Divine Caliphate or Dictatorship?

(Note: This piece contains numerous hyperlinks which need to be explored to substantiate the points)

Kim Jong-Il the long ruling dictator of North Korea has died. Over the years he was given a divine like status by the state propaganda machine. According to state propaganda his birth was prophesized by a swallow and heralded by a double rainbow and his life was, apparently, not any less eventful with many miraculous events being attributed to him, such as having the ability to even control the weather. In describing his death, the state media declared it caused the heavens and earth to shake and magical writing appeared on the side of a mountain. All this religious fervour, bizarrely, comes from an atheistic communist party.

News channels around the world have been showing some remarkable images of North Koreans mourning the death.  Many people found the whole spectacle somewhat baffling, given what this man has done to his people over the years. Kim Jong-Il and his party have made North Korea into one of the most closed and isolated countries in the world. The citizens are denied freedom, access to the most basic of amenities is forbidden such as imported food, mobile phones, movies, internet, and the state apparatus monitors the words and movement of everyone. Yet these draconian rules don’t apply to everyone, all that is forbidden to North Koreans lay people is readily enjoyed by the ruling elite and in particular the dictator or ‘dear leader’ as everyone is taught to call him. In the 1990’s as many as 3.5 million North Koreans died of starvation, while the dictator and his cronies wallowed in luxuries. While children died of lack of food, the ‘dear leader’ was eating imported lobster and drinking champagne, whilst watching his collection of 20,000 Hollywood movies.

Yet Kim Jong-Il’s behaviour and hypocrisy is not unique to him, everywhere across the world where ever we find dictators, we find this pattern of behaviour. Dictatorship can be defined as totalitarian rule by one or a few group of people. The power of rule is often obtained through force or inheritance and is maintained through a propaganda instilling a combination of fear and idolization of the dictator. Most dictatorships transform into hereditary dictatorships, where power is held and transferred through a single family.

The Muslim world has more than its fair share of hereditary dictators, what then does Islam have to say on the matter? Well a very interesting hadith tackles the subject very nicely, in which the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) prophesizes the political leadership of the Muslim Ummah as follows:

From Hudhayfah that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) said:

“The Prophethood will remain amongst you for as long as Allah wills it to be. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be the khilafah upon the Prophetic methodology. And it will last for as long as Allah wills it to last. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be biting kingship, and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be tyrannical (forceful) kingship and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then He will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be a khilafah upon the Prophetic methodology. Then he (the Prophet) صلى الله عليه و سلم was silent.”
[Reported by Ahmad and Abu Dawud.]

Let us list the stages outlined the hadith

  1. Prophethood of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم)
  2. Rightly guided Caliphate (Just and righteous rule)
  3. Hereditary rule (Kingship)
  4. Oppressive hereditary rule (Dictatorship)
  5. Rightly guided Caliphate (Just and righteous rule restored)

Looking at the history of the Muslim Ummah, we can see this prophecy has unfolded step by step. The rightly guided period of the Khulafa Rashidun upon the Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه و سلم) Sunnah, is characterised by the following:

  1. The rule was not hereditary, i.e. it was not held and transferred by a single family.
  2. There was ‘rule of law’ where the Khalifa could be held to account by a judge or even a layperson.
  3. The Khalifa’s role was one of serving the people and not for personal benefit.
  4. The Khulafa shunned an opulent and luxurious life, despite the huge wealth coming into the possession of the state. For example after Muslims liberated Jerusalem, Sayidina Umar entered the city on foot (while his servant was riding a on a camel) wearing clothes with patches on them and refused to wear luxurious clothing.

Some scholars have commented that the Muslim Ummah is now in the 4th stage of the prophecy, namely oppressive hereditary rule. But given the recent events unfolding in what has been labelled the ‘Arab Spring,’ which has seen the end of hereditary rule we may well be moving towards the 5th stage of a just and righteous rule. (see this link for a very interesting lecture by Imam Suhaib Webb on this) The central point I wish to take make is that the 4th period is referring to oppressive hereditary dictatorship and it is a stark contrast from the rightly guided period of Khulafa Rashidun.

Now let us turn our attention to Ahmadiyya in light of what we have discussed so far. Ahmadiyya leaders claim that they have entered the 5th period of a Khilafah based on prophetic rule. They claim that the so-called Khalifas of Ahmadiyya are a fulfilment of the prophecy in this hadith.

But when we examine the claim of the leaders of Ahmadiyya, we see that it not only falls short of prophetic standard, it outright contradicts it. The first thing we note about the Ahmadiyya nizaam is that it has never been political rule, which goes against the entire theme of the hadith, which refers to political rule.

Ahmadis have tried to argue that since ‘Isa ibn Maryam will end the jizya it indicates the rule will not be political. This argument clearly makes no sense; a person who is not in office cannot pass, amend or repeal legislation.

The next thing to consider is the question of accountability, Is the Ahmadiyya khalifa and the ruling elite, accountable to anyone? The answer is a resounding no. There is no system of accountability available to average Ahmadis to question whether Islamic law is being adhered to.

The other striking thing about the Ahmadiyya nizaam is that it has not ended a hereditary system (which contradicts the method of the way of the Khulafa Rashidun), but instead enshrined a hereditary dictatorship. After the demise of the first Khalifa, every single so called Khalifa of Ahmadiyya has been from the same ruling family.

Then we come to lifestyle, can we say that the so called Khalifas of Ahmadiyya are living a life of simplicity, like the Khulafa Rashidun who gave away their wealth shunning opulence and luxuries? It is clear that Ahmadi Khalifas have in fact been doing the opposite, amassing huge wealth.  After all, how many people do you know that can afford to pay more than £40,000 to someone for looking after their horses? This is all happening while average Ahmadis and their families are forced to make personal sacrifices and live a frugal life, the leadership brazenly wallow in luxury in their own VIP areas. Does this all sound familiar?

A neutral observer will note that the Ahmadiyya nizaam has more in common with the hereditary dictatorship of Kim Jong-Il of North Korea than the rightly guided Khulafa Rashidun.

In fact the similarities between Ahmadiyya and the dictatorship of Kim Jong-Il are very striking. Similarities include creating a closed and insular community controlled by fear and propaganda, veneration of hereditary leadership based around the ‘cult of personality,’ the iconological use of the dictator’s portrait in homes and public spaces (see this), restriction and control of interactions with outside world (in particular with Muslims),  banning  the use of social networks such as Facebook, preventing women from having equal participation, monitoring the movements and behaviour of individuals, banning visiting cinema. Even the food distribution in the annual Jalsa is like North Korea, an unequal two tier system, where the elite eat meat and the masses eat beans.

It is just like George Orwell’s book ‘Animal Farm’, where the ruling pigs announce “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” (A book everyone should read, especially Ahmadis)

External observers find the emotional attachment of the oppressed to their oppressor puzzling, how is it that they cannot see what is being done to them? The Ahmadiyya hereditary dictatorship, like that of the dictatorship of Kim Jong-Il, maintains its control on its followers by appealing to their superstitions and also through a system of indoctrination from an early age; compare the Waqf-e-Nau with THIS.

Every year thousands of North Koreans wake up from their nightmare and escape. With their new found freedom they are amazed by how they were so taken in by the state propaganda and not surprisingly former Ahmadis say exactly the same thing.

In The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon describes Sayidina Umar (the liberator of Jerusalem and Persia) in the following terms:

“Yet the abstinence and humility of Umar were not inferior to the virtues of Abu Bakr: his food consisted of barley bread or dates; his drink was water; he preached in a gown that was torn or tattered in twelve places; and a Persian satrap, who paid his homage as to the conqueror, found him asleep among the beggars on the steps of the mosque of Muslims”
That gives us some indication of what standards we are speaking of when we speak about the rightly guided Caliphate based on the Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه و سلم) Sunnah, which is clearly distinct from oppressive hereditary dictatorships.

We prayer Allah frees humanity from all forms of oppressive dictatorships.


The following article was submitted by Br. Muhammed Khan

Suhaib Webb’s Blog

To our readers, I would highly suggest checking out Imam Suhaib Webb’s blog. I generally dislike “Internet Islam“, but Imam Suhaib’s blog is one of the few good ones out there. They openly discuss topics such as Divorce, Politics, Sex, Spirituality, Law and more. They have an article titled “Being Religious Without Being a Jerk“.

http://www.suhaibwebb.com/

Check it out and let us know what you think!

The Four False Prophets, Part IV: Musaylimah al-Kaddhab

بسم الله الحد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم

The Four False Prophets: Musaylimah Al-Kaddhab
Al-Aswad Al-’Ansi Tulayhah al-Azdi Sajjah bint al-Harith Musaylimah al-Kaddhab

This is the last installment in a series of articles on four of the early false prophets from the time of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم and Abu Bakr رضى الله عنه. In it, we will discuss their rise, opposition by the Muslims, and eventual defeat.

I hope this one will be the most interesting and intense…
Continue reading

Ramadan Reminders


بسم الله الرحمان الرحين الحمد لله رب العالمين و صلاة و سلام على أشرف النبين و إمام المتقين سيدنا و مولانا محمد المصطفى و على أهل البيت الطاهرين

Imagine that you are a foot-soldier on a battlefield. Behind you is a mounted horseman, in pursuit trying to kill you. Battered and beaten, you flee from the enemy. As you run, he strikes you left and right, blow after blow.. Injured and dazed, you look into the near distance and see a friendly castle. With the enemy right behind you, you run towards the castle. Dropping your sword and shield, you make haste across the bridge, and with your last ounce of strength, you pull up the draw-bridge. You collapse, exhausted and disheveled, thanking God for safety and your respite…

The battlefield is your life. The enemy attacking you is Shaytaan, whispering into your hearts. And the castle is Ramadan.

When we think of Ramadan, we often think of not eating or drinking during daylight hours. This is literally how we explain it to others. Some of the more adventurous amongst us mention abstinence. We make frequent mention of the health benefits, or that fasting reminds us of how the poor feel.
Continue reading

Al-Jazeera’s Stream discussion After-Thoughts

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم تسليما

After a recent approach by Al-Jazeera to the team at Thecult.info, today there was an excellent discussion between Akber Choudhry, the representative from the Ahmadiyya Awareness team, and Amjad Khan, a member of the Ahmadiyya religion on Al-Jazeera’s Stream programme. As the discussion progressed, it became clear that the points raised by Mr. Choudhry were causing Mr. Khan to become visibly uncomfortable. Most notably, Mr. Khan repeatedly lied on international TV concerning the following points:

  1. Mirza Masroor’s banning of individual Ahmadis’ Facebook pages;
  2. The Ahmadiyya doctrine that Muslims are not Muslims;
  3. Denying that they routinely associate average Muslims with the worst Islamophobic stereotypes (ie, ‘mullahs’ or ‘terrorists’);

This is the first time in a century that some of the Ahmadiyya beliefs and cult-like practices have been exposed to the full glare of the international media spotlight and faced with the bald facts, Mr. Khan and the Ahmadiyya were caught woefully short. We’re not surprised.

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و صحبه و سلم

Announcement from Brother Shahid

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم

The following is an announcement from Brother Shahid, the creator of TheCult team.

As-salaamu `alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakaatuh

I am suspending my activity in the field of Ahmadiyya Awareness for the time being. I will likely return insha’Allah, but I don’t have a date for you yet.

After over 6 years of this important work, I am pleased to say that there are many people well able to continue the cause in my absence, with the blog ably managed by brother Farhan and the forum by brother Tahir and other supporters working behind the scenes. I am appreciative of the immense work they have put in over the last year. There are of course many other people working in the field, alhamdulillah and they all continue to make massively important contributions. May Allah (SWT) reward them.

In the meantime, feel free to contact me through the blog and forum, your messages will get relayed to me insha’Allah.

I’d like to extend my sincere appreciation to my brothers and sisters in Islam for their support, especially the ones who have joined Islam from Ahmadiyya recently – your reversions were what this work was all about. To the Ahmadis, I say pray for guidance, and insha’Allah may you receive it.

As for me, I will be pursuing Islamic studies insha’Allah.

wassalaam

Shahid

Gressenhall Road: Mirza Masroor’s New Palace

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم

The Ahmadiyya Community has applied for an extensive redevelopment of their site at Gressenhall Road, London, SW18 5QL. The site contains the oldest Ahmadi prayer house in the UK and the residence of the Ahmadiyya leader Mirza Masroor Ahmad.

The development description reads:

“Demolition of the west wing of the administration block and hall next to the London Mosque and office buildings, plant room, wash rooms, bin store and garage along western boundary. Erection of replacement hall with single-storey element containing kitchen, bookshop, bin store and garage; alterations to administration/residential building, including the addition of a fourth floor and new facade in connection with use as offices. Erection of three-storey building to provide three dwellings ancillary to the Mosque, fronting Melrose Road. Use of No.65 Melrose Road as ancillary residential accommodation. Landscaping works including the felling of 13 trees.”

Continue reading

On Baihaqi’s narration about the descent of Eisa (A.S.)

In my last post on categorical narrations about the descent of Eisa (AS) from the heavens above, I quoted a hadith (#3) from Imam Baihaqi’s Asma’ wal Sifaat and promised to answer the Ahmadi chatter about it.

I am cognizant of the fact that it may well be too deep and not of too common interest but I feel there is need to document the things for general use if and when required.

The Hadith:

The Hadith in full along with the comments by Imam Baihaqi goes as under:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ، أنا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ، أنا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، ثنا ابْنُ بُكَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنِي اللَّيْثُ، عَنْ يُونُسَ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ، مَوْلَى أَبِي قَتَادَةَ الْأَنْصَارِيِّ قَالَ: إِنَّ أَبَا هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «كَيْفَ أَنْتُمْ إِذَا نَزَلَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فِيكُمْ وَإِمَامُكُمْ مِنْكُمْ» . رَوَاهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ فِي الصَّحِيحِ عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ بُكَيْرٍ، وَأَخْرَجَهُ مُسْلِمٌ مِنْ وَجْهٍ آخَرَ عَنْ يُونُسَ. وَإِنَّمَا أَرَادَ نُزُولَهُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ بَعْدَ الرَّفْعِ إِلَيْهِ

Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz (i.e. Imam Hakim) – Abu Bakr bin Ishaq – Ahmad bin Ibrahim – Ibn Bukayr – Laith – Yunus – Ibn Shihab – Nafi’ the freed-slave of Abu Qadadah al-Ansari — Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with him – Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, said: “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you from the heavens and your Imam will be from amongst you?” Bukhari narrated it in al-Sahih from Yahya bin Bukayr. And Muslim also narrated it through another chain from Yunus (bin Yazid). And they (also) meant his descent from the Heavens after his ascension towards it.

(Asma’ wa Sifaat 2/331 Hadith 895. Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih)

Note: The difference in the reference to Hadith in the current and the previous post is because I am using a different edition now. This one is with research of the scholar mentioned above.

Answers to Objections

Ahmadis contend that the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens” in this narration are not genuine but a later interpolation.

The author of Ahmadiyya Pocket Book has raised certain objections on this narration See Ahmadiyya Pocket Book pp.227-228. In the following lines I respond to each of them.

Comparison with Bukhari’s narration:

He says that Imam Baihaqi has written after the narration, “Bukhari narrated it,” and in Bukhari’s Sahih we do not find the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens” so it means these words are not part of the narration.

This is a rather naïve argument for it shows absolute ignorance of the author.

1. Firstly Baihaqi’s book is not like Kanzul Ummal that he is quoting things on someone’s authority without giving a chain down to himself. Infact as one can see Imam Baihaqi has given the chain down to him and that is why he has clarified that Bukhari has narrated it from Yahya bin Bukayr. Even though the same fellow falls in the chain of Imam Baihaqi but between him and Ibn Bukayr there are two other fellows. This proves Baihaqi has not narrated it on the authority of Bukhari but has given a complete chain for himself.

2. Now as to the question that why it happens. I reproduce the words of Shaykh Shafi Usmani in response to this;

فإن من له أدنى معرفة بالحديث وكتبه يعلم أن المحدثين قاطبة – ولا سيما البيهقي – ربما يعزو رواية لبعض المحدثين إذا أخرجها بأكثر ألفاظها ، ولا يشترط استيعاب ألفاظ الرواية ، فإذا قال المحدث : رواه البخاري كان مراده أن أصل الحديث أخرجه البخاري

‘Whoever has even a slight knowledge of Ahadith and its compilations knows the all the Muhaddithin- especially Al-Baihaqi- whenever they ascribe a narration to some other Muhaddithin and they narrate it with more words, they do not mean to relate exactly the same words of the narration [as narrated by the Muhaddith to whom they ascribe it to]. So when the Muhaddith says ‘Bukhari narrated it’ his point is that the essence of the Hadith has been narrated by him.’

3. And the above statement can be substantiated by multiple examples. Following should suffice for now.

Baihaqi says:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ , وَأَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ يُوسُفَ بْنِ يَعْقُوبَ السُّوسِيُّ وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ الْقَاضِي , قَالُوا: ثنا أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ نا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ خَالِدِ بْنِ خَلِيٍّ , نا بِشْرُ بْنُ شُعَيْبِ بْنِ أَبِي حَمْزَةَ , عَنْ أَبِيهِ , عَنْ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ , عَنِ الْأَعْرَجِ , عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ , قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «إِنَّ لِلَّهِ تِسْعًا وَتِسْعِينَ اسْمًا مِائَةً إِلَّا وَاحِدًا مَنْ أَحْصَاهَا دَخَلَ الْجَنَّةَ , إِنَّهُ وِتْرٌ يُحِبُّ الْوِتْرَ» رَوَاهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ فِي الصَّحِيحِ عَنْ أَبِي الْيَمَانِ عَنْ شُعَيْبِ بْنِ أَبِي حَمْزَ

Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz – Abu Abdullah Ishaq bin Muhammad bin Yusuf bin Ya’qub al-Susi and Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Hasan al-Qadhi – Abu al-Abbas Muhammad bin Ya’qub – Muhammad bin Khalid bin Khaliyy – Bishr bin Shu’aib bin Abi Hamza – his father (i.e. Shu’aib bin Abi Hamza) – Abi Zannad – A’raj – Abu Huraira – Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him said: “Verily for Allah there are ninety nine names, one less than hundred – whoever remembers them will enter Jannah. And indeed Allah is Witr (One) and loves Witr.” Bukhari narrated it in al-Sahih from Abi Yaman from Shu’aib bin Abi Hamza.

(Asma’ wal Sifaat 1/21 Hadith 5)

But if you search in Bukhari you find this narration as;

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو اليَمَانِ، أَخْبَرَنَا شُعَيْبٌ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الزِّنَادِ، عَنِ الأَعْرَجِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ: أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: «إِنَّ لِلَّهِ تِسْعَةً وَتِسْعِينَ اسْمًا مِائَةً إِلَّا وَاحِدًا، مَنْ أَحْصَاهَا دَخَلَ الجَنَّةَ»

Abu Yaman – Shu’aib (bin Abi Hamza) – Abu Zannad – A’raj – Abu Huraira — Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him said: “Verily for Allah there are ninety nine names, one less than hundred – whoever remembers them will enter Jannah.” (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 2736)

Clearly it does not have the words, “And indeed Allah is Witr and loves Witr,” and no one can find these words in Bukhari with the chain a through Abi Yaman from Shau’aib bin Abi Hamza as Baihaqi said.

This supports the point 2 above that when Muhaddithin especially Baihaqi says “Bukhari narrated it” all they means is about the essence of the narration and not a verbatim parallel.

And it is never a problem for Baihaqi has not quoted from Sahih Bukhari but given a complete chain down to him as stated in point 1 above.

Weakness of the narrator Abu Bakr bin Ishaq:

Second objection that Malik Abdul Rahman, the compiler of Ahmadiyya Pocket Book has raised is a glaring example of Ahmadiyya scholars’ intellectual “honesty.”

He argues that Abu Bakr bin Ishaq is actually Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Muhammad al-Naqid and then he quotes scholarly views about his being negligent in Hadith narration.

Whatever the author has quoted from Lisan al-Mizan is true but the fact is he is not the narrator here. Narrator infact is Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Ishaq al- Nishapuri.

How do we know this? In Lisan al-Mizan (5/69) Hafiz Ibn Hajr has given the names of the common narrators from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Muhammad al-Naqid and Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz (i.e. Imam Hakim) i.e. the person narrating from him in the hadith under consideration, is not among them.

However, Imam Dhahbi gives the profile of Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Ishaq al-Nishapuri and counts Abu Abdullah al-Hakim among the people who narrate from him (see Sayr A’lam al-Nubala 15/483-484). This proves Ahmad bin Ishaq and not Muhammad bin Ishaq is the narrator in the chain.

And that is how Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has said in his research on the book Asma’ wal Sifaat. See his footnotes to Hadith 895 and Hadith 4. Kitabul Asma’ wal Sifaat pub. Makteba al-Sawadi, Jeddah 1993

Weakness of the narrator Ahmad bin Ibrahim:

Next Malik Abdul Rahman, the Ahmadi author, says that Ahmad bin Ibrahim is also Da’if and he says, “See Lisan al-Mizan.” Now in Lisan al-Mizan 18 narrators by the name of Ahmad bin Ibrahim are given. Neither has he clarified as to which one he thinks falls in the chain in question nor has he given any comment that can help us sort the fellow out.

However our contention is that it makes no difference for the actual narrator intended here is not mentioned in Lisan al-Mizan. The actual narrator here is Ahmad bin Ibrahim bin Milhan. And we know it because under his profile Hafiz al-Dhahbi writes “Companion of Yahya bin Bukayr” (see Sayr A’lam al-Nubala 13/533-534) and in the Hadith in question he is narrating from Yahya bin Bukayr only.

And this fellow is indeed trustworthy. Imam Dhahbi writes that Imam Darqutni has graded him as “reliable.” Same is quoted by Khateeb al-Baghdadi, See Tarikh al-Baghdad 5/18 No. 1862. And they have not mentioned any criticism on him.

Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi in his research on Kitabul Asma’ wal Sifaat also says that the narrator is Ahmad bin Ibrahim bin Milhan. See his footnotes to Hadith 895 and Hadith 95.

Weakness of other narrators:

The author then goes further to criticize the narrators, Yahya bin Abdullah (Ibn Bukayr) and Yunus bin Yazid. He is simply trying to be smart by quoting some critical views about them but for general readers it is enough that they are the narrators of Bukhari and Muslim which is good enough of evidence for their reliability. We can insha’Allah answer all the lies but for the fear of making the discourse too lengthy I simply allude to their being the narrators of the Sahihayn (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim).

The two narrators I discussed above are not the narrators of Bukhari and Muslim and further the Ahmadi author was simply lying so the two-fold reason became a drive to discuss their cases in detail.

Are the words “from the Heavens” a later interpolation?

Next the Ahmadi “scholar” comes with an allegation that the hand-written edition of Baihaqi’s Asma’ wal Sifaat was first published in 1328 A.H.[sic] and that Muslim scholars added it as an adulteration and interpolation.

There are two problems with the claim.`

1. It is false to say that first edition was published in 1328 A.H. Infact we have extant to this day the hand-written edition published in 1313 A.H.

See the front page

clip_image002

1313 A.H. is certainly not 1328 A.H. And on its page 301 one can find that the words are there.

clip_image004

Download the complete edition HERE

Moreover, this is not a proof that first edition was published in so and so year and the words were there. To prove the idea of interpolation one has to be show some manuscript or earlier edition in which words are not there. Burden of proof is on the one who claims!

The case of Durr Manthur:

Next he argues that Imam Suyuti has quoted the narration and has not given the words in question, proving that they were interpolated.

Imam Suyuti writes in Durr Manthur:

أخرج أحمد والبخاري ومسلم والبيهقي في الأسماء والصفات قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : كيف أنتم إذا نزل فيكم ابن مريم ، وإمامكم منكم؟

Ahmad, Bukhari, Muslim and Baihaqi in Asma wal Sifaat says: “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you and your Imam will be from amongst you?”

One can see that Imam suyuti has given the names of 4 books in which the narration is found and in case when one odd book gives slightly different wording he cannot account for that. This is easily understandable if we consider the fact that in Durr Manthur Imam Suyuti has given loads of narrations and often he quotes them on the authority of multiple compilations. This is the reason he could not take into account slight variation of wording but only considered the essence of the narration.

This is further clear from the following example.

Imam Suyuti in his same book, Durr Manthur writes;

وَأخرج أَحْمد وَالْبُخَارِيّ وَسلم وَالنَّسَائِيّ وَابْن مرْدَوَيْه وَالْبَيْهَقِيّ فِي الْأَسْمَاء وَالصِّفَات عَن ابْن عَبَّاس عَن النَّبِي صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم فِيمَا يروي عَن ربه من هم بحسنة فَلم يعملها كتبت لَهُ حَسَنَة فَإِن عَملهَا كتبت لَهُ عشرا إِلَى سَبْعمِائة إِلَى أَضْعَاف كَثِيرَة وَمن همّ بسيئة فَلم يعملها كتبت لَهُ حَسَنَة فَإِن عَملهَا كتبت لَهُ وَاحِدَة أَو يمحوها الله وَلَا يهْلك على الله إِلَّا هَالك

Clearly He attributed the narration to Bukhari along with Ahmad, Muslim, Nasai, Ibn Mardwiya and Baihaqi’s Asma’ wal Sifaat but the words in red towards the end are not to be found in Bukhari. Infact even for the rest of the narration wording in Sahih Bukhari is different.

Now the question is why this “anomaly”?

Did someone remove the last words from Bukhari after Suyuti and changes the rest of wording too?

Or it is simply that Muhaddithin did not rather could not consider all the variation in the wording from one Hadith collection to another when they referred to multiple works at a time?

For any reasonable person the issue is quite clear. They did so considering the essence of the narration only which remains the same.

So we find all the Ahmadiyya lies refuted Alhamdulillah!

Points to note:

With so much discussion on this narration, let’s not forget this is not the only narration with these words. We earlier saw more of them.

After giving the narration and saying that Bukhari and Muslim have also narrated it, Baihaqi said that they also meant his descent from the Heavens after his ascension. This shows the belief of Imam Baihaqi who has been recognized as Mujaddid by Ahmadis. Moreover even without the narration in question this “mujaddid” of Ahmadis has established the meaning of Hadith from Sahih Bukhari.

Let’s turn the tables now!

Murabbis tell common Ahmadis to take exception to the fact that Imam Suyuti did not put the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens” even though it was infact not possible to take account of all the variation in wording a explained above. But how many times are they allowed to question as to why Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani ate away these words from a narration of Kanzul Ummal when he quoted it.

In my last post I quoted a narration (# 5) from Kanzul Ummal which goes as;

قال ابن عباس: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: “فعند ذلك ينزل أخي عيسى ابن مريم من السماء على جبل أفيق إماما هاديا وحكما عدلا

Ibn Abbas narrated: the Messenger of Allah, on whom be the blessings of Allah, said: ‘And near it (Bait al-Maqdis) will descend from the Heavens my brother ‘Eisa ibn Maryam on Mt. Afiq as a guided leader and a just ruler.’ (Kanzul Ummal 14/619 Hadith 39726)

But when Mirza Ghulam Ahmad quoted it in Himamatul Bushra (p. 148 included in Rohani Khazain vol. 7 p.314) he ate away the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens.”

Now mark the difference, Imam Suyuti quotes a narration from 4 different books with slight variation of wording and Ahmadiyya make an issue of it while their “prophet” quotes from a certain book and eats away the words. Does that not prove “something”?

I will request Ahmadi readers to take these points to Murabbis and Jamaat leaders and question them;

1. Why did Mirza Ghulam Ahmad not quote the Hadith honestly? Or is there any justification for this?

2. How to “explain” the gimmicks of the author of Ahmadiyya Pocket Book who plays with the common people using the proximity of names of different authors?

3. With all the Ahmadiyya arguments refuted what is now the significance of the narration?

And one question that our Ahmadi fellows need to ask themselves;

How it feels to be a part of the group whose leader and “scholars” display such intellectual dishonesty?

Indeed Allah knows the best!

Du’a for their Guidance

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلما كثيرا
و سلام على أبو بكر و عمر و عثمان

I just left a wonderful Qiyam al-Layl with our beloved and local Imam Mohamed Magid حفظه الله (who is also the president of Islamic Society of North America, ISNA). In his Khatirah he reminded us of the power of Du’a, and that while we must use our energy and effort for his sake, ultimately change is in the power of Allah. There is no change and there is no power except with Allah.

Many times in our da’wah efforts to Ahmadis, we approach them using reason, logic and facts. While this has proven to be effective, sometimes we forget that this alone has no power. As al-Ghazali opined in his Faysal Tafriq bayna al-Islam wa Zandaqa, reason is not the cause of belief, reason serves only to support a position that is already held by the adherent. (This is why we see some Ahmadi arguments as logical gymnastics). As Al-Ghazali also wrote in his Deliverance from Error, “Anyone who believes that the unveiling of truth is the fruit of well-ordered arguments belittles the immensity of divine mercy.”

In short: Reason alone does not change the hearts.

In addition to our efforts, we must make sincere and constant Du’a to Allah that he guides Ahmadis away from the misguidance of the false prophet to the correct beliefs of the true Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم. Really, seriously, ask God from the bottom of your heart. Beg him. Humiliate yourself before your Lord. How many times have we shed tears of pain at the absolute misguidance they are in, yet believing themselves to be guided? How many times have we spent the night crying to Allah, mentioning Ahmadis by name, and asking Allah to guide them?

…so let us ask Allah right now, as you read this post…

Oh Allah, we ask you to send your peace, blessings and salutations upon your noble Prophet Muhammad ibn Abdullah, and upon his family and those who follow him.

We ask Allah to guide the Ahmadis back to Islam. O Allah, the one who Guides, you alone are the turner of hearts, so guide us on your Deen and guide them to your Deen. O You who guides, most of them are but a generation or two away from Islam, so guide them back into the fold so that we may reunite with our sisters and brothers. O Allah, they were taken away from us by a false prophet, so bring them back to us. O Allah, many are sincere in their misguidance so make them sincere in guidance. We ask you Allah and you alone, associating no partners with you, to turn the hearts of the Ahmadis to leave the false teachings of the false prophet and to come back to the Truth.

We ask You to shower his peace, blessings and security upon our noble master Muhammad ibn Abdullah and upon his family and those who follow him until the day of judgment.

Ameen!


I highly recommend current-Ahmadis read two books by Imam Al-Ghazali.
A) The Decisive Criteria Between Islam and Heresy: This text explains the criteria between who is considered a Muslim and who is not. The English translation was done by Dr. Abdul Hakim “Sherman” Jackson under the title On the Boundaries of Theological Tolerance.
B) Deliverance From Error: This light read chronicles Al-Ghazali’s journey through the different spiritual and sectarian movements that existed in his lifetime and explains his conclusions. The English translation is available here.

The Scholarship of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiani

Guest Contribution by Muhammed Khan

There is a lively debate happening on the internet, between Muslims and Ahmadis, on the important topic of the finality of prophethood. The Muslim position is that there is no nabi (prophet) or rasul (messenger) after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم. This belief is held by Muslims throughout the world, from Morocco to Indonesia, from Bosnia to South Africa. The Ahmadis on the other hand tell us that we have got it wrong- that we are misguided. Ahmadis tell us that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) is not the last prophet. Muslim ‘mullahs,’ say the Ahmadis, are ignorant, insincere, misguided, backward and corrupt. Therefore they cannot or will not arrive at the right conclusion, but the evidence is there for all to see.

So who is right? The entire Muslim world or the murabbis? There is one way we can decide. Let us take someone who Ahmadis believe to be sincere, righteous, upright and the most learned man of his time, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. That’s right, let us use the research and conclusion of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani to arbitrate between Muslims and Ahmadis.

Ahmadis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is the most learned man of the 14th century, they believe that he was so righteous and so learned that he achieved what no other human being in history achieved: He became a prophet through his personal rigorous effort.

So what did Mirza Ghulam Ahmad have to say after he examined the evidences stated in the Qur’an, hadith and Ijma‘ (scholarly consensus) about the subject of finality of prophethood?

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani made the following two statements which summarise his conclusions:

  • “I believe in all the items of faith as prescribed by the Sunni School of Islam and I accept everything that is according to the Quran and Hadith.  I fully subscribe to the doctrine that Muhammad is the last of all Prophets, and that any claimant to Prophethood after him is an impostor and a Kafir. It is my belief that the revelations of Prophethood started with Adam and closed with the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)”.
    (Majmuha-Estaharet, P. 230-231; Tableegh-i-Risalat, Vol 2, Page 20 -
  • Also appeared in a Qadiani poster dated Oct 2, 1891; 20 Shaaban, 1313 A.H.)
    “I consider that man who rejects the doctrine of Last Prophethood is a disbeliever and outside the pale of Islam.”
    (Tableegh-i-Risalat, Vol 2, Page 44 - Also read out in Congregation of Jama Masjid, Dehli, Oct. 23, 1891)

As you can quite clearly see that after years of learning and study, the most sincere, pious and learned man, according to Ahmadiyya, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani studied the Qur’an and hadith and came to the exact same conclusion as the rest of the Muslim world, that anyone who claims prophethood after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم is a liar and apostate.

It is worth pointing out that both Lahori and Qadiani Ahmadis do not dispute these statements but the two groups present us with two interpretations. The Lahori Ahmadis claim that these statements prove that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani did not claim to be a prophet and therefore these statements support their position very clearly. Unfortunately the Lahori Ahmadi position is not very credible in light of all Mirza’s other statements, where he describes himself as being a prophet. Even if this was merely a metaphor, as the Lahoris claim, this was an extremely irresponsible thing to do.

Are Lahori Ahmadis happy to accept that Mirza’s statements are directly responsible for the misguidance of thousands of Qadiani Ahmadis who believe he was a prophet and therefore removing themselves from the fold of Iman? That would be quite an achievement, given that Lahori Ahmadis are tiny in number compared to Qadiani Ahmadis. It means that Mirza sahib has misguided a larger number of his own followers away from Islam than towards a correct understanding of Islam, which is nothing short of a spectacular failure.

Now we turn our attention to the second party, the Qadiani Ahmadis who believe that when Mirza sahib made the above statements, (that he adhered to the Sunni beliefs, that there was no prophet after Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and whoever held such beliefs was an apostate) he was unaware that he was going to be appointed a prophet in the future. The Qadiani Ahmadis tell us that since he was not aware that he was going to be appointed a prophet by God in the future his statements are not unreasonable.

At this point we ask Qadiani Ahmadis some questions;

  • Do you believe that Mirza sahib was a sane and intelligent man when he made those statements?
  • Do you believe that he was the most learned scholar on the earth not just in his life time but in the fourteenth century?
  • Do you believe that he had a firm grasp of the sciences, beliefs and principles of the Islamic faith?

The response from Ahmadi lay people, Jamia students, Murabbis and Khalifas to these questions is a resounding, “YES!” Ahmadis tell us “Mirza sahib was and is the most learned man in the fourteenth century, and the Muslim scholars (mullahs) who were his contemporaries and those after, are ignorant and insignificant in learning compared to the ‘Promised Messiah’ Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani.”

So we ask Ahmadis, how is it possible that a man with such immense learning, religious worship and devotion to God could arrive at the exact same (‘deviated and erroneous’) belief as the entire orthodox muslim world held?

How can a man, whose learning is so great that he is endowed with prophethood, not reach the ‘correct’ conclusion that there are going to be prophets after Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم? He had the intelligence, the devotion, insight and access to all the primary sources of Islam law yet arrived at a position of complete ‘error and misguidance’.

You see it is immaterial to the argument that Mirza sahib at that point was unaware that he was going to be a prophet, the point is that given his deep learning, insight, sincerity and the ‘overwhelming proofs’ from the Quran and hadith that Ahmadis tell us exist, he should have still arrived at the conclusion that THERE WILL BE prophets after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and the fact of the matter is that he did not arrive at this conclusion.

We can understand that he would have been unaware that he himself was going to be appointed a prophet in the future, BUT, that does not prevent him arriving at the conclusion from his research that prophets WILL come after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم.

If he could not reach that conclusion, that there will be prophets after Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم what was the reason? Did he have a lack of intelligence? Or was he Ignorant? Or was he insincere?

In fact Mirza sahib’s fatwa demonstrates that the entire Muslim world (including Mirza sahib) held the belief that there is no prophet or messenger after Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم because that is exactly what the evidences, the primary sources of Islam (Quran, hadith and Ijma) demonstrate.

Ahmadis keep telling us that Sunni Islamic scholars are misguided from the true understanding of Islam, they dismiss them as ignorant and backward and they believe that it is because of these reasons that they have arrived at the wrong conclusions and fatwas. Yet if we take Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani as a litmus test, then we find that his conclusion was exactly the same as Orthodox Muslim scholars,  that there is no Prophet after Sayiddina Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and whoever rejects this, has left the fold of Islam.

Ahmadis, how is that possible?

The truth is that the primary sources of Islam are unambiguous there are no Prophets or Messengers after Sayyidina Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and you don’t need ‘mullahs’ to tell you that!