A gaunt, regal saffron turbanned figure, yaktaro held aloft, steps onto the stage. Beside him is a smaller, younger man; several other saffron-robed faqirs follow, and as the full throated, open roar of Faqir Abdul Ghafoor rents the night air, they move around him in rhythmic union, echoing the words of the kafi he is singing. It is an unforgettable experience and one that can never be repeated, for Faqir Abdul Ghafoor died last month. (Article was written in 1986 and this post is posted in 2011)
Ant Bahar Di Khabar by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
Chalo Way Sayan by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
With his passing, a long chapter in Sindh’s cultural history drew towards a close. It seems tragically symbolic that the greatest surviving Sindhi folk singer should die at a time when monumental changes are taking place in his beloved homeland: changes which will sweep away the society and culture which shaped his musical career.
Sohnay Yar Di Gharoli by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
Faqir Abdul Ghafoor was born into that environment: the feudal society of Sindh, with its rural base, its village culture, its havelis and autaqs and, most important of all as far as the music is concerned, its dargahs and pirs and faqirs. He grew up surrounded by the sounds of the dargah and the kalam of the sufi poets, and took up the study and practice of music at an early age. At that time, the music of the dargah was the dominant form of musical expression at the popular level, and it was inevitable that the young Ghafoor would gravitate towards a murshed.
Kalangi Walra 2 by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
His choice was Sachal Sarmast, and it was at his dargah at Daraza (near Khairpur), that Faqir Abdul Ghafoor received his early training. Sachal’s shrine was the gathering place for many great singers of his kafis, and Ghafoor gained invaluable experience, listening to them and storing away their particular styles and approach. He presided over the annual ceremony at which a special chadar was laid on the tomb of the saint, and sang the kafi associated with this occasion, and sung only once in a year.
Bar Sudagar by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
Ghum Charakhra by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
The range and power of Faqir Abdul Ghafoor’s voice had already marked him out as an exceptional kafi performer, but his scope was not limited to the dargah. His intense interest in the politics of Sindh was seldom far from his music. During the period of agitation against One Unit, Ghafoor performed at a students’ function at Liaquat Medical College, Hyderabad. His choice of a Shaikh Ayaz’s wai brought the house down:
Sahando ker mayar o’ yar
Sindhri ta’an ser ker na deendo
(Who among us, my friend, would bear the shame
Of not sacrificing himself for Sindh when the call comes?).
Muhinjey Ranay Khey Raham Paway by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
After this performance, no Sindhi cultural occasion was considered complete without Ghafoor singing Sindhri... A close friend of Ghafoor’s once recalled that, ”Whenever Ghafoor has stepped onto a stage in Sindh during a period of political turmoil, he has always been called upon to sing Sindhri. In fact, the emotions aroused by his performance were so powerful that the authorities banned him from singing this wai on public occasions. They allowed others to sing whatever they wanted to, but Ghafoor was too much for them to handle.”
Nahay Barochal by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
Ghafoor pioneered and popularised many other now-famous folk songs and kafis, including Dama dam mast Qalandar, Gharoli and Rano. His performance of Rano was a special favourite of the late Prime Minister Bhutto, who often used to call Ghafoor to his home to sing for him. This association between the Prime Minister and the Faqir assumed a special poignance when Mr. Bhutto was in jail, a few months before his death, and Ghafoor sang Rano on the Bhitshah stage: the cry by Moomal (Sindh) that Rano would return, was readily associated by the audience with the then current political situation.
Faqir Abdul Ghafoor’s love of Sindh and his rebellious nature were a natural vehicle for the anti-establishment poetry with which his music was largely associated. But he was much more than just a Sindhi folk musician. His collection of the kalam of various poets and his own development of the songs he discovered during his sojourn at Sachal’s and other shrines, was a unique contribution to the musical tradition of Pakistan. The sufi literary and musical heritage has drawn from a variety of sources; Ghafoor himself was familiar with the poetry of several languages, including Seraiki, Baluchi, Farsi, Gujrati, Punjabi and Urdu/Hindi..
Soorat Jo Sultan by Late. Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor
Dil Masto Mast by Late Faqeer Abdul Ghafoor
Hithay Nahin To Kithay Nahin Yeh Kaun Piya Bolenda by Faqueer Abdul Ghafoor (Sachal Sarmast)
Aao Kaanga Kar by Late Faqeer Abdul Ghafoor
The environment which produced I. this extraordinary man has now changed so substantially, that it is inconceivable that another Ghafoor could emerge. The spontaneity, lack of artifice and the self-consciousness of Ghafoor’s performance (and that of other Sindhi musicians like Hussain Bakhsh Khadim, his constant companion and co-performer, Allan Faqir and Dhol Faqir) is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Having moved far away from the open maidans and informal gatherings of village life, divorced from the dargah culture which gave birth to the various schools of sufi music, modern performers are a different breed from Ghafoor. Electronic media and stage performances have created new musical forms and changed the relationship between the singer, the audience and the source of inspiration; the latter is, perhaps, now commercial success and money, rather than devotion to the murshid or participation in a life centred around his dargah. Courtesy: Faqeer Abdul Ghafoor (1910-1986) By Amenah Azam Ali (Courtesy: The Herald, August 1986) http://www.the-reporter.info/2009/feb-march09/memoirs/index.htm
LAHORE: Thousands of people on Sunday rallied in Lahore against any proposed amendment to the blasphemy laws and unanimously vowed to defend the “Namoos-e-Risalat” (sanctity of the Holy Prophet PBUH) at any cost. The leaders threatened to stage a long march if any change was made to the blasphemy laws. The rally started from Nasser Bagh and concluded near the Faisal Chowk, a few yards away from the Punjab Assembly building. Carrying banners, flags and placards, participants of the rally chanted vociferous slogans against the government’s alleged plan to amend the blasphemy laws, and demanded death penalty for the blasphemy convicts.
Is fiqah Hanafi the real islam by Shaikh Talib ur Rehman Shah 1
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19xOEgQ46JQ
Leaders of almost all the mainstream political and religious parties, except the Pakistan People’s Party and the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, participated in the rally. Prominent among them were: Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-F Ameer Maulana Fazlur Rehman, Jamaat-i-Islami Ameer Syed Manawwar Hasan, Pakistan Muslim League-Q leader Ch Pervaiz Elahi, PML-N central leader MNA Khwaja Saad Rafique, Jamatud Dawa Ameer Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, Maulana Sami Ullah, Allama Ibtisam Elahi Zaheer, Azam Swati, Qari Zawar Bahadur, Hafiz Mohammed Daud Abul Khair, Ameer Hamza, PML-Z chief Ejazul Haq, Maulana Mohammed Ilyas Ghumman, MPA Maulana Ilyas Chinoti, Maulana Samiul Haq, Hafiz Akif Saeed, Hafiz Hussain Ahmad, Maulana Ataul Memon, Qari Hanif Jalandhri, Allama Sajid Mir, Maulana Amjad, Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haidery, Sahibzada Pir Abdur Raheem, Allama Syed Sajid Naqvi, Maulana Ajmal Qadri, Hafiz Abdul Gaffoor Roparri and others.
Is fiqah Hanafi the real islam by Shaikh Talib ur Rehman Shah 2
The brothers of two young men killed by an American consulate employee, Raymond Davis, also participated in the rally. They addressed the gathering and demanded the trial of the accused under the Pakistani laws. Addressing the rally, JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman urged the government to clarify its position on the issue of Namoos-e-Risalat without any delay. He termed the government an American agent and warned it of Tunisia and Egypt like revolts in the country. He cautioned the ‘extremist forces’ of the West that if they did not stop their war against Islam, they would have to face its consequences. He advised the newly appointed Punjab governor to visit Mumtaz Qadri in jail to show solidarity with the Muslims of Pakistan. He announced holding a public gathering in Peshawar on Feb 20.
Is fiqah Hanafi the real islam by Shaikh Talib ur Rehman Shah 3
Jamaat-i-Islami Ameer Syed Munawwar Hasan said on the occasion if the blasphemy laws were amended, neither parliament nor the rulers would survive. He said the revolutionary wave sweeping the Islamic world currently could not be kept away from Pakistan, as situation here was also ripe for a change. The JI chief said after the 9/11 incident, the US had been planning to impose a new world order all-over the world, but the Islamic movements had frustrated its designs. The US wanted to disband madrassas and religious education, but its plans have been frustrated by the religious parties in Pakistan, he added. Munawwar said it was only because of cowardice of the Pakistani rulers that the Americans were killing innocent Pakistanis in our streets. Jamaatud Dawa leader Hafiz Muhammad Saeed said he would like to ask the European Parliament and Pope Benedict the reasons for abolishing the blasphemous laws. He said laws are made to maintain law and order in society. How the abolition the Namoos-e-Risalat act will help maintain law and order in Pakistan, he asked. He called for making an international law for protecting the sanctity of all prophets of God. He asked the government to expel the ambassadors of those countries from Pakistan which were involved in blasphemy acts. Hafiz Saeed believed that Afghanistan, Kashmir and Palestine would be freed soon from the clutches of oppressed forces. PML-N leader Ch Pervaiz Elahi promised that his party would not sit in the assemblies if the government tried to pass any bill against Namoos-e-Risalat. “We curse the assembly that dares amend the Namoos-e-Risalat (PBUH) law, and our party will be the first to quit such an assembly,” added Pervaiz Elahi. PML-N leader Khwaja Saad Rafique, addressing the rally, said his party assured the religious community that Tahaffuz-e-Namoos-e-Risalat was not aimed at victimising any particular community but protecting the sanctity of Holy Prophet (PBUH). He asked the PPP leadership to join hands with the Tehreek-e-Tahaffuz-e-Namoos-e- Risalat. He said Nawaz Sharif told the American ambassador that the issue of Raymond Davis would be decided by the courts when he called on the PML-N leader. Quaid-e-Millat-e-Jafferiya Allama Sajid Naqvi said all schools of thought agreed on the Namoos-e-Risalat Act. He advised the government to accept the demands, put forward by the Tehreek-e-Tahaffuz-e-Namoos-e-Risalat. He asked the government to clear its stance whether they wanted to amend the law or not.
Fareed Paracha & Jamat-e-Islami Misquote/Distort Quran on Samaa TV & Commit Blasphemy
PML-Z leader Ejazul Haq said on the occasion the rally was a proof that nobody could repeal the Namoos-e-Risalat act. Tanzeem-e-Islami Ameer Hafiz Akif Saeed said foreign authorities were working on an agenda of maligning the Islamic identity of the country by abolishing the Islamic laws. “They succeeded in repealing the Hadood Ordinance. Now they are trying to abolish the Namoos-e-Risalat act and after this they would go for removal of constitutional clause regarding non-Muslims,” he added. Ataul Memon asked the parliamentarians and lawyers of the country to pass resolutions in their respective bar associations against the efforts made by government to make changes in the Namoos-e-Risalat act. JUI-F central leader Hafiz Hussain Ahmad warned the leaders if American Consulate employee was released, people would besiege the American Embassy and the Aiwan-e-Sadr. Allama Ibtisam Elahi Zaheer said some liberal and secular scholars, on behalf of the government, were trying to create an impression that Islam would not be affected by abolishing this act. He warned these elements of staying away from commenting on these issues. Wafaqul Madaris President Qari Muhammad Hanif termed the Namoos-e-Risalat act the jugular vein of the Muslims. Allama Sajid Mir believed death was the only punishment for the blasphemers. Maulana Abdul Gaffoor Haidery asked MNA Sherry Rehman to seek Allah forgiveness for speaking against the blasphemy laws. Maulana Samiul Haq advised the party workers to launch a movement for ‘independence’ of Pakistan from American oppression as the country had been turned into an American state. Maulana Ilyas Chinioti, Maulana Ilyas Ghumman, Ameer Hamza, Sahibzada Pir Abdur Rahim, Qari Zawar Bahadur, Maulana Amjad, Maulana Ajmal Qadri, Hafiz Abdul Gaffar Roparri and Abul Khair also asked the government to clear its position on the proposed amendments to the blasphemy laws. Agencies add: About 40,000 people rallied in Lahore in the latest protest against the proposed reforms of the blasphemy laws, police said. REFERENCE: Blasphemy law: long march to counter any change By Adnan Rashid Monday, January 31, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=3662&Cat=13&dt=1/31/2011
Imran Khan & Dunya TV also committed Blasphemy.
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2B3oLxXnKI
Need to prevent misuse of Blasphemy Law Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain
LAHORE: Police as well as the Joint Investigation Team set up by the federal government to investigate January 4 assassination of governor Salman Taseer are in a sticky situation how to quiz the two clerics who had allegedly instigated the self-confessed assassin to commit the murder. The Rawalpindi trial court has already granted them pre-arrest bails besides rejecting the investigators’ plea for their custody. Mumtaz Qadri had admitted in his confessional statement that he was actually provoked for the murder by the fiery speeches of two Rawalpindi-based clerics Mufti Hanif Qureshi Qadri and Imtiaz Hussain Shah. According to Qadri’s confessional statement, Mufti Hanif Qureshi, the ameer of a Rawalpindi-based Barelvi religious outfit, Shabab-e-Islami Pakistan and Imtiaz Hussain Shah, the imam of a Rawalpindi-based Amna Masjid, had described Salmaan Taseer a “Yazeedi governor” in their December 31, 2010 speeches at a public meeting in Rawalpindi organised by the Shabab-e-Islami .
Barelvi Scholar declares that "Dobandis & Wahabis" are KAFIR.
Ashraf Ali Thanvi Deobandi Soor (Khanzeer) Pandat Thanvi ka Iqrar by Mufti Haneef Qureshi
The clerics were trying to convince the listeners, while citing certain verses of the Holy Quraan that Taseer was worth killing (Wajibul Qatal) for having committed blasphemy by labeling the blasphemy law a black law. During their speeches, the clerics narrated an event of blasphemy committed by a woman during the rule of Hazrat Abu Bakar Siddiq, the first Caliph of Islam, saying, “The governor of the area where the woman lived awarded punishment to her over the act of blasphemy. As she approached the Caliph, seeking mercy, the latter decided against her and ordered that her teeth to be broken and fingers and tongue be cut for having committed blasphemy”. As the Rawalpindi-based investigators were flexing their muscles to detain the two clerics for interrogation, Hanif Qureshi and Imtiaz Shah launched a preemptive offensive to counter any move against them. While resorting to street agitation, the two clerics staged a demonstration in Rawalpindi on January 7, to ‘pay homage’ to the assassin of Taseer. The rally culminated at the Muslim Town residence of Malik Mumtaz Qadri. The participants of the rally were chanting slogans and carrying banners and placards, inscribing pro-Qadri slogans and describing him a “Ghazi”.
Hanif Qureshi against Ameer Muaviya
Condemning the government for Qadri’s arrest, Hanif Qureshi, who also leads Friday prayers at the Jamia Rizvia Zial Uloom in Rawalpindi, praised the killer for having killed a ‘blasphemer’. He further said: “Ghazi Malik Mumtaz Qadri did this for the love of our beloved Prophet Mohammad (Peace Be upon Him). The man who called the Blasphemy Law a black law was bound to meet this end and he should not be called a martyr but a blasphemer. And Mumtaz Qadri should not be called a killer but a “Ghazi” (one who leaves the battle victorious).” Keeping in view the street power shown by Hanif Qureshi and Mumtaz Shah, the investigating agencies became defensive and decided to seek court orders for the arrest of the two clerics instead of detaining them on their own. The investigators were of the view that the arrest of the two fanatic mullahs without seeking court orders could trigger nationwide protests by their followers.
Response To Deobandi Mulla Mehmood Madni By Mufti Muhammad Hanif Qureshi
However, on January 17, 2011, an Anti Terrorism Court (ATC) in Rawalpindi refused to issue warrants for the arrest of the two clerics for the purpose of interrogation about their speeches during which they had reportedly justified killing of any blasphemer. Having heard arguments from both the sides, ATC Judge Malik Akram Awan, refused to issue the warrants on grounds of incomplete evidence. Two days later, on January 20, the ATC judge granted pre-arrest bails to Hanif Qureshi and Imtiaz Shah against surety bonds worth Rs200, 000 each. The counsel for the clerics argued before the ATC judge that his clients were not at all involved in motivating Qadri and the FIR also did not mention their names. Under these circumstances, the Rawalpindi police as well as the Joint Investigation Team are simply unable to question the suspects who have refused to cooperate in investigations of the case. The authorities will have to wait for the expiry of their pre-arrest bails before proceedings against them any further. REFERENCE: Agencies probing Taseer murder in a fix By Amir Mir Monday, January 24, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=27431&Cat=2&dt=1/24/2011
“The judgement of apostasy and expelling someone from the religion is only appropriate for the people of knowledge who are firmly grounded in knowledge, and they are the judges in the various Sharee’ah law courts, and those who are able of giving legal verdicts. And this is just like the other matters, and it is not the right of every person, or from the right of those who are learning, or those who ascribe themselves to knowledge, but who have deficiency in understanding. It is not appropriate for them to make judgements of apostasy (upon others). Since, mischief will arise from this, and sometimes a Muslim might be judged as an apostate but he is not actually so. And the takfir of a Muslim who has not committed one of the nullifications of Islaam contains great danger. Whoever says to his brother “O Kaafir” or “O Faasiq”, and he is not like that, then the words will fall back upon the one who said them. Hence, the ones who actually judge with apostasy are the legislative judges and those who are able and fit for giving legal verdicts. And as for those who enforce the judgements they are the leaders of the Muslims (wullaat al-amr). As for whatever is other than this, then it is mere confusion.”
Barelvi Mufti Muneeb ur Rehman's Fatwa against Saudi Arabia & Deobandis.
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ttHNLcF8Q0
“Meting out the punishments is only appropriate for the leader of the Muslims and it is not for every person to establish the punishment, since confusion, and corruption necessarily follows from this, and also the cutting off of the society, tribulations and provocations occur. Establishing the punishments is appropriate (i.e. befits only) to the Muslim leader. The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Pardon each other for the punishments that are between you, but when the execution of the punishment reaches the [authority of the] Sultaan, then Allaah curses both the one who seeks intercession and the one who grants the intercession [i.e. to revoke the punishment]”. And from the responsibilities of the Sultaan in Islaam, and from those matters that befit him is the establishment of the punishments after they have been established legislatively, via the Sharee’ah law courts, upon the one who fell into the crime for which the legislator has designated a specific punishment, such as for stealing. So what has been said is that establishing the punishments (i.e. meting them out) is from the rights of the Sultaan, and when the Muslims do not have a Sultaan amongst them, then they should just suffice with commanding the good and forbidding the evil, and calling to Allaah, the Might and Majestic, with wisdom, good admonition and arguing with that which is best. And it is not permissible for individuals (in the society) to establish the hudood, since that, as we have mentioned, will bring about chaos, and also provocations, and tribulations will arise, and this contains greater corruption than it contains rectification. And from amongst the Sharee’ah principles that are submitted to is, “Repelling the harmful things takes precedence over bringing about the beneficial things”. FURTHER REFERENCES/READING: The Takfiris make unlicensed Takfeer of Governments and scholars and call the common-folk to bloody revolution as a way to remove such governments and establish Islaamic Law. http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/MSC060006.pdf
LAHORE, Jan 30: A big rally here on Sunday warned of a long march to Islamabad if the government attempted to amend the blasphemy law. A large number of charged activists of religious parties representing all schools of thought amid tight security marched from Nasser Bagh to Charing Cross on The Mall where leaders of mainstream parties like PML-N, PML-Q, PML-Z and Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaaf also joined them. They were carrying flags of their respective parties as well as placards and banners inscribed with slogans in favour of blasphemy law and against Pope Benedict, American Congress and European Parliament. Many of them coming from adjoining areas of the provincial metropolis were also chanting slogans seeking release of Mumtaz Qadri, who had killed Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer.
Under the umbrella of Namoos-e-Risalat Tehrik, the religious parties under had been campaigning in the city for the last many days to mobilise the masses. Religious leaders visited various seminaries and some school chains run by religious schools and distributed leaflets to motivate them for joining the rally. Police made tight security arrangements to avoid any untoward incident as all routes leading to The Mall were closed to traffic and pedestrians, causing traffic jams on many city arteries, especially in the downtown area. The people willing to join the rally could enter from the Nasser Bagh or Masjid Shuhada side only after a thorough frisking and moving from walkthrough gates. Security staff was deployed on buildings along both sides of the route from Nasser Bagh to the Charing Cross.
Speaking to the participants, JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman announced another rally in Peshawar on Feb 20. He also announced that demonstrations would be held on Fridays to maintain the momentum of the movement till Feb 20. He said the nation could put up with price hike, load-shedding and joblessness but not change in the blasphemy law. He demanded that the government take a clear stance on blasphemy law instead of making vague clarifications. Referring to the incident of killing of three people by a US citizen, he warned the rulers against setting Raymond Davis free without judicial trial, saying the people would take the law into their own hands if the government resorted to any illegal course. He advised Governor Latif Khosa to call on Mumtaz Qadri in prison as he (Khosa) was holding the office because of Qadri.
Jamaat-i-Islami chief Syed Munawar Hasan said the assemblies as well as the rulers would cease to exist if attempts were made to amend the blasphemy law. PML-Q senior leader Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi said his party would be the first to quit the parliament if it dared to amend the law. The Q League has 50 representatives in the 342-seat National Assembly. Jamaatud Dawa amir Prof Saeed urged the rulers to work for an international legislation to curb desecration of Prophets all over the world. He said the rulers who had taken oath on the Holy Quran should decide to sever diplomatic relations with the countries where blasphemous caricatures had been published. JUP chief Sahibzada Abul Khair Zubair urged the political parties having representation in the parliament to take up the issue of protecting blasphemy law at the highest platform. Tehrik-i-Insaaf vice-president Ijaz Chaudhry pledged that his party would not allow any change in the law. He demanded public execution of Raymond Davis. MJAH chief Senator Sajid Mir said the nation had registered a strong protest against any amendment to blasphemy law. “The Ummah is unanimous that blasphemer(s) deserves only death.” Islami Tehrik chief Allama Sajid Naqvi regretted that the government was not taking a clear stance on blasphemy law only because of US pressure. PML-Z chief Ijazul Haq suggested giving a deadline to the government and if it failed to address reservations of the nation about the law, then a long march should be launched. PML-N MNA Khwaja Saad Rafiq said: “My party is very clear that blasphemy law should not be amended and efforts should be made to stop its misuse.” Ashraf Jalali, Abdul Qadri Ropri, Ibtesam Elahi Zaheer and others also spoke. REFERENCE: Blasphemy law: rally threatens long march From the Newspaper By Our Staff Reporter Yesterday http://www.dawn.com/2011/01/31/blasphemy-law-rally-threatens-long-march.html
Barelvi Shah Turabul Haq Issues Fatwa of Kufr against Imam Kaaba & Saudi Arabia.
ISLAMABAD: Top leaders of an organisation representing Deobandi madrassas across the country have reprimanded PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif for calling members of the Ahmadiyya community as “brothers” of Muslims.“Sharif should be ashamed of calling them brothers of Muslims,” said a statement issued by the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia (WMA).Sharif said in Lahore on Saturday that Ahmadis were as important citizens of Pakistan as people from other religions and called them an asset.He made the statement to express solidarity with the Ahmadiyya community following last month’s two synchronised attacks on their places of worship in Lahore which claimed more than 80 lives with many more injured.In a statement issued here on Sunday, leaders of the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia – an umbrella organisation of more than 12,000 Deobandi madrassas – called Ahmadis “traitors”. WMA leaders Maulana Salimullah Khan and Qari Hafeez Jahalindri urged Sharif to retract his statement and advised him not to “defy religion for petty political gains.” The statement termed the Ahmadis as “infidels” and said that they could not be brothers of Muslims until they convert to Islam again. Ahmadis were declared a minority under the 1973 constitution – a move that some people believe intensified hatred against Ahmadis. REFERENCE: Sharif’s statement on Ahmadis angers clerics Published in the Express Tribune, June 7th, 2010.http://tribune.com.pk/story/19379/sharif%E2%80%99s-statement-on-ahmadis-angers-clerics/
Barelvi Mullah Shah Turabul Haq says that Deobandi and Wahabi are Kaafir
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj5Z7yzzgpI
Barelvi Shah Turab ul Haq Qadri says Ashraf Ali Thanvi & Wahabis are Kaafir.
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iab5Fm0PqzQ
“The judgement of apostasy and expelling someone from the religion is only appropriate for the people of knowledge who are firmly grounded in knowledge, and they are the judges in the various Sharee’ah law courts, and those who are able of giving legal verdicts. And this is just like the other matters, and it is not the right of every person, or from the right of those who are learning, or those who ascribe themselves to knowledge, but who have deficiency in understanding. It is not appropriate for them to make judgements of apostasy (upon others). Since, mischief will arise from this, and sometimes a Muslim might be judged as an apostate but he is not actually so. And the takfir of a Muslim who has not committed one of the nullifications of Islaam contains great danger. Whoever says to his brother “O Kaafir” or “O Faasiq”, and he is not like that, then the words will fall back upon the one who said them. Hence, the ones who actually judge with apostasy are the legislative judges and those who are able and fit for giving legal verdicts. And as for those who enforce the judgements they are the leaders of the Muslims (wullaat al-amr). As for whatever is other than this, then it is mere confusion.”
Barelvi Mufti Muneeb ur Rehman's Fatwa against Saudi Arabia & Deobandis.
“Meting out the punishments is only appropriate for the leader of the Muslims and it is not for every person to establish the punishment, since confusion, and corruption necessarily follows from this, and also the cutting off of the society, tribulations and provocations occur. Establishing the punishments is appropriate (i.e. befits only) to the Muslim leader. The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Pardon each other for the punishments that are between you, but when the execution of the punishment reaches the [authority of the] Sultaan, then Allaah curses both the one who seeks intercession and the one who grants the intercession [i.e. to revoke the punishment]”. And from the responsibilities of the Sultaan in Islaam, and from those matters that befit him is the establishment of the punishments after they have been established legislatively, via the Sharee’ah law courts, upon the one who fell into the crime for which the legislator has designated a specific punishment, such as for stealing. So what has been said is that establishing the punishments (i.e. meting them out) is from the rights of the Sultaan, and when the Muslims do not have a Sultaan amongst them, then they should just suffice with commanding the good and forbidding the evil, and calling to Allaah, the Might and Majestic, with wisdom, good admonition and arguing with that which is best. And it is not permissible for individuals (in the society) to establish the hudood, since that, as we have mentioned, will bring about chaos, and also provocations, and tribulations will arise, and this contains greater corruption than it contains rectification. And from amongst the Sharee’ah principles that are submitted to is, “Repelling the harmful things takes precedence over bringing about the beneficial things”. FURTHER REFERENCES/READING: The Takfiris make unlicensed Takfeer of Governments and scholars and call the common-folk to bloody revolution as a way to remove such governments and establish Islaamic Law. http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/MSC060006.pdf
Ghulam Ahmad Pervez of Lahore was a well-known Pakistani Islamic thinker and writer, representing the Ahl-i Quran (Hadith Rejector) tendency, and founder of the Idara Tulu‘-i-Islam (Institute of the Dawn of Islam). In the monthly journal of this institute, entitled Tulu‘-i-Islam, dated August 1969, there is an extensive article headed Fatwas of Kufr (Rulings of Heresy) quoting fatwas of various Sunni groups condemning one another as kafir. A long extract from this article is given below in translation. The Sunnis are divided into two main sects: Non-conformists (ghair muqallid), commonly known as Ahl-i Hadith, and conformists (muqallid), commonly known as Hanafis. The conformists are divided into two groups: Deobandi and Barelvi. Also among the conformists are the various Sufi orders. Now let us see how these sects are declaring each other as kafir.
Fatwas of conformists against non-conformists
“The non-conformist (ghair muqallid) sect, whose distinctive outward manner [of prayer] in this country is saying Amen aloud, raising the hands [during the prayer], folding the arms on the chest, and reciting the Al-Hamd behind the Imam, are excluded from the Sunnis, and are like other misguided sects, because many of their beliefs and practices are opposed to those of the Sunnis. It is not permissible to pray behind them. To mix with them socially and sit with them, and to let them enter mosques at their pleasure, is prohibited in Islamic Shari‘ah.” (This bears the seals of nearly seventy Ulama. Reference the book: Arguments with regard to the expulsion of Wahabis from mosques, p. 8.)
“He who calls conformism (taqlid) as prohibited, and conformists as polytheists, is a kafir according to Islamic Shari‘ah, and in fact a murtadd [apostate].” (Book: Discipline of mosques with regard to the expulsion of mischief-makers from mosques)
“It is obligatory upon the Ulama and Muftis that, by merely hearing of such a thing, they should not hesitate to issue fatwas of heresy and apostasy. Otherwise, they themselves would be included among the apostates.” (ibid.)
Ahmad Raza Khan, the Barelvi leader, has quoted the beliefs of all sections of the non-conformists, and given the fatwa:
“All these groups are murtadd and kafir. He who doubts their being kafirs, is himself a kafir.”
(Book Hisam al Haramain)
Fatwas of non-conformists against conformists
“Question: What say the Ulama and the Muftis regarding the conformist (muqallid) group, who follow only one Imam [i.e. Hanafis]. Are they Sunnis or not? Is it valid to pray behind them or not? Is it permissible to allow them into mosques, and to mix with them socially?
“Answer: Undoubtedly, prayers are not permissible behind conformists because their beliefs and practices are opposed to those of the Sunnis. In fact, some of their beliefs and practices lead to polytheism, and others spoil prayers. It is not correct in Islamic Shari‘ah to allow such conformists into mosques.”
This bears the seals of nineteen priests. (Reference the book: Collection of Fatwas, pp. 54 – 55)
The late Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan wrote:
“The word polytheist can be applied to conformists, and polytheism can be applied to conformism. Most people today are conformists. The Quranic verse, ‘Most people believe not, they are but polytheists’, applies quite well to them.”
(Iqtarab as-Sa‘a, p. 16)
Not only Hanafis, but all of them:
“The followers of all the four Imams and the followers of the four Sufi orders, viz. Hanafi, Shafi‘i, Maliki, Hanbali, Chishtiyya, Qadiriyya, Naqshbandiyya and Mujaddidiyya are all kafirs.”
“The Deobandis, because of their contempt and insult, in their acts of worship, towards all saints, prophets, and even the Holy Prophet Muhammad and the very Person of God Himself, are definitely murtadd and kafir. Their apostasy and heresy is of the worst kind, so that anyone who doubts their apostasy and heresy even slightly is himself a murtadd and kafir. Muslims should be very cautious of them, and stay away from them. Let alone praying behind them, one should not let them pray behind one, or allow them into mosques, or eat the animal slaughtered by them, or join them on happy or sad occasions, or let them come near one, or visit them in illness, or attend their funerals, or give them space in Muslim grave-yards. To sum up, one must stay away from them completely.”
(See the Unanimous Fatwa of Three Hundred Ulama, published by Muhammad Ibrahim of Bhagalpur)
Deobandis should be declared non-Muslim minority
In March 1953, a poster was put up on walls in Karachi headed: “Demands: Deoband sect should be declared a separate minority”. Among other things it said:
“Just as Sikhs originated from Hinduism, but are not Hindus, and Protestants came from Roman Catholicism, but are not Catholics, similarly, the Deobandi sect originated in the Sunni community, but are not Sunnis. The representatives of this minority sect are Mufti Muhammad Shafi, Sayyid Sulaiman Nadawi, Ihtasham-ul-Haqq, and Abul Ala Maudoodi, etc.”
After this it was demanded that this sect be declared a non-Muslim minority. It was signed by 28 persons (see Tulu‘-i-Islam, May 1953, p. 64).
Fatwa of Deobandis against Barelvis
Maulavi Sayyid Muhammad Murtaza of Deoband has, in his book, tried to show that Ahmad Raza Khan, the Barelvi leader, was a kafir, a great kafir, Anti- Christ of this century, murtadd, and excluded from Islam. (See the booklet Radd at-Takfir ala-l-fahash at-Tanzir.)
The opposite side
Ahmad Raza Khan (Barelvi) has noted the beliefs of Muhammad Qasim Nanotavi (founder of the school at Deoband) and Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (of Deoband), and then added:
“They are all murtadd [apostate] according to the unanimous view (ijma) of Muslims.”
This fatwa bears the signatures and seals of Ulama of Makka and Madina, and other Muftis and Islamic judges. Three reasons have been given for calling them kafir:
They deny the finality of prophethood;
They insult the Holy Prophet;
They believe that God can tell a lie.
Hence it is written about them:
“He who doubts that they are kafirs, is himself a kafir.”
(Hisam al-Haramain, pp. 100 and 113)
You will have seen that all the sects, whether Hanafis, Ahl-i Hadith, Deobandi, or Barelvi, and all the Sufi orders such as Chishtiyya, Qadiriyya, etc., have had fatwas of heresy and apostasy pronounced against them. And not only sects, but the prominent men of these sects have had fatwas directed against them individually.
Maulana Nazir Husain of Delhi (Ahl-i Hadith) was called disputant, doubter, follower of base passions, jealous, dishonest and alterer (of the Quran).
Maulavi Muhammad Husain Batalavi, along with the above Maulana, was called devil, atheist, stupid, senseless, faithless, etc. This fatwa bears the seals of 82 Ulama of Arabia and elsewhere. (Book Nazar al-Haq)
Maulana Sana-Ullah of Amritsar (Ahl-i Hadith) had fatwas directed against him which were obtained in Makka. It is written about his commentary of the Quran:
“It is the writing of a misguided person, one who has invented new doctrines. In his commentary he has collected beliefs such as re-incarnation and the doctrines of the Mu‘tazila [an early extreme Muslim sect]. It is neither permissible to obtain knowledge from Maulana Sana-ullah, nor to follow him. His evidence cannot be accepted, nor can he lead prayers. There is no doubt regarding his heresy and apostasy. ... His commentary deserves to be cut to pieces. In fact, it is forbidden to see it except for the purpose of refuting it.”
(Faisila Makka, pp. 15 – 20)
Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani (Deobandi):
Referring to an article of his, the weekly Tarjuman Islam of Lahore carried the following extract in its issue for 10 November 1961:
“Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, Deobandi, was a first-rate scholar and servant of Quran and Hadith. He needs no introduction. But one was very shocked by a letter of his which contained the grotesque idea of the denial of Hadith. This concept goes beyond the Mu‘tazila, and breaks the records of the ideologies of Chakralvi and Pervez.”
All those whose record is said to be broken by Husain Ahmad Madani, have had fatwas of kufr directed against them. This makes it clear that Maulana Madani too is considered a kafir.
Abul Ala Maudoodi and his party have been the subject of fatwas by Ulama of nearly every sect.
Mufti Muhzar-ullah, of Jami Fatehpuri in Delhi, wrote in his fatwa:
“On the very face of it, these things [beliefs of Maudoodi’s party] exclude a Muslim from the Sunnis, and lead to divisions among the believers, and is the basis of making a new sect. But looking closely, these things take one to heresy. In this case, they do not make a new sect, but result in one’s entry into the group of apostates.”
Maulana Hafiz-ullah of Aligarh has written:
“Whatever was the position of the Zarar mosque, similar is the position of this [i.e. Maudoodi’s] party.”
[Note: The Zarar mosque was a mosque built by some hypocrite Muslims in Madina during the Holy Prophet’s time for the purpose of conspiring against Islam].
The word kufr is used about the Zarar mosque in the Holy Quran. Hence the same word applies to these people.
Maulana Izaz Ali, Deobandi, wrote in his fatwa:
“I consider this [i.e. Maudoodi’s] party to be even more harmful for the faith of the Muslims than are the Ahmadis.”
Mufti Sayyid Mahdi Hasan, President-Mufti of the theological school at Deoband, writes in his fatwa:
“If an Imam of a mosque agrees with the views of Maudoodi, it is a hateful matter to pray behind him.”
Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani (Deobandi) wrote in a letter to Maudoodi:
“Your ‘Islamic’ movement is against the righteous tradition in Islam. It is like the [extremist] sects of old such as Mu‘tazila, Khwarij and Rafiz. It resembles modern sects such as Qadiani, Chakralvi [deniers of Hadith], Naturi [rationalist], and Baha’i [i.e. the Baha’i religion]. It seeks to make a new Islam. It is based on principles, beliefs and practices which are against the Sunnis and Islam.”
The Committee of Ulama of Maulana Ahmad Ali wrote in a poster against Maudoodi:
“His reasoning is devilry against the Quran.”
It is then added:
“May God save all Muslims from Maudoodi and the evil and deceit of his so-called Islamic Party.”
Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan [prominent Muslim modernist leader and founder of the Aligarh University for Muslims, d. 1898]:
In his biography Hayat-i Jawaid by Maulana Hali, the storm of condemnation and takfir against Sir Sayyid is fully detailed. Read some of these lines:
“Sir Sayyid was called atheist, irreligious, Christian, nature-worshipper, anti-Christ, and many other things. Fatwas that he was a kafir were prepared, and signatures of Maulavis of every town and city were obtained. Even those who remained silent against Sir Sayyid as regards takfir, were called kafir.” (p. 623)
“All the Muslim sects in India, be they Sunni or Shiah, conformist or non-conformist, the seals and signatures of the known and unknown Ulama and priests of all these are on these fatwas.” (p. 627)
A fatwa was obtained from Makka, bearing the seals of Muftis of all the four schools, in which it was written:
“This man is an heretic, or he was inclined to unbelief (kufr) from Islamic law in some aspect. ... If he repents before he is arrested, and turns away from his misguided views, and there are clear signs of repentance from him, then he should not be killed. Otherwise, it is obligatory to kill him for the sake of the faith.” (p. 633)
Jinnah and Iqbal [revered in Pakistan as fathers of the nation]:
Sir Sayyid had at least expressed views on religious matters. But these people also called Jinnah as “the great kafir”. Even a true believer like Iqbal had a fatwa of kufr directed against him.
Fatwas of kufr against early savants
The pastime of declaring people as kafir is not a product of the present age. Unfortunately, this disease is very old, and there can hardly be anyone from among the great figures of Muslim religious history who escaped being a subject of such fatwas. Let us look at the great leaders of religion after the age of the Holy Prophet’s Companions.
Abu Hanifa: He was disgraced, called ignorant, inventor of new beliefs, hypocrite and kafir. He was imprisoned and poisoned. He died in 150 A.H. [circa 768 C.E.].
Imam Shafi‘i: He was called devil and imprisoned. Prayers were said for his death. He was taken in captivity from Yemen to Baghdad, in a condition of humiliation and degradation. He died in 204 A.H. [circa 820 C.E.].
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal: He was kept in prison for 28 months, with a heavy chain around his feet. He was publicly humiliated, slapped and spat upon. Every evening he used to be flogged. All this was because of the controversy regarding whether the Quran was ‘uncreated’ or ‘created’.
Imam Malik: A resident of Madina, he too was imprisoned and flogged.
Bukhari [Collector of Hadith]: He was exiled and died in 256 A.H. [circa 871 C.E.].
Nasa’i [Collector of Hadith]: He was disgraced and beaten in a mosque so much that he died.
Abdul Qadir Jilani [Saint of Baghdad, d. 1166 C.E.] was called kafir by the jurists.
Muhiyud-Din Ibn Arabi [great philosopher and saint, d. 1240 C.E.]: The Ulama issued a fatwa against him saying: “His unbelief is greater than that of Jews and Christians”. All his followers were declared kafir, so much so that those who doubted his unbelief were called kafir.
Rumi, Jami and Attar [now world famous Muslim saints and writers of Persia] were called kafir, and anyone not calling them kafir was also called kafir.
Imam Ghazali [philosopher and mujaddid, d. 1111 C.E.] was called kafir, and burning his books and cursing him was declared a good deed.
Ibn Taimiyya [Muslim philosopher and mujaddid, d. 1327 C.E.]: The King of Egypt asked for a fatwa to put him to death.
Hafiz ibn Qayyim: imprisoned and exiled.
Shaikh Ahmad of Sirhind [d. 1624 C.E., mujaddid in India]: called kafir.
Shah Wali-ullah [d. 1763 C.E., mujaddid in India]: called inventor of new beliefs and misguided.
Sayyid Ahmad Barelvi [d. 1831 C.E., mujaddid and military leader in India]: called kafir.
Shah Ismail Shaheed [deputy of above mujaddid]: Fatwas of heresy against him obtained from Makka.
FATWAS AGAINST PERVEZ
Ghulam Ahmad Pervez, founder of the movement which publishes Tulu‘-i-Islam, from which the above extract has been taken, was himself the subject of fatwas such as those quoted below:
“Ghulam Ahmad Pervez is a kafir according to Islamic Shari‘ah, and excluded from the pale of Islam. No Muslim woman can remain married to him, nor can a Muslim woman enter into marriage with him. His funeral prayers cannot be said, nor is it permissible to bury him in a Muslim grave-yard. This applies not only to Pervez, but to every kafir. It also applies to any person who is a follower of his in these heretic beliefs. As he has become an apostate (murtadd), it is not permitted by the Shari‘ah to have any kind of Islamic relations with him.
Signed: Wali Hasan Tonki, Mufti and teacher, Muhammad Yusuf Banori, Shaikh al-Hadith, Madrasa Arabiyya Islamiyya, New Town, Karachi.”
An organ of Maudoodi’s Jama‘at-i Islami gave the following fatwa about Pervez’s followers:
“If they say that Shari‘ah is only that which is contained in the Quran, and all that is besides this is not Shari‘ah, then this is clear heresy. It is the same kind of heresy as the heresy of the Qadianis. In fact it is worse and more extreme than that.” (article by Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi, in the daily Tasneem, Lahore, 15 August 1952, p. 12)
``The Deobandis, because of their contempt and insult, in their acts of worship, towards all saints, prophets, and even the Holy Prophet Muhammad and the very Person of God Himself, are definitely murtadd and kafir. Their apostasy and heresy is of the worst kind, so that anyone who doubts their apostasy and heresy even slightly is himself a murtadd and kafir. Muslims should be very cautious of them, and stay away from them. Let alone praying behind them, one should not let them pray behind one, or allow them into mosques, or eat the animal slaughtered by them, or join them on happy or sad occasions, or let them come near one, or visit them in illness, or attend their funerals, or give them space in Muslim grave-yards. To sum up, one must stay away from them completely.''
(See the Unanimous Fatwa of Three Hundred Ulama, published by Muhammad Ibrahim of Bhagalpur)
Deobandis should be declared non-Muslim minority
In March 1953, a poster was put up on walls in Karachi titled:
``Demands: Deoband sect should be declared a separate minority''.
Among other things it said:
``Just as Sikhs originated from Hinduism, but are not Hindus, and Protestants came from Roman Catholicism, but are not Catholics, similarly, the Deobandi sect originated in the Sunni community, but are not Sunnis. The representatives of this minority sect are Mufti Muhammad Shafi, Sayyid Sulaiman Nadawi, Ihtasham-ul-Haqq, and Abul Ala Maudoodi, etc.''
After this it was demanded that this sect be declared a non-Muslim minority. It was signed by 28 persons
(see Tulu`-i-Islam, May 1953, p. 64).
Fatwa of Deobandis against Barelvis
Maulavi Sayyid Muhammad Murtaza of Deoband has, in his book, tried to show that Ahmad Raza Khan, the Barelvi leader, was a kafir, a great kafir, Anti- Christ of this century, murtadd, and excluded from Islam.
(See the booklet Radd at-Takfir ala-l-fahash at-Tanzir.)
The opposite side
Ahmad Raza Khan (Barelvi) has noted the beliefs of Muhammad Qasim Nanotavi (founder of the school at Deoband) and Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (of Deoband), and then added:
``They are all murtadd [apostate] according to the unanimous view (ijma) of Muslims.''
This fatwa bears the signatures and seals of Ulama of Makka and Madina, and other Muftis and Islamic judges. Three reasons have been given for calling them kafir :
1.They deny the finality of prophethood;
2.They insult the Holy Prophet;
3.They believe that God can tell a lie.
Hence it is written about them:
``He who doubts that they are kafirs, is himself a kafir.''
(Hisam al-Haramain, pp. 100 and 113)"
(Tulu'-i-Islam, August 1969)
Late. Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi on everybody!!!!!!
"QUOTE"
"The Ahl'ul Sunnah have an ijma that Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab was a Khwaarijee and baghi (rebel) whoever holds this Najdee belief is an enemy of Islam" [Ahmad Sayyid Kazmi his book "Al Haq al Mobeen page 10-11 and Amjad Ali in "Bahar Shariath Volume 1 page 46"]
"The Wahabis are worse than Jews, Christians, Magians, Hindus, and more damaging to Islam they are worse than Murthads".
"Whoever is a Wahabi and follows Rashid Ahmad Gangohi is a kaffir".
"From the Shaytan Wahabis is Ashraf 'Ali Thanvi"
"Whoever doubts the kufr of Ashraf Ali Thanvi is also a kaffir, his followers are all kaffirs and it is a sin to read his book Bahishti Zewar".
The Sunni scholar Naasir Sunniyath Abu Tahir Muhammad Thabib Siddiqui Dhana Purri, writes as follows:
"the Ulema of Deen, and scholars of the Law are faced by the problem of Wahabis, Deobandis….Najdhis kufr beliefs, and this book addresses how Muslims should deal with them". ["Tajhahib Ahl ul Sunnah" by Naasir Sunniyath Abu Tahir Muhammad Thabib Siddiqui Dhana Purri, published Markazi Anjuman Huzbul Aynaf Lahore, Bareylvi Electorate Press 1361 Hijri]
"A reply to question one
"The followers of Muhammad bin Najdi are called Wahabis. Shah Ismail Dehlavi under "Al Iman" in which there lots of kufr translated his book "Tauhid" in India. Whoever follows the Wahabis is a kaffir.
"Deobadiyaat is a form of Wahabiyath their ideology is to disrespect the Saints, every Deobandi is a Wahabi, and not every Wahabi is a Deobandi. Deobandi's become Hanafi and those that are not Deobandis call themselves Ahl-e-Hadith. They possess a great deal of kufr beliefs. The Wahabis and Ahl e Hadith tend to adhere to the work "Taqwiyat ul Iman" and call it the truth. The Deoband apostates acknowledging their kufr beliefs still call them Muslims, under Islamic Law they are therefore both kaffir and should be punished accordingly" ["Tajhahib Ahl ul Sunnah" by Naasir Sunniyath Abu Tahir Muhammad Thabib Siddiqui Dhana Purri, published Markazi Anjuman Huzbul Aynaf Lahore, Bareylvi Electorate Press 1361 Hijri]
"Oh God send your curse who refuted your beloved, disrespected him and identified faults in him and send your curse on those who loved and supported Abdul Wahab because such people are apostates".["Tahjanib Ahl'ul Sunnah un Ahl'ul Fitna (published Bombay by Anjumaun Tablighi Sadaqat): page 657]
"Verily there is no doubt that the Wahabi Najdis are kaffir and according to Sharí'a they are apostates if they die without repenting, they will be the first to perish in the fire". ["Tahjanib Ahl'ul Sunnah un Ahl'ul Fitna (published Bombay by Anjumaun Tablighi Sadaqat): page 263]
In the same above book the scholar names the guilty party with the following titles:
Ibne Saud, Kahazala Malik al Mabuud (page 257)
Ibne Saud, Kujha al Malik al Wuddod (page 259)
Murdood Ibne Saud (page 268)
Khubsa Najad (page 258)
Mullah Una'y Najad (page 259)
Kafara Najad (page 259)
Murdha Najad (page 260)
Kuffar Najad (page 263)
Murthadeen ay Najad (page 264)
Maloon e Najad (page 268)
Shayaatheen au Deoband (page 268)
"Tahjanib Ahl'ul Sunnah un Ahl'ul Fitna (published Bombay by Anjumaun Tablighi Sadaqat)
Ahl ul Sunnah work "fitnah Najdiyaat" by Haji Nawabdeen Golarvi writes:
"Mufti Azam Maulvi Zafar Ali Khan says who is Ibne Saud but a sales man of Haram Shareef that invests his profits on illicit luxuries, appeaser of the British, fired bullets on Muslims"["fitna Najdiyaat" by Haji Nawabdeen Golarvi", publishers Makathaba Ghosia, Thala, Ganag Road, Chakwaal, page 252]
In the same book Haji Nawabdeen Golarvi writes:
"If at any time Ameer Faysal turns against the British they have an alternative Crown Prince Ibne Saud on the pay roll taken from the speeches of Mufti Azam Muhammad Ali, published Delhi, Ghunni Muthaba, Delhi Volume 2 page 68"["fitna Najdiyaat" by Haji Nawabdeen Golarvi", publishers Makathaba Ghosia, Thala, Ganag Road, Chakwaal, page 76]
"Wahabis are greater kaffirs than Jews and Christians we have heard from our ancestors that even the Jews and Christians didn't deny their Prophets but these filthy individuals are against their own Prophet (taken from Munkuul As Azad ki Kahani page 351)"["fitna Najdiyaat" by Haji Nawabdeen Golarvi", publishers Makathaba Ghosia, Thala, Ganag Road, Chakwaal, page 98]
"As far as I recall he said that marriage with a Wahabi is not permissible - Azaz ki kahani"["fitna Najdiyaat" by Haji Nawabdeen Golarvi", publishers Makathaba Ghosia, Thala, Ganag Road, Chakwaal, page 173]
"Those that follow Abdul Wahab are called Wahabi in our country and consider themselves la madhabi. They claim that it is shirk to follow any of the four Imams, those that do are polytheists and consider Ahl'ul Sunnah women as captives, and deem it halaal to murder Sunni's. These are Wahabis a group of Khwaarjis as deemed Allamah Shaafi".["fitna Najdiyaat" by Haji Nawabdeen Golarvi", publishers Makathaba Ghosia, Thala, Ganag Road, Chakwaal, page 108]
"Deobandis books should be spat upon and urinated on"[Fatawi Razooba, Volume 4 page 183]
"The kufr of Ismail has been proven by the Ulema - quoting Mufti Azam Allamah Shah FuzulAllah Badhyawni (ra) - 10 - 13 Hijri"[Fitnah Wahabiyaath page 36 Haji Nawabadeen and Maulvi Fazl Haq Sahib Khayr Abadi, in their commentary "Tahqeeq al Fatawi Fi Abthal at Thaqhi Kamal Sharra wa basath" - pages 18-20]
"Ismail Dehlavi according the Sharia is a Kaffir and his killing is a duty. Whoever doubts his Kufr is also kaffir and cursed".[Haji Nawabadeen and Maulvi Fazl Haq Sahib Khayr Abadi, in their commentary "Tahqeeq al Fatawi Fi Abthal at Thaqhi Kamal Sharra wa basath" - page 20]
"The scholars of Ahl'ul Sunnah and the Ulema of Ka'ba, Arabs and non Arabs have a united Fatwa that Ashraf Ali Thanvi is kaffir whoever doubts this is also a kaffir".["Private Matters of the Muslim League" page 7 by Muhammad Miyaar Qadri]
One of the most famous public documents in the history of Pakistan is known commonly as the Munir Report, its official title being: Report of the Court of Inquiry constituted under Punjab Act II of 1954 to enquire into the Punjab Disturbances of 1953. The disturbances referred to were instigated by a number of religious leaders (ulama) in pursuance of their demand that the government officially classify Ahmadis to be a non-Muslim minority community, and take certain other actions against members of this movement.
The disturbances were eventually quelled by the authorities, and a public court of inquiry appointed with Justice Muhammad Munir as president and Justice Kayani as member to investigate the causes of the trouble. The inquiry went into the underlying issues behind the events, carrying out an incisive analysis of the ulama's concept of an Islamic state. Its 387-page Report, which soon became a historic document, was presented in April 1954.
Referring to the ulama's call for Pakistan to be run as an official `Islamic' state, and to their demands against Ahmadis, the Report says:
``The question, therefore, whether a person is or is not a Muslim will be of fundamental importance, and it was for this reason that we asked most of the leading ulama to give their definition of a Muslim, the point being that if the ulama of the various sects believed the Ahmadis to be kafirs, they must have been quite clear in their minds not only about the grounds of such belief but also about the definition of a Muslim because the claim that a certain person or community is not within the pale of Islam implies on the part of the claimant an exact conception of what a Muslim is. The result of this part of the inquiry, however, has been anything but satisfactory, and if considerable confusion exists in the minds of our ulama on such a simple matter, one can easily imagine what the differences on more complicated matters will be. Below we reproduce the definition of a Muslim given by each alim in his own words.''
(p. 215)
There then follow in the Report the answers given by various ulama to the question, What is the definition of a Muslim. At the end of the answers, the Report draws the following conclusion:
``Keeping in view the several definitions given by the ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines are agreed on this fundamental. If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulama, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kafirs according to the definition of every one else.''
(p. 218)
After this, under the heading Apostasy, the Report refers to the belief held by the ulama that, in an Islamic state, a Muslim who becomes a kafir is subject to the death penalty. The Report says:
``According to this doctrine, Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan, if he has not inherited his present religious beliefs but has voluntarily elected to be an Ahmadi, must be put to death. And the same fate should befall Deobandis and Wahabis, including Maulana Muhammad Shafi Deobandi, Member, Board of Talimat-i-Islami attached to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, and Maulana Daud Ghaznavi, if Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri or Mirza Raza Ahmad Khan Barelvi, or any one of the numerous ulama who are shown perched on every leaf of a beautiful tree in the fatwa, Ex. D.E. 14, were the head of such Islamic State. And if Maulana Muhammad Shafi Deobandi were the head of the State, he would exclude those who have pronounced Deobandis as kafirs from the pale of Islam and inflict on them the death penalty if they come within the definition of murtadd, namely, if they have changed and not inherited their religious views.
``The genuineness of the fatwa, Ex. D.E. 13, by the Deobandis which says that Asna Ashari Shias are kafirs and murtadds, was questioned in the course of enquiry, but Maulana Muhammad Shafi made an inquiry on the subject from Deoband, and received from the records of that institution the copy of a fatwa signed by all the teachers of the Darul Uloom, including Maulana Muhammad Shafi himself which is to the effect that those who do not believe in the sahabiyyat of Hazrat Siddiq Akbar and who are qazif of Hazrat Aisha Siddiqa and have been guilty of tehrif of Quran are kafirs. This opinion is also supported by Mr Ibrahim Ali Chishti who has studied and knows his subject. He thinks the Shias are kafirs because they believe that Hazrat Ali shared the prophethood with our Holy Prophet. He refused to answer the question whether a person who being a Sunni changes his view and agrees with the Shia view would be guilty of irtidad so as to deserve the death penalty. According to the Shias all Sunnis are kafirs, and Ahl-i-Quran, namely, persons who consider hadith to be unreliable and therefore not binding, are unanimously kafirs, and so are all independent thinkers. The net result of all this is that neither Shias nor Sunnis nor Deobandis nor Ahl-i-Hadith nor Barelvis are Muslims and any change from one view to the other must be accompanied in an Islamic State with the penalty of death if the Government of the State is in the hands of the party which considers the other party to be kafirs. And it does not require much imagination to judge of the consequences of this doctrine when it is remembered that no two ulama have agreed before us as to the definition of a Muslim. If the constituents of each of the definitions given by the ulama are given effect to, and subjected to the rule of `combination and permutation' and the form of charge in the Inquisition's sentence on Galileo is adopted mutatis mutandis as a model, the grounds on which a person may be indicted for apostasy will be too numerous to count.''
(p. 219)
Hence this extensive inquiry found that if the fatwas of the ulama are relied upon to determine whether a sect is Muslim or kafir, then no sect at all will be left which could be called Muslim.
Barelvi and Deobandi Maulvis on Shias being Infidels [in Urdu.]
TAILPIECE FOR "TAKFIRI" PAKISTANI MULLAHS
“The judgement of apostasy and expelling someone from the religion is only appropriate for the people of knowledge who are firmly grounded in knowledge, and they are the judges in the various Sharee’ah law courts, and those who are able of giving legal verdicts. And this is just like the other matters, and it is not the right of every person, or from the right of those who are learning, or those who ascribe themselves to knowledge, but who have deficiency in understanding. It is not appropriate for them to make judgements of apostasy (upon others). Since, mischief will arise from this, and sometimes a Muslim might be judged as an apostate but he is not actually so. And the takfir of a Muslim who has not committed one of the nullifications of Islaam contains great danger. Whoever says to his brother “O Kaafir” or “O Faasiq”, and he is not like that, then the words will fall back upon the one who said them. Hence, the ones who actually judge with apostasy are the legislative judges and those who are able and fit for giving legal verdicts. And as for those who enforce the judgements they are the leaders of the Muslims (wullaat al-amr). As for whatever is other than this, then it is mere confusion.”
“Meting out the punishments is only appropriate for the leader of the Muslims and it is not for every person to establish the punishment, since confusion, and corruption necessarily follows from this, and also the cutting off of the society, tribulations and provocations occur. Establishing the punishments is appropriate (i.e. befits only) to the Muslim leader. The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Pardon each other for the punishments that are between you, but when the execution of the punishment reaches the [authority of the] Sultaan, then Allaah curses both the one who seeks intercession and the one who grants the intercession [i.e. to revoke the punishment]”. And from the responsibilities of the Sultaan in Islaam, and from those matters that befit him is the establishment of the punishments after they have been established legislatively, via the Sharee’ah law courts, upon the one who fell into the crime for which the legislator has designated a specific punishment, such as for stealing. So what has been said is that establishing the punishments (i.e. meting them out) is from the rights of the Sultaan, and when the Muslims do not have a Sultaan amongst them, then they should just suffice with commanding the good and forbidding the evil, and calling to Allaah, the Might and Majestic, with wisdom, good admonition and arguing with that which is best. And it is not permissible for individuals (in the society) to establish the hudood, since that, as we have mentioned, will bring about chaos, and also provocations, and tribulations will arise, and this contains greater corruption than it contains rectification. And from amongst the Sharee’ah principles that are submitted to is, “Repelling the harmful things takes precedence over bringing about the beneficial things”.
Al-Khawaarij
The Prophet said:
إنَّ أمّتكم هذه جُعل عافيتها في أوّلها، وسيصيب آخرَها بلاء وأمورٌ تنكِرونَها،
فمَن أحبَّ أن يُزحزَح عن النار ويُدخَل الجنّة فلتأتِه منيّتُه وهو يؤمن بالله
واليوم الآخر، وليَأتِ إلى الناس الذي يحبُّ أن يُؤتَى إليه
“Safety of this your ummah lies in its first generation. Its later generations will be afflicted with calamities and things you will find repulsive. Trials will follow one another successively until later ones will make the former seem insignificant until the believer will say at the advent of each trial: ‘This is the one that is going to destroy me.’ So let whosoever wants to be saved from Hell and made to enter Paradise die while he is believing in Allaah and the Last Day and let him do to people what he would like them to do to him .” (Muslim)
Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood spoke the truth when he described the companions of the Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) by saying:
فإن الحي لا يؤمن عليه الفتنة، أولئك أصحاب محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم من كان منكم مستنا ، فليستن بمن قد مات أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا ، وأعمقها علما ،
فاعرفوا لهم حقهم وتمسكوا بهديهم ، فإنهم كانوا على الهدى المستقيم
“Whoever wants to follow a path, let him follow the path of one who has died, for there is no guarantee that the one who is still alive will not be tempted. Those are the companions of Muhammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ), the most pure in heart of this ummah and the most deep in knowledge, the least sophisticated and complicated, people whom Allaah chose to establish His religion and accompany His Prophet. So acknowledge their rights and adhere to their guidance, for they are following true guidance .”
{ and verily, among them is a party who distort the Book with their tongues (while they read it) , so that you may think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book, and they say, “This is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie against Allah while they know it.} [3:78].
Imam ibn Al-Qayyim said, “The origin of Kufr and Shirk comes from saying about Allah without knowledge, which is one of the most prohibited acts in the Sight of Allah. It produces the most harmful effects, because it entails lying with regards to Allah and describing Him with what is not appropriate. This also entails changing and altering Allah’s religion, denying what He has approved while approving what He has denied, implementing what He has rejected while rejecting what He has commanded to be carried out, hating those who are His loyalists while taking His enemies as loyal friends, detesting what He loves while loving what He hates, and describing Him with what is not appropriate with regards to His Attributes, Speech and Actions.”
Allah has forbidden us from following our lusts and desires, and declared that doing so is not the path of the believers, but instead is the path of the disbelievers and the heretics. Allah said about such people, what translated means,
أَفَرَأَيْتَ مَنِ اتَّخَذَ إِلَهَهُ هَوَاهُ
Have you seen him who takes his own lust (vain desires) as his ilah (god)? [45:23].
The Salaf used to call those who follow the sayings that contradict the Quran and Sunnah and those who innovate in the religion, “Ahlu Al- Ahwa’,” meaning the people who follow the desires.
This is because such people discard the Quran and Sunnah and what they legislate, and instead follow their opinions and desires and depend on them.
They have even made their desires and lusts as the indisputable source of legislation, and declared that the Texts of the Quran and Sunnah do not necessarily lead to certain and clear rulings.
They thus accept the Texts only if they are in harmony with their opinions and desires, and they reject the rest or alter their meanings in the manner they see fit.
The Messenger of Allaah said,
إياكم والغلو في الدين، فإنما أهلك من كان قبلكم الغلو في الدين
"Beware of extremism in religion, for it is extremism in religion that destroyed those who were before you." (Ahmad and An-Nasaaee)
Imaam Maalik said,
ينبغي للمرء أن لا يتكلم إلا فيما أحاط به خيرًا، فقد كان رسول الله وهو إمام المسلمين وسيد العالمين يُسأل في الشيء، فما يجيب حتى يأتيه الوحي من السماء
“It is incumbent upon a person not to speak on an issue until he knows everything about it. Even the Messenger of Allaah who is the leader of all Muslims would not answer a question posed to him until he received a revelation to that effect from Heaven.”
Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know. ( 16:43)
The Shaykh ‘Allaamah Saalih Al-Fawzaan was asked:
هل أسامة بن لادن ومن تبعه من قوله وأيدهم على مذهبهم يُعتبرون من الخوارج؟
Is Bin Laden and those who follow his views and promote his beliefs considered to be from the (deviant sect known as the) Khawaarij?
He responded:
عندكم قاعدة أن الذي يخرج على ولي الأمر أنه من الخوارج سواء أسامة بن لادن أو غيره، اللي يخرج على ولاة أمور المسلمين هذا من الخوارج .
There is a (well known) principle, and this is that everyone who rebels against those in authority is considered to be from the Khawaarij, whether this is Bin Laden or anyone else. Anyone who rebels against the Muslim leaders is deemed to be from the Khawaarij.
1427/2/5 in the lesson ‘The Explanation of the Creed'
Question: Are those who carry the ideology of the Khawarij present today?
Answer: Far removed is Allah from all imperfections! And that which is happening today, is it not from the actions of the Khawarij? And it is declaring the Muslims to be disbelievers, and more severe than that is the killing of the Muslims and transgressing against them through terrorist activities. And this is the Manhaj of the Khawarij, it comprises of three aspects:
Firstly - Takfir of the Muslims.
Secondly - Disobedience to the ruler.
Thirdly - Making permissible the blood of the Muslims.
This is the Manhaj of the Khawarij, and even if a person believed it in his heart and did not speak (with any of it) or did not act out any of it, he would still become a Khariji in his belief and opinion, which he did not express openly.
Shaykh Salih al-Fawazan
Al-Ijaabaat al-Muhimmah fee Mashaakil il-Mudlahimmah, compiled by Muhammad bin Fahd al-Husayn.
Translated by Abul-Irbaad Abid Zargar
Question: Is the one who makes Takfir of the rulers and encourages the Muslims to revolt against their rulers, to be considered from the Khawarij?
Answer: This is the Madhhab of the Khawarij. When an individual holds it permissible to revolt against the Muslim rulers, and more severe than that is to declare them to be disbelievers. This is the Madhhab of the Khawarij.
Shaykh Salih al-Fawazan
Al-Ijaabaat al-Muhimmah fee Mashaakil il-Mudlahimmah, compiled by Muhammad bin Fahad al-Husayn.
Translated by Abul-Irbaad Abid Zargar
Question: What is our position towards those who make Takfir of the Muslim rulers today, generally and in detail? Are they (those who make Takfir of the rulers) considered to be from the Khawarij?
Answer: Those who declare the Muslim rulers to be disbelievers in general, then these are from the most extreme of the Khawarij because they do not exclude anyone and give the ruling of disbelief to all the Muslims rulers. So this is most severe form of the Madhhab of the Khawarij, because they generalized (the declaration of disbelief).
Shaykh Saleh al-Fawazan
Al-Ijaabaat al-Muhimmah fee Mashaakil il-Mudlahimmah” by Muhammad bin Fahad al-Husayn
Translated by Abul-Irbaad Abid Zargar
Question: What is your advice to those who say that this country fights the deen and restricts the du’aat?
Answer: Since the Saudi state began, it has been aiding the deen and its people, and it was not set up except on this foundation.
And now it aids the Muslims in every place with financial help, building Islamic centers and masajid, sending du’aat, printing books foremost amongst them - the Noble Qur’an, opening centers of learning and Shari’ah colleges, and also it rules by the Islamic Shari’ah and has an independent body for enjoining good and forbidding evil in every town.
And all of that is a proof that this state aids Islam and its people, and it is a thorn in the throats of the hypocrites and the people of evil and splitting.
And Allah will aid His deen even if the mushrikun and those of evil intentions hate it.
And we do not say that this state is perfect in every way and that it doesn’t have any mistakes.
Mistakes occur from everyone, but we ask Allah to aid us in rectifying the mistakes.
And if the one who said this looked at himself he would find mistakes in himself which would prevent him from speaking about others and he would be ashamed to look at the people. Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan
“The recompense of those who wage war against Allaah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.” (Al-Maaidah 5:33)
HISTORY OF KHAWAARIJ
Al-Khawarij is plural for “Kharij”, meaning one who rebels against the acknowledged Muslim ruler whom Islam obliges every Muslim to obey and not rebel against.
This definition of Al- Khawarij, which is taken from Islamic terminology, has become a trademark for the twelve thousand Muslims who rebelled against Caliph Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, and this includes all the groups that followed their way of understanding the religion.
These groups have since been known as “Al-Khawarij” even though they carried different names.
Among those groups are: Al- Muh’akkimah, Ash- Sharat, Al- ‘Haroriyyah, An- Nawa-sib, and Al- Mariqhah.
Al-Khawarij are the people whom the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, mentioned when he said, what translated means, “A group will go astray during a time of division between Muslims. The closest among the adversaries (the side of Ali bin Abi Talib and the side of Mu’awiyah) to the Truth will kill them (the deviant group, Al-Khawarij).”
Also, the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, said regarding a man who once accused him of injustice, “From among the offspring of this man there will rise a people who will read the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats (meaning it will not enter their hearts). They will kill Muslims and spare Idol-worshippers. They will deviate from Islam (as fast and clean) as an arrow pierces the game. If I live to witness their appearance, I will kill them as the people of ‘Aad (whom Allah utterly destroyed and annihilated because of their disbelief) were killed.” [Al-Bukhari & Muslim].
He further said, “Just before the end of time, young, idiotic people will rise. They will say words similar to (the good words) of the best people. They will recite the Quran, but it will not go beyond their throats. They will deviate from the religion as fast as an arrow pierces the game. If you meet them, kill them, for killing them will bring about a reward from Allah on the Day of Resurrection for whoever kills them.” [Al-Bukhari & Muslim].
The companions of the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, were unanimous in their decision to fight Al-Khawarij. Also, the majority of the scholars of Islam state that it is an obligation to fight them.
Soon after they appeared as a distinct group, Al-Khawarij divided into seven groups, among them Al- Muh’akkimah who fought Ali bin Abi Talib.
Al-Khawarij accused Ali of Kufr and announced their animosity towards him. They departed to Haroraa’ and chose two men as their leaders, one to lead them in prayer and the other to lead their forces in battle. When Ali realized the danger posed by these people, he sent Abdullah Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, to debate them and expose their erroneous ways. Ibn Abbas argued with them and refuted the arguments supporting the positions they took. Many of them abandoned the camp of Al-’Haroriyyah and rejoined the camp of Caliph Ali bin Abi Talib.
However, their leaders and those who remained with them refused to abandon their rebellion against the righteous Khalifah, Ali. They announced that their campaign of war against their adversaries will continue. Ali bin Abi Talib then decided to meet them himself.
He called upon them to rejoin the ranks of the Khalifah and abandon their deviant ways. He also refuted their arguments and nullified their misguided way of understanding the religion.
However, they persisted in their defiance of the Khalifah and camped their forces at the area of An-Nahrawan.
On their way to An-Nahrawan, Al-Khawarij met Abdullah -- the son of Khabbab bin Al-Aratt, a noble companion of the Messenger Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, and seized him. They asked him, “Who are you?” He replied, “I am Abdullah bin Khabbab, the companion of the Messenger Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam.” They said, “Narrate to us a Hadith you heard from your father who related it to the Messenger Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam.” He said, “I heard my father say, ‘The Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, said, ‘There will be a Fitnah (calamity and division) in which those who sit idle are better than those who walk, and those who walk are better than those who rush. Therefore, whoever has no choice but to kill or be killed, let him be killed and let him not be the killer.’” They asked him, “What do you say regarding Abu Bakr and Umar?” Abdullah said good words of praise regarding them. They said, “What do you say with regards to At- Ta’hkim (when Ali and Mu’awiyah reverted to some of the companions to judge between them in their dispute, according to the Quran and Sunnah)?”
He said, “I say that Ali has better knowledge in the Book of Allah, is more careful with the religion, and has more wisdom than you!” They said, “You do not follow the Truth and Guidance. Rather, you follow men according to their fame.” They then said to him, “This Quran (which you carry) around your neck commands us to kill you.” He said, “Whoever the Quran preserves his life, you preserve his life in turn.
And whoever the Quran sheds his blood, give him death in turn.” Then, they brought Abdullah bin Khabbab closer to the river, and one of them, Musmi’ bin Qhadali, slit his throat. Then, they entered his house and killed his children and also his wife, who was pregnant, and slit open her stomach.
When Ali bin Talib heard what Al-Khawarij did to Abdullah bin Khabbab and his family, he led an expedition of four thousand soldiers to arrest those who committed this atrocity. When he reached their area, he asked them to deliver those who killed Abdullah. They said to Ali’s emissary, “We all killed him. And, furthermore, if we catch you (meaning
Ali) we will kill you too.” Then, Ali prepared to fight them.
But before the battle commenced, he asked them, “What do you dislike as regards my matter?” They said, “We hate that you, when we fought with you on the Day (incident) of Al-Jamal, allowed for us their (the side of ‘Aaishah, Tal’hah, and Az-Zubair) possessions after we defeated them but did not allow us to seize their women and children as slaves. Why did you allow us to shed their blood and seize their possessions but not their women and children?” Ali said, “I only allowed you to seize their possession in return for their looting the Muslim treasury in the city of Basrah before I came to meet them (to convince them to end their rebellion). As for their women and children, they did not fight against us and they, therefore, still enjoyed the rights of Muslims who live in the Islamic state. Also, if I had allowed their women for you, who among you would have liked to take ‘Aaishah (the Prophet’s wife) as his share?” They became ashamed and silent.
Thereafter, Ali refuted all their arguments and, as a consequence, eight thousand of them rejoined his camp. However, four thousand of them insisted on fighting, led by Abdullah bin Wahb Ar-Rasibi and Thu Al-Khuwaysirah (also known as Thu Ath-Thadiyyah), whose name was Hurqus bin Zaid.
Soon afterwards, the battle between Ali and Al-Khawarij commenced, and Ali’s army defeated and killed them all except nine people.
After the battle ended, Ali ordered his soldiers to search for Thu Ath- Thadiyyah, who was then found among the dead. Ali then said, “Allah and His Messenger have said the truth,” because before he passed away, the Prophet Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam had told Ali that he should search for Thu Ath-Thadiyyah among the dead when he meets these rebels.
This sect of Al-Khawarij, also known as Al-Mu’hakkimah, considers Uthman, Ali, ‘Aaishah, Tal’hah, and Az-Zubair as Kuffar. They also oblige the removal or assassination of the Muslim ruler who does not agree with their way of understanding the religion.
Furthermore, they accept the Muslim Ummah being leaderless, allow shedding the blood of the women and children of their adversaries, consider those who fall into major sins as Kuffar, and prohibit marrying the women of those who do not follow them, because they consider them also as Kuffar.
Also, among the sub-sects of Al-Khawarij is Al-Bayhasiyyah. They are the followers of Abu Bayhas, Al- Haytham bin Jabir. They claim that knowledge is only knowing Allah and what the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, was sent with. They consider whoever falls into an action not knowing if it permissible or forbidden as Kafir, since he lacks the “knowledge”.
Al-Azariqhah is another Khawarij sub-sect. They are the followers of Nafi’ bin Al-Azraqh who was known as Abu Rashid. When he first appeared, he rebelled against Abdullah bin Az-Zubayr -- a companion of the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam. Many people from Oman and Al-Yamamah also joined Nafi’. They later moved to Persia and took over the area of Al- Ahwaz after they killed Abdullah bin Az-Zubayr’s deputy in that area. They soon controlled Al-Ahwaz and adjacent areas in Persia.
As is the case with other deviant sects, Al-Azariqhah consider their adversaries as Kuffar. They consider those who join their ranks as believers and all others who do not as Kuffar. Yet, they believe that whoever joins their ranks must first be tested to prove his allegiance by ordering him to kill a Muslim captive. Otherwise, he would be killed himself. Also, Al- Azariqhah permit killing the women and children of their adversaries and consider those adversaries to be bound to dwell in Hell for eternity along with their women and children. They also consider the areas that do not join them to be areas of Kufr. Furthermore, they abandon stoning the adulterer, compel women to pray and fast while in their menses, consider Muslims who commit major sins as Kuffar, and allow shedding the blood of Muslims who do not join their ranks. Yet, they prohibit shedding the blood of Jews and Christians who live under Muslim control!
This is just as the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, described them that, “They kill Muslims and spare idol-worshippers.” Also, Al-Azariqhah would cut the hand and arm of the thief, while Islam commands cutting the thief’s hand only from the wrist. They also claim that the Ayah,
And of mankind there is he whose speech may please you (O Mohammad) in this worldly life.[2:204], describes Ali bin Abi Talib, and that the Ayah,
And of mankind is he who would sell himself, seeking the Pleasure of Allah. [2:207], describes Ibn Muljim, the cursed criminal who killed Ali, may Allah be pleased with him.
Najdah bin Amir was the leader of yet another Khawarij subsect called “An-Najdaat”, which established its stronghold in Al-Yamamah. They believe that it is an act of Kufr to consider as Kuffar those followers who could not physically join their forces. They also believe that those who agree with their beliefs will not enter Hell, and if they are punished in Hell, it will be because of their other sins and not because they joined their sect. They also give their loyalty to their followers who fall into major sins but consider insisting on committing minor sins as Kufr. Furthermore, they do not consider those who persist on committing major sins as Kuffar. In addition, they allow shedding the blood of their neighbors as well as their adversaries.
Another sub-sect of Al- Khawarij is As-Safriyyah, followers of Ziyad bin Al-Asfar. This group does not consider as Kuffar those who believe in their way but do not join their ranks. Also, they do not consider the children of their adversaries as Kuffar or that they will abide in Hell forever. They differ, however, on whether those who commit major sins are Kuffar or not. Some of them consider such sinners as Kuffar. Others, on the other hand, disagree, except in the case of those caught committing major sins and are thus punished for these sins by the rulers.Some of them claim that major sins that have prescribed punishment will not cause whoever commits them to become a Kafir, while actions that do not have a prescribed punishments, such as abandoning the obligatory prayer or Az-Zakat, will cause one to become a Kafir. They also allow women to assume leadership positions.
Another Khawarij sub-sect, “Al-Ajaridah”, are followers of Al- Karim bin Ajrad. This group disowns their own children before they reach the age of puberty. After the child becomes an adult, they oblige calling him unto Islam and teaching him matters of the religion. They do not allow shedding the blood of Ahlu As- Sunnah except if they meet them in battle. They also consider those who commit major sins as Kuffar.
Ath-Tha’alibah is yet another Khawarij sub-sect. This group was started by Tha’labah bin Mashkan, who used to be a follower of the Ajaridah before he started his own sect. This group later divided into six sects, the first being the followers of Tha’labah himself who persisted on his path. As for those who formed their own sects after they were followers of Ath-Tha’alibah, they include Al- Ma’badiyyah, followers of Ma’bad bin Abdurra’hman, who declare other Tha’alibah as Kuffar and who used to take Az-Zakat due on the possessions of their rich slaves. They also include Al-Akhnasiyyah, followers of Al- Akhnas bin Qays, who differed with Ath-Tha’alibah when they hesitated to call those who might appear to be disbelievers, yet conceal their Islam, as Kuffar. These sects also include followers of Rashid At-Tawsi, who were called Ar-Rashidiyyah. This sect disowned all those who disagree with them. There is also Al-Mukarramiyyah, followers of Abu Mukarram Al-’Ijli. This group considers those who fall into major sins as Kuffar because they are ignorant about Allah.Again, this group also considers those who disagree with them as Kuffar, and their adversaries from among Ath- Tha’alibah considered them Kuffar in turn. The sixth Tha’alibah sub-sect was called Ash-Shaybaniyyah, followers of Shayban bin Salam. This is the sect which Abu Muslim Al-Khurasani, the leader of the Abbasid armies, fought and defeated, killing Shayban and capturing the rest of his followers. This was the end of Ath- Tha’alibah who denied Allah’s Attributes and also resembled Allah with the creation.
Another major sub-sect of Al-Khawarij is the one still known as “Al- Ibadhiyyah”, who are the followers of Abdullah bin Ibadh Al-Murri. He permitted Al-Ibadhiyyah to marry women from Ahlu As-Sunnah and accepted the testimony of Ahlu As- Sunnah even against the Ibadhiyyah Themselves because they consider that the general name of Islam still bonds them together.
This group only allowed the shedding the blood of Ahlu As-Sunnah in battle. They fell into confusion when they considered their adversaries as Kuffar (disbelievers), but not Mushrikeen (polytheist).
Al-Ibadhiyyah also divided into six sects.
The first is Al-Yazidiyyah, followers of Yazid bin Anas who claimed that another Prophet will be sent for non-Arabs and that his law will replace Prophet Mohammad’s Law. They also claimed that Arabs who attest that there is no god except Allah and that Mohammad is His Messenger are believers even if they do not actually embrace and abide by Islamic laws. Therefore, according to this false claim, Arab Jews and Christians are considered believers if they only declare the Shahadatayn (the Testimony) with their tongues.
The second sub-sect of Al- Ibadhyyah is known as Al-Hafsiyyah, followers of Al-Hafs bin Abi Al- Miqdam. They claim that belief is merely knowing Allah and that this suffices if one disbelieves in the Prophets, the angels, Paradise, Hell, Resurrection, and Reckoning. They consider those who know Allah to be saved from Shirk even if they commit all types of major sins.
The third Ibadhi sub-sect is known as Al-’Harithiyyah, followers of Al-’Harith bin Yazid. This sect denies Predestination and Allah’s Will and condones acts of worship that are not meant for the sake of Allah. The last three Ibadhi sub-sects are Al- Ibrahimiyyah, Al-Maymoniyyah, and Al-Waqifiyyah.
We have shown how this deviant sect, Al-Khawarij, divided among themselves, and we also clarified the major beliefs of different Khawarij sub-sects.
From this short summary of their beliefs and practices, we now know the imminent danger of their beliefs, many of which still flourish among ignorant Muslims in the present time.
The beliefs of Al-Khawarij have always been and still pose grave danger to Islam and Muslims.
We ask Allah for protection and safety from the misguided beliefs of Al-Khawarij and their likes, for He is the All-Hearer and the only One Who fulfills the Du’aa’.
THE GREAT DEBATE of Ibn Abbas’s
The story of Ibn Abbas’s (May Allah be pleased with him and his Father) debate against them is in the Mustadrik of Hakam (2/150-152) in an authentic chain and upon the conditions of acceptance of Imam Muslim.
In it is the statement of Ibn Abbas:
أتيتُكم من عند صحابة النَّبيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم من المهاجرين والأنصار، لأبلِّغكم ما يقولون،المخبرون بما يقولون، فعليهم نزل القرآن، وهم أعلمُ بالوحي منكم، وفيهم أنزل، وليس فيكم منهم أحد
“I come to you from the Companions of the Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) from amongst the Muhajireen and Ansaar to inform you of what they say. They were present when the Qur’an was revealed, and they are more knowledgeable about the revelation than you are and were present at its descending, and not a single one of you is from them. So some of them said: لا تخاصموا قريشاً Do not dispute with a person from the Quraish because
Allah says: بَلْ هُمْ قَوْمٌ خَصِمُونَ But they are a quarrelsome people Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him and his Father) said:
وأتيتُ قوماً لم أرَ قوماً قطُّ أشدَّ اجتهاداً منهم، مسهمة وجوههم من السَّهر، كأنَّ أيديهم وركبهم تثنى عليهم، فمضى من حضر
“I never saw a people striving harder in doing deeds. Their faces were marked with lines from abstaining from sleep. It was as if their hands and knees praised them.
So those who were present proceeded, and some of them said,
لنكلِّمنَّه ولننظرنَّ ما يقول
“By Allah we will speak to him and debate what he says”I asked:
أخبروني ماذا نقمتم على ابن عمِّ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وصهره والمهاجرين والأنصار؟
“Why do you have resentment against the cousin of the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) his in-laws, the Muhajireen and Ansaar? They said:” (because of) ثلاثاً Three things” I asked: ما هنَّ؟ “What are they?”
They said: أمَّا إحداهنَّ فإنَّه حكم الرِّجالَ في أمر الله، “As for the first one it is that he made men arbitrators in the matters of Allah. And Allah said:
إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلّهِ Verily! The decision rests only with Allah [Yusuf: 67]
I said: هذه واحدة “ This is one” And they said:
ولَم يسْب ولَم يغنَم، فلئن كان الذي قاتل كفَّاراً لقد حلَّ سبيُهم وغنيمتهم،
ولئن كانوا مؤمنين ما حلَّ قتالُهم
“As for the other, it is that he fought and did not take captives or booty of war. If the ones being fought are disbelievers, then indeed it is permissible to take them captive and take the booty of war, and if they were believers it would not be permissible to fight them.
I said: هذه ثنتان، فما الثالثة؟ “ That’s two, so what is the third one?”
They said: إنَّه مَحا نفسَه من أمير المؤمنين، فهو أمير الكافرين “He wiped out the title of ‘Amir al-Mu’mineen’ for himself, so he is the Amir of the disbelievers.”
I said: أعندكم سوى هذا؟ “Do you have anything others than these? They said: حسبنا هذا “ This suffices us” So I said to them:
أرأيتم إن قرأت عليكم من كتاب الله ومن سنَّة نبيِّه صلى الله عليه وسلم
ما يُردُّ به قولُكم أتَرضَون؟
“If I read of the Qur’an and Sunnah that which refutes these claims, will you be pleased? They said: نعم! “Yes” So I said:
أمَّا قولكم: حكَّم الرِّجال في أمر الله، فأنا أقرأ عليكم ما قد رُدَّ حكمُه إلى الرِّجال في ثمن ربع درهم، في أرنب ونحوها من الصيد
As for your statement: ‘A man has arbitrated in the matter of Allah’, I will read to you what has given the power of arbitration to men concerning a killed rabbit and the likes of that which is hunted which price is worth a quarter of a dirham. Allah says:
إلى قوله: (( يَحْكُمُ بِهِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ ))،
O you who believe! Kill not game while you are in a state of Ihram (for Hajj or 'Umrah), and whosoever of you kills it intentionally, the penalty is an offering, brought to the Ka'bah, of an eatable animal (i.e. sheep, goat, cow, etc.) equivalent to the one he killed, as adjudged by two just men among you; [Maidah: 95]
فنشدتكم الله: أحُكم الرِّجال في أرنب ونحوها من الصيد أفضل أم حكمهم في دمائهم وصلاح ذات بينهم؟!
وأن تعلموا أنَّ الله لو شاء لَحَكم ولَم يُصيِّر ذلك إلى الرِّجال، وفي المرأة وزوجها
I ask you by Allah, is the arbitration of men concerning a rabbit and its like of hunted animals better than their arbitration regarding bloodshed and reconciliation between themselves? And you are aware that if Allah wished he would have decided the matters himself and not left it to men. And concerning a woman and her husband Allah says:
"If you fear separation between them, appoint an arbitrator from his family and from her family; if they both wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation" [Nis’aa: 35]
فجعل الله حكم الرِّجال سنة مأمونة، أخَرَجتُ من هذه؟
So Allah has made the judgement of men a reliable Sunnah. Have I convinced you on this?” They replied: : نعم! “Yes” (I said to them):
قاتَل ولم يسْب ولم يغنم، أَتَسبُون أمَّكم عائشة، ثمَّ تستحلُّون منها ما يُستحلُّ من غيرها؟!
فلئن فعلتم لقد كفرتُم، وهي أمُّكم، ولئن قلتُم: ليست أمَّنا لقد كفرتُم
Regarding your saying ‘You fought them, but did not seize their booty nor capture them,’ Can you capture your Mother 'Aisha then make permissible concerning her what is permissibility concerning other female slaves.
If you say that she can be captured and treated like any of the other female slaves, you have surely committed disbelief, because she is your mother. If you say that ‘she is not our mother’ than you have also committed disbelief, for Allah says:
The Prophet is closer to the believers than their ownselves, and his wives are their (believers') mothers (as regards respect and marriage). [Ahzab: 6]
فأنتم تدورون بين ضلالَتين، أيّهما صرتُم إليها صرتُم إلى ضلالة، فنظر بعضُهم إلى بعض،
You are thus hovering between two deviations. Whichever one you go towards, you go towards misguidance.”
So some of them began to look at each other.I asked: أخرجتُ من هذه؟ “Have I convinced you?” They replied: نعم! “ Yes” (I said to them):
مَحا اسمَه من أمير المؤمنين، فأنا آتيكم بمَن ترضَون وأريكم، قد سمعتُم أنَّ النَّبيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يوم الحُديبية كاتَبَ سُهيل بن عمرو وأبا سفيان بن حرب،
فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لأمير المؤمنين
اكتب يا علي: هذا ما اصطلح عليه محمد رسول الله، فقال المشركون:
لا والله! لو نعلم أنَّك رسول الله ما قاتلناك،
فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : اللَّهم إنَّك تعلمُ أنِّي رسول الله، اكتب يا علي:
هذا ما اصطلح عليه محمد بن عبد الله، فوالله لرسول الله خيرٌ من علي،
وما أخرجه من النبوة حين محا نفسَه
And as for your statement that he wiped out the title of ‘Amir al- Mu’mineen’ for himself, I will show and bring you proof by one whom you are pleased with. I heard on the Day of Hudaybiyyah, when the treaty was being drafted by Suhail bin Amr and Abu Sufyan bin Harb, the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) say to the Amir ul Mu’mineen: "Write O’ 'Ali: ‘This is what has been agreed upon by Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah’." The Mushrikeen objected to this saying: "No, By Allah, if we believed that you were the Messenger of Allah, we would not have fought you." Upon this, the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) said: O’ Allah you know that I am the Messenger of Allah. Write O’ Ali ‘This is what has been agreed upon by Muhammad bin Abdullah.’ …For I swear by Allah that the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) is better than Ali, and erasing his title did not remove his Prophethood.
Abdullah Bin Abbas (May Allah be Pleased with him and his Father) said:
: فرجع من القوم ألفان وقُتل سائرُهم على ضلالة
So (after this), two-thousand of them (the Khawaarij) returned to the truth and the rest of them were killed upon falsehood.
THERE IS ENOUGH BENEFIT FOR ANYONE WHO HAS INTELLECT.
Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said,
فإن عامة ضلال أهل البدع كان بهذا السبب، فإنهم صاروا يحملون كلام الله ورسوله على ما يدعون أنه دال عليه، وليس الأمر كذلك
“Majority of innovations have their roots in misunderstanding of Islaamic texts, for those who established innovations had wrongful perception of the Word of Allaah which they used to back up their innovations.”
The scholars say,
من اتباع المتشابهات الأخذ بالمطلقات قبل النظر في مقيِّداتها، أو في العمومات من غير تأمل في مخصِّصاتها، وكذلك العكس بأن يكون النص مقيدًا فيُطلق، أو خاصًا فيُعمّ بالرأي من غير دليل سواه، فإن هذا المسلك رميٌ في عماية واتباع للهوى بالدليل، وحينئذ فالخلل في هذه المسالك الاجتهادية يوقع في أخطاء فاحشة عقائدية وفرعية
“It is part of following the ambiguous evidences to take to absolute evidences before looking at its restricted aspects or to take to general rules and disregard its particular aspects like making particularized or restricted evidence a general or unrestricted one or vice versa without any tangible evidences. This may cause grave mistakes.
For instance, the Khawaarij who revolted against ‘Alee said, “There is no judge save Allaah”, misinterpreting the Word of Allaah, “The judgement is but Allaah’s.” They thereby gave this verse a wrong meaning.
The Khawaarij sect was later influenced by scholastic theology and its principles became very close to those of the Jahmite and Mu’tazilite sects.
They center upon the following matters:
(1) Imputing kufr upon ‘Ali, ‘Uthmaan and other sahaabah ﻦﻴﻌﻤﺟأ ﻢﻬﻨﻋ ﷲا ﻲﺿر .
(2) The right to rebel and fight the Muslim rulers who may err or sin.
(3) Justifying the rebellion and fight against disobedient Muslims (rulers and/or ruled) and that it is permissible for them to secede from the general body of the Muslims.
(4) They believe that the Qur’aan is created. However, the Qur’aan is the literal Word of Allaah Who uttered it in letter and sound and which He Spoke to Jibreel عليه وسلم , directly without a mediator, and who then brought it down to the Prophet Muhammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ). The Qur’aan is neither the word of Jib reel nor the word of Prophet Muhammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ).
(5) They distort the meanings of Allaah’s Attributes by resorting to figurative interpretation.
(6) Like the twelver Shee’ites and other deviant sects, they deny that the believers will see Allaah on the Day of Resurrection. This contradicts what is asserted in the Qur’aan and authentic sunnah .
(7) Imputing kufr on the Muslims who commit major sins.
(8) The majority of the Khawaarij deny the actual punishment in the grave that Allaah inflicts upon those who deserve it.
(9) They speak ill about the scholars الطعنُ في العلماء See the incident with Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم and Ibn Abbaas, how they treated them, this is the common amongst the mis-guided youths of today, ignorant, foolish in understanding.
The aforementioned are some of the major characteristics of the Khawaarij.
I intended to give the reader some background about this very dangerous sect and which has influenced many Muslim groups and parties in our times leading to bloodshed in many parts of the Muslim World. The bloody confrontations are hard to stop in some places and that has distorted the view of Islam in many parts of the world. The truth, however, is emerging and will inshaa’ Allaah completely emerge on the hands of the true followers of Islam who are working hard to correct this problem with the good word without compromising the ‘aqeedah nor the manhaj . We should be able to present the truth without imitating the kufaar and their ways. In this respect, the words of Imaam Maalik ) ﷲا ﻪﻤﺣر ( are remembered: “Nothing will benefit this ummah to come except that which benefited its early generations .” Related by Imaam Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr in At-Tamheed (23:1).
This refers to the correct creed, methodology and righteous deeds. Another point of benefit is that the Muslim should be aware that the principles of many of these sects are still alive and propagated by certain individuals and/or groups, and accordingly the believer must be cautious
And what shows the danger of extremism and deviation from the truth and staying away from what Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah is upon, is the statement of the Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) from the Hadith of Jabir (May Allah be pleased with him):
إنَّ أخوفَ ما أخاف عليكم رجل قرأ القرآن،
حتى إذا رُئيت بهجته عليه وكان ردءاً للإسلام،
انسلخ منه ونبذه وراء ظهره، وسعى على جاره بالسيف ورماه بالشرك،
قلت: يا نبيَّ الله! أيُّهما أولى بالشرك: الرامي أو المرمي؟ قال: بل الرامي
Indeed what I fear most for you is that a man reads the Qur’an until magnificence is seen upon him and he is a support for Islam and it is withdrawn from him and he throws it behind his back and strives against his neighbor with the sword and he accusing him of shirk. I said O’ Prophet of Allah, which one is more worthy of (the accusation of) shirk, the accuser or the accused? He said: The accuser . [Collected by Imam Al-Bukhari in his Taarikh and Abu Ya’ala and Ibn Hibban and Al-Bazaar. See Sahih Al-Albani 3201]
The Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) said:
ومَن خرج على أمَّتي يضرب برَّها وفاجرَها، ولا يتحاش من مؤمنها،
ولا يفي لذي عهد عهدَه،فليس منِّي ولستُ منه
“Whoever rebels against my Ummah and fights the righteous and unrighteous of them, does not avoid its believers and does not fulfill his obligation to whom he has a contract, then they are not from me and I am not from them . [Muslim 1848]
Ibn Al-Qayyim said,
نهيُ النبيِّ عن قتال الأمراء والخروج على الأئمة وإن ظلموا أو جاروا ما أقاموا الصلاة، سدًّا لذريعة الفسادِ العظيم والشرِّ الكثير بقتالهم كما هو الواقع، فإنّه حصل بسبب قتالهم والخروج عليهم أضعافُ أضعافِ ما هم عليه، والأمّة في بقايا تلك الشرور إلى الآن
"The Prophet forbidden taking arms against the rulers and revolting against them even if they were unjust as long as long as they established prayers. He said this in order to prevent great corruption and evil that could emanate from taking arms against them.
The reality has shown that taking arms and revolting against them had brought harm and evil that that was much greater than their corruption."
While speaking about undesirability of forbidding vices if that could lead to a greater vice he said,
ومن تأمّل ما جرى على الإسلام في الفِتن الكبار والصِّغار رآها مِن إضاعةِ هذا الأصلِ وهو إنكار المنكر إذا كان يترتّب عليه ما هو أنكرُ منه، ومِن عدم الصبر على المنكَر،
فيُطلَب إزالتُه، فيتولّدُ منه ما هو أكبر منه
"Like revolting against kings and rulers, for this is the foundation of all evils and calamities. If one reflects over what happened to Islaam during minor and major crises one will realize that it caused by the negligence of this very principle."
‘Umar said,
إنا لا ننتصر على عدوّنا بعددٍ ولا عدة، وإنما ننتصر بطاعتنا لله ومعصيتهم له، فإن عصينا الله فقد استوينا وإياهم في المعصية، وكان لهم الفضل علينا
“We do not defeat our enemy through our great numbers and or sophisticated ammunitions, we defeat them through our obedience to Allaah and our enemies’ disobedience to Him. But when we disobey Allaah, we become like them in sins and they will then defeat us.”
REMOVING DOUBTS
Question: As you know, there are a number of ahaadeeth concerning how Muslims are to deal with the Muslim rulers, including the sinful and oppressive rulers.How would you respond to the one who claims that these ahaadeeth are concerning the khaleefah of the Muslims, not the various leaders, kings, or prime ministers of today?
The Answer: This Shubuha (misconception) that the Ahaadeeth of obedience to the Rulers are restricted to the general Khaleefah (greater Imaam) is, al-hamdulillah , already answered by the scholars of Islaam. Here are some of their statements:
1- Sh. Al-Islam Ibn Taymeyah ( rahimahullaah) said: "The sunnah is that the Muslims have one Imaam and the rest are his deputies. Suppose, however, the Ummah abandoned this due to a sin from some part of it and incapacity from the rest or for a reason other than that and which led to having number of Imaams, then it is binding upon each Imaam to establish the Hudood (prescribed punishments) and fulfill the rights (of people)." [Majmoo' al- Fataawaa, 35/175-176].
2- Imaam Ash-Shawkaani ( rahimahullaah) said: "In Principle, all Muslims should have one Imaam. However, after the spread of Islam and the expansion of its territories and their remoteness, it is known that in each region there became a ruler or Imaam and so with the rest of the regions, none of them having authority to command and forbid in the other regions... So the presence of various (multiple) Imaams and Rulers is of no harm, and it is binding to obey each one of them after giving him the bay'ah (pledge of allegiance) in the region in which his commands and prohibitions are executed therein. And similarly in the case of the one in charge of another region. And it is not obligatory upon the people of the other regions to obey him, nor to be under his governorship due to the remoteness of the regions..."
Then he said: "You should know this, since it is fitting to the Sharee'ah Foundations, and in full agreement to what is indicated by the evidences. And turn down what is being said in opposition to this, since the difference between the condition of the early Islamic wilaayah (administrative governship) and its state nowadays is clearer than the sun during the day." [Imaam Ash-Shawkaani in As- Sayelul Jarraar, 4/512].
3- Sh. Imaam Muhammad bin 'Abdil Wahaab ( rahimahullaah) said:
"The Imaams from each Madh-hab are unanimous that whoever overtakes a country or countries (seizes power) is entitled to assume the same rulership as the Imaam in ALL affairs. Were it not so, the affairs of this worldly life would not be upright. And for a long time, since before the time of Imaam Ahmad ( rahimahullaah) and until our time, people were not in agreement upon one Imaam, and they have no account of a scholar stating that the validity of (the applicability) of any of the rulings (of sharee'ah) is conditional upon the presence of the Greater Imaam ." [In Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah, 7/239].
4- Al-'Allaamah (esteemed scholar) As-San'aani ( rahimahullaah) said in his explanation of the hadeeth of Abu Hurairah ( radiya Allaahu 'anhu), raised to the Prophet ( _ : salllaallaahu 'aleihi was-sallam):
"One who defected from obedience (to the Amir) and separated from the main body of the Muslims - if he died in that state - would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya (i. e. would not die as a Muslim). [Saheeh Muslim, Book 20, # 4555, English Translation] that the "obedience" is the obedience to the Khaleefah upon whom there isagreement, and it seems that what is intended is the khaleefah on any region from the regions, since people were not on agreement on a single khaleefah over the entire Islamic lands since the Abbasid Rule. Rather each region became independent under a ruler running its affairs. And if we carry the hadeeth to apply only to one khaleefah upon whom the Muslims are unanimous then its (the hadeeth) benefit would be diminished.
And that the saying (in the hadeeth) "and separated from the main body of the Muslims," means: separated from the Jamaa'ah who agreed upon an Imaam under whom their body and affairs are organized, their world is united, and their protection from their enemy is achieved."
So, it becomes clear that negating the validity of governership on separate Muslim states leads to evil in the sense that its sets the stage for rebellion against the rulers, and this is forbidden in Islaam even if the ruler is an oppressor as this constitutes the creed of ahl-us-Sunnah .
And Allaah Knows Best.
May Allaah, the Most High, guide me, you, and all Muslims to abide by the way of the Salaf and make us from those who relate the unclear matters to the clear so that they reach that which is clear and pleasing to Allaah.
Shaykh `Alee al-Faqeehee on The Ways Used By the Khawaarij To Incite the Youth
Shaykh `Alee bin Naasir al-Faqeehee explained that what is said regarding the excellence of these miracles (karaamaat), then that is amongst the ways of stirring up the youth and he also said:
Verily, the ideology of the Khawaarij which is exemplified in declaring the Islamic societies to be disbelieving (societies) has not ceased to spread, and it has its callers and those who organise for it to be spread.
It is spread using these means by way of the Internet and the callers (to this ideology) spread it amongst the youth (in order) to employ their religious zeal. This is done by spreading what they claim to be miracles of the mujaahideen, and this is amongst the ways of stirring up the youth and using their zeal.
It is for this reason that they approach them from the avenue of their religion, and there has come in a hadeeth of Abu Bakr for a hadeeth of `Alee bin Abee Taalib (radiyAllaahu `anhu) in description of the Khawaarij - and Ibn Hajr has related it in the explanation of the hadeeth - "Then Satan will come to them from the avenue of their religion". And this is happening today, because what is spread on the World Wide Web is from unknown (unidentified) people, not known for knowledge and nor for religion.
And all of that (is done) in order to stir up the youth from the angle of their religion. The likes of this is not befitting for an intelligent person in that he turns to an unknown ignoramus (on the Internet), and such a one could be a plant (placed) by certain orientations who have goals that are enmitous to Islaam and which are not openly announced to the people.
And when we notify the youth of the likes of this (affair), we do not (at the same time) reject the miracles of the Awliyaa (pious friends of Allaah), rather these affairs are established and they are from the creed of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa`ah.
And we do not also reject what Islaam and the Muslims are subjected to by its enemies. These affairs are well-known, and it is obligatory upon every Muslim to do what he is able towards this. However, Jihaad in the path of Allaah has conditions and rulings, and it is the Scholars and the Jurists of the religion who explain all of that .
Selected Examples from the Characteristics of the Extremist Khawaarij
About the Book:
This is a complete translation of the small booklet “Al-Masaa’il-ul-Muntaqaat min Sifaat al-Khawaarij-ul-Ghulaat” [Selected Examples from the Characteristics of the Extremist Khawaarij] compiled and prepared by a student of knowledge, ‘Aadil bin ‘Alee Al-Furaydaan, and reviewed and examined by Shaikh Saalih bin Fawzaan Al-Fawzaan and Shaikh Muhammad bin ‘Abdir-Rahmaan Al-Khumayyis.
In this treatise, the author briefly touches upon the definition, history, and characteristics of the Khawaarij, one of the first and most dangerous sects in Islamic history whose effects and ideologies continue to exist up to today and will remain until the Final Hour. The majority of the treatise is dedicated to outlining the major and distinguishing attributes of the Khawaarij, which the author counts at 58.
It is important to study and be aware of these attributes so that one may avoid characterizing himself with them and thus fall into the ranks of the Khawaarij. This is from the perspective of learning evil in order to avoid it. And it is also beneficial since today, the ways and ideologies of the Khawaarij are prevalent, as can be seen in terrorist acts, suicide missions, assassinations and political strife. So by understanding the characteristics of the Khawaarij, the reader will be able to identify the perpetrators of such crimes, acknowledge their remoteness from Islaam and the fact that they are indeed from the extremist Khawaarij.
More Reading Material:
1 - The Takfiris make unlicensed Takfeer of Governments and scholars and call the common-folk to bloody revolution as a way to remove such governments and establish Islaamic Law.
A gaunt, regal saffron turbanned figure, yaktaro held aloft, steps onto the stage. Beside him is a smaller, younger man; several other saffron-robed faqirs follow, and as the full throated, open roar of Faqir Abdul Ghafoor rents the night air, they move around him in rhythmic union, echoing the words of the kafi he is singing. It is an unforgettable experience and one that can never be repeated, for Faqir Abdul Ghafoor died last month. (Article was written in 1986 and this post is posted in 2011)
