Abu Dawud ch. 40: forbearance

حَدَّثَنَا مَخْلَدُ بْنُ خَالِدٍ الشَّعِيرِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا عُمَرُ بْنُ يُونُسَ، حَدَّثَنَا عِكْرِمَةُ يَعْنِي ابْنَ عَمَّارٍ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي إِسْحَاقُ يَعْنِي ابْنَ عَبْدِ الله بْنِ أَبِي طَلْحَةَ قَالَ قَالَ أَنَسٌ كَانَ رَسُولُ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مِنْ أَحْسَنِ النَّاسِ خُلُقًا فَأَرْسَلَنِي يَوْمًا لِحَاجَةٍ فَقُلْتُ وَاللهِ لاَ أَذْهَبُ (مزاحا و هو غلام غير مكلف) وَفِي نَفْسِي أَنْ أَذْهَبَ لِمَا أَمَرَنِي بِهِ نَبِيُّ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم‏.‏ قَالَ (أنس) فَخَرَجْتُ حَتَّى أَمُرَّ عَلَى صِبْيَانٍ وَهُمْ يَلْعَبُونَ فِي السُّوقِ (فاشتغلت معهم في اللعب) فَإِذَا رَسُولُ الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قَابِضٌ بِقَفَاىَ () مِنْ وَرَائِي فَنَظَرْتُ إِلَيْهِ وَهُوَ يَضْحَكُ (أي يتبسم رفقا به) فَقَالَ ‏يَا أُنَيْسُ اذْهَبْ حَيْثُ أَمَرْتُكَ‏.‏ قُلْتُ نَعَمْ أَنَا أَذْهَبُ يَا رَسُولَ الله (أي أنا في سبيل إليه)‏.‏ قَالَ أَنَسٌ وَاللهِ لَقَدْ خَدَمْتُهُ سَبْعَ سِنِينَ أَوْ تِسْعَ سِنِينَ (شك الراوي لكن جزم تسع سنين في رواية المسلم) مَا عَلِمْتُ قَالَ لِشَىْءٍ صَنَعْتُ لِمَ فَعَلْتَ كَذَا وَكَذَا ولاَ لِشَىْءٍ تَرَكْتُ هَلاَّ فَعَلْتَ كَذَا وَكَذَا

#4773: Ishaq b. Abdullah b. Abu Talhah1 reports that Hadrat (May Allah be pleased with him) said, The prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) had the best of character. Once He sent me on an errand. I [being a child jokingly] said, ‘By Allah I won’t go’ but in my heart I intended to go to do what the prophet (peace be upon him) commanded me.

He (may Allah Almighty be pleased with him) said, I went out [to fulfil the errand] until I passed upon some boys who were playing in the market. [Distracted from his task, he joined them in play.] Then suddenly, the Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) [standing] behind me grabbed the back of my neck. I [turned and] looked towards him and He was smiling. He (peace be upon him) said, ‘O Unays (Little Anas)! Go and do what I told you!’ I said, ‘Yes, I am going, O prophet of Allah’.

Anas (may Allah almighty be pleased with him) said, By Allah, I served [the Prophet] for seven or nine years. [During that time], I never knew Him to say on something I did, ‘Why did you do this or that!’ Nor did He say on something I missed, ‘Why didn’t you do this and that!’

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللهِ بْنُ مَسْلَمَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُلَيْمَانُ يَعْنِي ابْنَ الْمُغِيرَةِ عَنْ ثَابِتٍ (بن اسلم البناني) عَنْ أَنَسٍ قَالَ خَدَمْتُ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَشْرَ سِنِينَ بِالْمَدِينَةِ وَأَنَا غُلاَمٌ لَيْسَ كُلُّ أَمْرِي كَمَا يَشْتَهِي صَاحِبِي أَنْ أَكُونَ عَلَيْهِ مَا قَالَ لِي فِيهَا أُفٍّ قَطُّ وَمَا قَالَ لِي لِمَ فَعَلْتَ هَذَا أَوْ أَلاَ فَعَلْتَ هَذَا.‏

#4774: Thabit (b. Aslam al-Bunani)2 reports from Hadrat Anas that he said, I served the Prophet (peace be upon him) for ten years in Madinah. I a was a boy; not everything of mine was as my sire wanted it to be. He never said ‘uff‘ to me and he said to me, ‘why did you do this or why did you not do this?’

See Takmilah Fath al-Mulhim p. 454 v. 4; Bazl al-Majhud p. 29 v. 20

——
[1] The sanad is Sahih. Imam Muslim narrates with the same sanad except that he reports from Abu Ma’n rather than Makhlad b. Khalid both of whom are thiqah. Some have commented on the sanad due to the presence of Ikramah b. Ammar. The words in Muslim is the same except that the narrator is not conflicted and flatly reports nine years.

[2] —

Avoid some common mistakes in evaluating hadith

ball-figure-eight-black-white-grass-old

The following is a summary of some remedial principles mentioned by Mufti Taqi Usmani. This is in order to avoid the common mistakes in evaluating hadith and making unwarranted objections that one abandons strong evidences.

(1) A hadith is evaluated on the reliability of the sanad and validity of the matn not merely based on the collection it belongs.

(2) The appraisal of the hadith is a tedious task and solely the purview of those who possess the requisite criteria and the rank of ijtihad in the field.

(3) When such experts differ in their appraisal, prioritise the cautious expert over the lenient and the fair over the harsh. If both the experts are fair and cautious one should judge the rationale if they are qualified to do so or else they should choose the one they trust.

(4) Know that the opinion of one expert is not evidence against another expert.

(5) Furthermore, note that the experts judge with the quality of the sources at hand, hence, the loss of information at a later stage does not negate the classification of the earlier experts.

(6) The declaration of sahih or da’if signifies that it fulfils or lacks the set criteria for acceptance; it is highly likely that it reflects the reality but not certainly so. One must act upon the likelihood unless strong evidence indicates to the contrary.

(7) The ahnaf amongst others consider the practice of the sahabah and tabi’in as significant evidence to strengthen a seemingly weak hadith similar to the existence of multiple sanads which in effect reclassifies it to hasan li ghayrihi.

(8) If two reliable ahadith collide, the ahnaf will prioritise the content which conforms to the Quran or the general principles of Shari’ah irrespective if the other sanad is relatively stronger as according to them effect in superior to quantity once reliability is established.

For more details, read Eight Remedial principles in evaluating hadith

الدر المنضود في أسانيد شيخ الهند محمود

كتب الشيخ الفقيه المفسر المفتي الأعظم لباكستان محمد شفيع العثماني رحمه الله تعالي
في الإزدياد السَني علي اليانع الجَني

حصل له، قدس سره القراءة والسماعة والإجازة  من الصدر الأكبر، والبدرلمنير، المسند الرحلة، حجة الإسلام أبي أحمد مونا محمد قاسم الصديقي النانوتوي. و سبق مناشئ من ذكره. قال قذس سره: و حصل لي إجازة من الفقيه  المحدث، صدر الإسلام،والبدر التمام، قطب العالم، حضرة مولانا رشيد أحمد الأنصاري الكنكوهي. قالا (يعني شيخيه النانوتوي والكنكوهي) حصل لنا القراءة والسماع والإجازة عن الصدر الزاهد، والبدر السافر، المحدث العارف بالله، الشيخ عبد الغني المجددي المهاجر، بإسناده المثبت في اليانع الجني من أسانيد الشيخ عبد الغني، عن الصدر الأجل والبدر الأكمل، المشتهر في الأفاق، الحاففظ الحجة، مولانا إسحاق الدهلوي، رحمهم الله.

قال رحمه الله: و حصل الإجازة عن علم العلوم العلماء، حضرة سيدنا العلامة الورع التقي، مولانا أحمد علي المحدث السهارنفوري، صاحب التعليقات المعروضة المقبولة على صحيح البخاري و غيره. وعن الصدر الأكبر، والبدر الأنور، حضرة مولانا الشيخ محمد مظهر، المحدث النانوتوي، مؤسس المدرسة المسماة بمظاهر العلوم بسهارنفور. وعن شمش العلوم، وزين العلماء، حضرة العالم الرباني، مولاناالشيخ عبد الرحمن القارئ الفاني فتي، رحمة الله عليهم أجمعين رحمة واسعة. كلهم (يعني الثلاثة الأخيرة) عن مسند العلم والعلماء، في عصره، مدارالإسناد والتحديث في وقته، حضرة مولانا الشاه محمد إسحاق الدهلوي، الموصوف فيما سبق بإسناده المثبت في اليانع الجني

هذا كله ما ذكره الشيخ، قدس سره، في سند الإجازة الذي كتبه لشيخنا الأبجل، زهري الوقت، حافظ العصر، حضرة مولانا الشاه محمد أنور الكشميري، متعنا الله تعالى بطول بقائه بالخير. ثم رأيت شيخي الهمام، والمولى الهمام، الورع التقي العارف بالله، السيد الأكبر، مولانا السيد أصغر حسين، المحدث الفقيه الديوبندي، متعنا الله تعالى بطول بقائه بالخير، ذكر في تذكرته المسماة بحياة شيخ الهند أن الشيخ رحمه الله لما حضر المدينة المنورة، زادها الله تعالي شرفا و إجلالا، مع شيخه النانوتوي والكنكوهي، رحمة الله تعالي عليهما، و تشرفوا بزيارة شيخ المشائخ مسند أسانيدهم، حضرة مولانا الشاه عبد الغني رحمه الله، (و كان قد هاجر إلى المدينة) فأستدعاه الشيخ النانوتوي، رحمه الله، أن يكتب الإجازة لشيخنا شيخ الهند رحمه الله، فأجازه بأسانيده الثابتة في اليانع الجني.

The conditions for ijazah in hadith

By Mufti Sa’eed Ahmad Palanpuri
Tuhfat al-Qari v.1 p. 116
Translated by Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami  – 13 Jumada I 1436

The ijazah for hadith is given with three conditions. When these three conditions are found, there will be ijazah or else not.

The first condition is that the student should have heard or read the hadith to a teacher. If they have neither heard or read the hadith rather they were absent or sleeping whilst sat, they will not have ijazah.

The second condition is that they must have understood the hadith. Those who did not understand, do not have permission.

The third condition is that the hadith be firmly remembered and relayed forward with caution.

Hence, the students should consistently be present in lessons. No hadith should remain unread or unheard. It should be understood with full focus and when stating the hadith in future it should be done with full caution. Reading in this form is ijazah. The teacher sitting to teach (تصدي للإقراء) is ijazah – there is no need to seek a separate ijazah at the end of the year. The ijazah which is given after cursory reading of the beginning of books is only for the kamil – it is not given to any and all. Hence, in the sanad of the Darul Uloom an ijazah for the hadith is not written. It simply states that this graduate has studied such and such hadith books and that’s it.

———–

Note! The condition are not exhaustive rather the most pertinent for those studying in their final year. The criteria of piety is a given for one who has already studied for six years.

#201602221801 – 13 Jumada I 1436 | 22 February 2016

Abu Ayyub Ansari

By Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami
10 Jumada I 1437 | 19 February 2016

Abu Ayyub Ansari was a close companion (sahabi) of the Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) and a consummate warrior. He was born Khalid b. Zayd b. Kulayb of the clan Najjar which is a branch of the tribe Kazraj.1 Hence, he was amongst the Ansar who helped the Prophet (peace be upon him) when he emigrated to Madinah Munawwarah.

When the Prophet (peace be upon him) arrived in Madinah, most wanted to host him. The Prophet let loose his camel with the intent that He will stay at the house of the person where the camel stopped. It stopped briefly at the house of Abu Ayyub who in turn rushed and took off the saddle to his house. Thus, he was designated the host of the Prophet who stayed with him many months until the main masjid was built. Even after the prophet moved, Abu Ayyub (may Allah Almighty be pleased with him) used to prepare food for the Prophet (peace be upon him) and host his guests. This was due to the close amity the Prophet felt with Abu Ayyub Ansari.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) coupled him in brotherhood with the great Sahabi and standard bearer Mus’ab b. Umayr (may Allah Almighty be please with him) who was martyred in Uhad. Abu Ayyub himself was a seasoned warrior. He was present at the pledge of Aqabah as well as the battles of Badr, Uhad and all the campaigns of the Prophet (peace be upon him). It is said that the only reason he would not have been in a battle the Muslims fought is because he was engaged in another battle. He fought in the side of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) during the civil war and thereafter for Mu’awiyah (may Allah Almighty be pleased with him) during his reign. Around 52 years after the Prophet’s arrival to Madinah, now in his old age, Abu Ayyub Ansari accompanied Yazid b. Mu’awiyah to conquer Constantinople. There he fought but then fell ill. Yazid visited him and asked if he had any requests. He replied, ‘My request is that when I die, ride deep into the enemy territory as far as possible and bury me there’. He died in that campaign and his wish was fulfilled. He was buried at the border of Constantinople. May Allah Almighty be pleased with him and elevate his status.

The notable sahabah such as Ibn Abbas, Ibn Umar, Bara’ b. Azib, Abu Umamah, Zayd b. Khalid, Miqdam b. Ma’dikarib, Anas b. Malik, Jabir b. Samurah, and Abdullah b. Yazid narrate from Abu Ayyub Ansari (May Allah Almighty be pleased with them all). Amongst the tabi’un, Sa’id b. Musayyab, ‘Urwah, Salim b. Abdillah, Abu Salamah, Ata b. Yasar, Ata b. Yazid etcetera narrate from him (may Allah almighty have mercy upon them).

For more details, read al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah #1361

——–

[1] His full lineage is Khalid b. Zayd b. Kulayb b. Tha’labah b. Abd b. ‘Awf b. Ghanam b. Malik b. Najjar (Taym Allah) b. Tha’labah b. Amr b. Khazraj (Akbar). His mother’s name is Hind bt. Sa’id b. Amr b Imra’ al-Qays b. Malik b. Tha’labah b. Ka’b b. Khazraj b. Harith b. Khazraj.

The teachers of Hadith at Mazahirul Uloom Saharanpur

By Ml. Ashiq Ilahi Meerati
al-ʿAnāqīd al-Ghāliyah min al-Asānīd al-ʿĀliyah
Translated by Shoaib A. Rashid in The Silent Admirer – 21 September 2014

At the college of Mazāhir al-ʿUlūm in Saharanpur, the first among those that took up the task of teaching Hadith, especially the teaching of Sahīh Bukhāri, was Shaykh al-Mashāyikh Maulana Muhammad Mazhar al-Nānautawi (May Allah sanctify his secret) after whom the school is named. He began at this college in 1867 three months after the school was established. He remained there until he returned to Allah on 24 Dhu ‘l-Ḥijjah 1302/3 October 1885. During this long time period, he taught books of Quranic exegesis, Hadith, and other subjects from the various sciences. He would teach “the Two Sahīhs” with intense fervour and complete thoroughness. Outstanding scholars graduated at his hands. Among them was the author of Badhl al-Majhūd fī Ḥall Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Shaykhu Mashāyikhinā Maulana Khalīl Aḥmad al-Sahāranpūri th. al-Muhājir al-Madani. Joining the college of Maẓāhir al-ʿUlūm in 1874 was the famous Hadith scholar and researcher of Sahīh Bukhāri and Jāmiʿ Tirmidhi, Maulana Ahmad ʿAlī al-Sahāranpūri. He remained there until he passed away in 1881. In these years he taught the six books of Tafsīr and Hadith, especially “the Two Sahīhs.” He would demonstrate total mastery in Hadith and its sciences (May Allah have mercy on him).

After the passing away of the college’s senior Hadith scholar, Maulana Muhammad Mazhar al-Nānautawi, his position of teaching Hadith was inherited by Maulana ʿAbd al-ʿUlā until he resigned in 1889. After him, Hadith was taught by Shaykh Ahmad ʿAlī al-Murādābādi and Shaykh Habīb al-Rahmān, son of the muhaddith Maulana Ahmad ʿAlī al-Sahāranpūri (May Allah Most High have mercy on all of them). Shaykh Aḥmad ʿAlī resigned in 1893.

As for Shaykh Habīb al-Rahmān, he taught Hadith from 1889 until he left to Hyderabad and resigned from his services to the college in 1897. At this time, the honourable Hadith scholar Maulana Khalīl Aḥmad al-Sahāranpūri had been teaching the books of Hadith and other sciences at the college of Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband with his friend, Shaykh al-Zaman Maulana Mahmūd al-Ḥasan, famously known as Shaykh al-Hind, as mentioned above. So when Maulana Ḥabīb al-Rahmān resigned from the service of teaching at the college as we discussed prior, and the college now required a skilful teacher and outstanding Hadith scholar, the great imam Quṭub al-ʿĀrifīn Maulana Rashīd Aḥmad al-Gangōhi (May Allah Most High sanctify his secret) commanded the most honourable muhaddith Maulana al-Shāh Khalīl Aḥmad al-Sahāranpūri to transfer from Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband to Mazāhir al-ʿUlūm Saharanpur. And so [Shaykh Khalīl Ahmad] obeyed the command and took up the directorship of education there. He arrived at the college of Mazāhir al-ʿUlūm on 8 Jamād al-Ākhar 1314/1896. He, being a graduate of that college, was most worthy and suited to take this position. He assumed the directorship of education and the teaching of Hadith and other sciences for thirty years, until he migrated to Madinah Munawwarah. During this time period, he taught “the Two Sahīhs” and others from among the Six Books numerous times over.

In Rabīʿ al-Awwal of 1335/1917, he began working on Badhl al-Majhūd, a commentary on Sunan Abī Dāwūd, with the help of his most special pupil Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Maulana Muḥammad Zakariyyā al-Kāndhlawi (May Allah sanctify their secrets). They completed it in Madinah Munawwarah in Riyad al-Jannah on 21 Shaʿbān 1345/1927, as we will soon mention in detail if Allah wills.

We cannot forget to mention the honourable Shaykh Maulana Muḥammad Yahyā al-Kāndhlawi (May Allah Most High have mercy on him), for he taught Hadith at the college of Maẓāhir al-ʿUlūm from 1326/1908 until Allah caused him to pass away in 1334/1916.

When the most honourable Shaykh Khalīl Ahmad al-Sahāranpūri migrated to Madinah Munawwarah in 1926, the lessons of Hadith were entrusted to his honourable students. Among them was Ustādh al-Asātidhah Maulana al-Sayyid ʿAbd al-Latīf who became the principal of the school after his migration, so he would teach Sahīh Bukhāri as well as tend to the affairs of the college. Also among them were the esteemed Shaykh Maulana ʿAbd al-Rahmān al-Kāmalpūri, the courageous Shaykh Maulana Muḥammad Asʿadullāh al-Rāmpūri, and the outstanding Shaykh Maulana Manẓūr Ahmad Khān al-Sahāranpūri (May Allah Most High grant them all abode in the prosperity of His Paradise).

Maulana ʿAbd al-Rahmān al-Kāmalpūri taught the Jāmiʿ of Imam al-Tirmidhi and Sharh Maʿānī al-Āthārof Imam Abu Jaʿfar al-Ṭahāwi, and some years he would teach Sahīh Muslim as well. Maulana Manẓūr Ahmad Khān taught Sahīh Muslim numerous times over. Sometimes Maulana Muhammad Asʿadullāh taught it as well, and I was among those that read Sahīh Muslim under him in 1944. As for the Sunan of Imam Abu Dāwūd, it was taught by our Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā al-Kāndhlawi (May Allah sanctify his secret) from 1929 to 1954. Then Maulana Muhammad Asʿadullāh taught it from 1954 to 1965. After Maulana ʿAbd al-Rahmān al-Kāmalpūri left to Pakistan, the Sunan of Imam al-Tirmidhi was taught by the honourable jurist Maulana al-Qārī Saʿīd Ahmad al-Ujrārawi, the senior muftī of the college, as well as the honourable Shaykh Maulana Amīr Ahmad al-Kāndhlawi.

As for Sharh Maʿānī al-Āthār of Imam al-Ṭahāwi, after Maulana ʿAbd al-Rahmān al-Kāmalpūri it was taught by Maulana Manzūr Ahmad al-Sahāranpūri, Maulana Muḥammad Asʿadullāh al-Rāmpūri, and Maulana Amīr Aḥmad al-Kāndhlawi (May Allah Most High have mercy on all of them). As for the books of Imam al-Nasā’ī and Imam Ibn Mājah, and the Mu’attā according to both narrations, they were all taught by Maulana Manẓūr Ahmad al-Sahāranpūri. I read them all under him in the year 1944 (May Allah Most High have mercy on all of them).

In the year 1926, our Shaykh Maulana Muḥammad Zakariyyā al-Kāndhlawi (May Allah sanctify his secret) travelled with his shaykh to the Ḥijāz to help him in the preparation of Badhl al-Majhūd. When he returned to Saharanpur in 1929, he took up the teaching of Sahīh Bukhāri and the Sunan of Imam Abī Dāwūd al-Sijistāni (May Allah Most High have mercy on him). He taught the Sunan until 1954, and he did not stop teaching Sahīh Bukhāri until difficulties and illnesses caught up with him and forced him to give up teaching.

At this point, the teaching of Sahīh Bukhāri was entrusted to his astute and intelligent pupil Maulwī Muhammad Yūnus al-Jaunpūri (May Allah Most High preserve him). The honourable master [i.e. Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā] himself bequeathed this post to Maulwī Muhammad Yūnus during his own lifetime. He (May Allah Most High preserve him) taught for fourteen years during the life of the Shaykh, and he was quite worthy to perform this honourable service. May Allah Most High deliver amongst us more folk along the likes of him. Afterwards, the teaching of Hadith at this college continued at the hands of the students of these eminent personalities, such as Muftī Muzaffar Ḥusayn al-Ujrārawi, Muftī Muhammad Yahyā, and Maulana Muhammad ʿĀqil al-Sahāranpūri (May Allah Most High preserve them all).

The teachers of Hadith at Darul Uloom Deoband

Dar-ul-Uloom-Deoband

By Ml. Ashiq Ilahi Meerati
al-ʿAnāqīd al-Ghāliyah min al-Asānīd al-ʿĀliyah
Translated by Shoaib A. Rashid in The Silent Admirer – 21 September 2014

The first person to have the honour of being the director of education at Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband was the honourable Hadith scholar, Shaykh al-Mashāyikh Muḥammad Yaʿqūb, son of Fakhr al-ʿUlamā wa Zayn al-Fuqahā wa Ustādh al-Asātidhah Maulana Mamlūk ʿAlī al-Nānautawi (May Allah sanctify his secret). Shaykh Muhammad Yaʿqūb acquired knowledge of the various sciences from his father, and he took Hadith from Shāh ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Mujaddidi (May Allah Most High have mercy on him). He taught and spread benefit in Delhi and Ajmer. Then he took up the position of director of education at the college of Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband, where he taught until he returned to Allah Most High in the year 1884 in his hometown of Nānautah. His position as the director of education was taken up by the skilful and honourable al-Sayyid Ahmad al-Dehlawi until he left to Bhopal in the year 1887, at which point the directorship was entrusted to Shaykh al-Shuyūkh wa Ustādh al-Asātidhah Hadrat Maulana Mahmūd al-Ḥasan al-Deobandi, better known as “Shaykh al-Hind” (May Allah sanctify his secret). Before being entrusted with this position, he used to teach the books of Hadith, as well various other subjects that were being taught at the Dār al-ʿUlūm. He was appointed as a teacher in the year 1871, and in 1876 he was entrusted to teach Sunan al-Tirmidhi. After taking up the directorship, he would teach both Sahīh Bukhāri and Sunan al-Tirmidhi. He taught Hadith at the college of Deoband for forty years, a task that he shared for some time with the honourable Shaykh Maulana Khalīl Ahmad al-Sahāranpūri al-Muhājir al-Madani (May Allah sanctify his secret) – and this was from the years 1890 to 1896. Shaykh Mahmūd would teach Sahīh Bukhāri and Sunan al-Tirmidhi, and his colleague Shaykh Khalīl would teach Sahīh Muslim and other books. The honourable Shaykh Muhammad Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīri graduated at the hands of both of them in the year 1894 (May Allah Most High have mercy on them all).

When Shaykh al-Hind Mahmūd al-Hasan journeyed to the Hijāz in the year 1914, his most honourable student, al-Sayyid Muhammad Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīri (May Allah Most High have mercy on him) took his place in teaching Hadith. He was entrusted with the teaching of “the Two Jāmiʿs” (i.e. the books of Imam al-Bukhāri and Imam al-Tirmidhi, May Allah Most High have mercy on them). He taught at Deoband until he left the Dār al-ʿUlūm in the year 1928 and moved to the Islamic College (al-Jāmiʿah al-Islāmiyyah) in Dabhel, Surat. He narrated Hadith there and spread benefit until he returned to Allah Most High in the year 1933. From the colleges of both Deoband and Dabhel, senior scholars and luminous personalities graduated at his hands, some of whom are listed as follows: Maulana Muḥammad Idrīs al-Kāndhlawi, Maulana Badr al-ʿĀlam al-Mīruthi, Muftī Muḥammad Ḥasan al-Amritsari, the honorable jurist Grand Muftī Muḥammad Shafīʿ al-Deobandi, Tāj al-Khutabā Maulana al-Qārī Muḥammad Ṭayyib al-Qāsimi, the honorable Hadith scholar and distinguished jurist al-Sayyid Muḥammad Yūsuf al-Binnōri, and Maulana Shams al-Ḥaq al-Afghāni (May Allah Most High have mercy on them all).

After Shaykh al-Kashmīri left Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband, the board of trustees (majlis al-istishārī) of the college – at the head of which was Mujaddid al-Millah wa Hakīm al-Ummah Maulana al-Shāh Ashraf ʿAlī al-Thānawi (May Allah Most High sanctify his secret) – was compelled to select replacements for the directorship of education and the teaching of the books of Bukhāri and Tirmidhi. The replacement would have to fill the shoes of the muḥaddiths that preceded him. They requested Shaykh al-Islām Maulana al-Sayyid Husayn Ahmad al-Madani (May Allah Most High sanctify his secret) to take up this position. He was the most special student of Shaykh al-Hind and the confidant in his affairs. Before this, he had already taught at Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband for two years, from 1909 to 1910, and he had taught for more than ten years in the Noble Mosque of the Prophet (May Allah Most High send peace and salutations upon him and his Companions). [Maulana Husayn Ahmad] complied with their wishes and accepted their request on certain conditions which the council accepted. They went ahead and entrusted him with the directorship as well as the honorable position of narrating Hadith in the year 1927. [After taking up his new responsibilities,] he continued to be respected, beloved, heeded, kind, and courageous. He taught Sahīh Bukhāri and Sunan al-Tirmidhi even while being required to travel frequently. He toured the various towns and cities. He delivered speeches against British colonialism. He was the leader of the Jamʿīyyat ʿUlamā al-Hind. He guided spiritual disciples. Furthermore, he was frequent in worship, devotions, serving guests, and tirelessly turning toward Allah Most High. He assumed the directorship and took up the teaching of Hadith from the year 1928 till his demise in 1958. May Allah Most High grant him abode in the prosperity of His Paradise, and may He shower upon him and his mashāyikh a downpour of His Mercy and His Approval.

This long period of Maulana Husayn Ahmad’s directorship was interrupted by a short interval from Jamādī al-Ākhar 1361/June 1942 to Ramaḍān 1363/August 1944 during which the British government imprisoned him. During this interval, his lessons were delegated to Maulana al-Sayyid Fakhr al-Dīn Aḥmad al-Hāpūri th. al-Murādābādi, as well as Maulana Muḥammad Iʿzāz ʿAlī al-Amrōhi, Shaykh al-Fiqh wa ‘l-Adab at Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband (May Allah Most High have mercy on them all).

After Shaykh al-Islām al-Madani passed away in 1957, his position as the teacher of Sahīh Bukhāri was inherited by Maulana al-Sayyid Fakhr al-Dīn Aḥmad who was mentioned previously. Prior to his appointment, he had taught at the Qāsimi College (al-Jāmiʿah al-Qāsimiyyah) in Moradabad for more than forty years. He took up teaching at Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband and continued until his death in the year 1972 (May Allah Most High have mercy on him). After his passing until today, Sahīh Bukhāri has been taught at that college by shuyūkh that graduated at the hands of those Elders (May Allah Most High have mercy on them all). Among them are Maulana Sharīf al-Ḥasan al-Deobandi (d. 1977), and Muftī Maḥmūd al-Ḥasan al-Gangōhi (May Allah endow him with honor), Maulana Naṣīr Aḥmad Khān al-Barni, Maulana Saʿīd Aḥmad al-Pālanpūri, and Maulana ʿAbd al-Ḥaq al-Aʿẓami.

As for Sahīh Muslim, it has been taught by Maulana Muḥammad Ibrāhīm al-Balyāwi, Maulana Bashīr Aḥmad Khān al-Barni, and Maulana Sharīf al-Ḥasan al-Deobandi (May Allah Most High have mercy on all of them).

As for Sunan al-Tirmidhi, after Shaykh al-Islām al-Madani it was taught by Maulana Muḥammad Iʿzāz ʿAlī al-Amrōhi, Maulana Muḥammad Ibrāhīm al-Balyāwi, Maulana Sharīf al-Ḥasan al-Deobandi, and Maulana Fakhr al-Ḥasan (May Allah Most High have mercy on them), and Maulana Saʿīd Aḥmad al-Pālanpūri (May Allah Most High preserve him). As for Sunan Abī Dāwūd, it was taught by Maulana Aṣghar Ḥusayn al-Deobandi, Maulana Muḥammad Iʿzāz ʿAlī al-Amrōhi, Maulana Muḥammad Idrīs al-Kāndhlawi, Grand Muftī Maulana Muḥammad Shafīʿ, Maulana Bashīr Aḥmad Khān al-Barni, and Maulana Fakhr al-Ḥasan (May Allah Most High have mercy on them all).

As for the Sunan of Imam al-Nasā’i, the Sunan of Imam Ibn Mājah, the Shamā’il of Imam al-Tirmidhi, Sharh Maʿānī al-Āthār of Imam al-Tahāwi, and the Mu’attā according to both its narrations, the following eminent figures alternated in the teaching of those books: Maulana Muhammad Iʿzāz ʿAlī al-Amrōhi, Maulana Muḥammad Idrīs al-Kāndhlawi, Grand Muftī Maulana Muḥammad Shafīʿ, Maulana Fakhr al-Ḥasan, Maulana Nasīr Ahmad Khān al-Barni, and others. May Allah Most High thank them for their efforts and accept their struggles.

سلسة الزبرجد في أسانيد الشيح حسين أحمد

كتب الشيخ الفقيه المفسر المفتي الأعظم لباكستان محمد شفيع العثماني رحمه الله تعالي
في الإزدياد السَني علي اليانع الجَني

زين المشاهد والمنابر، بقية أولئك ألأكابير، المجاهد في سبيل الله، حضرة الشيخ مولانا حسين أحمد المدني، أدامه الله تعالى، بقي مد ظله من ريعان عمره تحت إشراف حضرة الشيخ شيخ الهند رحمه الله، و كان كبعض عياله، بل من أعز عترته، فقرأ ما قرأ تحت إشرافه، و قرأ عليه كتابا عديدة من الفنون المختلفة، و لا سيما كتب الحديث، فلا أحصي عدد قراءتها عليه مرة بعد مرة، حتّى عاد مرجع الخلائق في العلم والإرشاد فعلم الفنون برمتها، ولا سيما العلوم الحديثية مدة مديدة في المدينة المنورة تجاه من هو مبدأ الأحاديث و منتهاها صلى الله عليه و سلم، فأشهر أسناده مد ظله عن حضرة شيخ الهند رحمه الله بأسانيده التي مرت منا في هذه الرّسالة، و هو اليوم زين صدارة المدرسين بدار العلوم الديوبندية أداماها الله تعالى فنذكر ما ذكره هو بنفسه في ورقة أسانيده اامطبوعة بلفظها و هي هذه: أجازني بها الأئمة الفحول، أجلهم و أمجدهم سراج المحققين، و إمام أهل المعرفة واليقين، والعارف بالله، شيخ الهند مولانا أبو ميمون محمود الحسن العثماني الديوبندي موطنا، والحنفي مسلكا، والجشتي النقشبندي القادري السهروردي مشربا، (قدس الله سره العزيز) عن أئمة أعلام أجلهم مولانا شمس الإسلام والمسلمين، العارف بالله، مولانا أبو أحمد محمد قاسم العلوم والحكم النانوتوي موطنا، الحنفي مسلكا، والجشتي النقشبندي القادري، السهروردي مشربا، رحمهما الله تعالى. و هما قد أخذا سائر الفنون والكتب الدرسية، خلا علم الحديث، عن أئمة أعلام أجاهم مولانا الثبت أبي يعقوب، مملوك علي النانوتوي الحنفي، والمفتي صدر الدين الدهلوي، قدس الله أسرارهما، و غيرهما من أساتذة الفنون بدهلي، المعاصرين لهما عن أئمة أعلام أجلهم مولانا رشيد الدين الدهلوي، عن الإمام الحجة، مولانا العارف بالله، الشاه عبد العزيز الدهلوي، الحنفي، قدس الله سره العزيز رحمه الله، ويروي الشمسان، المؤمى إليهما سابقا، كتب الحديث والتفسير قراءة وإجازة عن أئمة أعلام أجلهم شيخ مشائخ الحديث، (يعني الكنكوهي والنانوتوي رحمهما الله) الإمام الحجة، العارف بالله، الشيخ عبد الغني المجددي الدهلوي ثم المدني، و عن الشيخ أحمد سعيد المجددي الدهلوي، ثم المدني، و مولانا أحمد علي السهارنفوري قدس الله أسرارهم، كلهم عن الشهير في الآفاق مولانا الإمام الحجة محمد إسحاق الدهلوي، ثم المكي، قدس الله سره العزيز، عن جده أبي أمه إمام الأئمة، العارف بالله، مولانا الشاه عبد العزيز الدهلوي، قدس الله سره العزيز، عن إمام الأئمة في المنقول، مركز دوائر الفروع والأصول، مولانا العارف بالله، الشاه ولي الله الدهلوي النقشبندي، وأسانيده إلى المحقق الدواني والسيد الجرجاني، والعلامة التفتازاني، قدس الله أسرارهم، مذكورة في القول الجميل و غيره، وكذلك أسانيده إلى أصحاب السنن ومصنفي كتب الحديث، مذكورة في ثبته، وكذلك في أوائل الصحاح الست.ح. ويروى حضرة مولانا الشاه عبد الغني الدهلوي المرحوم سائر الكتب، سيما الصحاح الست، عن الإمام الحجة محمد عابد الأنصاري السندي ثم المدني، صاحب التصانيف المشهورة، وأسانيده مذكورة في ثبته المسمى بحصر الشارد في أسانيد الشيخ محمد عابد، و كذلك في ثبت الشيخ عبد الغني، المعروف باليانع الجني. ح. ويروى شيخنا العلامة شيخ الهند المرحوم، عن العلامة محمد مظهر النانوتوي، و مولانا القارئ عبد الرحمن الفاني فتي، المرحوم كلاهما عن العارف بالله، الشيخ محمد إسحاق المرحوم، ح، و أروى هذه العلوم و الكتب عن الشيخ الأجل مولانا عبد العلي، قدس الله سره العزيز، أكبر المدرسين في مدرسة  مولانا عبدالرب المرحوم بدهلي و عن الشيخ الأجل مولانا خليل أحمد السهارنفوري ثم المدني كلاهما عن أئمة أعلام، سيما الشمسان المؤمى إليهما. ح. وأروى عن مشيخة أعلام من الحجاز إجازة وقراءة لأوائل بعض الكتب أجلهم شيخ التفسير حسب الله الشافعي المكي، و مولانا عبد الجليل برادة المدني، و مولانا عثمان عبد السلام الداغستاني، مفتي الأحناف بالمدينة المنورة، و مولانا السيد أحمد البرزنجي مفتي الشافعية بالمدنية المنورة، رحمهم الله تعالى وأرضهم

————-

اللعة: الزبرجد – الحجر الكريم الأرزق المخضرّ

المسك الأزفر من أسانيد الشيخ محمد أنور

كتب الشيخ الفقيه المفسر المفتي الأعظم لباكستان محمد شفيع العثماني رحمه الله تعالي
في الإزدياد السَني علي اليانع الجَني

وهو حافظ العصر، ذهبي وقته و عسقلاني دهره، بحر العلوم والفنون، شيخي وشيخ المشائخ، حضرة مولانا الشاه محمد أنور الهاشمي القرشي الكشميري، و هو الذي أقام بصدارة المدرسين بدار العلوم الديوبندية بعد شيخه الأجل حضرة شيخ الهند مولانا محمود حسن، رحمه الله تعالى، المؤمى إليه سابقا، و بقي نحو عشرين سنة مكبا على درس الحديث بفنونه، وكشف معضله و مكنونه، حتى انزوى عن هذا المنصب سنة ١٣٤٦ من الهجرة، فتخرج عليه نحو ألف رجل من العلماء والفقها، والمحدثين. و قد ألف بعض أصحابه قدس سره سيرته و ترجمته مفصلا سماه نفحة العنبر في هدي الشيخ الأنور من شاه فليراجعه. قرأ عليه العبد الضعيف الصحيح للإمام البحاري، والجامع للترمذي، والشمائل له، و دروس البلاغة، والنفيسي في الطب، وشطرا من الفلسفة الطبعية الجديدة. وهو-متعنا الله تعالى بفيوضه- قرأ أكثر كتب الصحاح على شيخ المشائخ حضرة شيخ الهند، رحمه الله، بأسناده المذكور آنفا، وحصل له الإجازة بقراءة الأطراف عن مسند وقته، علامة عصره، شمس العلوم والعلماء، حضرة مولانا حسين الجسر الطرابلسي البغدادي، صاحب الرسالة الحميدية، والحصون الحميدية، المشهورة المفيدة في علم الكلام الجديد، و صاحب تأليفات أخرى، بإسناده إلى العلامة الطحاوي، المذكور مفصلا في ثبته. وذلك حين رحليه إلى الحرمين، زادهما الله تعالى شرفا. فلشيخنا الأنور قدس سره في أسانيد الحديث ثلاثا طرق اهـ من نفحة العنبر ص ٣٨ إلى ص ٨٤

الإسناد الأول لسائر كتب الحديث عن شيخه و شيخ العالم المحدث البارع، مولانا الشيخ محمود حسن الديوبندي، المدعو بشيخ الهند قدس سره، ثم لإسناده طرق:

الأول: عن الحجة العارف، مولانا محمد قاسم النانوتوي الديوبندي رحمه الله، و عن المحدث الحجة مولانا رشيد أحمد الكنكوهي رحمه الله، كلاهما عن الشيخ المحدث الشاه عبد الغني الدهلوي، ننزيل المدينة المنورة.

الثاني: عن الشيخ المحدث مولانا أحمد علي السهارنفوري رحمه الله، محشي صحيح البخاري.

والثالث: عن الشيخ العارف، مولانا محمد مظهر النانوتوي رحمه الله.

والرابع: الشيخ المحدث القاري، مولانا عبد الرحمن الفاني فتي رحمه الله، و هؤلاء، الأعلام، الشاه عبد الغني والمحدث السهارنفوري، والمظهر النانوتوي، والمحدث الفاني فتي، كلهم عن الشيخ الأجل المحدث الشاه محمد إسحاق الدهلوي عن حبر الأمة المحدث العارف الشيخ عبد العزيز الدهلوي، عن والده الشيخ الإمام الحجة قطب الدين أبي الفياض أحمد المدعو بالشاه ولي الله الدهلوي، عن الشيخ أبي طاهر المدني، عن والده الشيخ إبراهيم الكردي، عن الشيخ المزاحي، عن الشهاب أحمد السبكي، عن الشيخ النجم الغيطي، عن الشيخ زين الدين زكريا، عن عزالدين الشيخ عبد الرحيم، عن الشيخ عمر المراغي، عن الفخر بن البخاري، عن عمر بن طبرزد البغدادي، بإسناده إلى الحافظ الحجة أبي عيسى الترمذي، صاحب الجامع. و من شاه االإطلاع على أسانيد الشيخ عبد الغني، وأحوال رجالها، فليرجع إلى اليانع الجني في أسانيد الشيخ عبد الغني، و قد طبع بحيدرآباد مرة، وأخرى بديوبند.

الإسناد الثاني عن شيخه اليخ محمد إسحق الكشميري، عن الشيخ السيد نعمان الآلوسي، عن والده أعلم بغداد الشيخ الحبر مولانا مخمود الآلوسي البغدادي، صاحب روح المعاني، بالإسناد المثبت في ثبته، وهذا هو الإسناد الذي يقول لأجله شيخنا رحمه الله في بعض مؤلفاته قال شيخي بواسطتين محمود الآلوسي في روح المعاني فاغتنمه.

الإسناد الثالث عن الشيخ حسين الطرابلسي الجسر صاحب الحميدية، والحصون الحميدية، الجسر صاحب الحميدية، بإسناده إلى الشيخ السيد أحمد الطحطاوي المصري، صاحب التعليق على الدر المختار، و مراقي الفلاح، استجاز عند الشيخ رحمه الله، بالمدينة المنورة، زادها الله شرفا وتعظيما، كما أشرنا إليه فيما سلف، فهذا ما اطلعت عليه من أسانيد هؤلاء المشائخ الذين كانوا غرر عصرهم، ومسانيد وقتهم، قدس الله أسرارهم وأشاع في العالمين أنوارهم وبركاتهم. و قد أجازني شيخي رحمه الله بأسانيده هذه كلها، فلله الحمد والمنة، ثم له جزيل الشكر و حسن الثناء، وصلى الله تعالى على خير حلقه سيدنا محمد وآله و صحبه أجمعين يوم الجزاء. ولئن أنام الله تعالى طبعه مرة أخرى فسأكر فيه مفصلا إن شاء الله تعالى مع شئ من تفصيل أحوال هؤلاء، الكرام، متعنا الله تعالى بعلومهم، و إلا فكم غادر الأول للآخر، و كم حسرات في بطون المقابر.

Sadr Shariah – The author of Nuqayah, Sharh Wiqayah and Tawdih

By Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami
2 Jumada I 1437 | 12 February 2016

He is the great scholar faqih, and master of usul, Sadr al-Shariah (al-asghar) Ubayd Allah b. Mas’ud b. Taj al-Shariah Mahmud b. Sadr al-Shariah al-Akbar al-Mahbubi al-Bukhari (d. 747). When Sadr al-Shariah is said without any prefix it refers to him. Amongst others, he acquired knowledge from his grandfather, the great scholar and the author of the monumental fiqh text Wiqayah,  Taj al-Shariah Mahmud.

His expertise expanded to many fields including Hadith, Fiqh, Usul, Aqa’id, logic, grammar, rhetoric and poetry. He researched assiduously and wrote meticulously. His knowledge was vast and incisive through which he was able to summarise many important and difficult topics succinctly. Allm. Abd al-Hayy Lacknawi writes that all the works of Sadr al-Shariah are accepted by the reliable scholars amongst the fuqaha.

His books Nuqayah, Sharh Wiqayah, and Tanqih wa Tawdhih are considered classics which summarises Hanafi fiqh and usul fiqh.

For further detail, read Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami’s article, ‘Sadr al-Shariah (al-Asghar) – d. 747′. Islamic Studies Bulletin (DIBAJ), Issue 2. Available at http://uloom.com/dibaj/article/130820501

How to study Usul al-Fiqh

By Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami
Extracted from Mastering Usul Fiqh in Islamic Studies Bulletin – 9 Shawwal 1434

To master usul for a person with a Hanafi background, one must first have a strong foundation in fiqh. Study Usul al-Shashi to get an in-depth understanding of the central masa’il covered in usul fiqh as well as an introduction to the core principles. Thereafter, read Manar al-Anwar along with Nur al-Anwar to understand the principles in detail along with the evidence which support and justify these rules as well as answers objections posited by the mutakillimin. This will make it easy to decipher the usul of Bazdawi, Sarakhsi, Jassas and make Talwih accessible. Now that a solid foundation in the Hanafi approach is developed, one should consolidate the learning with the reading of Husami with special attention on the Qiyas section; this will cover the topics in Taqwim al-Adillah, Tasis al-Nazar and Usul Karkhi. This should suffice for one to understand the Hanafi evidence and usul.

To advance one should study Tawdih with Talwih. This will summarise the key mutakallimin works such as Ihkam and Muntaha al-Sul along with what was covered in Manar and Husami in addition to gaining the Ash’ari insight via Talwih. This should give one scope to understand most of the books of the other Mazahib. Follow up with the study of Musallam al-Thubut with Fawatih al-Rahmut; this will suffice to understand the works of the later works of the muta’akhkhirin including Jam’ al-Jawami’ and Tahrir.

For further detail, read Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami’s article, ‘Mastering Usul Fiqh’. Islamic Studies Bulletin (DIBAJ), Issue 3. Available at http://uloom.com/dibaj/article/130818501

Mu’in al-Fara’idh #4: Impediment

murder

By Mufti Mahmud Hasan Ajmeri
Translated by Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami – 29 Rabi II 1437 | 10 February 2016

Those eligible to inherit, sometimes due to a certain causes can be impeded (mahrum) from inheriting. These causes are known as ‘Mawani’ al-Irth’. There are four such causes: Riqq (slavery), Qatl (homicide), Tabayun Din (religion), and Tabayun Darayn (nationality). The details are mentioned below.

(1) Riqq refers to full or partial slavery such as a slave, mudabbarmukatab or umm walad. The reason being, these people do not fully own themselves or anything in the possession. Hence, if any relative of theirs dies, they will not be eligible to get anything from the tarkah. Furthermore, they cannot impede others from inheriting either.

(2) Qatl [in this case refers to homicide] which necessitates qisas or kaffarah. The homicide which impedes the killer from inheriting are three types: Qatl ‘Amad,, Qatl Shibh ‘Amad (voluntary manslaughter) and Qatl Khata’ (involuntary manslaughter).

(a) Qatl ‘Amad (murder) is the purposeful killing of an innocent human life with a lethal weapon such as a sword, sharp stone, canon, gun and fire. This results in sin and qisas but not diyyat or kaffarah.

(b) Qatl Shibh Amad (voluntary manslaughter) is the purposeful killing of an innocent human life with a non-lethal item such as ordinary stone or wood piece. This results in diyyat, sin and kaffarah but not qisas.

(c) Qatl Khata’ (involuntary manslaughter) is the accidental killing of an innocent human life such as a hunter who shot at a target but accidentally hit a person due to which he died. This results in diyyat and kaffarah but not qisas and sin.

As there is qisas in ‘amad and kaffarah in shibh ‘amad and khata’, all these forms killing will impede inheritance.

(3) Tabayun Din refers to when from the deceased and the heir, one is a Muslim and the other is a non-Muslim. This difference (tabayun) in their religion impedes the heir from inheriting. Yes! amongst non-Muslims (disbelievers) regardless of how much difference [between them], they will be considered as one religion under the principal of ‘kufr millatun wahidah‘ (kufr is all one religion). Hence, non-Muslims of different religions will not be impeded [from each other].

(4) Tabayun Darayn refers to when non-Muslims live in two different nations. This is a cause of them being impeded. This is irrespective if the difference is real such as one is harbi and the other is zimmi or if the difference is assumed such as one is zimmi and the other is musta’min or both are from two separate dar al-harb. Muslims being of different nations does not impede them [from inheriting].

Mu’in al-Fara’idh #3: Succession

By Mufti Mahmud Hasan Ajmeri
Translated by Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami – 28 Rabi II 1437 | 9 February 2016

The estate which remains after shroud, burial, payment of debts and fulfilment of bequest will be distributed amongst the heirs in accordance to the Quran, sunnah of the Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) and ijma.

There are three types of heirs (waratha): Zawil Furudh, ‘Asabat, and Zawil Arham. Their order of priority will be mentioned below.

(4)  Zawil Furudh: They are those who have been fixed a specific share in the Quran, Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and through ijma. From the inheritors, the zawil furudh are the first to be given their fixed shares. After their share, if any amount remains, it is given to the eligible ‘asabat.

(5) ‘Asabat: They are those who if alone take the entire tarkah and if with a zawi al-furudh take all that remains tarkah after their share. These ‘asabat are of two types:

(a) ‘Asabat Nisabi: They are those who are related to the deceased [by blood] such as father, father’s father, son, son’s son. The details will come in the ‘asabat section.

(b) ‘Asabat Sababi: They are those who freed the deceased or the ‘asabat of those who freed [the deceased]. As in the deceased was a slave who was freed by his owner. If this free person dies and there is no heir from the above category to inherit, the master who freed or if unavailable the master’s ‘asabah nisabi will be inherit. Note! If the master is not alive, only the male relatives may inherit – not the females. The reason being, females can only inherit [as ‘asabah] from their freed slave or the freed-slave of their freed slave – they cannot inherit [as ‘asabah] from the freed-slave of their relatives.

(6) Radd bi Zawil Furudh: Give the fixed share to the zawil furudh and thereafter if any amount remains give it to the ‘asaba nisabi and if they are unavailable give it to the ‘asaba sababi. However, if the deceased has neither of the ‘asabat, redistribute the remaining amount amongst the zawi al-furudh according to their proportions. This is called radd which we will discuss in detail in the radd section. Here, just remember that radd is only done to zawi al-furudh nisabi and not zawi al-furudh sababi (spouse).

(7) Zawil Arham: All relatives other than zawil furudh and ‘asabah are classed zawil arham such as the daughter’s son and daughter, brother’s daughter, sister’s daughter, father’s sister, mother’s sister, mother’s brother, and mother’s father etcetera. If there is no one from the above mentioned categories, the tarkah (estate) of the deceased will be given to the zawil arham. The detail will come in the zawil arham section. If from the zawil furudh there is only the spouse and there are no ‘asabah, give the remaining amount to the zawil arham.

(8) Mawla Muwalat: They are those who the deceased formed a pact of fealty. As in the deceased had no known family and so made a pact,

You are my mawla and after I die, you will receive my money. However, if a crime occurs on my part due to which I must pay diyyat (blood money), you shall fulfil it.

If after forming the pact, this person with no known family dies and leaves no eligible heirs from the above categories, the estate will be given to this mawla muwalat with whom the pact was made whilst alive. Hence, if the spouse is alive but after their share there is no heir from the above groups, the remaining amount will be given to the mawla muwalat with whom the pact was made.

(9) Muqirr lahu bi al-Nasab ala al-Ghayr: They are those regarding whom the deceased admitted to being related. However, the relationship could not be established by admittance alone as it entails including them in the lineage of another. For example, the deceased admitted a stranger to be his brother or uncle. As this entail this stranger being included in his father or grandfather’s lineage, the relationship will be established so long as the father or grandfather do not confirm. The mere admittance will not be sufficient be establish the person as his real brother or uncle. However, If the one remains adamant on their claim till death and after dying there is no one from the above categories or they have a spouse and there is no one from the above categories to receive the remaining amount, the muqir lahu bi al-nasabi ala ghayr will be given the remain estate.

(10) Musa lahu bi Jami’l Mal: They are those to whom the deceased bequeathed their entire estate. However, in accordance to the shariah, they were given a third and two-thirds was held for others who may be eligible. But on further investigation it was discovered there is no one eligible of the two-thirds from the above mentioned categories. Consequently, the remaining amount will be given to this musa lahu bi jami’l mal.

(11) Bayt al-Mal: If no one from the above mentioned categories, the estate will be given to the bayt al-mal (Muslim treasury) which then should be spent on [the needy who are destitute and have no one].

(12) Radd bi Zawjayn: If there no one from the above mentioned categories, the general books of fiqh state that the tarkah of the deceased be given to the bat al-mal. However, when the later scholars have seen that in our time there is no bayt al-mal or [if there is] they do not spend it in an Islamic cause, they deemed that if there is a spouse and for the remain amount there is no one from above mentioned categories, the spouse should be given the remaining amount.

Mu’in al-Fara’idh #2: Payment schedule

By Mufti Mahmud Hasan Ajmeri
Translated by Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami – 28 Rabi II 1437 | 8 February 2016

(1) Shroud and burial: First and foremost, pay the shroud and burial expenses from the deceased’s estate even if it requires that the entire estate be spent. You should be moderate in the funeral expenses. For example, the shroud should be of the standard which the deceased may have worn in jumua, the two Eids or when meeting friends.

(2) Debt payment: [Secondly,] repay [recognised] debts which are owed to people from the estate which remains after the payment of [necessary] funeral expenses even if it requires that the entire estate be spent.

If the estate is insufficient to repay all the debts, give priority to the payment of strong debts over weak debts. For example, debts incurred whilst the deceased was healthy or debts which are proven conclusively will be given priority over debts admitted (without any verifiable proof) whilst the person was dying . If multiple debts of equal standing have accumulated, divide the estate amongst the creditors according to their proportions.

Arrears of zakat and kaffarat are written off as a debt in this world. The reason being, it not associated with the rights of the people rather it is the right of Allah Almighty. Of course, the inheritors or someone else may give it from their own wealth as a form of compensation if they please. If the deceased at the time of their demise bequeathed that it be paid, it would be classified as a bequest.

(3) Bequest: [Thirdly,] fulfil the bequest (wasiyyat) of the deceased from one third of the estate (tarkah) which remains after the payment of [recognised] debts.

Wasiyyat (bequest) refers to the asset which the deceased expressed that it be given to a particular person or cause [upon their death].

In fulfilling the bequest, it is a requisite that (1) it not be more than a third, (2) it not be given to an heir automatically inheriting when the deceased died and (3) it not be a cause which contravenes the shari’ah.

If it is more than a third or the bequest was for an heir, it may not be fulfilled without the consent of the remaining heirs.

——–

Keyword: Mal (estate: all the money and property owned by a person), Tarkah (the net asset of the deceased), Dayn pl. Duyun (debts), Wasiyyah (bequest).

Note: This schedule of payment which occurs before any heir receives their share is known as muqaddamah ‘alal irth.

Mu’in al-Fara’idh #1: Introduction

By Mufti Mahmud Hasan Ajmeri
Translated by Muhammad Saifur Rahman Nawhami – 25 Rabi II 1437 | 5 February 2016

We praise Allah Almighty and send salutations to His noble Prophet.

Before starting any subject the introductory matters are mentioned so that the student may find it easy to learn and understand. Hence, before starting ilmul fara’id, we shall write the definition (ta’rif), subject matter (mawdu’), objective (ghard wa ghayat), some keywords and technical terms so that you may find learning this subject easy.

Definition: This is the knowledge of the rules and cases of fiqh which if known one will be informed of (1) the legal heirs of the deceased and (2) the legal principals of how to determine the shares of their inheritance.

Subject matter: The deceased’s estate (tarkah) and the eligible heirs (waratha).

Aim and objective: The aim of this knowledge is to discover the eligible heirs of the deceased’s estate and their share.

Etymology:  Fara’idh (فرائض) is derived from faridhah (فريضة) which means to fix. This knowledge is called ilmul fara’idh as the shares that are stated for the heirs, their amount are fixed by Allah Almighty himself.

Virtue: The Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) says, ‘Knowledge is of three and all else is a bonus: the clear ayat, established sunnah and the fair share’ (Abu Dawud). The Prophet (peace be upon him) also said, ‘Learn inheritance and teach it’ (Ibn Majah). In another narration, [he says], ‘It is the first thing which will be taken from my ummah‘ (Majma’ al-Anhur).

قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم العلم ثلاثة، و ما سوي ذلك فهو فضل: اية محكمة، أو سنة قائمة، أو فريضة عادلة رواه أبو داود و قال صلي الله عليه و سلم أيضا تعلَموا الفرائض و علّموها، فإنها نصف العلم رواه ابن ماجة و في رواية أخري في مجمع الأنهر و هو سنتي و هو أول شئ ينزع من أمتي.

In consideration of these narrations, the importance and virtue of this knowledge over other subjects is apparent. Furthermore, before commencing on this subject, it is important that the student know mathematics in addition to sarfnahw and the masa’il of fiqh.

Tarkah: Any asset or property (be it real or owed) which remains after a person has died minus any asset associated with the rights of another person. For example, the asset of the deceased which the deceased has placed as a security of a loan or an asset which was bought but not paid and the buyer dies before taking possession of the asset. In these cases, as the lender or sellers right is associated with the asset, it will not be included within the tarkah.

Keywords: Mayyit (the deceased person), Tarkah (the net asset of the deceased), Warith pl. Waratha (heirs: a person entitled to inherit the asset of the deceased person), Fara’id (inheritance)

[Mu’in Fara’id is a standard primer for mirath which is taught before or in conjunction with Siraji]

Preferred wordings for Tashahhud

By T. Zaman
24 Rabi II 1437 | 4 February 2016

The wordings of tashahhud in salah differ slightly in the narrations with the reports of Hadrats Umar, Abdullah b. Mas’ud, and Abdullah b. Ibn Abbas (may Allah Almighty be pleased with them) considered the clearest. If one were to read any of these it would be permissible1. However, the schools differ as to which is the most preferred form of tashahhud of the three.

Imam Abu Hanifah2 and Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal3 (may Allah Almighty be pleased with them) give preference to the narration of Hadrat Abdullah b. Mas’ud (may Allah Almighty be pleased with him) as it is considered the most authentic4, consistent5 (asah and athbat) and in line with the practice of majority of the ahlul ilm amongst the sahabah. He relates:

التحيات لله و الصلوات و الطيبات، السلام عليك أيها النبي و رحمة الله و بركاته، السلام علينا و على عباد الله الصالحين أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله، و أشهد أن محمدا عبده و رسوله

Imam Shafi’i6 (may Allah Almighty have mercy upon him) gives preference to the narration of Hadrat Abdullah b. Abbas (may Allah Almighty be pleased with him) as he considered it the most comprehensive. He relates:

التحيات المباركات الصلوات الطيبات لله، سلام عليك أيها النبى و رحمة الله و بركاته، سلام علينا و على عباد الله الصالحين، أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله و أن محمدا رسول الله

Imam Malik Bin Anas7 (may Allah Almighty have mercy upon him) gives preference to the narration of Hadrat Umar b. Khattab (may Allah Almighty be pleased with him) as he mentioned it in the pulpit (minbar) and none in the congregation objected. His relates:

التحيات لله الزاكيات لله الطيبات الصلوات لله السلام عليك أيها النبى و رحمة الله السلام علينا و على عباد الله الصالحين أشهد أن لا اله الا الله و أشهد أن محمدا عبد الله و رسوله

Read Fath al-Mulhim for more detail8.

———————

[1] The great Hanafi scholar Allm. Ibn Nujaym in Bahr suggests that to read any other al-tahiyyat other than the one reported by Hadrat Abdullah b. Mas’ud is Makruh Tahrimi. However, this is not so as Imam Muhammad in Muwatta indicates it is permissible and this is the position of the majority of the Ahnaf (See Fath al-Mulhim v. 2 p. 311).

[2] Imam Quduri. 2008. Mukhtasar Al-Quduri. Maktabah al-Bushra; Pakistan p. 76

[3] Ibn Qudama. al-Mughni.

[4] See Sunan Tirmidhi

[5] Hadrat Abdullah b. Mas’ud did not used to like to add or decrease any words of the tahiyyat, hence, his reported form is consistent throughout.

[6] al-Umm li Imam al-Shafi’i. 2001. Dar Al-Wafa; Egypt

[7] Imam Maalik bin Anas & Sahnun (ed). al- Mudawwanah al-Kubrah. v. 1 p.143

[8] Usmani, Allm. Shabbir Ahmad. 2006. Fath al-Mulhim. Darul Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi; Beirut, Lebanon. v. 3 pp. 310-312

The meaning of Iman

Iman is do tasdīq (assenting) to what is known that the Messenger (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) came with, briefly in that which is known briefly, and in detail in that which is known in detail. Note! Assent here refers to shar’i assent.

By Mufti Rashid Ahmad Ludhyanwi
Ahsan al-Fatawa v. 1 pp. 60-65
Translated by Ml. Zameelur Rahman in Darul Ma’arif – 28 September 2014

Question:

In a public gathering, Gandhi stated these words while delivering a speech: “I do not understand why I should not recite the kalimah? Why should I not praise Allāh? Why should I not accept Muhammad as His messenger? I have faith in the saints and the prophets of all religions.” Can Gandhi be called a Muslim for saying the aforementioned words? Please attend to the reply quickly, because I have need for it for a religious publication. Explain with proof, may the Most Merciful reward you.

Answer:

The definition of īmān is:

التصديق بما علم مجيئ الرسول صلي الله عليه و سلم به إجمالا فيما علم إجمالا و تفصيلا فيما علم تفصيلا

Tasdīq (assenting) to what is known that the Messenger (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) came with, briefly in that which is known briefly, and in detail in that which is known in detail.”

In this definition, the intent of “assent” is neither logical assent – meaning recognition and perception of a connection [between a subject and its predicate]1 – nor linguistic assent – meaning the attribution of truthfulness to a speaker.

Rather, the intent is Shar‘ī assent which is a combination of three things:

  1. Recognition (ma‘rifah)
  2. Linguistic assent (tasdīq lughwī)2
  3. Submission and acceptance (inqiyād wa stislām)

Or it will be said that the reality of īmān is only linguistic assent, while recognition and submission are conditions for the realisation of īmān.

According to the Jahmiyyah, īmān is merely recognition, which is rejected because this is not volitional. Īmān is volitional, due to it being something [human beings are] made accountable for, and accountability occurs only in volitional acts. Moreover, His (Exalted is He) statement, “Gain knowledge that there is none worthy of worship but Allāh” (47:19) proves īmān is acquired, while recognition is not acquired. Moreover, recognition is an [internal] state, while assent is an action, and there is conflict between the two.

The texts of the Glorious Qur’ān refute the Jahmiyyah. Allāh (Exalted is He) said: “They denied them out of sheer injustice and arrogance, though their hearts believed them” (27:14), “Those whom We have given the Book recognise him as they recognise their own sons” (2:146), “Yet when there came to them that which they did recognise, they denied it” (2:89). And Allāh (Exalted is He) said, quoting Mūsā (upon him peace) addressing Fir‘awn: “You know well that these were sent down by none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth as signs. And, I am afraid O Fir‘awn, you are going to be destroyed” (17:102).

Thus, mere recognition is not sufficient for īmān. Rather, assent and submission are also necessary.

Imām al-Haramayn said in al-Irshād:

Upon verification, tasdīq is an internal speech, but it is not established except with knowledge.

Ibn al-Humām said:

The outward [meaning] of the speech of al-Ash‘arī in this context is that tasdīq is an internal speech and it is preconditioned by recognition, the absence of which entails its absence. There is [also] the possibility that īmān is a combination of recognition and internal speech, so each of them is an integral component of īmān.

Thus, for the realisation of īmān in both interpretations, it is necessary to have recognition, that is, cognition that the claim of the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) is in accordance with reality and something else, which is internal acceptance and submission, by accepting the commands and prohibitions, which necessitates reverence and not belittling. This internal acceptance is the meaning of internal speech, and this is how the author [al-Ghazālī] expressed it in his discussion on ‘īmān’ and ‘islām.’ We only said that something else is necessary with recognition, and that is internal acceptance, because of what has preceded of the realisation of mere recognition in the presence of disbelief.

‘Allāmah al-Zabīdī said in Sharh al-Ihyā’:

The most apparent [position] is that tasdīq is an internal speech besides recognition, because what is understood from tasdīq linguistically is attribution of truthfulness to a speaker, which is an action, and recognition is not an action but is from the category of an [internal] state, in contrast to the description of an action. Thus, it is entailed that both submission, that is acceptance, and recognition, are excluded from the notion of tasdīq linguistically, while their consideration is established in Sharī‘ah for īmān. Their consideration in this fashion is based on their being two components of its meaning in the Sharī‘ah, or two conditions for its consideration for the operation of its laws in the Sharī‘ah. The second [interpretation] is superior, since the first necessitates taking īmān out of its linguistic meaning to another Shar‘ī meaning, and that is rejected because there is no evidence necessitating it being so, because it is contrary to the default condition. Thus, it will not be resorted to except on the basis of evidence, and there is no evidence.

In fact, it [i.e. īmān] is demanded of the Arabs frequently in the Book and Sunnah, and those who responded to it responded without asking for its meaning, and if a question did occur from them, it was only about what īmān pertains to [and not īmān itself]. The non-realisation of īmān without recognition and acceptance does not entail their being components of its meaning in the Sharī‘ah, because of the possibility that they are conditions of īmān in the Sharī‘ah, while its reality is tasdīq of specific articles [of belief] in the linguistic sense. Once this is established, it is apparent that linguistic tasdīq may appear without them [i.e. acceptance and submission], together with disbelief, which is the very opposite of īmān.

‘Allāmah al-Ālūsī discussed some of this, and said after some comments:

The outcome of this is the non-acquisition of tasdīq for an obstinate person [who refuses to proclaim the truth of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) despite recognising its truth], as it [i.e. tasdīq] is the opposite of rejection; while what is achieved by him is recognition which is [only] the opposite of ignorance. They have agreed that this recognition is external to linguistic tasdīq, and that is what is considered in īmān. (Fath al-Mulhim)

In sum, regardless of whether linguistic tasdīq (assent) can or cannot be separated from recognition and submission, [internal] submission is necessary for the realisation of īmān. Without submission, verbal testimony is not considered.

In declaring the truth, the words of Heraclius bear so much weight, yet because of not having submitted, he cannot be called a believer (mu’min). After explaining the circumstances of the prophets (peace be upon them), Heraclius said: “If all that you say is true, he will soon have sovereignty over the place of these two feet of mine. Indeed I had knowledge that he will emerge, but I did not think he will be from you. If I knew I could reach him, I would endeavour to meet him, and if I were in his presence, I would wash his feet.” Heraclius said: “This is the king of this nation, he has emerged.” A letter came to him from his companion agreeing with the opinion of Heraclius on the emergence of the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) and that he is a prophet, whereupon he said: “O Assembly of Romans. If you have [hope] for success, guidance and that your kingdom remains, pledge to this prophet.” (Sahīh al-Bukhārī).

In Fath al-Bārī, [Ibn Hajar says]:

[It is reported] from al-Tabrānī: Caesar said: ‘I know him to be such.’ In a disconnected [report of] Ibn Ishāq: Heraclius said: ‘Woe to you! By Allah, verily I know that he is a prophet that has been sent.’ In Musnad Ahmad [it states] that he wrote from Tabūk to the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) that I am a Muslim. The Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) said: ‘He lied. Rather, he is [still] upon his Christianity.’ In Kitāb al-Amwāl of Abū ‘Ubayd with asahīh chain to the disconnected [report of] Bakr ibn ‘Abd Allāh al-Muzanī the like of this, and its wording is: He said: ‘The enemy of Allāh lied. He is not a Muslim.’ Based on this, the author of al-Istī‘āb said that he believed, meaning expressed faith, but he did not persist on it, and he did not practise on its dictates, but was greedy for his kingdom and favoured this perishing [realm] over the everlasting [life].” (Fath al-Bārī)

Al-Nawawī said:

There is no excuse in what he said: ‘If I knew I could reach him, I would endeavour to meet him,’ because he recognised the integrity of the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace), yet he was greedy for sovereignty and craved leadership so he favoured them over acceptance of Islām, and that has been reported explicitly in Sahīh al-Bukhārī. – (‘Umdat al-Qārī)

Heraclius confessed with the tongue and even sent in writing that I am a Muslim. Despite this, the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) did not regard him as truthful, because there was no submission. Similarly, merely due to his confession and words, it has not be claimed that Waraqah ibn Nawfal was a Muslim. Rather, his faith was established from the dream of the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace).

Abū Tālib showed so much support for the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace). He endured such burdensome difficulties in the spread of Islām. He continued to support the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) in every way, verbally and practically. He said in addressing the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace):

You invited me and I knew that you are truthful.
Indeed you spoke the truth and you were, from before, trustworthy.
By Allāh! They will never reach you with their [entire] group,
Until I am laid to rest, buried in the earth!
Proclaim your cause, no harm will come to you.
Bear glad tidings of that and let eyes be cooled by you.
Indeed I knew that the religion of Muhammad
Is from the best of religions of all creatures as dīn.
Were it not for blame or fear of insult,
You would find me open to that plainly.

Despite this, because there was no submission, Abū Tālib cannot be regarded as a mu’min.

In Fath al-Mulhim, the following statement of Hāfiz Ibn Taymiyyah is quoted:

In fact, Abū Tālib and others, despite their love for the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) and their love for the elevation of his word due to not having envy for him and their knowledge of his honesty and their acceptance of it, they were driven to not following his upright religion and his straight conduct because of their sympathy towards the religion of their people and their dislike for separating from it and earning the displeasure of Quraysh. Hence, they did not leave īmān due to not knowing, but due to personal whims. So how can it be said in spite of this that every disbeliever only disbelieved due to having no knowledge of Allāh?”

It says in Fath al-Mulhim:

Based on this, disbelief is of types: disbelief of rejection, disbelief of denial, disbelief of obstinacy and disbelief of hypocrisy. That is, if the denial – meaning, the non-acceptance – is with the heart and with the tongue both, it is the first. If it is only with the tongue together with the acquisition of recognition and certainty with the heart, it is the second. And if it is together with the acquisition of recognition and confession of the tongue and merely due to obstinacy, it is the third. (Heraclius, Abū Tālib and Gandhi fall in this category). And if it is only with the heart along with acceptance and loyalty with the tongue, it is the fourth.

It is realised from the above discussion that for the realisation of īmān, surrender is necessary.

Furthermore, the measure of the presence and realisation of surrender is that every person understands that this person has entered into Islām, having left his earlier religion.

The explanation of this measure is written with these words in al-Durr al-Mukhtār:

Disbelievers are of five categories: those that deny the Creator like the materialists, those that deny the oneness [of Allāh] like Zoroastrians, those who affirm it but deny the sending of the messengers like the philosophers, those that deny both [the oneness of Allāh and the prophets] like the idolaters and those who affirm both but deny the inclusiveness of the messengership of the Chosen One (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) like [some] Christians. Thus, in the first two, the statement lā ilāha illAllāh is sufficient [as proof for the acceptance of Islām]. In the third, the statement Muhammadur Rasūlullāh[is sufficient] and in the fourth either of them [is sufficient] and in the fifth both of them [are necessary] along with disassociation from every religion that differs from the religion of Islām…That which fatwa is given upon is its validity with the two testimonies without disassociation [from other religions], because pronouncement of them has become a symbol of Islām. Thus, he will be killed if he turns back and did not repent.

It states in Radd al-Muhtār under his statement, “Thus, in the first two, the statement lā ilāha illAllāh is sufficient”:

Because they refuse the testimony completely, so when they confess it, it is evidence of their īmān.

And under his statement, “In the third”:

If he were to have said lā ilāha illAllāh, it would not be determined that he has accepted Islām because he denies messengership, and he does not refrain from this statement. And if he had said, ‘I bear testimony that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’, it would be determined that he has accepted Islām because he refrained from this testimony, so confession of it is evidence of īmān.

And under his statement, “In the fourth”:

He explained its reason in al-Durr, that he denies both realities, so whichever of them he bears testimony to, he has entered into Islām…And he added that if he were to say, ‘I am a Muslim,’ he is a Muslim because idol worshippers do not claim this description for themselves but distance [themselves from it] with the purpose of angering Muslims. The same is the case if he were to say, ‘I am on the religion of Muhammad’ or ‘on monotheism’ ‘or on the religion of Islām.’

And under his statement, “In the fifth”:

Apparently if he were to pronounce the two testimonies and state clearly that the messengership extends to the Israelites and all others, or he said, ‘I bear testimony that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allāh to all creation, mankind and jinn,’ that too will suffice for disassociation [from all religions], as the Shāfi‘īs have clearly stated.

Under the title “notice”, he said:

I say: He (upon him blessing and peace) only sufficed with the two testimonies because the people of his time would deny his messengership completely, as will come. Further, know that it is derived from the ruling of [some] Christians [described above] that the one whose disbelief is due to denial of a necessary article [of faith], like the prohibition of wine, for example, it is necessary for him to disassociate himself from what he used to believe, because he would confess the two testimonies along with it, so it is necessary for him to distance [himself] from it, as the Shāfi‘īs clearly stated, and as is obvious.

And under his statement, “In al-Durar, he made the condition of disassociation general for every Jew and Christian”:

[It says in al-Dhakīrah:] As for Jews and Christians, acceptance of Islām in his time (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) was by [declaring] the two testimonies, because they would deny his (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) messengership. As for today in the lands of ‘Irāq, one will not be considered to have accepted Islām for as long as he does not say, ‘I disassociate [myself] from my [earlier] religion and I have entered into the religion of Islām’, because they say that he is a messenger to the Arabs and the non-Arabs but not to the Israelites. [Imām] Muhammad stated this.

It says in Sharh al-Siyar of Sarakhsī: ‘As for the Jews and Christians today in the midst of the Muslims, when one of them pronounces the two testimonies, he will not become a Muslim, because they all say this. There is no Jew or Christian amongst us but he says this sentence. When we inquire from him [about it], he says: The messenger of Allāh to you not to the Israelites.’

Then he said: ‘If he were to say, I am a Muslim, he would not become a Muslim thereby, because every group claims this for itself. The Muslim is [literally] the one that submits to the truth, and every adherent of a religion claims that he submits to the truth. Our teacher, Imām [al-Halwānī], would say, except the Zoroastrians in our lands, because the one amongst them who says, I am a Muslim, he becomes a Muslim, because they reject this description, and they insult their children with it [saying], O Musalmān!’ …

Based on this, the same would be said of the Jews and Christians in our lands, because they refuse to say, ‘I am Muslim,’ such that when one of them wishes to withhold himself from something he says: ‘If I do this, I will become a Muslim.’ Thus, when he says, ‘I am a Muslim’ wilfully [and not in mockery], that is evidence of his acceptance of Islām, even if he has not been heard pronouncing the two testimonies, as stated in Sharh al-Siyar regarding one who offered salāh in jamā‘ah, that he will be determined as having accepted Islām, and that the acceptance of Islām will be determined based merely on the mark of the Muslims with respect to the obligation of performing [Janāzah] Salāh over him when he dies. Moreover, they strongly refuse to pronounce the two testimonies, so when they pronounce them wilfully, it is necessary to consider him as having accepted Islām, because this is greater than a [mere] mark.

There is no doubt that [Imām] Muhammad only made disassociation [from their previous religion] a condition based on [the circumstance] that was [prevalent] in his time, in terms of confessing messengership in contrast to [the circumstance] that was [prevalent] in the time of the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) of rejecting it. Hence, since they reject it in our time and they refuse to pronounce the two testimonies, it is necessary that the ruling reverts back to what it was in his (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) time, as there no longer remains any reason to divert from it; while [Imām] Muhammad only gave a ruling based on [the circumstance] that was [prevalent] in the lands of Irāq, not in general as suggested incorrectly by what is in al-Durar.

About this, ‘Allāmah Qāsim [ibn Qutlūbughā] mentioned that he was asked about a Sāmirī that pronounced the two testimonies and then took it back, and he replied with what the outcome of which is, that ‘his beliefs will be examined, since they mentioned that some Jews restricted the messengership of our Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) to the Arabs, and for such a person, the two testimonies alone are not sufficient, as distinguished from one who denies the messengership completely. Some whose hearts Allāh has blinded considered them one group in all lands, such that they determined that the Christian who denies messengership and articulated the two testimonies as remaining on Christianity because he did not distance [himself from his earlier religion].’

The upshot is that that which must be relied upon is that if his state is unknown, he will be interrogated about it, and if it is known as in our time, the matter is obvious.

And he said under his statement, “pronouncement of them has become a symbol of Islām”:

He demonstrated with the word ‘become’ that [the circumstance] that was [prevalent] in the time of Imām Muhammad has changed, because in his time they would not decline to pronounce it, so it was not a mark of Islām, which is why he made disassociation [of the person’s earlier faith] a condition along with it. However, in the time of Qāri’ al-Hidāyah, it had become a mark of Islām, because no one would pronounce it except a Muslim, like this time of ours…This must be resorted to in the Egyptian lands of Cairo because the two testimonies are not heard there from the people of the book, and this is why [Imām] Muhammad restricted it to Irāq….And this is what is practised upon. Thus, it should be preserved.”

And he said under the title, “Conclusion”:

Know that acceptance of Islām also occurs by action, like salāh in jamā‘ah, or confession of [having performed] it, or Adhān in some masjids, or Hajj, and attending the rites, not salāh by oneself and ihrām alone. The commentator has presented this in verse at the start of Kitāb al-Salāh, and we have presented its commentary earlier in full detail, and we mentioned there that there is no difference in accepting Islām by an action between a Christian or another. The intent is that this is evidence of having accepted Islām, so the one who does that will be assessed accordingly.”

– Radd al-Muhtār, Kitāb al-Jihād, Bāb al-Murtadd

From this detailed passage of al-Durr al-Mukhtār and Radd al-Muhtār, it is clear that the measure for establishing surrender is custom. In the present custom, it is not conceivable that the one who said words like Gandhi is a Muslim. Nor do nonreligious people avoid and refrain from such words. Greater praise than Gandhi’s of Islām and the Messenger of Allāh (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) is found from adherents of different religions in prose and in poetry. After saying these words, the public, the Hindu and the Muslim and the speaker himself understood him to be a Hindu. Even the mistaken impression of him having become Muslim did not cross anyone’s mind. This is why, after the death of Gandhi, the Muslim ‘ulamā’ who were very familiar with Gandhi’s biography, and in fact were his companions in politics, even they did not call for janāzah salāh and a Muslim burial for Gandhi. Nor did the Hindus, having understood him to be a Muslim, express any displeasure at preparing his burial. In short, based on these words of Gandhi, neither Muslims nor Hindus considered him to be a Muslim. Nor did Gandhi himself have the knowledge or notion that he became a Muslim with these words. If he had, he would subsequently have adopted the way of the Muslims, or at least made a bequest for janāzah salāh in his will. Such words, in fact even more [emphatic words] than them, were always said by intelligent people from other religions. Yet, no one considered them Muslims.

In the present custom, one is considered Muslim only when he says clearly, “I am a Muslim,” or without mockery, he recites the two testimonies and subsequently adopts the behaviour of Muslims. Gandhi’s statement, “I have faith in the saints and the prophets of all religions” is a belief contrary to Islām. It is apparent from this that Gandhi considers all present religions, Islām, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Sikhism and so on to be true. Gandhi’s belief and [the fact] that he did not enter Islām is very clear from this last sentence.

The reality is that he only made this declaration to deceive the Muslims, just as a hunter uses a prey’s voice to catch it. If Gandhi really believed Islām to be true, what prevented him from accepting Islām? To consider such a deceiver and categorical disbeliever a Muslim is [itself] disbelief.

And Allāh guides whoever He wills to the straight path.
22 Rabī‘ al-Awwal, 74 Hijrī (November, 1954)

 

[1] According to the logicians, “assent” (tasdīq) is to understand the connection between two words, the subject and its predicate. For example, in the sentence “Allāh exists”, Allāh is the subject and “exists” its predicate, and the connection between the two words is an affirmation of Allāh’s existence.

[2] That is, to affirm the truthfulness of the speaker – in this case of the Prophet (peace and blessing be upon him)

Lightning, thunder and thunderbolt

 

رعد | برق | صائقة

In the Quran, Allah almighty uses the thunderstorm to exemplify His might. He uses three synonymic (mutaradif) words which translates to thunder (رعد), lightning (برق) and thunderbolt (صائقة).

قال الجوهري في الصحاح: الرعد الصوت الذي يُسْمَع من السَحاب اهـ البرق واحد بروق السحاب ويقال رعدت  السماء وبرقَت برقانا، أي لمعت اهـ الصاعقة نار تسقط من السماء في رعد شديد. يقال صَعَقَتْهُم السماءُ، إذا ألقت عليهم الصاعقَةَ. والصاعِقَةُ أيضا صيحة العذاب

الرعد / Thunder / The noise in the sky

أَوْ كَصَيِّبٍ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فِيهِ ظُلُمَاتٌ وَرَعْدٌ وَبَرْقٌ – 2:19
وَيُسَبِّحُ الرَّعْدُ بِحَمْدِهِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةُ مِنْ خِيفَتِهِ – 13:13

البرق / Lightning / The flash in the sky

أَوْ كَصَيِّبٍ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فِيهِ ظُلُمَاتٌ وَرَعْدٌ وَبَرْقٌ – 2:19
يَكَادُ الْبَرْقُ يَخْطَفُ أَبْصَارَهُمْ كُلَّمَا أَضَاءَ لَهُمْ مَشَوْا فِيهِ – 2:20
هُوَ الَّذِي يُرِيكُمُ الْبَرْقَ خَوْفًا وَطَمَعًا وَيُنْشِئُ السَّحَابَ الثِّقَالَ – 13:12
يَكَادُ سَنَا بَرْقِهِ يَذْهَبُ بِالْأَبْصَارِ – 24:43
وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ يُرِيكُمُ الْبَرْقَ خَوْفًا وَطَمَعًا وَيُنَزِّلُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مَاءً – 30:24
فَإِذَا بَرِقَ الْبَصَرُ – 75:7

الصاعقة / Thunderbolt / A bolt of lightning accompanied by thunder

يَجْعَلُونَ أَصَابِعَهُمْ فِي آذَانِهِمْ مِنَ الصَّوَاعِقِ حَذَرَ الْمَوْتِ – 2:19
لَنْ نُؤْمِنَ لَكَ حَتَّىٰ نَرَى الله جَهْرَةً فَأَخَذَتْكُمُ الصَّاعِقَةُ – 2:55
فَقَالُوا أَرِنَا الله جَهْرَةً فَأَخَذَتْهُمُ الصَّاعِقَةُ بِظُلْمِهِمْ – 4:153
وَيُرْسِلُ الصَّوَاعِقَ فَيُصِيبُ بِهَا مَنْ يَشَاءُ – 13:13
فَإِنْ أَعْرَضُوا فَقُلْ أَنْذَرْتُكُمْ صَاعِقَةً – 41:13
مِثْلَ صَاعِقَةِ عَادٍ وَثَمُودَ – 41:13
فَأَخَذَتْهُمْ صَاعِقَةُ الْعَذَابِ الْهُونِ بِمَا كَانُوا يَكْسِبُونَ – 41:17
فَعَتَوْا عَنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّهِمْ فَأَخَذَتْهُمُ الصَّاعِقَةُ وَهُمْ يَنْظُرُونَ – 51:44

————