Biography of Allah’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ in 29 Nights with Podcasts (14)

Herewith my notes for the Sīrah discussion I intend giving this year after Tarāwīḥ, Allāh willing. If we had all the time in the world we could not do justice to the greatest personality that ever walked the face of the earth. Yet in view of the lack of knowledge on the basics of his life by the general public I am using this platform for this purpose, on the premise that one can only truly love someone if one knows that person. As long as we are ignorant about the life and character of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ    our love for him cannot be as complete as it could be.

سليمان الكندي
Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi

 

14.                        Hijrah

• When Muslims later met to discuss when to start dating their calendar, Hijrah was chosen over Mawlūd, revelation of Qurʾān, etc.


• Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ    allowed his followers to go first. He would leave at the end. Thus was his character. Leadership is responsibility, not seeking privileges.


• The Quraysh tried to stop the Muslims. Thus families were split, e.g Umm Salmah, her husband and child.


• They had to leave their wealth behind, some had to give up everything, e.g. Ṣuhayb “Rūmī”


• All had to go secretly except ʿUmar, who openly announced his Hijrah. He arms himself, makes Tawāf and calls, “Whoever wishes to make his wife a widow and children orphans, then come and meet me…”


• Abū Bakr was not granted permission because he was destined to accompany Muḥammad صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ     When told he wept for joy. He had only 5,000 dirham left out of 40,000 before Islām. He spent everything on Islām.


• ʿAlī was left behind to give back the trusts. Despite their opposition, the Quraysh trusted al-Amīn صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ    so much, they used to leave their valuables with him.

https://youtu.be/jU1QlJa9G9s

و صلى الله على راكب البراق كامل الأخلاق

Qaṭar: Satan’s Horn vs Dajjāl’s Foes

عن زيد بن خالد الجهني رضي الله عنه أن النبي صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قال: من فطر صائماً كان له مثل أجره غير أنه لا ينقص من أجر الصائم شيئاً. رواه الترمذي

Zayd bin Khālid al-Juhānī (May Allāh be pleased with him) narrates the Prophet صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  said, “He who gives a fasting person something to break his fast with, receives a similar reward as him, without anything being reduced from the reward of the one who fasted.” [at-Tirmiẓī]

 

I start with this Ḥadīth. If it does not trouble you that contrary to feeding others, there are supposed Muslims who can gleefully try and blockade the food of other fasting Muslims during Ramaḍān, then indeed you are far too sophisticated for me. I respectfully ask you not to read any further and leave me to simple people who have some heart.

 

Disclaimer

 

• Firstly, I state at the outset that I am not going to be presenting some behind the scenes inside news, I do not have such news.


• Secondly, I am presenting two Ḥadīths applicable to the two parties at loggerheads. These are intended to understand the parties involved in terms of their general character, nature and motivations. I do not claim for an instant that either Ḥadīth refers to the current crisis definitely or specifically.

Two Camps – Their Histories

 

Najd is the central part of Arabia, to the east of al-Ḥijāz, the western coastal strip which included Makkah and al-Madīnah. The House of Saʿūd is based in Najd. They first appear in history less than 6 centuries back in ad-Diriyah in Najd. The Saʿūd later relocated to their present capital, Riyāḍ, which is also in Najd.

 

Whilst 6 centuries may seem long, in terms of Arab lineages this is nothing and in fact presents a problem. Whilst other royal families can trace their lineages back to the tribes which were contemporary to Allāhs Messengerصَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  the Saʿūdīs cannot. There are sometimes claims of Banū Ḥanīfah, sometimes of ʿAnazah but they are not conclusively proved. Where they irrefutably originated from before 6 centuries ago remains a mystery. This played into the hands of Egypt which was in conflict with the Saʿūdīs during the 1960s. Ṣawtul ʿArab radio boldly broadcast that they were not Arabs at all, but Jews. On the other hand, in other lands, the current and historical Arab kings could trace their lineage to actual Arab tribes (e.g. the Jordanian king is Ḥāshimī, Qurashī and the Rashīdīs who represented the Ottomans and fought against the Saʿūdīs are from Kindah, i.e. Kindīs). My teacher who taught in Makkah for several years mentioned that when a newspaper raised this question, the government’s reaction was to angrily demand how they could even question them, rather than simply produce their family tree.

 

Whatever the reality, the Saʿūdīs cannot conclusively be identified with any tribe mentioned in the Ḥadīth, only a region. Since the others have a distinct tribal identity, often outside the region (e.g. the Rashīdīs as Kindīs originate from Yemen) from the other angle, the region of Najd is symbolic of the House of Saʿūd who have lived there and currently rule there. From there they spread out and contaminated the Ḥijāz.

 

The people of Qaṭar too are not native to their present land. Three centuries ago the tribe of Banū Tamīm left Najd for Qaṭar where they reside to this day. Although, like any other tribe, there are Tamīmīs scattered throughout the modern world, it is only in Qaṭar that they form a cohesive tribal unit ruling over an independent land. The ruling family, the Āl Thānī, is descended from Qaʿqaʿ bin ʿAmr at-Tamīmī, who fought under Khālid bin al-Walīd (may Allāh be pleased with him) at Yarmūk. (On a side note, it irks me when journalists and even scholars cannot distinguish between al (the) and āl or aal (family of). That laymen do not know that it is Sūrah Āl ʿImrān not al-ʿImrān is understandable. For the learned not to exercise their brains is another matter). In short the ʾĀl Saʿūd are identified with Najd whilst Qaṭarīs have a primary tribal identity, documented right to the era of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ , the Banū Tamīm, which can be separated from the residential or regional identity.

 

Two Ḥadīths

 

There is a Ḥadīth related to Najd. It is narrated by ʾal-ʾImām ʾal-Bukhārī under the Chapter of Fitan (tribulations before the end of the world). It speaks of the region in relation to the tribulations, not any tribe, i.e. whilst Kindah, Tamīm and many other tribes may have passed through at various stages in history, the prophecy refers to certain people who actually inhabit Najd at the time of the tribulations. If Allāh wills these tribulations to be contemporary to our times, then there can be only one candidate the Ḥadīth refers to – the ʾĀl Saʿūd. Tamīm has vacated Najd. The Ḥadīth is as follows:

 

حدثنا علي بن عبد الله حدثنا أزهر بن سعد عن ابن عون عن نافع عن ابن عمر قال ذكر النبي صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ اللهم بارك لنا في شأمنا اللهم بارك لنا في يمننا قالوا يا رسول الله وفي نجدنا قال اللهم بارك لنا في شأمنا اللهم بارك لنا في يمننا قالوا يا رسول الله وفي نجدنا فأظنه قال في الثالثة هناك الزلازل والفتن وبها يطلع قرن الشيطان

ʿAbdullāh bin ʿUmar (may Allāh be pleased with father and son) narrates that the Prophet صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  prayed, “O Allāh! Bless us in our Syria, O Allāh bless us in our Yemen.”

“O Allāh’s Messenger!” exclaimed [some people from Najd], “And in our Najd!”

[The Prophet صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  again] prayed, “O Allāh! Bless us in our Syria, O Allāh bless us in our Yemen.”

“O Allāh’s Messenger!” [they again] exclaimed, “And in our Najd!”

I [Ibn ʿUmar] think it was after the third time that he replied, “Over there will be tremors and tribulations. Over there does Satan’s horn rise.” [al-Bukhārī]

 

Syria is to the north of ʾal-Ḥijāz, while Yemen is to the south. She has no western neighbour, other than the Red Sea. Najd, to the east, was intentionally omitted from the prayer of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ . What does that tell you?

 

On the other hand, what does the Ḥadīth say of Banū Tamīm, i.e. the Qaṭārīs? ʿAl-Bukhārī narrates the following as well, in ʿal-Maghāzī :

عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه قال لا أزال أحب بني تميم بعد ثلاث سمعته من رسول الله صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  يقولها فيهم هم أشد أمتي على الدجال وكانت فيهم سبية عند عائشة فقال أعتقيها فإنها من ولد إسماعيل وجاءت صدقاتهم فقال هذه صدقات قومي

Abū Hurayrah (may Allāh be pleased with him) states:

I have always loved the Banū Tamīm since I heard Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  saying three things about them. “They will be the severest of my nation against Dajjāl.” Furthermore ʿĀishah had a captive from amongst them. So he said, “Free her, for she is from the descendants of Ismāʿīl.” When their charity arrived, he said, “These are the charities of my people.” [al-Bukhārī]

 

So there you have it. The people from where Satan’s horn rises have imposed a blockade on those who will be the severest against the Anti-Christ, the descendants of ʾIsmāʿīl (peace be upon him), the people of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ .

 

• Is it not Satanic for supposed Muslims to cut off the food of other Muslims during Ramaḍān of all times?


• Is it not Satanic to expel Muslims, separating mixed families, father from children, husbands from wives?


• Is it not Satanic to threaten 15 years imprisonment for those who express sympathy for their brethren in Qaṭār? (To be fair it is their ally, UAE)

Or are these Saʿūdī acts, sometimes I forget the difference between Satan and Saʿūd…

Track Record

 

I have no right to impose my interpretation of Ḥadīth on others (unlike some people), you may disagree, as long you do not endanger your faith by disputing Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  himself. Yet I would dare suggest that if you are honest and look at recent history it should be clear as to who wears the badge of Satan’s horn and who opposes the forces of the Anti-Christ.

 

Most certainly we can find fault with Qaṭārīs, as we can find in ourselves. Yet on the balance, Qaṭār is a nation which assists the poor and their shortcomings are human shortcomings, not deliberate assaults against Islām and Muslims, which their neighbours are guilty of.

 

The ʾUmmah has remained silent for far too long. It is close to a century now that Makkah and al-Madīnah have had to endure the Saʿūd rule initiated with the shedding of Muslim blood and the deliberate obstruction of the effort to revive the Khilāfah which the Turks had just abandoned. Also, who amongst the educated did not know that they were in the pay of the British? These should have been warning signals, but that was another generation. It may be that they had no full information and being under colonial rule, were desperate for any ruler who claimed the banner of Islām.

 

But that was then. Time has moved on and news is no longer the privilege of a few.

Yet the Saʿūd slavery to American interests was now known but overlooked.

The princes’ spending the Ummah’s wealth on gambling and prostitution was overlooked.

The utter destruction of the Islāmic heritage was overlooked.

The imprisonment and torture of opposition figures, including scholars were overlooked.

The deliberate interference amongst foreign Muslim communities in their Masājid, instead of inviting non-Muslims to Islām, was overlooked.

The deliberate ritualisation of Ḥajj and the segregation of Muslim for the first time were overlooked.

The inviting of Christian and Jewish troops to tramp on the sacred soil of Arabia was overlooked.

That not even extremist Shīʿah rulers had had the guts to disobey that final command of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  was overlooked.

The collaboration in overthrowing the only pious ruler modern Egypt has known and was democratically elected was overlooked.

The funding of Pharaoh Mubārak and Pharaoh Sīsī to help the Zionist besiege Ghazzah was overlooked.

Thus the deaths in Ghazzah resulting from the Saʿūdī-Egyptian siege were overlooked.

 

Now as we approach the century mark, our leaders will overlook the assault on another Muslim people whom Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  has praised. They are assaulted not by America or the Zionists, but by the “Custodian” of the Ḥaramayn.

 

Why? They do not have the same excuse as the previous generations. The reality is that Saʿūdī petrodollars and visas buy their silence. Just how much will Saʿūdī petrodollars and visas help them in their graves?

 

May Allāh bless Shaykh Salmān an-Nadwī, who has fearlessly denounced the Satanists err.. Saʿūdīs.

 

I shall not say, “Enough is enough!” That time passed by years ago. If your only concern when visiting the Ḥaramayn is which is the best perfume and clothing shops, then I can only pray that at least the Qaṭar siege will make you a more sensitised slave of Allāh.

 

سليمان الكندي

Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi

 

Biography of Allah’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ in 29 Nights with Podcasts (1-10)

Herewith my notes for the Sīrah discussion I intend giving this year after Tarāwīḥ, Allāh willing. If we had all the time in the world we could not do justice to the greatest personality that ever walked the face of the earth. Yet in view of the lack of knowledge on the basics of his life by the general public I am using this platform for this purpose, on the premise that one can only truly love someone if one knows that person. As long as we are ignorant about the life and character of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ    our love for him cannot be as complete as it could be.

سليمان الكندي
Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi

Contents

1. The World Before Islam.. 3


2. Lineage. 3


3. Birth of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ 3


4. Childhood. 4


5. Youth. 4


6. Marriage. 4


7. Revelation. 5


8. Preaching. 5


9. Opposition & Migration (year 6). 6


10. The Boycott years (7-9). 7

 

1.     The World Before Islam

• “A bounty is appreciated when its lost.” To appreciate the light of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ understand the darkness before and what we would be in today without him.


• State of the Arabs.


• Byzantium and Persia, the superpowers of the day.


• Yemen, under Persia, land of maternal ancestry of Quraysh.


• Kaʿbah, its origins and origins of idolatry. Do Muslims worship the Kaʿbah?


• ʾIbrāhīm and ʾIsmāʿīl ʿalayhimas salām.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-001-the-world-before-islam

2.     Lineage

• ʾIbrāhīm and ʾIsmāʿīl ʿalayhimas salām.


• Jurhum of Yemen.


• Banū Khuzāʿah. Migrated to Makkah 5 centuries before Islā Quṣṣāy married woman of Khuzāʿah, hence generations later allied with Muslims, ultimately conquest of Makkah. Tafsīr of Sūrah Sajdah – destined matters are set in a thread of motion a thousand years before.


• Hāshim married woman of Yathrib, where his son, Shaybah = ʿAbdul Muṭṭalib grew up.


• Zamzam lost and found.


• Year of the Elephant. Delicacy of Arabic - ʿĀmul Fīl, NOT Sannatul Fīl.


• Abraha and the Elephants.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-002-lineage-of-rasulullah-sallallahu-alayhi-wa-sallam

3.     Birth of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

• Makkah, 570, Exact date not absolutely known.


• Most narrations of miracles at birth are not authentically proven, except for the light which Aminah saw that extended all the way to Syria.


• The four “mothers” of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  . Abū Lahab frees Thuwaybiyah, as a result his punishment is alleviated in Hell. One moment of love is eternally rewarded, how then if a Muslim is steadfast in Sunnah?


• Name – almost unique amongst the Arabs.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-003-birth

4.     Childhood

• Never saw his father, ʿAbdullāh died during the pregnancy period.


• Quraysh sent their children to be raised in the desert – for health reasons and to learn pure Arabic.


• Banū Saʿd bin Bakr – a tribe which specialised in this kind of child rearing. Spoke the purest of Arabic and Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ later attributed his amazing eloquence to them. Experiencing drought.


• Ḥalīmah as-Saʿdīyah i.e. of Banū Sʿad, accompanied wet-nurses of her tribe to Makkah. All rejected Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ due to his perceived poverty. Ḥalīmah turned back and accepted custody as a last resort and immediately perceived blessings. Her old goat started producing milk again. Her riding animal became fast.


• Asked Āminah for an extension at age 2.


• At age 4 Jibrīl opened his chest and removed black spot from heart. Returned to Āminah.


• Age 6, Āminah dies at ʾAbwā. Umm ʾAyman takes him back to ʾAbdul Muṭṭalib.


• Age 8, ʿAbdul Muṭṭalib dies. Entrusted to Abū Ṭālib, the poorest of all the uncles.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-004-childhood

5.     Youth

• Teenage years spent as a shepherd.


• Allāh created circumstances e.g. fainting/ barriers against the customs of the time e.g. parties, working naked.


• Ḥilful Fuḍūl – oath to protect the oppressed. Al-Āṣ bin Wāʾil refused to pay the Zubaydī merchant from Yemen. Decent men gathered around ʾAbdullāh bin Jadʿān to halt such practice, including Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ . He was happy about this oath even after Islām, i.e. good can be done with non-Muslim cooperation.


• Learnt trade from Abū Ṭālib in Syria, but the incident of meeting the monk is denied by several scholars.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-005-youth

6.     Marriage

• Khadījah bint Khuwaylid, may Allāh be pleased with her, twice-widowed and had considerable wealth. Had children from her first husband. She is called aṭ-Ṭāhirah, the Pure Woman and her descendants are Banū Ṭāhirah


• Hired Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   to sell her merchandise in Syria.


• She was so impressed with his ability, honesty and character that she proposed to him, a poor man, having rejected the proposals of the elite of Makkah.


• Muḥammad صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   was 25 and she was 40. He was not worried about her age, he loved her character.


• She bore all his children except for ʾIbrāhīm son of Māriyah


• At age 35 Kaʿbah was destroyed by flood. The various clans argued who would replace the Black Stone. Agreed that whoever entered Masjid first could decide.


• Honour of even pagans. No Ḥarām funds allowed at the insistence of the worst pagan, Abū Jahl. So Kaʾbah was shortened to its present dimensions when Ḥalāl funds were depleted.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-006-marriage

7.     Revelation

• When Muḥammad صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   approached his 40^th year he began to feel an intense spiritual agitation and desire to worship in seclusion.


• Rocks greeted him and years later he remembered a particular rock. How then if we greet him with love?


• For 6 months before Ramaḍān he experienced true dreams.


• Monday during that Ramaḍān, first revelation, Cave of Ḥirāʾ in Mount Nūr.


• Darkness, Jibrīl’s form was not seen. Squeezed Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  thrice so hard he thought he was going to die.


• Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   was anxious and it was our Mother, Khadījah raḍiyallāhu ʿanhā who comforted him at this critical juncture. She mentions his good character, not his ritual worship, e.g. assist the less fortunate, hospitable to guests, etc


• No further revelation for a while, people mocked, that his “demon” had abandoned him. In other words ,he was the first person to be tested.


• Khadījah raḍiyallāhu ʿanhā, took him to her cousin, the Christian monk, Waraqah bin Nawfal, who testified to his truth and that he would be persecuted. He died shortly thereafter and is known to enter Paradise.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-007-revelation

8.     Preaching

• Quiet preaching at the outset for three years. Most early coverts were poor, e.g. Bilāl, but also rich, e.g. ʿUthmān, may Allah be pleased with him.


• Invited his close relations to meals and preached to them, only ʾAlī, who was a child, accepted.


• First public preaching at Abū Qubays. Abū Lahab threw sand and cursed, “May you be destroyed for the rest of your day.” Sūrah Lahab revealed in response.


• Continuous preaching at all public venues - Kaʿbah, markets etc.


• Quraysh attempt to stop Muḥammad صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   through Abū Ṭālib, offering him wealth, kingship and women. Rasūlullāh صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ     responds, “O my uncle, were they to place the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, and ask me to abandon this course, I would not turn from it until Allāh makes it victorious or I perish therein.”

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/voice-002-sd1

9.     Opposition & Migration (year 6)

• Quraysh attempted various means to stop Islām. Shouting so that the Qurʾān could not be heard. Propaganda, telling people that Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ    was insane and should not be heard. Seeking advice from the Jews on how to combat him academically, (Sūrah Yūsuf and Sūrah Kahf).


• Al-Bazzār narrates: ʾAlī رضي الله عنه continued, “Indeed I saw the Quraysh grabbing Rasūlullāh صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   . One held him while another violently shook him. They were saying, ‘You are the one who made the gods one!’ By Allāh! None of us dared go near except Abū Bakr. He struck at one of them, pulled back another and shook another, whilst saying, ‘Woe unto you! Do you kill a man for saying my Lord is Allāh?’”


• Torture – Bilāl رضي الله عنه dragged through the streets. Beaten.


• Khabbāb رضي الله عنه branded with heated iron.


• Ṭalḥah رضي الله عنه seen dragged through the streets of Makkah as a young man. A woman was the most severe in abusing him. A foreigner asked who she was, it was his own mother.


• Sumayyah رضي الله عنها  the first martyr. Abū Jahl speared her through her private part.


• Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   gave permission to the persecuted Muslims to migrate to Abysinnia, Ḥabshah, Ethiopia. 15 Muslims migrated the first time,e.g. ʿUthmān.


• Negus, an-Najāshī, title of the Emperor, not name.


• Christian ruler known for his justice.


• They returned after 3 months, heard false rumour that the Quraysh accepted Islā


• Some accepted protection of Quraysh leaders.


• 2^nd migration was more than 70. This time the Quraysh sent a delegation under Amr bin al-ʿĀṣ to retrieve the “rebels and trouble makers”


• Jaʿfar bin Abī Ṭālib defended the Muslim position. He had refused the Quraysh example of bowing before the Emperor.


• His speech is lauded by scholars as the one of the best concise and comprehensive invitations to Islām


• فقال له جعفر: أيها الملك كنا قوما على الشرك نعبد الاوثان ونأكل الميتة ونسئ الجوار، يستحل المحارم بعضنا من بعض في سفك الدماء وغيرها، لا نحل شيئا ولا نحرمه.
  فبعث الله إلينا نبيا من أنفسنا نعرف وفاءه وصدقه وأمانته فدعانا إلى أن نعبد الله وحده لا شريك له ونصل الارحام ونحمي الجوار ونصلي لله عزوجل، ونصوم له، ولا نعبد غيره.،


• “O King! We were a people upon polytheism. We worshipped idols and ate carrion. We forgot our neighbours and regarded the unlawful as lawful, in that we shed each other’s blood amongst other things. We had no real concept of the permitted and the prohibited. Allāh then sent a Prophet unto us. We knew his loyalty, honesty and trustworthiness. He called us to worship God alone, without any partners; to maintain relations; to protect neighbours; that we pray unto God, fast for His sake, worshipping none but Him.” [Ibn Hishām]


• The Emperor granted the Muslims protection and evicted the Quraysh delegation with their gifts. It is probable that he died upon Islā Rasūlullāh صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ   performed the funeral of a Negus although the body was in another continent. It is probable that this was a second Negus and both were Muslims.

https://soundcloud.com/sulayman-kindi/seerah-009-opposition

10.                        The Boycott years (7-9)

• ʿUmar bin ʾal-Khaṭṭāb, arch-enemy of Islām becomes great defender of Islām, Dārul ʾArqam. First public cry of Takbīr which is how Muslims express joy. Not hand-clapping and other pagan customs.


• Abū Jahl led the Quraysh to impose a boycott on Banū Hāshim which would last three years.


• They were not allowed food, drink, trade, marriage with other clans, and went into exile in the Glen of Abū Ṭālib.


• Non-Muslim Hāshimīs maintained solidarity and accepted exile as well, excluding Abū Lahab.


• Banū Muṭṭalib voluntarily joined Banū Hāshim. Some laws of Sharīʿah remain specific to Banū Hāshim and Banū Muṭṭalib.


• Extreme hunger, eating leaves.


• Muṭʿim bin ʿAdī and others used to smuggle in some food.


• Eventually Zuhayr, son of Ātikah bint ʿAbdil Muṭṭalib led some Quraysh to tear up the boycott decree. Allāh had already sent termites to eat the document, excluding, “Bismikallāhumma”

https://youtu.be/HqPsp5GeO64

و صلى الله على راكب البراق كامل الأخلاق

Proposal at the Kaʿbah, Are there Fiancés in Islām?

عمران بن حصين قال قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم الحياء لا يأتي إلا بخير

"Modesty brings nothing but good" [al-Bukhari]

Thanks to Allāh, my health has improved and basics like ablution and prayer are no longer such physically taxing mountains to overcome several times daily. I however delayed writing on a few topics I had in mind, since I had applied to write for a UK based blog. More important than the financial remuneration offered, I thought that being part of a systematic structure would be beneficial to me. However, it seems that swimming in a stream of rejection is my medicine for cleaning the heart of arrogance.

Today I read a tweet by a brother, “What are your thoughts about a Turkish man proposing to his fiance in front of the Ka’bah. Is respect being lost?”

I hit the reply button, “Why have you called her fiancé even before the proposal?”

He thereupon tweeted, “I haven’t. This is what a newspaper where I got the story from described her as”

My reply was, “The newspaper should check that fiancé is male and fiancée is female” “more importantly, terms create reality. Islamically they had no relation. We need not copy west in Islamic media.”

Petty Issues are symptoms of Broader Issues

If a certain dear friend of mine should read the above, he would berate me, “Are there no bigger matters for you to concern yourself with? Why do you nit-pick like this?” (His name I shall not mention, but shall indicate him by his vowel deprived birth place of Hrvatska – hint, hint).

To me there are enough people addressing “the important issues”. Besides which, there are not many who explain the link between the “petty issues” and the “bigger issues” at play.

Terms create Reality

I have written several times on this point. The words we use help create perceptions and ultimately new realities. See for example, my article on calling Palestine, “Israel”. Yet with the copy-and-paste attitude of Muslim media, one sadly notes Muslims calling al-Ḥaram ash-Sharīf in Baytul Muqaddas, “The Temple Mount”, for example. They never pause to consider the broader issues and the role they are playing in removing our claim to our sacred place.

So what is the big deal of saying “fiancé” whether before or after the proposal? In itself, as a simple description of a man and woman intending to marry each other, it is merely a word of identification. That is not a problem, for that is what the dictionary says. However, my gripe is with the unislāmic social conventions attached to the term, and which have become institutionalised amongst us as well.

Imitating Non-believers

Firstly, the issue of Tashabbuh bil Kuffār (imitating the non-believers), an issue which Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  and the jurists discussed at length, seems to have entirely disappeared as a matter of concern from present day Muslims - scholars and the masses. Where does the concept having a fiancé as an institutionalised norm originate from? Is the custom of prolonged “engagements” even compatible with the Sunnah? Would we even need to describe someone as a fiancé or fiancée if we adhere to the Sunnah instead of alien social norms?

Fiancé is not an empty term. It is a word used by the non-Muslims to indicate an entire social condition which is anathema to Islām. An Islamic wedding is simple both in implementation and expenditure. Beyond the social customs and financial extravagance of the engagement (which Muslims are so eager to ape) being a fiancé in practice becomes a licence to take liberties of marriage, which Islām does not condone before the actual marriage transaction. How many of the customs, parties and extravagances which occur between the proposal and the wedding have any Islāmic sanction, and how many anger Allāh, thus depriving the couple of blessings?

On one level, Muslims imitate the non-Muslims in discarding the laws of Ḥijāb and seize the term fiancé as a justification. They would date and say, “She is my fiancée!” A woman is either a stranger who should be respected with all the applicable laws and barriers of ḤIjāb, or she is your legally married wife and partner. Where in Islām is there scope for this intermediate stage of fornication on whatever level? By using the terms of unislamic immodesty, we help create an atmosphere where it becomes socially acceptable.

On an even more extreme level, accepting fiancé as an institution is already leading to the western way of the engaged couple living together before the marriage. She is my fiancée, we are living together to save expenses and to get to know each other.

I try to keep abreast of global developments. Yet I must confess to be completely taken aback to read on that when Prince William of the UK married his “fiancée” they had already been living together. Not that I do not know that it happens, but somehow I expected more from the future head of the Anglican Church. Yet it was not the immodesty which shocked me, it was the blasé manner in which the British media mentioned it, it was so normal. This is what I fear for us, not that we sin, but that our hearts accept this as normal.

Going to the Kaʿbah and proposing, which would entail so many violations of Ḥijāb (e.g. travel), is simply an extension of the license Muslims have illegally allowed couples who are “engaged” or have indicated that their dating will lead to marriage. By allowing respect to unmarried couples because “she is his fiancée,” we all share responsibility in this disrespect shown at the Kaʿbah.

Polytheism in Legislation

Another concept which many Muslims are no longer bothered about is ash-Shirk fit-Tashrīʿ (ascribing partners unto Allāh in the right of legislation). A man and woman who fornicate but acknowledge that it is a sin, remain Allāh’s sinful slaves and the doors of repentance are open unto them, however much the self-righteous judge them. On the other hand, someone who defends the right of couples “to express their love” before marriage (fornicate), even if he does not do the deed himself, has challenged Allāh’s right to sole-legislation, and is in a much worse spiritual plight than the actual fornicator.

There is a growing disease of Muslims having divorced, but remaining together, because “what will people say?” I unfortunately know such couples. Justifying such adulterous cohabitation is worse than the act of the adultery. However, the process of desensitising the couple’s aversion to adultery begins when their families are happy to let them defy Ḥijāb, “because we are fiancé and fiancée.”

Ḥijāb of Words

Ḥijāb is not just how we dress or even interact with each other, but the lives of the Companions of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  teach us modesty of the mind and words. A most beautiful example is that of the wife of ʿAbdullāh bin ʿAmr bin al-ʿĀṣ, may Allāh be pleased with them.

ʿAbdullāh رضي الله عنه  was devoted to his worship and was not inclined to marriage. His father, ʿAmr رضي الله عنه, eventually got him married. ʿAmr رضي الله عنه  visited his new daughter-in-law, may Allāh be pleased with her, to enquire how she was being treated. She replied, “He is a pious man. He spends the day fasting and the night praying.”

ʿAmr exploded in rage and complained to Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  against his son.

Er…. Did I miss something? Yes, the lady was being so modest yet eloquent, most of us who do not give account on what words should and should not be used, would miss the point. She had in fact most respectfully and modesty, yet honestly, indicated to her father-in-law, that she was a woman with human needs. With her husband who fasted the entire day and prayed the entire night, there was no opportunity for satisfying her natural desire.

Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  advised the young man to exercise a balance and to fulfil the rights of all.

Those who were present when the Word of Allāh was revealed, understood that the words we use have an effect. If we are to institutionalise immodest terms amongst ourselves, especially when it implies so much more, we allow for immodesty to become the norm.

سليمان الكندي
Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi

Crusader ʿAkkā vs Zionist Ghazzah

المؤمنون كرجل واحد إن اشتكى رأسه تداعى له سائر الجسد بالحمى والسهر

ʾan-Nuʿmābin Bashīr (may Allāh be pleased with him) narrates that Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ said, “The believers are like a single body. When his head complains, the entire body mutually calls out to him with fever and lack of sleep.”  [Muslim]

There are many striking parallels between the Crusades, almost a millennium ago, and the current situation in Palestine. To mention but a few:

• The geography


• The suppression of ʾIslām


• The role of scholars in reviving ʾIslām’s fortunes e.g. ʿAlī bin Ṭāhir as-Sulamī (may Allāh’s mercy be upon him)


• Treason of the Rawāfiḍ


• Treason of supposedly Sunnī rulers who aligned with the Crusaders against ʾIslām (Damascus princes then, Egypt and the Saʿūd royals today)

A comparison I wish to highlight today, is the contemporary Zionist siege of Ghazzah, vs. the Crusader siege of ʿAkkā (Acre).

ʿAkkā

Ever since its conquest by the Noble Companion of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  , Suraḥbīl bin Ḥasanah (may Allāh be pleased with him), ʿAkkā had played a distinguished role in the history of ʾIslām, not least because of its position as a strategic port in the north of Palestine.

Following his decisive victory at Ḥiṭṭīn (4^th July 1187), the Crusaders surrendered ʿAkkā to Ṣalāḥuddīn. However, on 28^th August 1189, King Guy surprise attacked ʿAkkā and laid siege to it. On the sea, the siege was supported by Sicily (Italians), Danes and Frisians (Dutch). On land, troops from France, Flanders (Belgium), Germany, Italy and Armenia added to the Crusader host.

Attempted Relief

Ṣalāḥuddīn arrived with the Muslim army on 4^th October and unsuccessfully attempted to break the siege. The Muslims were repulsed by the combined armies of Europe and the Ṣulṭān had to settle for pressuring the Crusaders by laying siege to them in turn. His fleet did however manage to break through and supply the besieged Muslims with food on the 30^th October.

Crusaders are further reinforced

Ṣalāḥuddīn desperately tried to save the Muslims for 8 months, but was unsuccessful. Worse was to come from July 1190, when the armies of England, France, Germany and Austria even further strengthened the Crusaders. The following year even more troops arrived with the kings of France (Philip) and England (Richard). On the 12^th July 1191 ʿAkkā surrendered and the flags of England, France and Austria flew over the city.

Massacre

On the 11^th August 1191 Ṣālāḥuddīn sent the first of three payments to ransom the Muslim prisoners held by the Crusaders. This was not fast enough for Richard. 9 days later he ordered 3000 Muslims to be sent to a hill called Ayyadieh. This was deliberately in full view of the Muslim camp, and in particular, Ṣalāḥuddīn’s headquarters. The Crusaders then proceeded to cold-bloodedly massacre the defenceless Muslims. Of course, Muslims are always terrorists, the ruthless barbarians who kill us are always the good guys.

The horrified Muslim warriors could see this bloodbath with their own eyes, this was no CNN broadcast. What emotion swept them, I cannot pretend to describe. They had fought close to two years to rescue their brethren. They had spent that time away from family and seen comrades fall to the enemy. The enemy had given its word and now causally killed 3,000 Muslim men, women and children. The broken Muslims attempted a final rescue but never made it up the hill. Allāh knows best how many joined the 3,000 martyrs in Paradise.

Tears vs Tweets

History records that ever since his repentance from his youthful lifestyle, Ṣalāhuddīn prayed every compulsory prayer 5 times daily with congregation, never alone. In addition, he never missed a single Tahajjud (optional night prayer). This was his constant lifestyle on the battlefield and on the rare occasion when he went home. History also records that his tender nature could not bear to see his Christian enemy suffer, let alone his fellow Muslims. Beyond the sweet pious Ṣultān, I would not venture to know how many Muslims spent the night after the massacre shedding tears. However many they may have been, they were certainly less than the tweets and retweets we emotionlessly broadcast in a few minutes. Yet, however few they may have been, I would dare venture that each tear was well received in the Divine Court, along with each drop of blood shed at Ayyadieh.

So how do contemporary Muslims react?

Ghazzah, the southern Palestinian port, receives a different reaction from contemporary Muslims as opposed to the reaction of our forebears to ʿAkkā, the northern Palestinian port. For one, no Muslim army has as yet been despatched to rescue Ghazzah, despite her siege being way longer than that of ʿAkkā. Of course, the sophisticated Muslim will be able to educate me on the realities of modern politics and enlighten me why that would be a naïve endeavour. Yes, I am not sophisticated, but what is quite simple for me to understand is that ʿAkkā was besieged by those who openly disbelieved in Allāh and His Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  , while Ghazzah is besieged by those who claim to be Muslim!

It is utterly hypocritical of the Muslim ʾUmmah at large, and activists in particular, to condemn and campaign against the Jewish blockade to the north, and quietly ignore their allies, the Egyptians, who besiege Ghazzah from the south.

Very easy to condemn the Zionist enemy, but no Muslim state, organisation or institute mention Sisi’s blockade, which is financed by the other Satanic regime of the region, the House of Saʿūd. How disgusted would the scholars who accompanied Ṣalāḥuddīn on his campaigns be, if they had known that the scholars of today either actively whip up support for these two murderous regimes, or maintain a “pious” silence for fear of losing financial backing or not being allowed an annual visa to Arabia. Their finances and annual pilgrimages take priority over speaking the truth and liberating the holy cities from regimes hostile to Islām. Perhaps I am wrong and there is great virtue and priority in multiple pilgrimages, when so many Muslims are starving, being killed and are besieged. Our contemporary scholars will be able to boast of their elevated position on the Day of Resurrection, and look down on Ṣalāhuddīn. Ṣalāḥuddīn, never knew a time to rest to even perform the compulsory pilgrimage, let alone annual voluntary pilgrimages. These scholars should also strongly rebuke the scholars who fought alongside Ṣalāḥuddīn, such as Qāḍī Bahāʾuddīn, or those who advised him, such as the Muḥaddith, ʾIbn ʿAsākir, for allowing him to fight for the sake of Islām and Muslim lives, instead of going on annual pilgrimages. Silly fellows!

Instead of rescuing Ghazzah, Egypt and her Saʿūdī paymasters actively besiege Ghazzah, to the extent of destroying Palestinian crops. To the eternal shame of Islām! There may have been other stinking traitors in the history of Islām, but I know not of anything as shameless as the Egypt-Saʿūd surrender. So enthusiastic as they are they to besiege Ghazzah, that Egypt joyfully evicts thousands of her own citizens along the Ghazzah border and allocates 79 square km of the lands of Islām to further tighten the noose around the Muslims of Ghazzah! For shame! And shame on the Muslims who remain quiet on this! Ghazzah vs ʿAkkā? There is no comparison.

You smugly declare that you do not buy dates from occupied Palestine, but do not care that your own Muslim governments stop food from Ghazzah.

You righteously tweet that unlike some Muslims, you do not buy a Jewish owned iced coffee powder, but do not care that your own Muslim governments stop medicine from Ghazzah.

Food? Medicine? A welfare worker told me that so many people are maimed in Ghazzah, they begged him to try and bring them adult diapers as they no longer have control over their bodies. Of course, your time-shares in Makkah and your shopping sprees there for the latest “Islamic” fashion and perfumes should always have priority.

Your forebears  at ʿAkkā should not spit on you. You are not worthy of their of their spit.

سليمان الكندي
Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi

Junaid Jamshed & Muslim Social Media

 

حَدِيثٌ : " كَفَى بِالْمَرْءِ كَذِبًا أَنْ يُحَدِّثَ بِكُلِّ مَا سَمِعَ " ، مسلم في مقدمة صحيحه من حديث شعبة عن خُبيب بن عبد الرحمن عن حفص بن عاصم عن أبي هريرة به مرفوعا

Abū Hurayrah (May Allāh be pleased with him) narrated that Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  said, “It is enough of a lie against a man that he should narrate whatever he hears. ” [Muslim]

 

This article is not about the life, personality, status and achievements of Junaid Jamshed. Those matters can easily be found elsewhere, and those who read my blog would recognise that I prefer dealing with topics which are less mentioned or not at mentioned at all, e.g. the Satanic entity that rules Makkah and al-Madīnah.

Jamshed’s accomplishments are well known and his reward lies with Allāh. What I wish to address are certain observations of Muslim behaviour which came to the fore when he died.

We first verify and we do not narrate everything

 

I had only read the headline that a PIA aircraft had crashed, when a brother announced that he had received a Whatsapp message from his wife, announcing the death of Junaid Jamshed. I respectfully asked him to withhold spreading such news until it had been verified, on the possibility that the news may not be correct. He agreed, but within a few minutes, again repeatedly announced is news to others. “Fortunately” for him the misfortune proved to be tragically true. I say “fortunately” in that at least he was saved from the sin of spreading false news.

This habit is unfortunately a very common one amongst people who are otherwise religious. The habit of immediately jumping and spreading every item of news is a characteristic of hypocrites, but  has infected the believers as well.

وَإِذَا جَاءهُمْ أَمْرٌ مِّنَ الأَمْنِ أَوِ الْخَوْفِ أَذَاعُواْ بِهِ وَلَوْ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى الرَّسُولِ وَإِلَى أُوْلِي الأَمْرِ مِنْهُمْ لَعَلِمَهُ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَنبِطُونَهُ مِنْهُمْ وَلَوْلاَ فَضْلُ اللّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَتُهُ لاَتَّبَعْتُمُ الشَّيْطَانَ إِلاَّ قَلِيل

And if any news, whether of safety or fear, come unto [the hypocrites], they broadcast it, whereas if they had referred it to the Messenger and such of them as are in authority, those among them who are able to think out the matter would have known it. If it had not been for the grace of Allah and His mercy you would have followed Satan, except a few (of you).[an-Nisā: 83]

A believer refers delicate news to the relevant authority. Consider:

• What if the news had been false, as is with so many broadcasts on social media?


• The emotional trauma upon the close ones of Junaid Jamshed hearing the news from strangers on social media, whereas Islām prescribes delicacy in the way news of death must be conveyed to the family of the deceased. Refer to Amongst the Etiquettes of Islām by Shaykh Abdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghuddah. We have become uncouth and unthinking people in our slavery to push buttons without reflection of the consequences.


• The lust to speak without thinking is a spiritual disease which harms oneself and society. Even if the news is true, what is the harm in obeying the below command of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ and letting someone receive the news a bit later?

عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه ، عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : من كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر ، فليقل خيرا أو ليصمت ، ومن كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر ، فليكرم جاره ، ومن كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر ، فليكرم ضيفه رواه البخاري ومسلم

 

Abū Hurayrah (May Allāh be pleased with him narrated that Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  said, “He who believes in Allāh and the Last Day should speak good or remain silent…” [Al-Bukhārī & Muslim]

 

• A believer guards his tongue or his smartphone and computer button as the case may be in this age. Even true news should not be broadcast simply for the sake of broadcasting. Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ said, “It is enough of a lie against a man that he should narrate whatever he hears. ”

A scholar who occupies a responsible position in a well-known Islāmic institute was a student during the time that it was announced that Usāmah bin Lādin had been slain. I did use Twitter at the time, despite him trying to convince me. He then argued that amongst the virtues of Twitter is that a Pakistani witness had been tweeting what he had been seeing even before institutionalised media had broadcast the news. So to him, accepting the news of some unknown man who did not even understand what he was seeing and spreading it without verification, is a virtue. Truly the world has gone insane when the learned regard contravention of Ḥadīth principles as virtue.

Love of Name and Fame

 

Why do we engage in hasty reporting when such behaviour is clearly contrary to the commands of Allāh and His Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  ? Each person’s outlook is different and there may be several motivating factors, but I contend that Riyā and Ḥubbul Jāh (ostentation and love of fame and status) are major motivating factors. Decades ago it was said that everyone will have “15 minutes of fame” as a consequence of the forms of the then new media and technology. So much has social media proliferated, that people now crave their mere 15 seconds of fame. There is just so much information overload and so many platforms, who gets an entire 15 minutes? People are unwilling to pause or even remain silent on a news item which they think that their circle may be unaware of. The anxious desire to spread news and be famous for being the one who did it first, is a sad hankering after the world, and for many, may well be within the ambit of the warning of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ :

يقول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: ( ما ذئبان جائعان أرسلا في غنم, بأفسد لها من حرص المرء على المال والشرف لدينه )رواه أحمد

“Two hungry wolves set loose amongst goats are not as detrimental to the flock as what a man’s greed for wealth and status [fame] is to his religion.” [Aḥmad]

Another indication of the love of fleeting fame is the amount of people, who during a sad time immediately following the tragedy, took to social media to post photographs (remember that word?) of themselves posing with Junaid Jamshed. That this included scholars amongst their ranks, is a tragedy in itself. I doubt if these people can give a conscious reply as to their motivation, for those who use social media irresponsibly do not think, they just press the button. Subconsciously however, what motivation can there be other than the craving to glean off the fame of Junaid Jamshed. Juristic arguments against unneeded depiction of the human form are simply out-dated cobwebbed thinking to the one who in effect says, “Hey! See who I was buddies with, I too am famous.”

What possible valid reason can there be if ostensibly you are expressing grief? You are so grief stricken that you have time to search, link and post your pic? Are you proving your love? That must be a real flimsy love if you now need pictorial evidence. To who is the message? Junaid? Is he reading your tweets? To his family? Is our social fabric so ruined that mourning families spend their time playing with social media instead of praying for the deceased? If you are indeed so close, surely a more personal avenue exists to communicate with the family. No, the message is to the world, that you too are famous.

Personality Cults

 

وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ أَفَإِن مَّاتَ أَوْ قُتِلَ انقَلَبْتُمْ عَلَى أَعْقَابِكُمْ وَمَن يَنقَلِبْ عَلَىَ عَقِبَيْهِ فَلَن يَضُرَّ اللّهَ شَيْئًا وَسَيَجْزِي اللّهُ الشَّاكِرِينَ

Muhammad is but a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) have passed away before him. Will it be that, when he dies or is slain, you will turn back on your heels? He who turns back does no harm to Allah. Soon Allāh will reward the grateful ones. [Āl Imrān: 144]

 

Upon the demise Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  , even such a great personality like Umar (may Allāh be pleased with him) was too overwhelmed with grief to think clearly. It took one greater than him, Abū Bakr (may Allāh be pleased with him) to put matters in perspective, by reciting the above Verse.

The good deeds of Junaid Jamshed is a matter of public record and we hope that he receives an excellent reward from the Most Generous.  However, the rude silence of Muslim social media, and also formal media, in regards the more than forty other Muslims who had perished in the same incident, is indicative of yet another psychosis  many Muslims suffer from – the personality cult. Why is only the famous Muslim deserving of your prayers and comment? I’d rather not say anything further about such people, except that the example is given to us, that we have to learn to contextualise the status of a personality, whilst bearing in mind the facts and what is expected of us. I too have become embroiled in the personality obsession of Muslims.  In this week I came across a reposting of an article of mine on another website’s forum. The forum discussion then ensued as to whether I have any standing since my opinion is different from other scholars (none of whom they actually named or referenced). Disagreement is part of Islām. What however disgusted me, was they did not once debate the points I had made. To them, facts of religion are of less significance than personal views and personalities. These are features of a cult, not Islām!

In summary, the social media activity following the PIA crash, brought to light some of the many dimensions of a tool which often irresponsibly used. A Muslim guards his every word or remains silent.

 

 

 

Guarding the tongue in regards Allāh

عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه ، عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : من كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر ، فليقل خيرا أو ليصمت ، ومن كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر ، فليكرم جاره ، ومن كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر ، فليكرم ضيفه رواه البخاري ومسلم

Abū Hurayrah (May Allāh be pleased with him narrated that Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  said, “He who believes in Allāh and the Last Day should speak good or remain silent…” [Al-Bukhārī & Muslim]

I noticed during the course of my Ramaḍān Tafsīr that I was wont to quote the above Ḥadīth. In fact, I may have even quoted it daily. It is just so applicable in so many situations.

Lèse-majesté is the crime of offending the majesty of the ruler or the state. It is unfortunate that many sincere and well-meaning Muslims commit Lèse-majesté against Allāh, the King of kings, through the careless choice of words, when referring to Allāh, or to other matters of Islāmic belief. These people do not maintain silence, and instead of speaking good, in fact commit the reverse.

You might argue that surely sincerity should count and it does not matter if an unintended meaning comes about from the wrong choice of words? No! If the above Ḥadīth appears to be too general to make one think and choose the correct word before speaking, then please refer to my previous article on the importance which Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  placed on the selection of words and terminology.

Many of the words which slip from our tongues are offensive to the majesty of Allāh. If we should guard our tongues in regards the creation, how much more so in regards Allāh?

Allāh is not in need

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ أَنتُمُ الْفُقَرَاء إِلَى اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ هُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ

O mankind! You are in need of Allāh, whereas Allāh is self-sufficient, Most Praiseworthy [al-Fāṭir: 15]

Allāh is aṣ-Ṣamad and al-Ghanī. He is free of any need and we are Fuqarā, in need of Allāh in every way during every moment of our existence. “Need” means that someone is deficient of something.   To intentionally ascribe need unto Allāh is clear unbelief. How possibly is your Lord Most High deficient and in need? To carelessly ascribe need unto Allāh is a sign of one not being careful with one’s tongue. This is a requirement of faith.

One commonly hears this word being used for Allāh in South Africa. “Allāh needs us to….”

My dear brother or sister, if you should ponder over the implications of your words, you would realise that your words are the opposite of the religious message you wished to convey. Allāh is not in need of our prayers, faith, repentance….our anything. Nor is Allāh your buddy that you may use any word you feel like. “Allāh wishes” or “Allāh commands” is more appropriate to Allah’s Majesty.

Allāh does not look, His knowledge is complete

وَاللّهُ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ

….Allāh knows and you do not know. [al-Baqarah: 232]

A statement often repeated in speeches which makes my blood boil is, “Allāh is looking for ways to forgive us.” The words of this statement implies two meanings of “look” which are far from the majesty of Allāh:

• look at Examine (a matter) and consider what action to take


• usually look for Attempt to find

Both meanings contradict Allāh’s attribute of perfect knowledge. Allāh does not have to consider what to do. He already knows in His perfect knowledge. Nor does Allāh have to attempt to find a way to forgive us. He does not attempt or try anything, He does! Furthermore attempting to find something means that Allāh’s knowledge is incomplete He still needs to search for the means of forgiveness! Worse, since the speaker will then be advocating a specific good deed, the implication is that the speaker knows the means of forgiveness whilst Allāh is “still looking”. Allāh save us from such ignorance.

It is not me who is being small minded, it is the utterer of such carelessness who should be more respectful to his Creator. Allāh has created various means for us to earn His forgiveness. He does not “look for ways to forgive us”.

Allāh does not have to “attempt”

بَدِيعُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَإِذَا قَضَى أَمْراً فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ

The Originator of the heavens and the earth! When He decrees a thing to be, He but says unto it, "Be" -and it is! [al-Baqarah: 117]

Already mentioned above, Allāh does not try or attempt anything, he simply does. The oft repeated phrase, “What Allāh is trying to say in this verse….”contradicts  Allāh’s perfection. Allāh says, Allāh does not try to say. It is you who does not know what to say, for “to try” means to exert oneself in an attempt to achieve an as yet unattained goal. Only imperfect creatures such as ourselves have to exert and our goals have yet to be accomplished. Allāh is HIs perfection does not exert, there is no effort on Him, and whatever He wishes becomes as He wills. Do not cast our imperfections upon Allāh.

There is no obligation on Allāh

فَعَّالٌ لِّمَا يُرِيدُ

He most certainly does as He pleases. [al-Burūj: 16]

Allāh is not obligated to us in any way. If He forgives us, it is through His mercy, not that He is obligated to accept repentance. If He grants us Paradise, it is through His generosity, not that He is obligated to reward our good deeds. Words such as “must” which mean that Allāh is obligated, are not in line with our beliefs. “I have prayed, so Allāh must answer…”  is your arrogance, not Islāmic belief. Humble yourself by saying instead, “I have prayed and I am confident that my Generous Lord will answer…” as the Ḥadīth teaches that supplications should be conducted with confidence.

Respect the Speech of Allāh

وَلَئِن سَأَلْتَهُمْ لَيَقُولُنَّ إِنَّمَا كُنَّا نَخُوضُ وَنَلْعَبُ قُلْ أَبِاللّهِ وَآيَاتِهِ وَرَسُولِهِ كُنتُمْ تَسْتَهْزِؤُونَ

And if you ask them, they will surely say, “We were only conversing and playing.” Say, “Is it Allah and His Signs and His Messenger that you were mocking?” [at-Tawbah: 65]

I had previously written on inappropriate Muslim “humour” and mocking the sacred. Since today’s topic is in regards words inappropriate to Allāh’s majesty, I shall conclude with discussing the using of the Qurān as humour, since it is the eternal speech of Allāh.

I find it tragic that as Islāmic knowledge increases, there are people who now have a greater platform for their jokes, just like the hypocrites mentioned in the Verse above, instead of having greater respect for the Qurān. It defies my understanding how the same people who rightfully show the utmost respect to the printed manuscript of the Qurān, are sometimes the worst culprits who disrespect the actual Speech of Allāh.

My ears have been polluted enough to hear variations of the South African “joke” that the Zulu nation is mentioned in the Qurān. Figure for yourself where the “zulu” sound occurs as part of Arabic words in the Qurān.

I recall as a student when we were taught the Verse containing “mustabīn”. The student sitting next to me is a person very respectful to the outer elements of the faith, yet he brayed, “Ha! Mister Bean is mentioned in the Qurān!”

Another idiocy I heard two decades ago and which just does not want to die, is that “Alif-Lām-Mīm means Allāh loves Memons.”

I will put this as simply as I can, and if does not sink in…then guidance is from Allāh.

The Qurān is the Speech of Allāh. Making jokes of the Qurān is mocking Allāh. This speech was brought to us through the efforts of His Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  who bled and was tortured to bring us this Book of Guidance. Can you not watch your tongue in regards Allāh and His Speech?

I have given a few examples which may not be applicable to all places or peoples. It is up to each slave to behave with dignity in regards his Master.