Status of Maẓāhib

Question sent via text message:

Salaam, what is the hadeeth regarding the different imams. I got 1 cake idiot arguing that theys [sic] no sects like hanafi shafi… n nabi saw neva [sic] talk of that.

M.G.

Reply

It’s difficult to answer this question without knowing exactly what the person is objecting to. Is he objecting to following an Imām, or the fact that Maẓahib differ? Be that as it may, I’ll mention certain points which might be of benefit.

Mujtahid Muṭlaq

There is no specific Ḥadīth mentioning following the Four A’immah (Imāms). Allāh however says:

فاسألوا أهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون

Ask those of knowledge if you do not know.

[al-Ambiyā: 7]

Thus there are two groups amongst the Ummah – those who have dedicated themselves to knowledge and those who should refer to the knowledgeable if they do not know. Of course, nothing prevents the second group from attaining further knowledge and becoming the learned themselves.

Now, let alone the common people, great giants amongst the ‘Ulama, felt the need to follow a Mazḥab. Those were ‘Ulamā’ who can never be equalled today. The entire Muslim world reads the Tafsīr of al-Ḥāfiẓ Ismā‘īl Ibn Kathīr and acknowledges the works of the Muḥaddith al-Ḥafiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. Both these titans were Shāfi‘ī. Almost every great scholar for over a thousand years followed one Maẓhab or the other.

 

The Ḥadīth refers to one who has memorised the Qurān as, “Ḥāmilul Qurān,” not, “Ḥāfiẓ.” Ḥāfiz meant someone who memorised at least 100,000 Aḥādīth – text and chain of narrators. You will note that both personalities mentioned here are titled, “al-Ḥāfiẓ,” in the original sense of the word. Yet neither felt qualified enough to proclaim himself Mujtahid Muṭlaq, one qualified in all Islāmic sciences and able to issue his own rulings without referring to the ruling of an Imām.

 

If one possesses the qualifications to be a Mujtahid Muṭlaq, then by all means proceed, nobody is forcing such a luminary to follow a Maẓhab.

 

Let’s list a few basic sciences required to be a Mujtahid Muṭlaq, not daring to approach the myriad fields actually required:

 

•  Is your friend a proficient Arabic speaker?


• Is he qualified to give tafsīr of the entire Qurān?Is he an expert in the biography of Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  and hence capable of contextualising various Aḥādīth

• Can he understand any Hadīth in Arabic, let alone memorise 100,000 Aḥadīth?

Those who were qualified in all of the above and much more, felt compelled to follow a Maẓhab. My knowledge is not a speck compared to theirs. How can I have the audacity to follow my own way instead of obeying…

واتبع سبيل من اناب الي

Follow the path of those who turn to Me

[Luqmān: 15]

Tabaqāt

The Ṭabaqāt books list the great ‘Ulamā’ of the past according the Maẓhab they followed. This encompasses almost all the ‘Ulamā’ of the past. Even those who reject Maẓāhib intently study the books of these ‘Ulamā’ who followed Maẓhabs. How is it possible to try and obtain the knowledge of these ‘Ulamā when the foundation of their knowledge was some Maẓhab, but the student denies Maẓāhib? The following are standard books in the land of the Ḥaramayn amongst those who reject Maẓāhib:

1.       The Tafsīr of Ibn Kathīr – Tafsīr al-Qurān al-‘Azhīm.

2.       The commentary on Bukhārī by Ibn Ḥajar - Fatḥul Bārī

3.       The Fiqh of al-Imām an-Nawawī – al-Majmū‘ Sharḥul Muhaẓẓab

All three were followers of al-Imām ash-Shāfi‘ī. They followed the path of one who turned to Allāh despite their own lofty status.

 

Maẓāhib existed amongst the Ṣaḥābah رضى الله عنهم

There were several Ṣaḥābah رضى الله عنهمwho distinguished themselves above the rest in terms of their knowledge. Other Ṣaḥābah referred to them to the extent that when the people of al-Madīnah were told a Ḥajj ruling by the ‘Ulamā’ of Makkah, they politely declined until referring the matter to Zayd bin Thābit رضى الله عنه, the Muftī of al-Madīnah. Thus they accepted him as their Imām, without disrespect to other ‘Ulamā’.

If Maẓāhib are true, why do they differ?

This is a common objection made by people who do not understand differences of opinion in Islām. For a detailed discussion on this topic, please refer to my article, Differences of opinion in Islām. The following incident however can be mentioned:

During the siege of al-Madinah during the Battle of Khandaq (5 Hijrī) the Jews of Banu Qurayzhah who were bound by treaty to the Muslims, betrayed the Muslims. After the siege was lifted, Jibreel alayhis salaam ordered Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  to punish the traitors.

Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  therefore announced:

لا يصلين أحدكم العصر إلا فى بنى قريظة

None of you should pray ‘Aṣr except at Banū Qurayzhah!

One group of Muslims took long to reach Qurayzhah. It was nearing sunset, and they had not yet prayed ‘Aṣr. Some insisted on following the command literally, even it meant praying Asr at Qurayzhah only when the stars had appeared. Others opined that the command meant to hurry, but ‘Aṣr had to be prayed before sunset, which meant not at Qurayzhah in their case.

Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  did not rebuke either group, even though their actions were opposite.

This is but a brief discussion, but inshāallāh it may assist in answering your question.

Status of Maẓāhib

Question sent via text message:

Salaam, what is the hadeeth regarding the different imams. I got 1 cake idiot arguing that theys [sic] no sects like hanafi shafi… n nabi saw neva [sic] talk of that.

M.G.

Reply

It’s difficult to answer this question without knowing exactly what the person is objecting to. Is he objecting to following an Imām, or the fact that Maẓahib differ? Be that as it may, I’ll mention certain points which might be of benefit.

Mujtahid Muṭlaq

There is no specific Ḥadīth mentioning following the Four A’immah (Imāms). Allāh however says:

فاسألوا أهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون

Ask those of knowledge if you do not know.

[al-Ambiyā: 7]

Thus there are two groups amongst the Ummah – those who have dedicated themselves to knowledge and those who should refer to the knowledgeable if they do not know. Of course, nothing prevents the second group from attaining further knowledge and becoming the learned themselves.

Now, let alone the common people, great giants amongst the ‘Ulama, felt the need to follow a Mazḥab. Those were ‘Ulamā’ who can never be equalled today. The entire Muslim world reads the Tafsīr of al-Ḥāfiẓ Ismā‘īl Ibn Kathīr and acknowledges the works of the Muḥaddith al-Ḥafiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī. Both these titans were Shāfi‘ī. Almost every great scholar for over a thousand years followed one Maẓhab or the other.

The Ḥadīth refers to one who has memorised the Qurān as, “Ḥāmilul Qurān,” not, “Ḥāfiẓ.” Ḥāfiz meant someone who memorised at least 100,000 Aḥādīth – text and chain of narrators. You will note that both personalities mentioned here are titled, “al-Ḥāfiẓ,” in the original sense of the word. Yet neither felt qualified enough to proclaim himself Mujtahid Muṭlaq, one qualified in all Islāmic sciences and able to issue his own rulings without referring to the ruling of an Imām.

If one possesses the qualifications to be a Mujtahid Muṭlaq, then by all means proceed, nobody is forcing such a luminary to follow a Maẓhab.

Let’s list a few basic sciences required to be a Mujtahid Muṭlaq, not daring to approach the myriad fields actually required:

·         Is your friend a proficient Arabic speaker?

·         Is he qualified to give tafsīr of the entire Qurān?

·         Is he an expert in the biography of Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  and hence capable of contextualising various Aḥādīth?

·         Can he understand any Hadīth in Arabic, let alone memorise 100,000 Aḥadīth?

Those who were qualified in all of the above and much more, felt compelled to follow a Maẓhab. My knowledge is not a speck compared to theirs. How can I have the audacity to follow my own way instead of obeying…

واتبع سبيل من اناب الي

Follow the path of those who turn to Me

[Luqmān: 15]

Tabaqāt

The Ṭabaqāt books list the great ‘Ulamā’ of the past according the Maẓhab they followed. This encompasses almost all the ‘Ulamā’ of the past. Even those who reject Maẓāhib intently study the books of these ‘Ulamā’ who followed Maẓhabs. How is it possible to try and obtain the knowledge of these ‘Ulamā when the foundation of their knowledge was some Maẓhab, but the student denies Maẓāhib? The following are standard books in the land of the Ḥaramayn amongst those who reject Maẓāhib:

1.       The Tafsīr of Ibn Kathīr – Tafsīr al-Qurān al-‘Azhīm.

2.       The commentary on Bukhārī by Ibn Ḥajar - Fatḥul Bārī

3.       The Fiqh of al-Imām an-Nawawī – al-Majmū‘ Sharḥul Muhaẓẓab

All three were followers of al-Imām ash-Shāfi‘ī. They followed the path of one who turned to Allāh despite their own lofty status.

Maẓāhib existed amongst the Ṣaḥābah رضى الله عنهم

There were several Ṣaḥābah رضى الله عنهم who distinguished themselves above the rest in terms of their knowledge. Other Ṣaḥābah referred to them to the extent that when the people of al-Madīnah were told a Ḥajj ruling by the ‘Ulamā’ of Makkah, they politely declined until referring the matter to Zayd bin Thābit رضى الله عنه, the Muftī of al-Madīnah. Thus they accepted him as their Imām, without disrespect to other ‘Ulamā’.  

If Maẓāhib are true, why do they differ?

This is a common objection made by people who do not understand differences of opinion in Islām. For a detailed discussion on this topic, please refer to my article, Differences of opinion in Islām. The following incident however can be mentioned:

During the siege of al-Madinah during the Battle of Khandaq (5 Hijrī) the Jews of Banu Qurayzhah who were bound by treaty to the Muslims, betrayed the Muslims. After the siege was lifted, Jibreel alayhis salaam ordered Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  to punish the traitors.

Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  therefore announced:

لا يصلين أحدكم العصر إلا فى بنى قريظة

None of you should pray ‘Aṣr except at Banū Qurayzhah!

One group of Muslims took long to reach Qurayzhah. It was nearing sunset, and they had not yet prayed ‘Aṣr. Some insisted on following the command literally, even it meant praying Asr at Qurayzhah only when the stars had appeared. Others opined that the command meant to hurry, but ‘Aṣr had to be prayed before sunset, which meant not at Qurayzhah in their case.

Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم  did not rebuke either group, even though their actions were opposite.

This is but a brief discussion, but inshāallāh it may assist in answering your question.

سليمان الكندي

Tamarrud – Satanic Rebellion

 

English speakers understand, “fury,” and “rage,” to be synonyms – the same general meaning. Similar are “Nā rāz,” and “Ghuṣṣah,” in the subcontinent. Not so Arabic. Each Arabic word, however similar the English translation might be, has a very specific import. For example, whilst an English speaker might translate both يعلم  (ya‘lamu)and يعرف (ya‘rifu) as, “He knows,” the first verb is general and the second implies knowing something which was not known before. So who cares? Well a Muslim does. A Muslim declares, “الله اعلم Allāhu a‘lam – Allāh knows best,” to admit his ignorance and the perfection of Allāh’s knowledge. The second verb can never be used in reference to Allāh. His knowledge is perfect. Never can He be said to know something that He did not know before. He always knew everything.

Egypt is an Arab land. It is a land where Ṣaḥābah and great ‘Ulamā’ are buried. It is a land known for the Qurān. The principle explained above would be imbued into an Egyptian with his mother’s milk, Muslim or not.

The overthrow of Mursī has shocked many. Of course good and bad rulers come and go, but what pains me beyond the actual events, is the choice of name of the rebels, Tamarrud.

Traditionally those seeking a change in government in Muslim lands have always presented their movements as something on the lines of Iṣlāḥ (rectification), taḥrīr (liberation), etc. Connotations of rebellion were avoided when the ruler was Muslim due to rulings that Muslim blood may not be spilt, as long as the ruler implements Sharī‘ah and is a Muslim.

To give an understanding of the diversity of verbs which can mean rebel/refuse/disobey; on the one side of the scale is a word which Allāh applies to both Himself and Satan, whilst on the other end, there is an exclusively satanic rebellion against Allāh.

يريدون أن يطفئوا نور الله بأفواههم ويأبى الله إلا أن يتم نوره ولو كره الكافرون

They desire to extinguish Allāh’s light with their mouths, but Allāh refuses except that He will complete His light even if the disbelievers dislike it.

[at-Tawbah: 32]

The very same verb (in the past tense) is used for Satan:

وإذ قلنا للملائكة اسجدوا لآدم فسجدوا إلا إبليس أبى واستكبر وكان من الكافرين

Recall when we said, “Prostrate,” to the angels, they prostrated but not Satan. He refused. He was arrogant and was amongst the disbelievers.

[al-Baqarah: 34]

Of all possible choices, the rebels have chosen to name themselves loudly and proudly as devilish rebels. The Qurānic usage of tamarrud is exclusively for rebels against Allāh, trouble seekers and devils:

 إن يدعون من دونه إلا إناثا وإن يدعون إلا شيطانا مريدا

Instead of Allāh, they call unto goddesses and the rebel Satan.

[an-Nisā: 117]

ومن الناس من يجادل في الله بغير علم ويتبع كل شيطان مريد

Amongst people are those who dispute concerning Allāh without any knowledge and follow every rebellious devil.

[al-Ḥajj: 3]

Concerning the last verse, Ibn Kathīr commented:

يقول تعالى ذاما لمن كذب بالبعث ، وأنكر قدرة الله على إحياء الموتى ، معرضا عما أنزل الله على أنبيائه ، متبعا في قوله وإنكاره وكفره كل شيطان مريد ، من الإنس والجن ، وهذا حال أهل الضلال والبدع ، المعرضين عن الحق ، المتبعين للباطل ، يتركون ما أنزله الله على رسوله من الحق المبين ، ويتبعون أقوال رءوس الضلالة ، الدعاة إلى البدع بالأهواء والآراء

The Most High rebukes those who do not believe in resurrection and deny Allāh’s power to revive the dead. They turn from what Allāh revealed to His Prophets. Such people in word, denial and disbelief are in fact following every rebellious devil, human or jinni. Such is the state of the people of misguidance and innovation. They turn away from the truth and follow falsehood. They abandon the clear truth that Allāh revealed to His Messenger. Instead, they follow the words of the leaders of misguidance, the inviters towards innovation, personal desires and opinions….

• If the rebellion was merely against Mursī as a man, it would have been sad, but not the worst calamity this Ummah has faced.
• If the rebellion had been against having an Islāmic government, it would be bitter and unsanctionable, but still understandable. After all, how many “pious” Muslims are truly ready for the full rigours of a true Islāmic state?
• The leaders of Tamarrud, cognisant of Arabic and living in a land of the Qurān, have gone way beyond the above. One hopes the masses are innocent, but the leadership are rebels against Allāh, for at the very least they reject Allāh’s laws. To quote Ibn Kathīr, “They abandon the clear truth that Allāh revealed to His Messenger. Instead, they follow the words of the leaders of misguidance, the inviters towards innovation, personal desires and opinions….”

Allāh knows best when exactly ad-Dajjāl will appear, yet the schemes of his followers have been obvious throughout the world for years, if not decades. What is totally unexpected, at least to me, is the sudden and brazen declaration of masses of people, born in Muslim homes, that they are devilish rebels.

Clearly the speed of events is escalating. Every Muslim should earnestly escalate his/her preparation and safeguard his Īmān.

 

 

Tamarrud – Satanic Rebellion

English speakers understand, “fury,” and “rage,” to be synonyms – the same general meaning. Similar are “Nā rāz,” and “Ghuṣṣah,” in the subcontinent. Not so Arabic. Each Arabic word, however similar the English translation might be, has a very specific import. For example, whilst an English speaker might translate both يعلم  (ya‘lamu)and يعرف (ya‘rifu) as, “He knows,” the first verb is general and the second implies knowing something which was not known before. So who cares? Well a Muslim does. A Muslim declares, “الله اعلم Allāhu a‘lam – Allāh knows best,” to admit his ignorance and the perfection of Allāh’s knowledge. The second verb can never be used in reference to Allāh. His knowledge is perfect. Never can He be said to know something that He did not know before. He always knew everything. 

Egypt is an Arab land. It is a land where Ṣaḥābah and great ‘Ulamā’ are buried. It is a land known for the Qurān. The principle explained above would be imbued into an Egyptian with his mother’s milk, Muslim or not. 

The overthrow of Mursī has shocked many. Of course good and bad rulers come and go, but what pains me beyond the actual events, is the choice of name of the rebels, Tamarrud. 

Traditionally those seeking a change in government in Muslim lands have always presented their movements as something on the lines of Iṣlāḥ (rectification), taḥrīr (liberation), etc. Connotations of rebellion were avoided when the ruler was Muslim due to rulings that Muslim blood may not be spilt, as long as the ruler implements Sharī‘ah and is a Muslim. 

To give an understanding of the diversity of verbs which can mean rebel/refuse/disobey; on the one side of the scale is a word which Allāh applies to both Himself and Satan, whilst on the other end, there is an exclusively satanic rebellion against Allāh. 

يريدون أن يطفئوا نور الله بأفواههم ويأبى الله إلا أن يتم نوره ولو كره الكافرون

They desire to extinguish Allāh’s light with their mouths, but Allāh refuses except that He will complete His light even if the disbelievers dislike it.

 [at-Tawbah: 32] 

The very same verb (in the past tense) is used for Satan:

وإذ قلنا للملائكة اسجدوا لآدم فسجدوا إلا إبليس أبى واستكبر وكان من الكافرين

Recall when we said, “Prostrate,” to the angels, they prostrated but not Satan. He refused. He was arrogant and was amongst the disbelievers. 

 [al-Baqarah: 34]

Of all possible choices, the rebels have chosen to name themselves loudly and proudly as devilish rebels. The Qurānic usage of tamarrud is exclusively for rebels against Allāh, trouble seekers and devils:

 إن يدعون من دونه إلا إناثا وإن يدعون إلا شيطانا مريدا

Instead of Allāh, they call unto goddesses and the rebel Satan.

  [an-Nisā: 117]

ومن الناس من يجادل في الله بغير علم ويتبع كل شيطان مريد

Amongst people are those who dispute concerning Allāh without any knowledge and follow every rebellious devil.

 [al-Ḥajj: 3]

Concerning the last verse, Ibn Kathīr commented:

يقول تعالى ذاما لمن كذب بالبعث ، وأنكر قدرة الله على إحياء الموتى ، معرضا عما أنزل الله على أنبيائه ، متبعا في قوله وإنكاره وكفره كل شيطان مريد ، من الإنس والجن ، وهذا حال أهل الضلال والبدع ، المعرضين عن الحق ، المتبعين للباطل ، يتركون ما أنزله الله على رسوله من الحق المبين ، ويتبعون أقوال رءوس الضلالة ، الدعاة إلى البدع بالأهواء والآراء

The Most High rebukes those who do not believe in resurrection and deny Allāh’s power to revive the dead. They turn from what Allāh revealed to His Prophets. Such people in word, denial and disbelief are in fact following every rebellious devil, human or jinni. Such is the state of the people of misguidance and innovation. They turn away from the truth and follow falsehood. They abandon the clear truth that Allāh revealed to His Messenger. Instead, they follow the words of the leaders of misguidance, the inviters towards innovation, personal desires and opinions….

•  If the rebellion was merely against Mursī as a man, it would have been sad, but not the worst calamity this Ummah has faced. 
•  If the rebellion had been against having an Islāmic government, it would be bitter and unsanctionable, but still understandable. After all, how many “pious” Muslims are truly ready for the full rigours of a true Islāmic state?
• The leaders of Tamarrud, cognisant of Arabic and living in a land of the Qurān, have gone way beyond the above. One hopes the masses are innocent, but the leadership are rebels against Allāh, for at the very least they reject Allāh’s laws. To quote Ibn Kathīr, “They abandon the clear truth that Allāh revealed to His Messenger. Instead, they follow the words of the leaders of misguidance, the inviters towards innovation, personal desires and opinions….”

Allāh knows best when exactly ad-Dajjāl will appear, yet the schemes of his followers have been obvious throughout the world for years, if not decades. What is totally unexpected, at least to me, is the sudden and brazen declaration of masses of people, born in Muslim homes, that they are devilish rebels. 

Clearly the speed of events is escalating. Every Muslim should earnestly escalate his/her preparation and safeguard his Īmān.

سليمان الكندي

Is the world stage set for the coming of al-Mahdi?

Comment: Umaru26 June 2013 09:17

Interesting perspective. On the topic of the events that will take place before Qiyamah, are you able to provide us with the Hadith in Muslims pertaining to the siege of Iraq, as well as some explanation around it?

http://kindi-blog.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-jew-hiding-behind-me-or-in-me.html?showComment=1372231023577

Reply:

I am aware of the Ḥadīth you refer to. It is embedded in my memory because we studied it at the time Baghdād fell to US forces. It was certainly thought provoking how the Ḥadīth corresponded to contemporary events.  That should be quite clear once you read the Ḥadīth. In fact, it seems that there are ‘Ulamā’ amongst the ‘Arabs who are of the opinion that the Ḥadīth refers to current events. 

Allāh alone has knowledge of the unseen, but based on the world’s geo-political situation paralleling the prophecies of His Rasūl صلى الله عليه وسلم, it is worth pondering over how soon the events surrounding ad-Dajjāl and al-Mahdī will transpire.

Some Ḥadīth to consider…

Sanctions against Irāq & Syria

حدثنا زهير بن حرب وعلي بن حجر واللفظ لزهير قالا حدثنا إسمعيل بن إبراهيم عن الجريري عن أبي نضرة قال كنا عند جابر بن عبد الله فقال يوشك أهل العراق أن لا يجبى إليهم قفيز ولا درهم قلنا من أين ذاك قال من قبل العجم يمنعون ذاك ثم قال يوشك أهل الشأم أن لا يجبى إليهم دينار ولا مدي قلنا من أين ذاك قال من قبل الروم ثم سكت هنية ثم قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يكون في آخر أمتي خليفة يحثي المال حثيا لا يعده عددا قال قلت لأبي نضرة وأبي العلاء أتريان أنه عمر بن عبد العزيز فقالا لا وحدثنا ابن المثنى حدثنا عبد الوهاب حدثنا سعيد يعني الجريري بهذا الإسناد نحوه

Al-Jarīrī narrates from Abū Naḍrah:

We were by Jābir bin ‘Abdillāh [the Ṣaḥābī] when he remarked, “It will be that neither Qafīz [about 16kg of food] nor even a Dirham [silver coin] will be allowed to be imported by the people of Irāq.”

“From where will that be caused?” we asked.

He replied, “From the non-‘Arabs.  They will block that.”

He then said, “It will be that neither a Dīnār [gold coin] nor even a small measure will be allowed to be imported by the people of Syria.”

“From where will that be caused?” we asked.

He replied, “From Rome.”

He then kept quiet for a while and then said, “Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم said, ‘There will be a Khalīfah at the end of my Ummah who will freely spread out wealth in amounts which cannot be calculated.’"

[Muslim]

As far as I am aware, Kuffār attacks against Irāq were always primarily military operations, be they Mongols, Rāfiḍī Persians or British. The exception was the UN sanctions which strangled the people of Irāq, years longer than the actual military operation.

It is interesting that the world powers express disagreement in regards the next victim, Syria. If indeed the above Ḥadīth applies here, it may indicate that this time America (Rome) will be practically alone if it attacks Syria, as opposed to the coalition (non-‘Arabs) who pillaged Irāq.

Yet Jābir رضى الله عنه indicates that these are the events which will occur before the victory of the Khalīfah, al-Mahdī.

The Butcher of Damascus

رواه الحاكم عن أبي هريرة قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: يخرج رجل يقال له السفياني في عمق دمشق، وعامة من يتبعه من كلب، فيقتل حتى يبقر بطون النساء أو يقتل الصبيان، فتجمع لهم قيس فيقتلها.... ويخرج رجل من أهل بيتي في الحرة فيبلغ السفياني فيبعث إليه جنداً من جنده فيهزمهم، فيسير إليه السفياني بمن معه حتى إذا صار ببيداء من الأرض خسف بهم، فلا ينجو منهم إلا المخبر عنهم

Abū Hurayrah رضى الله عنه  narrated that Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم, said:

A man known as the Sufyānī will emerge from the depths of Damascus. His followers will generally be of the Kalb [Dog] people. He will slay to the extent that he will rip open the bellies of women. When the Qays gather against him he will slay them…A man from my Household will emerge in al-Ḥarrah. When the Sufyānī hears of this he will despatch against him an army from amongst his armies. He will defeat them. The Sufyānī and those with him will then march against him. When he reaches a desert land the earth will swallow them. None will be saved except those who will give the news about them. 

[al-Ḥākim]

There are several possibilities, and Allāh knows best:

1. Bashār is not the Sufyānī and this Ḥadīth does not apply to current events.
2. Sufyānī means descendant of Abū Sufyān رضى الله عنه. Bashār is somehow his descendant and the Ḥadīth refers to him.
3. There are no direct living heirs of Abū Sufyān رضى الله عنه. His line failed at his great-grandson, Mu‘āwiyah bin Yazīd bin Mu‘āwiyah bin Abī Sufyān. Without contradicting his lofty status as a repentant Ṣaḥābī of Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم, “Sufyānī” may be a metaphor for the period when the idolatrous leader sought the extinction of the Muslims. So might this not apply to the idolatrous leader in Damascus who seeks the extinction of the Muslims?
4. None of the above.

What little I know of what is happening in Syria is too terrible to repeat, but there may be two silver linings amidst all the gloom:

1. The Rawāfiḍ [Shī‘ah] have revealed their true bestial and satanic colours. No true follower of the Sunnah will ever again be deceived, unless he is utterly blind or possesses less than two brain cells. An influential personality of the Caribbean continues to promote esoteric interpretations of the Ḥadīth, reminiscent of Ismā‘īlī Rāfiḍi thinking and still backs the Rawāfiḍ. One prays for the guidance of him and his followers. 
2. The suffering of the Syrians will not be in vain. It may this battle of theirs will be the one which heralds the coming of al-Mahdī.

An army from Afghānistān

يقتتل عند كنزكم هذه ثلاثة كلهم ولد خليفة لا تصير إلى واحد منهم ، ثم تقبل الرايات السود من خراسان فيقتلونكم مقتلة لم تروا مثلها ، ثم ذكر شيئا : فإذا كان ذلك فائتوه ولو حبوا على الثلج فإنه خليفة الله . وفي رواية ابن عبدان : ثم تجيء الرايات السود فيقتلونكم قتلا لم يقتله قوم ، ثم يجيء خليفة الله المهدي فإذا سمعتم به فأتوه فبايعوه فإنه خليفة الله المهدي .
الراوي: ثوبان مولى رسول الله المحدث: البيهقي - المصدر: دلائل النبوة

Thawbān رضى الله عنه narrated that Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم said,

Three will fight over your treasure, all of them sons of a ruler. It will not go to any of them. Then black banners will advance from Khurāsān. They will kill you such a killing which you had not seen before. Then only will the black banners arrive.

In the narration of ‘Abdān.

When that happens, go to him even if you have to crawl over ice, for indeed he is Allāh’s Khalīfah.

[al-Bayhaqī, Dalāil an-Nubwah]

Allāh knows best. It may be that three princes, not satisfied with spending the Ummah’s wealth in the casinos and brothels of Europe, will fight over the kingdom. When the Mujāhidūn advance against the princes, the princes will unleash their fury against the Ummah. These Mujāhidūn will in fact be part of the army of al-Mahdī.

But what indication is there that any aspect of this Ḥadīth may apply to our times? My interpretation may offend many, but here goes…

Khurāsān today includes the west of Afghānistān. Whilst the general perception of Afghānistān is that of a land dedicated to Jihād and the spread of Islām, I would dare to suggest that this is a fairly recent development. To start off with the historical record shows intense Afghān resistance against Islām. Whilst the Ṣaḥabah did reach Kābūl, pacification was only accomplished decades later under the auspices of Banū Umayyah. Other nations, such as the Syrians, demonstrated a much earlier enthusiasm to embrace Islām.  

Afterwards? Sure, there was always tribal fighting in Afghānistān, but can anyone prove a focussed mission for the sake of Islām before our times? Well, there was the sincere son of Islām, Sulṭān Maḥmūd al-Ghaznawī raḥimahullāh, but he was Turkish, not Afghān. Aḥmad Shāh Abdālī may have invaded Irān, but his prior loyal subservience to the Rawāfiḍ hardly lends credence to turning a tribal-nationalist war into a Jihād.

In short, at no other point in history have the people of Khurāsān been such capable candidates for the army of the Mahdī, as they are now. This may also be coupled with the issue of the lineage of the Pathāns which brings up the next Ḥadīth…

Events in Turkey

عن أبي هريرة أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال سمعتم بمدينة جانب منها في البر وجانب منها في البحر قالوا نعم يا رسول الله قال لا تقوم الساعة حتى يغزوها سبعون ألفا من بني إسحق فإذا جاءوها نزلوا فلم يقاتلوا بسلاح ولم يرموا بسهم قالوا لا إله إلا الله والله أكبر فيسقط أحد جانبيها قال ثور لا أعلمه إلا قال الذي في البحر ثم يقولوا الثانية لا إله إلا الله والله أكبر فيسقط جانبها الآخر ثم يقولوا الثالثة لا إله إلا الله والله أكبر فيفرج لهم فيدخلوها فيغنموا فبينما هم يقتسمون المغانم إذ جاءهم الصريخ فقال إن الدجال قد خرج فيتركون كل شيء ويرجعون

Abū Hurayrah رضى الله عنه narrated:

The Nabī صلى الله عليه وسلم asked us, “Have you heard of a city which has a side on land and a side in the sea?” They replied, “Yes, O Rasūl of Allāh!”

He said, “The Hour shall not arise until 70,000 of the descendants of Isḥāq march against it. When they reach it, they will not fight with weapons nor shoot an arrow. They will call out, “Lā ilāha illāhu wallāhu akbar!” and one side will collapse.  They will call out, “Lā ilāha illāhu wallāhu akbar!” and the other side will collapse.  They will call out for a third time, “Lā ilāha illāhu wallāhu akbar!” and it will crack open and they will enter it. Whilst they are distributing the booty there will be a shout, “The Dajjāl has emerged!” They will leave all that and return.

[Muslim]

It is agreed that the city the Ṣaḥābah referred to is Istānbūl. Now who are the descendants of Isḥāq  عليه السلام? Not only do ‘Ulamā’ from amongst the Pathāns of Afghānistān claim that their people are descended from Banū Isrāīl, but you can research the internet and also find Jewish claims that the Pathāns are their lost tribe of Israel. As the only Muslim nation descended from Ya‘qūb [Isrāīl] bin Isḥāq (peace be upon them both), the Pathāns who have now proven themselves as warriors for Islām, are the foremost candidates for being the 70,000 conquerors of Istanbūl. This was never feasible before our times, as discussed above.

That Istanbūl is currently ruled by a dedicated Muslim only means that Islāmic rule is to be crushed and then restored as described in the Ḥadīth. Current events in Turkey may be a prelude to plots of the enemies to remove Erdogan.

Gathering of the Jews

عن أبى هريرة أن رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- قال « لا تقوم الساعة حتى يقاتل المسلمون اليهود فيقتلهم المسلمون ، حتى يختبئ اليهودى من وراء الحجر والشجر ، فيقول الحجر أو الشجر : يا مسلم يا عبد الله هذا يهودى خلفى فتعال فاقتله ، إلا الغرقد فإنه من شجر اليهود

Abū Hurayrah رضى الله عنه narrated that Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه و سلم said:

The Hour shall not arise until the Muslims fight the Jews. The Muslims will slay them to extent that the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stone or the tree will call out, “O Muslim! O slave of Allāh! This is a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him!” The exception will be the Gharqad [Boxthorn/ Goji], for it is a tree of the Jews.

[Muslim]

A major battle between the Muslim and Jews was not possible before the Jewish usurpation of Palestine. Before this they were scattered throughout the world. By gathering in Palestine, they have set the stage for the fulfilment of this Ḥadīth.

The appearance of al-Mahdī is more probable now than at any other time in history. There are many indications for that. Yet Allāh alone has knowledge of the unseen future. It may be centuries away.