he says, “The Rabbaanee Scholar, Sayyid Qutb.”

The Inflexible Ruling Concerning Reading the Writings of Sayyid Qutb
By the Destroyer of Innovation, The Late Scholar of Yemen
Al-’Allaamah Muqbil Ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee (Troid)

A Brief Sketch of the Life of Sayyid Qutb

 
We begin with the Name of Allaah

 

Sayyid Qutb, despite an early Islamic upbringing spent around 15 or so years influenced by Marxist Socialism. He was a member of the secular Hizb ul-Wafd party for 15 years during which time he was in great confusion, even doubting about about the existence of Allaah. He had also studied Western philosophy and European and American culture, and he himself admits to all of these details, as well as his friends who wrote biographies for him – as indicated by Shaykh Rabee’ bin Haadee. Refer to the book of Salaah al-Khaalidee “Min al-Meelaad ilaa al-Istish.haad” a biography of Qutb (p.213-245). Prior to his Islamist days, Qutb was a member of the liberal western-oriented Egyptian intellectual elite, who later worked for the Ministry of Education of Egypt.

He was sent by the Egyptian government to the United States to learn Western styles and methods of education. He spent approximately two years in America 1948-1950), and he spent college life in Washington DC (Wilson Teacher’s College), Colorado, and California, as well as remaining in Denver, Colorado, Greely and other places. He also joined some church clubs and attended their services frequently, as he notes himself in his account of his experiences in America, in “al-Islaam wa Mushkilaat al-Hadaarah”. During his visit to America he was repulsed somewhat by the degradation in the society, and this was amongst the factors that made him proceed upon an Islamist course upon his return to Egypt.

After spending some time in Europe for about a year, he returned to Egypt, and then began writing as a journalist, turning down promotion in the Ministry of Education. He joined the Muslim Brotherhood at a time when they were working with “the Free Officers” to plot an overthrow against King Farooq and his monarchy. The Free Officers were top army officials, and included colonel Jamaal Abd an-Nasser, and colonel Anwar Sadat (both were also friends of Hassan al-Bannaa who was assassinated in 1949). Anwar Sadat, in his own account, explained that Sayyid Qutb was the main theoretician behind the Free Officers revolution against the monarchy, and had the coup failed Qutb would have been killed. Nasser also attended some of Qutb’s lectures, and Qutb served as an ideologist, and there was consultation between Qutb and the Free Officers.

When Nasser took power in an overthrow during these years – with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood, he proceeded along a national socialist line and within two years took full control of the state. The Brotherhood and Qutb had wanted to proceed along pan-Islamist lines (continuing in the tradition of Jamaal ad-Deen al-Afghaanee, Mohammad Abduh and Rasheed Ridaa). This saw the fallout in 1954 between the Free Officers (amongst them Jamaal Abd an-Nasser and Anwar Sadat) who had seized power from the monarchy, and the Brotherhood and Sayyid Qutb, because neither party was willing to share power with each other. Thus, the split occurred and Nasser being in power saw Qutb and the Brotherhood to be a threat. This saw the subsequent clamping down on the Brotherhood, and imprisonment of Qutb. Many attempts were made upon Nasser’s life during these turbulent years, and he too repressed and oppressed the Brotherhood, causing many of its members to flee to other lands in the 60s, often after failed assassination attempts on Nasser.

This was also the period in which the ideology of Sayyid Qutb emerged and developed, that of jaahiliyyah, takfeer and haakimiyyah, and calls for revolutions and rebellions. This was embodied in the book Milestones, which was written after Qutb was released from prison in 1964, after a decade of imprisonment. This led to his re-arrest and subsequent assassination by public hanging in 1966. Qutb borrowed his ideas from Leninist Marxism, and his terminology in his reformtive discourse was identical to that found in the Leninist discourse. Qutb was very well versed in the Marxist and Fascist criticisms of capitalism and democracy, and this influenced the formulation of his own ideologies.

Ladan and Roya Boroumand observe, “Like Mawdudi and various Western totalitarians, he [Qutb] identified his own society (in his case, contemporary Muslim polities) as among the enemies that a virtuous, ideologically self-conscious, vanguard minority would have to fight by any means necessary, including violent revolution, so that a new and perfectly just society might arise. His ideal society was a classless one where the “selfish individual” of liberal democracies would be banished and the “exploitation of man by man” would be abolished. God alone would govern it through the implementation of Islamic law (shari’a). This was Leninism in Islamist dress.” (“Terror, Islam, and Democracy”).

The ideology of Qutb was nothing unique in his time, with Martin Heidegger (German Philosopher), JP Sartre (French Philosopher), Franz Fanon (Algerian Revolutionary), Ali Shariati (Iranian Philosopher Activist) and the Dog, al-Khomeini, all sharing in the violent revolutionary resolve propounded by Qutb.

How Marx Turned [A Qutbi] Muslim

John Gray, writing for the Independent observes, “In A Fury for God, Malise Ruthven shows that Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian executed after imprisonment in 1966 and arguably the most influential ideologue of radical Islam, incorporated many elements derived from European ideology into his thinking. For example, the idea of a revolutionary vanguard of militant believers does not have an Islamic pedigree. It is “a concept imported from Europe, through a lineage that stretches back to the Jacobins, through the Bolsheviks and latter-day Marxist guerrillas such as the Baader-Meinhof gang”. In a brilliantly illuminating and arrestingly readable analysis, Ruthven demonstrates the close affinities between radical Islamist thought and the vanguard of modernist and postmodern thinking in the West. The inspiration for Qutb’s thought is not so much the Koran, but the current of western philosophy embodied in thinkers such as Nietzsche, Kierkegaard and Heidegger. Qutb’s thought – the blueprint for all subsequent radical Islamist political theology – is as much a response to 20th-century Europe’s experience of “the death of God” as to anything in the Islamic tradition. Qutbism is in no way traditional. Like all fundamentalist ideology, it is unmistakeably modern. Political Islam emerged partly from an encounter with western thought, but also from revulsion against the regimes founded in Egypt and elsewhere in the aftermath of European colonialism.” (“How Marx Turned Muslim: Not ancient, but modern: Islamist militants have Western roots”, The Independent [a British daily], July 27, 2002)

Shaykh Al-Albaani – Confirming The Case That Qutbism is Derived From Leninist-Marxism and Other 19-20th Century Philosophies of the Disbelievers That Gave Rise to Socialist-Revolutionary Movements

Shaykh al-Albaani was asked, “What is called in the current times as a military overthrow (coup) against the ruler, is this from the religion or is it an innovation?” The Shaykh replied, “These actions have no basis in Islaam, and it is in opposition to the Islamic manhaj in laying down the foundations of the da’wah, and bringing about a righteous land for it. For this is one of the innovations of the disbelievers by which some of the Muslims have been affected by, and this is what I mentioned in commenting and explaining al-Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah” (al-Asaalah vol. 10, 1414H).

THE MASHAAYIKH OF SAYYID QUTB

Part 1 : Alexis Carrel: French Medical Doctor, Christian Social Philosopher

In his PhD Thesis, “Man, Society, And Knowledge In The Islamist Discourse Of Sayyid Qutb” by Ahmed Bouzid (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, April 1998), Bouzid states the following:

quote:

A sustained target of his criticism in this “modern jaahiliyyah”, and, in Qutb’s eyes, one of its most articulate and intelligent spokesperson, is the French scientist and philosopher, Alexis Carrel (1873-1944) (p.70-71)

quote:

To make the same point, Qutb often quotes, and at great length, the French scientist Alexis Carrel. (p.219)

Added to and reinforcing the concept of Jaahiliyyah (rooted in Carrel’s barbarism) would be Mawdudi’s concepts of “jaahiliyyah” and “hukoomut ilaahiyyah” (divine government). This would direct Qutb towards his own understanding of “haakimiyyah”. Again all of this being in the absence of any knowledge or understanding of the Book and the Sunnah. This would also unleash a more aggressive ideology of takfeer, centred this time, around notions of government (in addition to notions of social barbarism). The ideology of takfeer based around haakimiyyah grew out of the historical separation, disagreement and mutual opposition between Qutb and Nasser (Qutb’s former friend and partner in the military coup in 1954). Nasser became the great despot indirectly hinted at in Qutb’s writings, and Qutb’s ideology of Haakimiyyah, essentially grew around Nasserite Egypt, then extended to other Muslim societies.

quote:

For example, the author Qutb quotes most extensively is the French Alexis Carrel, with whose ideas and observations Qutb seems to have been greatly impressed. (p.240)

quote:

[Youssef] Choueiri also explicates one of those seemingly minor points that actually is very revealing (pp. 142-49). This is the extent to which Sayyid Qutb was influenced by Alexis Carrel (1873-1944). Carrel, a medical doctor, received the Nobel Prize in 1912, but his importance here was his later book, Man, the Unknown(a best-seller in the 1930s and 1940s) and his easily fitting as an official in the government of Vichy France. Carrel put himself forward as a social philosopher (if not, indeed, a prophet) deploring the presumed dehumanizing impact of modern Western materialism (especially capitalism). A social Darwinist elitist, he went all the way into advocating eugenics and euthanasia to breed the best and weed out the unfit. Qutb, Choueri argues, adapted Carrel’s ideas (not, in fairness, eugenics and euthanasia) to come up with “a Third World version of fascism.” Choueiri shrewdly suggests that what Carrel called modern Western “barbarism” could be transposed into Qutb’s jahiliyya. An excellent insight, which also demonstrates that even Islamists most intent on rejecting the “other” in favor of a postulated cultural authenticity often rely on theories and ideologies advanced by outsiders.

Ibrahim Abu Rabi’ (a professor of Islamic Studies at Hartford Seminary – not that this makes him upon the Salafee aqeedah or Manhaj, but the Qutbiyyah might mind the quotation of non-Muslim authors, hence quoting a Muslim author to support the points being made), also said, in an interview that took place with Religioscope on 8th November 2001, when asked, “Qutb was also an avid reader as you observed. It seems however that you think the influence of other authors was not as strong as a number of scholars claim. You consider that the main influences upon him were his reading of the Quran and the historic situation in Egypt”, replied:

quote:

Yes. After the 1940s. But before that he had been influenced by a great number of authors. Even after the 1940s, this French medical doctor, Alexis Carrel, influenced him.

Comments: The roots of Qutb’s concept of “Jaahiliyyah” lies in the influence of Carrel’s parallel concept of “barbarism”. Alexis Carrel was a Christian and a social philosopher who wrote on the subject of the decline in the socials and morals of Christian society and offered solutions to the prevailing trends he saw. Qutb concurred with many of Carrel’s ideas, observations and reflections. This heavy exposure to Carrel, pre-1940s, would set the stage for Qutb’s later ideological development, when he would visit the United States for a Masters degree in education, as then Minister of Education for the Egyptian government, where he would witness for himself the nature of American permissive society. This pushed him in the direction of developing his theme of “Jaahiliyyah”. The influence of the revolutionary philosophy of Mawdudi would also play a role in the evolution of Qutb’s manhaj, as we shall see later (inshaa’allaah). However, the point to note here is that the origins of Qutb’s later doctrines lie in his earlier pre-Islamist days, before the late 1940s. The origins of his doctrines DO NOT lie in an authentic understanding of the Book and the Sunnah, since Qutb’s pre-Islamist days were secularist in nature. Rather, the literary influences upon Sayyid Qutb, combined with his experiences, are the primary origins of his doctrines, rendering him to be amongst Ahl ul-Kalaam and Ahl ur-Ra’i.

Qutb’s analysis of the Muslim world drew out of the influence of Carrel’s analysis of Western society, and this determined the nature of the ideology of Sayyid Qutb, later in his life. The themes of barbarism (i.e. Jaahiliyyah) are touched upon often by Carrel. Some references are included below:

quote:

Alexis Carrel, “We are unhappy. We degenerate morally and mentally. The groups and the nations in which industrial civilisation has attained its highest development are precisely those which are becoming weaker, and whose return to barbarism is the most rapid.” (Man, the Unknown, p. 27 and 28)

quote:

Alexis Carrel, “It is to these vices that the great nations partly owe their decline. In the years before the war they were the greatest consumers of alcoholic drink in the world. Alcoholism, nicotine poisoning, sexual excesses, the drug habit, mental dissipation and low morals all constitute extremely dangerous breaches of the law of self-preservation. These vices weaken the individual and mark him with a special stamp. The young Frenchman of the defeat: rude, slovenly, unshaven, slouching about with his hands in his pockets and a cigarette in the corner of his mouth, was all too representative of the anemic barbarism on which the France of those years prided herself.” (Reflections On Life, p.103)

quote:

Alexis Carrel, “Civilization is first and foremost a discipline; a discipline which is physiological, moral and scientific. Barbarism, on the contrary, is essentially undisciplined. But whereas primitive barbarism was subject to the harsh authority of nature, our anemic modern barbarism is completely unrestrained.” (Reflections On Life, p.195)

Qutb has many statements that are similar in nature, and his reaction to Western influence in the Muslim lands takes a similar course.

quote:

Sayyid Qutb, “Today we are in Jaahiliyyah, like that which was prevalent at the dawn of Islaam, in fact more oppressive (i.e. severe). Everything around us is Jaahiliyyah…” (Milestones p.210)

Being ignorant, and speaking about Islam from his opinion and intellect, and being influenced by his own experiences, he continued down the line of ignorance and excess, by making takfeer of all contemporary Muslim societies, based upon this “barbarism”:

quote:

Sayyid Qutb, “Entering into the realm of the Society of Ignorance (al-Mujtama’ al-Jaahiliyy) are all those societies which claim that they are Muslim societies… ” (Milestones p.103)

quote:

Sayyid Qutb, “The position of Islaam towards all these societies of Jaahiliyyah can be defined in a single expression: It rejects any acknowledgement of the Islaam of all of these societies.” (Milestones p.103).

 

quote:

Stated Sayyid Qutb, “Indeed this Jaahili Society that we live in is not a Muslim Society” (Dhilaal 4/2009)

Brutal Legacy- The history of “The Nation of Islam”

 
We begin with the Name of Allaah

Minneapolis, Minnesota, Jan. 12, 1995: Malik Shabazz’ daughter, Qubilah, is indicted by a federal grand jury on allegedly trying to hire a hit man to kill ‘Nation of Islam’ leader, Louis Farrakhan, who Malcolm X’s family believes played a role in his 1965 assassination.

The following day, in the wake of public suspicion regarding Farrakhan’s role in Malcolm X’s slaying 30 years earlier, the Nation of Islam moves quickly to shift the focus of public attention from Farrakhan to the government. Nation officials call a press conference and issue a press release, which ominously reads, “The identity of the alleged plotters was said to be some members of a ‘Muslim extremist group’. We do not know Ms. Shabazz to be a member of any such group. We call on the FBI to explain their assertion.” Was this true, or was it simply another ploy in a legacy of misinformation?

Indeed, a glimpse into the history and development of ‘The Nation Of Islam,’ shows a group which has traditionally marketed itself as dedicated to the brotherhood, benefit and upliftment of American blacks, while the Nation and the media continually refer to them as the premier American Islamic organization. However, the historical record of the group tells quite a different story. Over the years, a pattern of rampant deceit, manipulation and violence has prevailed, targeting Muslims, black critics, and even its own following, which dates from the very beginning of the movement.

On May 27, 1929, Wallace Dodd Ford, an immigrant New Zealander of Caucasian/Polynesian parentage, was released from California’s San Quentin prison after serving three years for selling narcotics in Los Angeles. Ford traveled to Chicago and then Detroit where he posed as a Bible-toting, itinerant silk and rug peddler ‘from the East.’ Ford attracted a following by blending a mixture of ideas adapted from Christianity, the Qadiani translation of the Qur’an, and numerous Messianic, Depression-era cult leaders, Marcus Garvey, Father Divine etc.

Using up to eighteen different aliases, among them, “W. Fard Muhammad,” and “W. D. Fard,” Ford variously identified himself as an Arab, a Hawaiian, and a black . He claimed to have been born in Mecca, of being the descendant of Prophet Muhammad, and finally, ‘the Apostle of Allaah.’ During this period, he met Elijah Poole from Sandersville, Georgia. Poole, an unemployed assembly line worker and former follower of Drew Ali’s “Moorish Temple”, was mesmerized by Ford’s aura and became his devoted follower. Ford changed Poole’s name to Elijah Karriem, and on July 4, 1930, a little more than one year after his prison release, Ford, with Karriem’s assistance, formed ‘the Nation Cult of Islam.’

For a fee of ten dollars, Ford gave Islamic sounding names to cult members, Elijah and his family going through a series of name changes, finally settling on Muhammad. Among Ford’s teachings, was a call for followers to sacrifice whites in order for the person ‘to return to his home in Mecca.’ Followers were also encouraged to believe in human sacrifice, ‘of himself or his loved ones if Allah requires it.’ In November of 1932, Robert Karriem Harris, one of the earliest members of ‘the Nation Cult of Islam’, was convicted of murder in Detroit in the sacrificial slaying of Nation follower, James J. Smith, amidst reports of other slayings. This event, referred to in Detroit as the infamous ‘Voodoo Murders,’ led to the confinement of Elijah Karriem (who at the time used the alias, Ghulam Bogans) to a mental ward, and the banisof his teacher, Wallace Dodd Ford to Chicago.

The departure of Ford in 1934 led to deadly power struggles within Elijah Karriem’s own family, as his brother Khallatt Muhammad threatened Elijah and forced him to flee from Detroit to Chicago. With Ford’s departure, Karriem changed his name to Elijah Muhammad, elevated his teacher to the status of ‘Allaah in person’ and himself to ‘the Messenger of Allaah.’ From the 1940’s onward, the Nation has recruited its staunchest following from prisons, thus the violent pattern degenerated into a gangster-style reign of terror against ex-‘Nation’ followers who renounced Elijah Muhammad. The practice of intimidation reached a boiling point during the 1960’s and 70’s as a number of Nation leaders pitted ‘brother against brother’ as in a macabre chess game, this amidst reports of Elijah and his family’s immorality.

In 1964, Aubrey Barnett, a former Boston minister under Louis X Farrakhan, quit the group after being fed up with the deceptions. Barnett was soon after viciously assaulted on a Boston street by 13 of Elijah’s men. On November 5, 1964, ex-member Kenneth Morton, died from internal injuries suffered when he was beaten by four members of ‘the Nation.’ During the same year, Malcolm X, former national spokesman for Elijah Muhammad, renounced Elijah’s organization, made Hajj and became a Muslim, and officially changed his name to Al-Hajj Malik Shabazz; openly declaring Elijah Muhammad to be a false prophet, thief and fornicator. This led to Elijah printing a series of articles critical of Malik Shabazz in issues of Muhammad Speaks, referring to Malik Shabazz as a ‘hypocrite,’ including a call for Malik Shabazz’ death written by Louis X Farrakhan.

On January 6, 1965, ex-member Benjamin Brown, who left ‘the Nation’ to establish a masjid, was shot in front of his masjid. This was followed by a series of unsuccessful attempts on Malik Shabazz’ life by Nation members. On February 21, 1965, Malik Shabazz was assassinated by Nation members in New York City. This was immediately followed by the brutal beating in Boston of Leon 4X Ameer, a former bodyguard for Malik Shabazz. Left in a coma for weeks as a result of the beating, Ameer emerged from the hospital in a vegetative state with permanent brain damage. He died shortly thereafter.

In 1971, twenty-five Nation members walked out of Temple no. 2 in Chicago, with the complaint that not enough money collected from members was reaching poor blacks. This led to the murder of two of the dissidents. In 1972, author Hakeem A. Jamal, a friend of Malik Shabazz and like him, an outspoken critic of Elijah Muhammad, was gunned down by Nation members. On January 18, 1973 in Washington DC, the most gruesome of murders took place when several assassins were dispatched from Elijah Muhammad’s Philadelphia branch temple to kill ex-follower Hamaas Abdul Khaalis, who had written dozens of letters to Elijah’s temples nationwide, calling Elijah a ‘lying deceiver who was stealing his followers’ money and dooming them to Hell’. The assassins entered Hamaas’ home, finding seven members of his family, all women and children. The assassins beat and shot the women and children numerous times, ransacking the house, then drowning two infants in a sink and tub. Hamaas’ daughter Amina, who survived despite being shot six times in the head at close range, recalled that one of the killers asked her, “Why did your father write those letters?” His last words to her were, “Don’t mess with Elijah.” The killers fled, but after a nationwide manhunt, all were eventually captured and convicted.

Between late 1973 and mid-1974, the city of San Francisco was terrorized by the ‘Zebra’ serial killings carried out by followers of Elijah Muhammad. Reviving the original 1930’s Nation teachings, the killers believed that godhood could be achieved by murdering non-blacks. For a 179-day period, the killers brutally assaulted, robbed, and sodomised a total of twenty-three persons, leaving fifteen dead.

After Elijah Muhammad’s death on February 25, 1975, his son, W. D. Mohammed, ascended to the leadership; in the process, reshaping the organization and its beliefs. Yet on November 22, 1975, 12 members of the Islaamic Party of North America, which had written newspaper articles denouncing the son’s refusal to renounce his father’s beliefs, were attacked and beaten with clubs, tire irons and pipes in Newark, New Jersey by followers of W. D. Mohammed.

In 1977, Louis Farrakhan, disgruntled with organizational changes under W. D. Mohammed, left W. D. Mohammed’s leadership to re-start the organization and beliefs of the former ‘Nation’. His group today commands a following including a variety of gang members, rap artists, and assorted nationalists.

The violent pattern continued in October 1990, where on Howard University campus, fifteen Farrakhan members attacked two Muslim university students following their public criticism of Farrakhan and Elijah Muhammad. 

In May of 1993, W. D. Mohammed declared in a London interview with The Muslim News, that Louis Farrakhan ‘respects Islam’ and ‘he does a lot of good.’ He added: “He is friendly with us and we should be friendly with him.”.

REFERENCES

  • Braden, Charles Samuel, These Also Believe: A Study of Modern American Cults and Minority Religious Movements, (MacMillan, NY, 194 9)

  • Breitman, George, Herman Porter & Baxter Smith, The Assassination of Malcolm X, (Pathfinder Press, NY, 1976)

  • Carson, Claybourne, Malcolm X, The FBI File, (Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc. NY, NY 1991)

  • Evanzz, Karl, The Judas Factor, The Plot to Kill Malcolm X, (Thunder’s Mouth Press, NY, 1992)

  • Friedly, Michael, Malcolm X, The Assassination, (Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc. NY, NY, 1992)

  • Howard, Clark, Zebra: the true account of the 179 days of terror in San Francisco, (R. Marek Publishers, NY, 1979]

  • Melton, J. Gordon, Encyclopedia of African American Religions, [with Larry G. Murphy & Gary L. Ward] (Garland Publishing Co., New York, 1993)

  • Perry, Bruce, Malcolm, The Life of a Man Who Changed Black America, (Station Hill Press, Berrytown, NY, 1991)

  • X, Malcolm, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, (Grove Press, Inc. NY, NY, 1965)

  • Malcolm X, The Last Speeches, (Edited by Bruce Perry; Pathfinder Books, NY, NY, 1990)

  • February 1965, The Final Speeches, (Pathfinder Books, NY, NY, 1992)

  • Magaine, Journal & Newspaper Articles

    • Ansari, Zafar Ishaq, W.D. Muhammad: The Making of a “Black Muslim” Leader (1933-1961), (The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, Jointly published by AMSS/IIIT, vol. 2, no. 2).

    • Barnett, Aubrey, The Black Muslims Are a Fraud, (Saturday Evening Post, February 27, 1965)

    • Beynon, Erdmann Doane, The Voodoo Cult Among Negro Migrants in Detroit, (The American Journal of Sociology, The University of Chicago Press, vol. XLIII, July 1937-May 1938)

    • Block, Merv, Elijah Muhammad -black paradox, (Chicago Sun-Times, March 26, 1972)

    • Islamic Party of North America, ‘Black Muslims’ Still Unbelievers, (Al-Islam: The Islamic Movement Journal, vol. 4, no. 4 Rajab-Shaban 1395/July-August 1975 & Sept.-Oct. 1975)

    • Elijah and Fard Must Go!, (vol. 4, no. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1975)

    • Blood in the Cause of Allah, The Attack-Its Meaning (vol. 5, no. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1976)

    • The Detroit News, Head of Cult Admits Killing (Nov. 21, 1932)

    • Leader of Cult Called Insane, (Nov. 22, 1932)

    • Leader of Cult to be Quizzed, (Nov. 23, 1932)

    • Cult Slayer Pleads Guilty, (Nov. 25, 1932)

    • The Muslim News, Imam Warith in London, (London, May 28, 1993)

    • Walsh, Edward, Farrakhan Says U.S. Concocted Plot Charge, (The Washington Post, Jan. 18, 1995)

    Brutal Legacy

    By Br. A. Idris Palmer

Al-Mawdoodee and his Denial of the Dajjaal

First: Al-Mawdoodee:
He said in his book Rasaa’il wa Masaa’il (pg. 57, 1351H Edition):
“The Messenger of Allaah used to think that the Dajjaal would appear during his time or close to his time. However, 1350 years have passed on this speculation (from the Prophet), many long centuries, and still the Dajjaal has not appeared. So this proves that his (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) speculation was not correct!!” In the 1362H edition of the book, he added to this, saying: “However, 1350 years have passed …and still the Dajjaal has not appeared. So this is the reality.” This is a clear rejection of the advent of the Dajjaal, for which there are many authentic ahaadeeth reported informing of his coming.

He also said (pg. 55): “It is confirmed that everything that has been reported in his ahaadeeth concerning the Dajjaal was just the opinion and estimation of the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), and that he had doubts over this issue.” Is this not a clear rejection of the Dajjaal and a denial of the reports of the Messenger about whom Allaah said: “And he does not speak from his own desire, rather it is revelation that is revealed to him.” [Surah An-Najm: 3-4]

He also says in his book Arba’atu Mustalahaat-ul-Qur’aan al-Asaasiyah (pg. 156): “Allaah commanded the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) in Surah An-Nasr to ask his Lord’s forgiveness for what occurred from him from deficiencies and shortcomings with regard to fulfilling the obligations – i.e. the obligations of prophethood.” We seek Allaah’s refuge from such a lie!! Is it not sufficient for him that Allaah described His Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) with the characteristic of servitude (‘uboodiyyah), which is the most perfect of human characteristics? He described him with this attribute ( i.e. slave of Allaah) in many verses throughout His Book. Where is he with respect to the Prophet’s statement in the hadeeth about the three people that asked about his (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) worship – and it is as if he is replying to this issue – in which he (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “As for me, then I am the most dutiful to Allaah amongst you”?

Al-Mawdoodee and his Denial of the Dajjaal
Author: Jamaal bin Fareehaan Al-Haarithee
Source: Al-Ajwibat-ul-Mufeedah ‘an As’ilat-il-Manaahij-il-Jadeedah (pg. 92-94) [2nd Edition] Al-Ibaanah.com

Shaikh Muqbil (rahimulllah) on Maududi- Satan or Saint????

Question: Is Abul-A’alaa al-Mawdoodee considered to be from the Imaams of the Muslims?

Answer: What is clear is that he has some tashayyu’ (Shiitism/Shiaism) in him and that he is to be considered as being from the Imaams of Innovation. May Allaah reward one of our brothers with good – for he has authored a book called: “Hurricanes in the Face of the Sunnah” (Zawaabi’ fee Wajhis-Sunnah). In this book, he clarifies and exposes the true condition of Abul-A’alaa Al-Mawdoodee and those like him who wage war against the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger ( sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and who weaken authentic ahaadeeth in the two Saheeh Collections (of Bukhaaree and Muslim) to suit their desires.

Maududi is the Imaam of Bid’ah
Shaikh Muqbil bin Haadee Al-Waadi’ee
Source: Fadaa’ih wa Nasaa’ih: pg. 165

IMAM (WALLACE) WARITH DEEN MOHAMMED

 
We begin with the Name of Allaah

IMAM (WALLACE) WARITH DEEN MOHAMMED

Q. What is your opinion regarding the so-called Imam Warith-deen Muhammad, who is a leader of Muslims in America and is said to be an upholder of the Quran and Sunnah?

A. All of Warithdeen Muhammad’s statements to date have been praising his father (Elijah Muhammad, who claimed that Allah was a man and that he was the last messenger of Allah). Warithdeen has changed most of the practices that were practiced during his father’s time, but he still insists on praising his father and referring to him as the Honorable Elijah Muhammad.

The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said, “Whoever honors a mubtadir (an innovator: one who brings something new into the religion) has helped to destroy Islam.” Elijah Muhammad is the worst of mankind and he is cursed by Allah. Allah has said in the Quran, “Who is worse than the one who claims to receive revelation, has received nothing.” [Soorah Al-‘Anaam (Chapter 6), Verse 93], those are the worst of mankind. So to honor such a person is a major deviation.

This sums up the level of his Islam and that is how we as Muslims, should judge people. If you praise one who is cursed by Allah, then you are displeasing Allah. Part of our faith is to love those who Allah loves and hate those who Allah hates. All those who seek to praise enemies of Allah, put themselves in the category of being enemies of Allah. So, for example, an individual like Farrakhan, though he maybe a very effective and eloquent spokesman and uses the name of Islam, he is a reviver of the original teachings of Elijah Muhammad. So to even speak of him in an honorable fashion or to praise him, is a major mistake on the part of Muslims. He is a blatant enemy of Islam. (Answered by Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips)

IMAM (WALLACE) WARITH DEEN MOHAMMED IN MATTER OF ‘AQEEDAH’

Along with what may be termed the rise of Orthodox or Sunnite Islaam in America, there has also appeared in the Twentieth century a variety of cults and sects all claiming to represent true Islaam. Most of these groups have or have had strong nationalist overtones and anti-white sentiments in their teachings, which is not surprising, since the vast majority of those who enter the fold of Islaam in America have been Black Americans and the reverberations of white supremacy on which the nation was built, were quite intense throughout the country until recently. The earliest of these groups is the “Moorish Science Temple of America” founded by Timothy Drew from North Carolina (1886-1929). Drew renamed himself Prophet Noble Drew Ali and opened the first branch of his cult in New York in 1913. [E.U., Essien-Udom, Black Nationalism, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 33]  

Drew taught that Black Americans were really “Moorish Americans” or “Moors” and that he had been commissioned by the King of Morocco to preach Islam to Black Americans. [Eric Lincoln, Black Muslims, (Boston: Beacon Press, 1961), p.52]

He provided his followers with a Scripture in English which he called Koran but which was in fact the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ written by Levi H. Dowling (1844-1911). Drew also included Buddha, Confucious, and Zoroaster among the prophets [Black Nationalism, p.35.] of whom he was supposed to be the last. The dress, symbols, and religious rites of his cult were, for the most part, borrowed from the Masonic order known as the “The Ancient Egyptian Arabic Order of Nobles of the Mystic Shrines” or simply “The Shriners.” 

The most prominent of these pseudo-Islamic groups in America was “The Lost Found Nation of Islam” which became known in the news media as the “Black Muslims”. This group’s beginnings are somewhat shrouded in mystery. A foreigner, by the name of Wallace Fard Muhammad, of uncertain origin, taught what he termed Islaam among Blacks in Detroit from 1929 to 1931. Following his disappearance in 1931, the most prominent of his students, Elijah Poole (1897-1975) secured leadership of the group and claimed that Fard was actually God in person and that he, Elijah, was the messenger of God sent to Black Americans. Elijah taught that Black people were gods, and White people were devils created by a Black scientist. Heaven and Hell, according to his teachings, are on earth in this life and there is no resurrection for the physically dead. [Black Muslims, pp. 72-78] Although Elijah claimed that the Qur’aan was the book of Muslims, he mostly referred to the Bible in his teachings. Actually, the main text of the cult was a book composed of some of his speeches and newspaper articles which he called Message to the Black Man in America. [Elijah Muhammad, Message to the Black Man in America, (Chicago, ILL: Muhammad’s Temple no. 2, 1965)]

And this WARITH DEEN MOHAMMED is son of Elijah, Here is a more detailed list of some of the beliefs and statements of W. D. Mohammed, who like Farrakhan, Richard Kalif (aka Rashad Khalifa) and others have deceived many and are enjoying their present lives. 

WD Mohammed The Record Speaks A Consistent Pattern from 1975 to the Present

1975- Publicly declares himself “The Manifestation of God”. “Yes, I myself am an Immaculate Conception. You say, “This man is crazy.” No, I’m not crazy… After we explain it to you, you’ll know that I’m not crazy. The world has just been in darkness. I can truthfully say that My physical father was not My father. I have never had a physical father…You say, “Who is your father?” Speaking in the language of the New Testament, My Father is God…I am the Manifestation of God.… All praise is due to Allah.” [1]

1976- Claims he is recipient of divine revelation. “The Book (Bible) says that there is another kind of water (sweet water) which is not salty, that comes from above that is divine revelation. The water that God gives is divine revelation and He reveals it to His prophets.”[2] “I am baptizing you with the water that God has given me. It is the water of revelation, of divine knowledge.”[3]

1977- Declares Islamic plural marriage forbidden. “The teaching of Muhammad and the teaching of the Qur’an is that “one is better for you if you but knew.” No other Prophet did this for the polygamist mankind. It was Prophet Muhammad who worked against polygamy.”[4]

1978- Rejects miracles of the prophets “Moses, being pursued by Pharaoh’s army, struck the water and the Red Sea parted, so the Book says, and Moses and his people walked across on dry land… Brother and sister, you will never convert intelligent people to religion today with unrealistic symbolical stories like that [5].

Sanctions false prophet Rashad Khalifa. Offers followers “20% discount” on purchase of Khalifa’s works.[6] 

Endorses Qadiyani translation of Quran.[7]

1979- Denies Return of Jesus and proclaims himself, “Masih-Mahdi”. “Jesus did his work… he’s not coming back here­never! That’s not the way of God. But his type has to return, another birth like his has to happen, has to happen, to produce his type again. So that his type will be able to see, the lies that have been told concerning his birth. It’s not him but its the same as though he’s the original. I know how Jesus is born because I’ve been born that way! So you can’t tell me how Jesus was born, I’ve been born that way!” “…well then you’re a Prophet; no I’m not, well you’re a Messenger of God, no (laughing) I’m not, well what are you? I am Masih-Mahdi, I am the Christ-Mahdi believe it or not! … You know, for a long time people have been hoping to fulfill the prophecy. The prophecy of the return of Christ or the return of the son of Mary and the presence of a Mahdi who would bring the religion to its original purity… they’ve been looking for that, it’s here now, what they’ve been looking for is here now­But can they appreciate it?”

1980- Proclaims himself, “the Mujaddid”, states, “If you want all the hadiths, then you should leave this community because I’m telling you, right now, I don’t accept all the hadiths. They have made too much trouble and confusion in the Muslim society.”[9]

1981-Claims those who desire plural marriage are, “cursed by God.”[10] Rules women’s hair is their hijab. “It is believed in the circle of learned scholars in the religion that the hair on women should be covered… Here in our community…we don’t make any big to-do about it. If some woman is seen with her hair uncovered we don’t raise the roof, because I understand that where there is some sex appeal in women’s hair, there is also religious symbolism attached. This symbolism is good but I don’t think we should enforce these laws too fanatically. If we do we might cause people of higher intellect to underestimate our intelligence. They might think we are superstitious or fanatical people and we don’t want them to think that.”[11]

1983- Claims Christians need not follow Islam “There are some scholars… I’ve heard some people who call themselves scholars in the religion say recently and I have heard this,… that the scriptures I quote referred to earlier times and later scriptures came and cancelled that. That now if anyone rejects our religion, he doesn’t go to paradise. I disagree. I simply disagree.[12]… I don’t feel that all Christians have to have my religion to improve their lives. I don’t feel that… I feel that some Christians are living very good lives. They have very good morals, they have a good sense of direction and I wouldn’t want to disturb that for them. As long as they are doing well I’d like to see them continue to do well.”[13] 

Compares those who don’t follow him to dogs “The word has come down from heaven follow Imam W. Deen Muhammad. Either do that or wear the dog collar and eat dog biscuits.”[14] 

Claims “If Jesus had lived to see 40, he would have died to Jesus and become Prophet Muhammad.”[15] 

Claims “The Quran doesn’t say that Prophet Muhammad is a messenger to the angels or Jinn, but to the people… Prophet Muhammad was sent to Naas, not to the Jinn.”[16]

1984- Calls for establishing his own school of thought “…we are going to have a school of fiqh and that school is raising up, or growing up right now with the growth of this community, under the leadership of your Imam and my Imam Warith Deen Muhammad. Yes, Imam Warith Deen Muhammad.”[17]

1986- Claims “The Muslim community also has a community obligation to serve the best interest of other communities Christian, Jewish and even the Socialist community.”[18] 

Denies existence of Jinn “Muslims do not believe that there are some foreign worlds existing out there somewhere. We don’t believe that there are some foreign creatures sharing space with us. We don’t accept the notion of other creatures in another dimension whose nature is not like ours. We don’t believe that there are creatures who can do things to us but we cannot reach them unless we find some way to plug into their foreign dimension. The real Muslim cannot accept that kind of idea. You cannot work voodoo on a Muslim because the Muslim is not vulnerable to superstition.”[19]

1987- Declares “But my position is this in our society, I have learned by experience, so I have differed with shiekhs, I have differed with leaders of Al-Islam, I have learned by experience in this community, that there is no guarantee, that a Muslim marrying a non-Muslim woman is going to have anymore success in bringing these children to Al-Islam, than a woman will be marrying a non-Muslim man… “[20] 

Declares, “I have no problems with the Pope; I respect him and honor him.”[21]

1988- Denies prophetic miracles. “We know that as much as man fears the fire, we know that Abraham was put in the fire. That not right? Yes, Abraham was put in the fire. And when they looked in the, when the those who put him in the fire came to see how he was fairing, how he was doing there, whether he was ashes or not, they found him there unaffected. Fire hadn’t touched him, fire hadn’t bothered him a bit. Instead, instead of him experiencing heat, see God made the flame cool on Abraham. (laughter) Now we know that’s metaphorical, that’s symbolic.”

1989- Proudly shows off grandchild from marriage of his daughter to a non-Muslim.[22] 

1991- Says Muslims should not invite non-Muslims to Islam “We (Muslims) are obligated to seek peaceful co-existence with Christians and people of Faith… the similarities are so much more important that we need not focus on the differences. We see Christians and Jews as people of the Book. We should not ask them to take their shahadah…”[22] 

Endorses Homosexuals during American Public Radio (APR) interview.[24]

1992- Endorses Farrakhan “I will never denounce him as long as he says he wants to be a Muslim.”[25] 

Declares, “We love our distinction as a people, our racial distinction…we want racial dignity and racial distinction. We want cultural distinction. We want that. Even within Islam we want that. We don’t want to copy the culture of another Muslim…we also stress that we owe an allegiance to the Christian people. Also we have to understand that our religion did not come to establish itself over everybody else.”[26] 

Speaking at ISNA headquarters “Mohammed says he does not favor intermarriage between indigenous and immigrant Muslims because African-Americans have suffered greatly at the hands of white America, and they need time by themselves as a race for the psychological scars of racism to heal.”[27]

1993- Declares all non-Muslims Muslims “If we look at the broad definition for Muslim, we have to say that even though a Christian may be worshipping Jesus the Christ Prophet more than he is worshipping Allah, he or she may be Muslim in their spirit. They may still be Muslim, though the orientation has now dominated their Muslim urge. The person carrying a heavy cross may be a Muslim inwardly. So it is for a Jew, or Communist, or a Buddhist, or a Hindu.” [28] 

Claims Farrakhan ‘does a lot of good’ “Farrakhan respects Islam and he does a lot of good, he is friendly with us and we should be friendly with him.”[29] 

Claims anyone can be recipient of revelation ‘If any revelation I receive, anybody else can get it, just read Qur’an and God will show us revelation if we’re sincere.’[30]

1994- Implies prophethood to Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King, calling them, “men of divine wisdom” who predicted the future “in the name of God”. [31] 

Denounces interracial marriage and women’s hijab. “Imam Mohammed said he would not encourage mixed marriages. “Marry your own race and people you are acquainted with.”…Covering hair in the mosque for prayer is needed, the Imam explained, but in the public when out shopping it is not a big deal. He noted that a sister can be more seductive with her hair covered than uncovered.”[32]

1998- Claims Paradise is on earth. “In the beginning, God put us in paradise and so shall it be in the end,” Mohammed said. And, pointing a finger to the sky, he added, “Not necessarily up there.”[33] 

1999- Celebrates “Savior’s Day” with Farrakhan. “I couldn’t resist coming here knowing that (The Nation of Islam) was observing this day. I haven’t lost my friendship with Minister Farrakhan.”[34] 

2000- Selected by MAS to lead Washington Area Muslims for Eid Al-Fitr Prayer at DC Armory. Praises Elijah Muhammad in Nation of Islam’s Savior’s Day ‘Family Reunion’. Declares lasting brotherhood with Louis Farrakhan.[35]

Notes:

[1] See Muhammad Speaks, May 23, 1975, pp. 17-19. His referral to himself as ‘The Manifestation of God’ has its links to Elijah’s teachings, as Elijah said that ‘after me will come God himself.’ See Message to the Blackman, p. 306. Thus, W.D. Mohammed labeling himself ‘The Manifestation of God’, is intended to be understood as ‘a fulfillment of prophecy.’
[2] See Lectures of Emam Muhammad, p. 48.
[3] See The Teachings of W.D. Muhammad, p. 13.
[4] See Bilalian News, July 8, 1977, p. 17. His statement “one is better for you if you but knew” is baseless. No such Qur’ânic verse nor Prophetic hadeeth exists that is even remotely
close to what he claims.
[5] See Lectures of Emam Muhammad, pp. 118-119.
[6] See Bilalian News, April 21, 1978, p. 9.
[7] See Bilalian News, Sept. 8, 1978, p. 6.
See Bilalian News, February 15, 1980, p. 17.
[9] See Bilalian News, February 22, 1980, p. 24.
[10] See Bilalian News, June 26, 1981, p. 18.
[11] See World Muslim News, November 27, 1981, p. S5.
[12] See Religion on the Line, p. 61.
[13] ibid. p. 67.
[14] See A. M. Journal, Mar 2, 1983, p. 23.
[15] See A.M. Journal, July 29, 1983, p. 9.
[16] See A. M. Journal, July 29, 1983, p. 2.
[17] See Challenges that Face Man Today, pp. 34-38.
[18] See Muslim Journal, May 16, 1986, p.2.
[19] See An African American Genesis, p. 9.
[20] See Muslim Journal, October 2, 1987.
[21] See Muslim Journal, November 13, 1987, p. 15.
[22] See Muslim Journal, June 2, 1989, p. 15.
[23] See Muslim Journal, June 28, 1991, p. 5.
[24] Recorded broadcast, September 4, 1991.
[25] See The Washington Times, Feb. 7, 1992, p. A6.
[26] See Muslim Journal, Feb. 28. 1992, p. 24.
[27] See Islamic Horizons, Summer 1992, p. 8.
[28] See Muslim Journal, Sept. 10, 1993, p. 17.
[29] See The Muslim News, May 28, 1993, p. 4.
[30] Recorded statements, May 14, 1993, Manchester, UK.
[31] See Muslim Journal, January 7, 1994, p. 7
[32] See Muslim Journal, June 17, 1994
[33] See Fayetteville (N.C.) Observer-Times, Feb. 16, 1998
[34] Transcript from NOI “Saviour’s Day” Rally, Chicago, February 26, 1999
[35] See Muslim Journal, March 17 & 24, 2000; also The Final Call, March 14 & 21, 2000

What is Fazaail-e-Aa’maal?

 
We begin with the Name of Allaah

All praise is due to Allah and may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon His messenger (saws). Verily the best speech is the book of Allah and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad sallallahu alaihiwasallam and the worst of affairs are the newly invented matters and every innovation is misguidance and all misguidance is in the fire. (Sahih Muslim Eng. Trans. Vol. 2 Page 40 no. 1885). To proceed: The religion of Islam is that which has been ordained by Allah, fully explained by the prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam as understood and practised by the salaf-us-saliheen (the pious predecessors which includes the Sahâbah, Tabi’een and their followers).

The Sunnah has been preserved in its pristine purity in the books of Sunnah only because of the chain of narrators (isnaad) reaching up to the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam, has been meticulously preserved by the Muhadditheen (Scholars of Ahaadeeth). In the words of Abdullah Ibn al-Mubarak (died 181 A.H.) on of the very illustrious teachers of Imam al-Bukhari, who said. “The isnaad is part of the religion and had it not been for the isnaad, whoever wished would have said whatever he liked”. Reported by Imam Muslim in the introduction to his Sahih. (Sharh Sahih Muslim – Arabic Vol. 1 Page 87 published by Darul Kuthubul-Islamiyyah, Lebanon).

Only the narrations which reach the level of Saheeh (authentic) or Hasan (good) as defined by the Scholars (Muhadditheen) are suitable to be held as evidence in matter of belief [such as creed (aqeedah) and the unseen (ghaib)], in the rulings and laws of the religion or in matters of worship. Only these can be attributed definitely and directly to the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam.

Narrations which fail to reach these two standards will be collectively termed weak (Da’eef) and should not be attributed directly to the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam in a definite form as clearly explained by Imam Nawawi in Sharh Sahih Muslim (Arabic Vol. 1, Page 81 – Darul Kuthubul Islamiyyah). Weak narrations provided their weakness is not sever, (i.e. There are no liars and / or fabricators and none suspected of lying or fabricating in the chain) can only be used to exhort or warn of a deed (amal) already sanctioned by the other authentic ahaadeeth (singular – hadeeth). If the weakness is severe (as in the case of false, fabricated, etc. ahaadeeth) it cannot be used for the above purpose as well. If such hadeeth are over to be quoted it should be only for the purpose of warning the Muslim community of false and fabricated ahaadeeth. Even then the defect should be clearly stated so that the ahaadeeth will not be attributed to the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam.

The Muhadditheen have collected such narrations for the purpose of warning the community, in separate books Few examples of such books are :

1. Ak-Maudhooaathul Kubra by Mulla Ali Qari.
2. Al-Maudhooaathul Sughra by Mulla Ali Qari.
3. Al-La’aali-ul-Masnuah fil Ahadeethil Maudhoo’ah by Imam Suyooti.
4. Thanzeehus Shareeathil Marfoo’ah anil Ahadith-ish-Shaneeathul Maudoo’ah by Ibnul Iraq al-Kan’ani.

Attributing a saying not told by the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam to the Prophet is a very grave sin and will lead the person to Hell. It is reported from a large number of Sahâbah from the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam that he said “Whoever lies on me intentionally then let him reserve his seat in hell”. (Sahih Bukhari. Eng. Trans. Book of Knowledge, Chapter – The sin of a person who tells a lie against the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam Vol. 1 Hadeeth no 106 and also by Imam Muslim in his preface to Sahih Muslim). Also it will include a person among the liars as can be seen in the following two ahaadeeth also found in the preface to Sahih Muslim.

1. “Whoever narrated a hadeeth from me which is seen as a lie then he is one of the liars[From Sharh Sahih Muslim (Arabic) by Imam Nawawi Vol. 1 Page 62 – Darul Kuthubul Islamiyyah]
2. “It is sufficient for a person to be a liar that he narrates all that he hears” (page 73 of the book referred to above).

And commenting on the above Imam Nawawi goes on to say “……. and there is no difference in the prohibition of lying on the Prophet either in what concerns the laws of the religion or in other than the laws like exhorting, warning, advising and the like of it, all of this is Haram (Forbidden). It is from the greatest of the grave sins and vilest of the abominable matters in the unanimous opinion of the Muslims ..etc”

In the light of this knowledge we shall examine a source reference of a long hadeeth from the original Urdu version of the book ‘Thabligi Nissab’, now renamed as “Fazail-e-Aa’maal”, written by Shaikh Maulana Muhammad Zakariyyah Kandalawi. The source reference which is in Arabic is not translated fully in the original version (which is in Urdu), nor is it found fully translated into the other languages (English/ Tamil / Singhalese). The Arabic source which can be seen in the Old Tamil Editions (untranslated) is itself strangely missing in the new editions in all the languages.

This book well known as the “Tha’leem Kitaab” of the Thablighi Jamaat, is reverently read in practically every mosque every day and the general public is made to listen to it in the pretext that it is a genuine and authentic book.

In the part entitled ‘Virtues of Salaah’ there is a sub-section called ‘Reproach on giving up Salaah’, hadeeth number 7 in this section is along hadeeth describing 5 rewards and 15 punishments. After quoting the hadeeth in Arabic a passage follows in Arabic which attempts to give the source of the hadeeth. This is not translated in to Urdu in the original “Tha’leem Kitaab” written by the author for Urdu readers. Further the translations of the book in to English, Tamil and Singhalese do not have the source reference as fully given in the Urdu version (a few inadequate comments are sometimes found in some editions regarding the source, but these do not reveal the true status of the hadeeth).

The translation o the Arabic source reference in “Thabligi Nisaab” (Urdu) by Sheikh Maulana Muhammad Zakariyyah Kandalawi, section “Fazail Namaaz”, Baad Awwal pg. 312 follows :

That which has been said in the explanation of the hadeeth in regard to the number does not tally with 15 as there are only 14. Maybe the narrator forgot the 15th. This has been said by Ibn Hajr al-Makkie* in his books ‘Zavaajir’.

I am saying : Abul Laith Samarkandy (1) has narrated the hadeeth in this book ‘Kurrathul Uyoon’, he has made 6 things as related to his world, saying that the 5th (of the above 6 things) is that “all the creations will hate him in this world” and that the 6th is that “that he will not have any part in the Du’aa of the pious”. Then he narrated the hadeeth till the end, and did not attribute to it (the hadeeth) to anyone.

Sheikh Nassr Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibraheem As-Samarkandy (2) says in his book ‘Thanbeeh-ghul-Ghafileen’ that it will be said “whoever was constant in his five time prayers with congregation, Allah will honour him with 5 favours. Whoever was negligent in it, Allah will punish him with 12 things, 3 in this world, 3 at the time of death, 3 in the qabr (grave) and 3 on the Day of Judgement”, then narrated the like of it and then said “it has been narrated the like of this from Abu Dharr from the Prophet Sallallahu alaihiwasallam”.

And Suyooti said in his book ‘Zailul Aalee’ (3) after narrating with this meaning from the narration of Ibn Najjar in ‘Thareekh Baghdaad’ with the chain to Abu Hurrairah. (Then Suyooti quotes) “said in ‘Meezan’ (4) this hadeeth is false, composed it : Muhammad Ibn Alee Ibn Abbass on Abu Bark Ibn Ziyaad-an-Naisaboorie.”

I am saying : But said Al-Hafiz (5) in ‘Munabbahath’ from Abu Hurrairah that it was attributed to the Prophet sallallahu alai hiwasallam “the prayer is the pillar of Deen and in it are 10 things”. I have told (wrote) it in ‘Al-Hindiyyah’ and told (wrote) it Al-Ghazzali in ‘Dakaikul-Akhbaar’ (6) the like of it and a more complete one of it, and said “whoever protected it Allah honoured him with 15 things ..” to its end and narrated the hadeeth in detail.

End of Translation of the Arabic source given in ‘Thablighi Nissab’. We shall now discuss some important points in this extract, numbers (1) – (5) at the end of which the authenticity of the narration will become clear for the reader himself.

(1), (2) : The authors referred to in (1) and (2) are both the same person, i.e. : Abul Laith Nassr Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ahmed Ibn Ibraheem As-Samarkandi,

This is an error on the part of the author to give the idea that 2 separate writers are referring to this hadeeth in 2 different books. This sort of duplicity and its other varieties are categorized in the terminology of the scholars of hadeeth as ‘Thadlees’ which literally means ‘concealing’. This will by no means enhance the authenticity of a hadeeth but will further increase its weakness.

Imam Shamsuddeen Dhahabi, a renowned scholar in his book Siar a’alamin nubalaa (Vol 16 Page 323) writing about Abul Laith Saamarkandy says that “he dabbles in fabricated ahaadeeth” and further Imam Dhahabi in his book Thareekthul Islam (reference to period between A.H. 351-380, pg583) says “Thanbeeghul Ghafileen contains numerous fabricated ahaadeeth”.

(3) ‘Zailul Aalee’ is a book by Imam Suyooti. The full name of the book has not been given. The reason for doing so will be soon evident once the full name and its meaning is known, i.e. : “Zailul -La’aali-ul-Masnuah fil Ahadethil Maudhoo’ah” when rendered into English will read ‘Tails of made up pearls in fabricated Ahaadeeth’. Therefore ‘Tails of pearls’ only is given to make it seemingly authentic pearls for a person who is unaware of the full name of the books which is devoted to discussing the false and fabricated ahaadeeth for the purposes of warning the Muslims of their existence! Imam Suyooti quotes this ahaadeeth in this book from another book called ‘Thareekh Baghdaad’ by Ibn Najjar in which the chain of narrators are mentioned. In its chain appears a fabricator of ahaadeeth of the name of Muhammad Ibn Alee ibn Abbaas who attributes it to Abu Bakr Ibn Ziyaad an-Naisaboori.

(4) As for the identity of Muhammad Ibn Alee Ibn Abbaas as a fabricator it is mentioned in “Al-Meezan-ul-I’athidaal fee Naqaddirrijaal”, a book written by Imam Dhahabi which is quoted by Imam Suyooti. Imam Dhahabi declare this hadeeth as ‘Baatil’ or ‘False’ as it is fabricated.

(5) Al-Hafiz as he is popularly know is Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalani (773 – 852AH) and is the author of the world renowned commentary on ‘Sahih al-Bukhari’ known as ‘Fath-ul-Bari’, is not Ibn Hajr al-Makkie referred to in * of the above translation. The hadeeth which is quoted from ‘Munabbahaath’ (ie. the prayer is the pillar of the deen and in it are 10 things) is different from the hadeeth for which the source is being provided (ie. The hadeeth referring to the 15 punishments, etc..)

Munabbathaath which has been attributed to Hafiz Ibn Hajar is not found amongst the books written by him. Further the book has not been attributed to Al-Hafiz by any of the scholars including Imam Sakhawi who is one of his students. Also several scholars have actually refuted the saying that Munabbahaath is al-Hafiz’s book. Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani in his book ‘Lisan-ul-Meezan’ (a book analysing the standard of narrators and their narrations) in Volume 5 pages 295-297, has quoted the hadeeth concerning the 15 punishments for neglecting the prayer which is quoted above and said that it is a “manifest falsehood from the people of Tareeqahs (Sufi paths).”

(6) Dakaikul Akhbaar which has been attributed to Imam Ghazali by Maulana Zakariyya again cannot be found amongst Imam Ghazali’s compilations! Rather it is found with the full name “Dakaikul Akhbaar fi bayani dhikri ahlil Jannah wa ahwali ahlin Naar” as a book written by Abul Laith Samarkandy who is the very same person referred to in (1) and (2)!!!!

Note : Sheikh Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn al-Baz – the Grand Mufti of the Saudi Arabia said in his ‘Fatawaa’ (Vol 1, page 97) in reference to the hadith concerning 15 punishments : “It will be compulsory on a person who finds a paper containing this hadith that he burns it, and warns anyone he finds spreading this narration, in order to safeguard the Sunnah of the Prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam from the lies of the liars”!!!!!.

We stop here with the analysis of the references given as by now it will be evident to the searcher of the truth and the one jealous for Islam, that it will be futile trying to authenticate this hadeeth.

Thus it is the conclusion that this hadeeth is false and fabricated. The hadeeth quoted from ‘Bukhari and Muslim’, the verdicts of Imam Nawawi (an authoritative Muhaddith) and sayings of the illustrious scholars of this Ummaah which are far too numerous to quote in such a small essay is that the Ummah must steer clear from quoting such hadeeth and its like. It should be quoted only for the purpose of warning that such false hadeeth exist. This is only one of the many such false and fabricated narrations which have been put into circulation amongst the Muslims. Insha-Allah further highlights of such false and fabricated ahaadeeth will follow so that the Muslims are warned and will be able to follow truly what the Prophet sallallahu alaihiwasallam said and not what has been falsely attributed to him. Because the prophet (saws) said “Whoever lies on me intentionally then let him reserve his seat in hell”. And our final call is that all praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Aalameen

« Older entries