Asif Ali Zardari: The Pakistani president’s government is under pressure after supreme court ended legal amnesty. Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images

Pakistan’s government this morning dismissed rumours of a coup in the country as the fallout from a supreme court verdict continued to rock President Asif Ali Zardari’s government.

The National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Pakistan’s top anti-corruption agency, said it was reopening hundreds of cases after the court quashed a legal amnesty introduced by the former president Pervez Musharraf two years ago.

Ghazni Khan, the agency’s spokesman, said it had asked the interior ministry to put 248 people on the exit control list, preventing them from leaving the country.

Khan did not give the names, but local TV stations, citing official sources, said the interior minister, Rehman Malik, was among them. Malik, who is usually voluble in front of the media, refused to comment on the case.

The agency also said it was reviving arrest warrants in some cases and freezing assets. The court ruling that struck down the corruption amnesty on Wednesday triggered turmoil in Pakistan’s political system.

Opposition politicians are clamouring for Zardari’s resignation, but he has insisted he will not go. As the president, he enjoys immunity from prosecution.

As temperatures rose, Zardari’s spokesman Farhatullah Babar this morning ruled out suggestions of a return to military government. “There is no coup,” he said.

Rivals have said Zardari’s moral authority has been irretrievably damaged. “He should quit this office in his own interest as well as in the interest of his party and the system,” Khwaja Asif, of the opposition Pakistan Muslim League, said.

Analysts said the country was moving into uncharted territory. “It’s chaos out there. Nobody knows what’s going on. Everyone is trying to work out the ramifications of the court order,” said Cyril Almeida, a columnist at the Dawn paper.

As the political turmoil deepened, a missile strike in the tribal belt underscored the grave militancy problem facing the country.

According to local officials, up to five US drones fired 10 missiles at a house in north Waziristan, raising speculation that a senior al-Qaida figure was being targeted. At least 12 people were killed.

A second drone attack in the same area targeted suspected militants travelling in a car. By late evening, officials could not identify those killed.

Western allies fear the trouble surrounding Zardari will further damage his government’s ability to provide political cover for the politically difficult attacks.

CIA-operated drones have struck 48 times in the past year, killing 400 people, mostly militants, according to a Reuters tally, but they have inflamed anti-US sentiment in a country whose people are already deeply hostile to Washington.

Musharraf introduced the corruption amnesty in 2007, with British and US backing, as part of a political deal allowing Benazir Bhutto to return from exile and contest elections.

Bhutto was assassinated in December 2007 while leaving a political rally, and two months later her political party came to power, paving the way for Zardari, her widower, to become president last year.

Zardari has been haunted by perceptions of corruption – an NAB official recently told a court he controls assets of $1.5bn (£900m) , ,many of them outside Pakistan, and his popularity ratings have plunged to a new low in recent months.

Zardari supporters claim their enemies – including powerful figures in the military – are using the supreme court to undermine his authority and force his resignation.Analysts said that if the president refuses to resign, his opponents could try to unseat him through a supreme court challenge to the legality of his election. No such action has yet been initiated and its chances of success remain unclear.

Know – my brother and sister Muslim – that it is vital to accompany actions with intentions. Allah’s Messenger (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallam) said: ‘Indeed actions are (judged) by the intentions (behind them) and every man shall receive (only) that which he intended.’15

It is also vital to make the intention sincerely for Allah due to His saying:

Acquiring Knowledge from a mubtadi1 (an innovator)

Beware of the mubtadi‘ Abu Jaahl, the one who has been touched by deviancy in his creed, and engulfed by the clouds of fiction; he who allows himself to be ruled by his vain desires and calls it logic and diverts from the texts [of the Qur'an and Sunnah]. After all where is logic [to be found] except in the text [of the Qur'an and Sunnah]?! He [also] holds fast to weak (hadeeths) and distances himself from the authentic (hadeeths).

They are also referred to as Ahl ash-Shubuhaat2 (dubious people), and Ahl al-Ahwaa’ (people who follow their vain desires in the religion), and for this reason Ibn al-Mubaraak (rahimahullaah) used to call them al-Asaaghir (the small ones).

Adh-Dhahabee (rahimahullaah) said: “If you see the innovative mutakallim3 saying: ‘leave out the Qur’an and Sunnah and bring forth Logic’, then know that he is Aboo Jahl. And if you see the ‘One on the Spiritual Path’, [who claims that by practising a set of prescribed forms of innovated worship he will attain oneness with Allah] (i.e., the Sufis) saying: ‘Leave us from [knowledge] that is transmitted (i.e. the Qur’an and Sunnah) and bring forth the ‘Taste and Ecstasy of Passion’4 then know that he is Iblees (Shayytaan) become manifest in a human form, or has become incarnate within him; so if you become cowardly then run away from him, otherwise wrestle him down, and sit on his chest with your knee, and read Ayaatul Kursee,5 and strangle him.6“

He also said (rahimahullaah): “…and I read in the handwriting of ash-Shaykh al-Muwaffaq his saying: ‘We heard his lesson – i.e. Ibn Abi Asroon – with my brother Abi ‘Umar then we stopped going to his lessons. I heard my brother say: I entered his house after that, and he asked: Why have you cut yourselves off from me? So I replied: Some people say that you are Ash’aree,7 so he said: By Allah I am not an Ash’aree.’ This is a rough meaning of the story.”8

It was narrated that Maalik (rahimahullaah) said: “Knowledge (hadeeth) is not taken from four: a foolish person who publicizes his foolishness, even if he was the most prolific narrator of hadeeth; a person of bid’aah who calls to it; a person who lies in his speech with people even if I don’t accuse him of lying in hadeeth; and a noble, pious worshipper if he does not memorise precisely what he narrates.”9

O seeker of knowledge if you are in a position of freedom of choice, then do not take from a mubtadi‘ [be he]: Raafidee10, Khaajiree11, Murjee’12, Qadaree13, or Qubooree14…etc. For you will never reach the level of [knowledgeable] men: correct in your creed, strong in your association with Allah, with strong vision, and following the ‘tracks’; except by abandoning the mubtadi’aah and their innovations. The books of biographies, and ‘Holding Fast to the Sunnah‘ are abundant with accounts of Ahl as-Sunnah finishing off the mubtadi’aah and renouncing their innovation, and distancing away from them as a sound person would distance himself from a sick, diseased person. There are so many stories and accounts that would take a long time to recount, but it gives me pleasure to mention a few of them for the Salaf used to seek reward with Allah in disregarding them, humiliating them, and rejecting the mubtadi‘ and his innovation. They also used to warn against becoming associated with them, or seeking their opinion, or eating with them; for the mubtadi‘ and Sunnee should be so far apart that each of them cannot see the fire of the other.

There were amongst the Salaf those who never used to pray over the funeral of the mubtadi‘, and would be seen leaving the [funeral ceremony]. It was also witnessed that al-Allamaah ash-Shaykh Muhammad bin Ibraaheem (died 1389AH) abstained from [funeral] prayer over a mubtadi‘.

Also there were amongst the Salaf those who used to prohibit from praying them,15 or mentioning their innovations because the heart is weak and doubtful affairs are swift in abduction (i.e. of the heart).

Sahl ibn ‘Abdullah at-Tustaree used to hold the opinion that it is not permissible for a mubtadi‘ to eat the flesh of an animal that died without being slaughtered according to the Islaamic Sharee’ah in case of dire necessity because he is a transgressor due to Allah saying:

“…But if one is forced by necessity without willful obedience nor transgressing due limits…”16

[Suraatul Baqaraah (2):173]

and he (the mubtadi‘) is a transgressor with his bid’aah.17

They also used to banish them from their gatherings, as in the story of Imaam Maalik with the one who asked him about the way in which Allah established Himself upon the Throne in which, after he made his renowned statement: “…and I suspect you of being associated with bid’aah,” he ordered for him to be banished.18

There are numerous accounts of the Salaf turning away from the mubtadi’aah and abandoning them out of fear of their evil, and in order control the spread of their bid’aah and to dishearten them from spreading it, since in the association of a Sunnee with a mubtadi‘ is a testimony for his credibility for the beginner and the ‘aamir (commoner). And ‘aammi is derived from ‘ama (blindness), and on most occasions he is in the hands of those who guide him.

Similar events can also be found in the books written on: the Science of hadeeth, and Etiquette in Seeking Knowledge, and declaring the narrator as being reliable or unreliable.19

O you seeker! Be Salafee, adhering to the Path, and beware of the mubtadi’aah lest they divert you; for they employ many ways to target and deceive [people] and fabricate a paved way to it by using honeyed speech – and in fact it is honey [read (in Arabic) left to right]20 - the downpour of tears, elegant dress, deceiving [people] with their imagination, astonishing people with ‘miracles’, and licking the hands, and the kissing of shoulders etc.

There is nothing more behind all of this than the craving for bid’aah and the dust of tribulation that he plants within your heart, and he uses you in his company, and by Allah the blind person (at heart) is not suited to lead the blind and guide them. As for taking from the scholars of the Sunnah, then lick the honey without asking (i.e. take knowledge from them without worrying).

May Allah guide you to prosperity, so that you may drink from the Prophetic Inheritance in its pure state, otherwise let he who wishes to cry; cry over the religion.

What I have mentioned to you is when you have freedom and choice, if however you are studying academically and you have no choice [in whom you take from] then be wary of him and seek refuge [in Allah] from his evil, and be alert to any infiltration since the saying goes: “Pick the fruit and throw the wood in the fire” and do not become fatigued by seeking knowledge, for I fear that it will be considered as turning ones back and fleeing from the battlefield at the time of fighting. [In this situation] you are only obliged to know his case, avoid his evil, and unveil. One example is when Aboo ‘Abdir-Rahmaan al-Muqree narrated from a murji‘, it was said to him: “Why do you narrate from a murji‘? So he replied: “I trade the meat in for the bones.”21 Al-Muqree narrated from him without deceit or anonymity because he made it clear by saying (when he narrated from him): “…and he was a murji‘”. 22

And what I wrote for you here is from the principles of your creed; the creed of Ahl-as-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah. As was written by Shaykh al-Islaam Abi ‘Uthmaan Isma’eel ibn ‘Abdir-Rahmaan as-Saaboonee (died 449AH) in his Salafee ‘Aqeedah,23 he said: “and they hate ahl al-bida‘h: those who innovated into the religion what is not of it; and they do not love them, or befriend them, or listen to their speech, or sit with them, or argue with them in affairs of religion nor do they debate them, and they protect their ears from their falsehood; because if it were to pass through the ears and reside in the heart it would be harmful, and would lead to evil whisperings and thoughts, and on this Allah revealed His statement:

“And when you see those who engage in a false conversation about Our Verses by mocking at them, then stay away from them till they turn to another topic.’”

[Suraatul An'aam (6):68]

It was narrated from Sulaymaan ibn Yasaar that a man by the name of Subaigh arrived at Madinah and began to ask about the mutashaabih (the unclear verses) of the Qur’aan, so ‘Umar sent for him and he had prepared for the date palm branches for him. [When he arrived] ‘Umar said to him: “Who are you?” He replied: “I am Subaigh, the Slave of Allah.” So ‘Umar took one of the branches and struck him with it till his head bled, then he left him till his head healed, and resumed striking him and again allowed him to become healed. Then he called for him to strike him again, so Subaigh said: “If you wish to kill me then kill me in a beautiful manner.” So he gave him permission to go back to his land, and wrote to Abu Moosa al-Ash’aree in Yemen: “None of the Muslims are allowed to sit with him,” narrated by ad-Daarimee.

It was also said that he was accused of holding the belief of the Khawaarij. An-Nawawee said in his book al-Adhkaar: “The chapter of declaring innocence from the people of bid’aah and sin” and he mentioned the hadeeth of Abu Moosa that the Messenger of Allah declared (himself) innocent of the woman who wails loudly when calamity befalls her, and the woman who shaves her hair when calamity befalls her, and the woman who tears her clothes when calamity befalls her23” (agreed upon). [There is also a] narration when Ibn ‘Umar declared his innocence of al-Qadariyyah; narrated by Muslim.”24

However, the issue of abandoning the mubtadi‘ is based upon considering the benefits and increasing them and deterring evil and decreasing it; and the permissibility of abandoning the mubtadi’ is based upon this principle as Shaykh al-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah clarified (in many of his books).”25

The mubtadi’aah only increase in numbers and emerge if knowledge becomes scarce and ignorance becomes widespread, and it is about them that Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “For it is this category that increases and emerges if ignorance and its people increase, and where there are no people who possess knowledge of Prophethood and the following of it, who makes its light apparent: [the light] which erases the darkness of misguidance and exposes all that which opposes it including lies, association [of false partners with Allah], and contradiction.” So if you become strong in knowledge; then subdue the mubtadi’ and his bid’ah with an authoritative tongue and eloquent tongue, and peace be with you.

Footnotes

1. Derived from the word bid’ah. Perhaps the best definition of bid’ah is the definition of Imaam Shaatibee in al-I’tisaam (1/37) where he defined it as being: “A way innovated into the religion that vaguely resembles the Sharee’ah, and [the person] intends by practising it the extensive worship of Allah.” (M)
2. Al-Jaami’, (1/137)
   
3. These are terms used by the Sufis. As for ‘taste’ it means to practise worship by way of practising according to their taste, i.e. their desires. As for ‘ecstasy of passion’ it means in Sufis terminology a level of [spiritual] intoxication with the love of Allah that a person reaches through their innovated practices. (M)
4. Verse 255 from Suraatul Baqaraah (2), and the reason he said this is because this verse is the most severe upon the Shaytaan as in the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah in Sahih al-Bukhaari (M).
5. As-Siyaar (4/472).
6. The followers of Abul-Hasan al-Ash’aree before he came back to the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. As for his creed before he came back to the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah it was based upon misinterpretation and negation of the Attributes of Allah.
7. As-Siyaar, (21/129)
8. As-Siyaar, (8/61)
9. The name given to the zealous Shi’ites by ‘Ali ibn Zayd (the grandson of Husayn – the grandson of the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi sallaam)). Their first manfiestation was in the time of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib by the hands of a Jew from Yemen by the name of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’, who reverted to Islam outwardly for the purpose of corrupting Islam. Amongst their principal beliefs today is the belief that the Qur’an was corrupted by the Companions of the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallam) and that they (except for a few of them) became apostates, and they slander the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah, Aboo Bakr, and ‘Umar. They also renounce the Sunnah, go to extremes concerning the family of the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wa sallam) in a manner that resembles the Christians with regard to ‘Eesaa. (M)
10. A person who is affiliated to the Khawaarij which is a heretical sect who deem the one who commits a major sin to be a kaafir (disbeliever) and deny the rule of Muslim leaders based on their belief that they are apostates, hence their leadership becomes invalidated, so as a result they rebel against them causing much chaos and bloodshed. Their first manifestation was in the time of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib. (M)
11. A person who is affiliated to the Murji’ah which is a heretical group whose principal belief is that emaan (faith) is merely the affirmation of the heart and that emaan does not increase or decrease, and they comprise of many sects. (M)
12. A person who is affiliated to the heretical sect al-Qadariyyah, and they went astray with regards to the belief in the sixth pillar of faith (predestination) and the scholars passed different verdicts upon them depending upon their belief as some of them completely denied this pillar (as we will discover when I mention the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar) and such a group were regarded by the scholars as apostates but they have become extinct. However, a group of them still remain but are not considered apostates as they do not deny this pillar but they believe that Allah does not predestine evil and that it is the sole doing of a person. And there are many authentic hadeeths that warn against them. (M)
13. A name given to a person who claims that he is a Muslim yet he indulges in actions that contradict his claim such worshiping graves (the grave dwellers who are believed to be close associates with Allah) and seeking aid and wealth from them, invoking them, using them as intermediates between them and Allah, swearing oaths and sacrificing animals to them, and swearing by their names etc. Such actions are considered as major shirk and take a person outside the fold of Islam.
14. The reason why some of the salaf didn’t pray over the funeral of a mubtadi‘ (innovator) or pray behind them in congregational prayers is not due to its impermissibility as some may think because it is an established principle of the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah that it is permissible to pray behind the mubtadi‘, and pray for their funeral as Imaam at-Tahaawee stated in his renowned book al-Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah: “We allow prayer behind every pious or sinful person among the people of the Qiblah. Similarly we deem it permissible to pray the funeral prayer over both of them (i.e. pious and sinful people),” pg26, and in Saheeh al-Bukhari he stated: [The chapter of the leadership (in congregational prayer) of a corrupt person or an innovator] and under it he mentioned some narration’s from the salaf that indicate its permissibility; rather the reason behind the salaf not praying behind the mubtadi’ah or praying over their funeral, is to deter those who are affected by bid’ah from continuing upon what they believe or practise; so it comes under the category of abandoning Ahl-al-Bid’aah, and under the category of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil.
15. Ibn Abi al-Izz said in his explanation of at-Tahaawiyyah, (pg. 375): “…the prayer of the sinful person and the mubtadi’ is valid in itself; so if the person is lead by one of them; his salaat does not become invalidated. However, those who disliked prayer behind them disliked it due the fact that enjoining good and forbidding evil is obligatory. Therefore; if a person manifests a bid’ah or a sin then he should not be appointed as a leader for the Muslims because he deserves to be chastised until he repents, so if it is possible to abandon him until he repents it would be commendable. And if some people when they abandon prayer behind them, and pray behind someone else; would have a [positive] effect in: deterring their evil until they repent, or removing them [from their position], or deterring people from falling into there sin; then abandoning salaat behind such people would realise religious interests, but ensuring that by carrying out such an action no Friday and congregational prayers are missed…” After reading this you will notice that the Shaykh said: “…and if some people…” and not anybody, and in this statement the Shaykh is referring to people with status within the community; the people of such knowledge and virtue, and it does not apply to normal people because such an action on their behalf would not have the required affects that the Shaykh mentioned. To give further clarification to this point I wish to remind the reader of some incidents where such action was taken; for example the incidents where the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallam) refrained from praying over the funeral of the one who killed himself, and the one who died without paying his debts, and the one who died after stealing from the booty; amongst many other examples where the salaaf carried out similar actions, and they were considered as people with high status within their communities. Ash-Shawkanee commented on the latter hadeeth: “As for the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallaam) refraining from prayer over him then it could be for the reason of deterring from stealing from the booty as he did with the person who died indebted.” Nayl al-Awtaar (4/58). For more information on this subject refer to Majmoo’ al Fataawa (23/343-344, 354, 360-361, 368), (3/286), Mawqif Ahlis-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah min Ahlil-Ahwaa’i wal Bida’h (1/367-368) by Shaykh Ibraaheem ar-Ruhaylee – may Allah preserve him.
16. At the beginning of this Ayaah Allah says: “He has forbidden you only maytah (an animal that dies without being slaughtered according to the Islamic Sharee’ah), and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that which slaughtered as a sacrifice for other than Allah. But if one is forced…” The scholars of tafseer spoke extensively on this Ayaah and gave varying explanations, and this one is one of the explanations given by the scholars of tafseer. However, the correct explanation of this Ayaah is the one chosen by Ibn Jareer at-Tabaree in which he said after mentioning the other explanations: “…and the first in choice out of these explanations of the verse is the opinion of those who said ‘…but if one is forced by necessity without wilful obedience in eating that which has been unlawful for him to eat, nor transgressing due limits…’ when eating of the flesh…” (2/88), i.e. he does not eat that which has been declared unlawful out of desire for it, nor does he transgress the limits of the religion in eating more than the necessary quantity in order to survive. (M)
17. See Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, (28/218).
18. The Shaykh is making a passing reference to the story because it is well known to the seekers of knowledge, but there is no harm in mentioning the full story for those who have not come across it: It was narrated that Yahya ibn Yahya said: “While we were in the company of Maalik ibn Anas a man came and said: “O father of ‘Abdullah ‘The Most Gracious is established over the Throne’ [Suraat Taa Haa (20):5]. How did He establish himself? So Maalik dropped his head until he became overwhelmed by the sweat (due to the severity of the question) and then he replied: The [meaning of] ‘establishment’ is not unknown [linguistically], and the way [in which He established Himself] is incomprehensible, and the belief in it is obligatory and asking about it (i.e. the way in which He established Himself above the Throne) is a bid’ah and I suspect you to be none other than a mubtadi’. And he ordered for him to be banished.” Narrated by Imaam Sa’eed ad-Daarimee in his book ar-Radd ‘alal Jahmiyyah, p.56, and al-Lalakaa’ee in his book Sharh Usool I’itiqaad Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah, (3/441), and al-Bayhaqee in al-Asmaa’i was-Sifaat (2/305-306) and adh-Dhahabee mentioned it in al-’Uloo (see Mukhtasar al-’Uloo by al-Albaanee p. 141-142) and it is authenticated by him, and Ibn Hajar in Fath-h al-Baari, (13/406-407). (M)
19. Amongst them are: al-Jaami’ by al-Khateeb, [the chapter of choosing the teachers if their characteristics differ], and in the book Manaahij al-’Ulamaa’ fil-Amri bil Ma’roofi wan-Nahyi anil-Munkar by as-Saamuraa’ee (p. 215-255) (which is important), and also at-Tahawwul al-Madh-habee taken from al-Isfaar by the author himself in which he made mention of some of the ill effects of mixing with them].
20. Honey in Arabic is ‘asal and when it is read left to right it becomes lasa’ which means poison, so what the Shaykh is saying is that these mubtadi’ah honey their speech, however it is not honey but poison. (M)
21. Al-Jaami‘, by al Khateeb (1/224).
22. Note: There is a subtle difference in acquiring knowledge in general and hadeeth in particular. For further clarification refer to Mawqif Ahlis-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah min Ahlil-Ahwaa’i wal Bida’h (1/367-368) by Shaykh Ibraaheem ar-Ruhaylee, (2/685). (M)
23. The actual name of the book is ‘Aqeedah as-Salaf wa As-haab al Hadeeth.
24. Such as the death of a beloved one.
25. Majmoo’ al-Fataawa Shaykh al Islaam ibn Taymiyyah (2/132, 5/119, 14/459-460, 36/218). [The Shaykh made a passing reference to the story of Ibn 'Umar when he was asked about the Qadariyyah; and it is the first hadeeth in Saheeh Muslim which he narrated that Yahya ibn Ya'mur said: The first person to [negate] qadar in Basra was Ma’bad al-Juhanee. So I set out on Hajj or on ‘Umrah with Humayd ibn ‘Abdir-Rahman al-Himyaaree, so we said to one another: If only we could meet with one of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallam) so that we might ask him about what is talked about about taqdeer (divine decree); so we were blessed with ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab who was entering the masjid, so we walked on either side of him, and I suspected my companion would leave the talking to me, so I said: “O father of ‘Abdur-Rahman! A group of people have emerged in our land; they read the Qur’aan and they seek the deep meanings of knowledge” = and he mentioned some of their characteristics – “and that they say that there is no Predestination and that all affairs [of creation] are recommended.” He said: “If you meet these people then inform them that I am innocent of them and that they are innocent of me, and by the One that Abdullah ibn ‘Umar swears by, if one of them was granted a mountain of gold the size of Mount Uhud Allah would not accept it from him until he believes in qadar…” he then narrated from his father the renowned hadeeth of Jibreel. (M)]
26. Mamjoo’ al-Fataawa Shaykh ul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, (28/213, 216-218).
    

The Etiquette of Seeking Knowledge by Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd.

Acquiring Knowledge from a mubtadi1 (an innovator)
Beware of the mubtadi‘ Abu Jaahl, the one who has been touched by deviancy in his creed, and engulfed by the clouds of fiction; he who allows himself to be ruled by his vain desires and calls it logic and diverts from the texts [of the Qur'an and Sunnah]. After all where is logic [to be found] except in the text [of the Qur'an and Sunnah]?! He [also] holds fast to weak (hadeeths) and distances himself from the authentic (hadeeths).

They are also referred to as Ahl ash-Shubuhaat2 (dubious people), and Ahl al-Ahwaa’ (people who follow their vain desires in the religion), and for this reason Ibn al-Mubaraak (rahimahullaah) used to call them al-Asaaghir (the small ones).

Adh-Dhahabee (rahimahullaah) said: “If you see the innovative mutakallim3 saying: ‘leave out the Qur’an and Sunnah and bring forth Logic’, then know that he is Aboo Jahl. And if you see the ‘One on the Spiritual Path’, [who claims that by practising a set of prescribed forms of innovated worship he will attain oneness with Allah] (i.e., the Sufis) saying: ‘Leave us from [knowledge] that is transmitted (i.e. the Qur’an and Sunnah) and bring forth the ‘Taste and Ecstasy of Passion’4 then know that he is Iblees (Shayytaan) become manifest in a human form, or has become incarnate within him; so if you become cowardly then run away from him, otherwise wrestle him down, and sit on his chest with your knee, and read Ayaatul Kursee,5 and strangle him.6“

He also said (rahimahullaah): “…and I read in the handwriting of ash-Shaykh al-Muwaffaq his saying: ‘We heard his lesson – i.e. Ibn Abi Asroon – with my brother Abi ‘Umar then we stopped going to his lessons. I heard my brother say: I entered his house after that, and he asked: Why have you cut yourselves off from me? So I replied: Some people say that you are Ash’aree,7 so he said: By Allah I am not an Ash’aree.’ This is a rough meaning of the story.”8

It was narrated that Maalik (rahimahullaah) said: “Knowledge (hadeeth) is not taken from four: a foolish person who publicizes his foolishness, even if he was the most prolific narrator of hadeeth; a person of bid’aah who calls to it; a person who lies in his speech with people even if I don’t accuse him of lying in hadeeth; and a noble, pious worshipper if he does not memorise precisely what he narrates.”9

O seeker of knowledge if you are in a position of freedom of choice, then do not take from a mubtadi‘ [be he]: Raafidee10, Khaajiree11, Murjee’12, Qadaree13, or Qubooree14…etc. For you will never reach the level of [knowledgeable] men: correct in your creed, strong in your association with Allah, with strong vision, and following the ‘tracks’; except by abandoning the mubtadi’aah and their innovations. The books of biographies, and ‘Holding Fast to the Sunnah‘ are abundant with accounts of Ahl as-Sunnah finishing off the mubtadi’aah and renouncing their innovation, and distancing away from them as a sound person would distance himself from a sick, diseased person. There are so many stories and accounts that would take a long time to recount, but it gives me pleasure to mention a few of them for the Salaf used to seek reward with Allah in disregarding them, humiliating them, and rejecting the mubtadi‘ and his innovation. They also used to warn against becoming associated with them, or seeking their opinion, or eating with them; for the mubtadi‘ and Sunnee should be so far apart that each of them cannot see the fire of the other.

There were amongst the Salaf those who never used to pray over the funeral of the mubtadi‘, and would be seen leaving the [funeral ceremony]. It was also witnessed that al-Allamaah ash-Shaykh Muhammad bin Ibraaheem (died 1389AH) abstained from [funeral] prayer over a mubtadi‘.

Also there were amongst the Salaf those who used to prohibit from praying them,15 or mentioning their innovations because the heart is weak and doubtful affairs are swift in abduction (i.e. of the heart).

Sahl ibn ‘Abdullah at-Tustaree used to hold the opinion that it is not permissible for a mubtadi‘ to eat the flesh of an animal that died without being slaughtered according to the Islaamic Sharee’ah in case of dire necessity because he is a transgressor due to Allah saying:

“…But if one is forced by necessity without willful obedience nor transgressing due limits…”16
[Suraatul Baqaraah (2):173]

and he (the mubtadi‘) is a transgressor with his bid’aah.17

They also used to banish them from their gatherings, as in the story of Imaam Maalik with the one who asked him about the way in which Allah established Himself upon the Throne in which, after he made his renowned statement: “…and I suspect you of being associated with bid’aah,” he ordered for him to be banished.18

There are numerous accounts of the Salaf turning away from the mubtadi’aah and abandoning them out of fear of their evil, and in order control the spread of their bid’aah and to dishearten them from spreading it, since in the association of a Sunnee with a mubtadi‘ is a testimony for his credibility for the beginner and the ‘aamir (commoner). And ‘aammi is derived from ‘ama (blindness), and on most occasions he is in the hands of those who guide him.

Similar events can also be found in the books written on: the Science of hadeeth, and Etiquette in Seeking Knowledge, and declaring the narrator as being reliable or unreliable.19

O you seeker! Be Salafee, adhering to the Path, and beware of the mubtadi’aah lest they divert you; for they employ many ways to target and deceive [people] and fabricate a paved way to it by using honeyed speech – and in fact it is honey [read (in Arabic) left to right]20 - the downpour of tears, elegant dress, deceiving [people] with their imagination, astonishing people with ‘miracles’, and licking the hands, and the kissing of shoulders etc.

There is nothing more behind all of this than the craving for bid’aah and the dust of tribulation that he plants within your heart, and he uses you in his company, and by Allah the blind person (at heart) is not suited to lead the blind and guide them. As for taking from the scholars of the Sunnah, then lick the honey without asking (i.e. take knowledge from them without worrying).


May Allah guide you to prosperity, so that you may drink from the Prophetic Inheritance in its pure state, otherwise let he who wishes to cry; cry over the religion.

What I have mentioned to you is when you have freedom and choice, if however you are studying academically and you have no choice [in whom you take from] then be wary of him and seek refuge [in Allah] from his evil, and be alert to any infiltration since the saying goes: “Pick the fruit and throw the wood in the fire” and do not become fatigued by seeking knowledge, for I fear that it will be considered as turning ones back and fleeing from the battlefield at the time of fighting. [In this situation] you are only obliged to know his case, avoid his evil, and unveil. One example is when Aboo ‘Abdir-Rahmaan al-Muqree narrated from a murji‘, it was said to him: “Why do you narrate from a murji‘? So he replied: “I trade the meat in for the bones.”21 Al-Muqree narrated from him without deceit or anonymity because he made it clear by saying (when he narrated from him): “…and he was a murji‘”. 22


And what I wrote for you here is from the principles of your creed; the creed of Ahl-as-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah. As was written by Shaykh al-Islaam Abi ‘Uthmaan Isma’eel ibn ‘Abdir-Rahmaan as-Saaboonee (died 449AH) in his Salafee ‘Aqeedah,23 he said: “and they hate ahl al-bida‘h: those who innovated into the religion what is not of it; and they do not love them, or befriend them, or listen to their speech, or sit with them, or argue with them in affairs of religion nor do they debate them, and they protect their ears from their falsehood; because if it were to pass through the ears and reside in the heart it would be harmful, and would lead to evil whisperings and thoughts, and on this Allah revealed His statement:


“And when you see those who engage in a false conversation about Our Verses by mocking at them, then stay away from them till they turn to another topic.’”
[Suraatul An'aam (6):68]


It was narrated from Sulaymaan ibn Yasaar that a man by the name of Subaigh arrived at Madinah and began to ask about the mutashaabih (the unclear verses) of the Qur’aan, so ‘Umar sent for him and he had prepared for the date palm branches for him. [When he arrived] ‘Umar said to him: “Who are you?” He replied: “I am Subaigh, the Slave of Allah.” So ‘Umar took one of the branches and struck him with it till his head bled, then he left him till his head healed, and resumed striking him and again allowed him to become healed. Then he called for him to strike him again, so Subaigh said: “If you wish to kill me then kill me in a beautiful manner.” So he gave him permission to go back to his land, and wrote to Abu Moosa al-Ash’aree in Yemen: “None of the Muslims are allowed to sit with him,” narrated by ad-Daarimee.


It was also said that he was accused of holding the belief of the Khawaarij. An-Nawawee said in his book al-Adhkaar: “The chapter of declaring innocence from the people of bid’aah and sin” and he mentioned the hadeeth of Abu Moosa that the Messenger of Allah declared (himself) innocent of the woman who wails loudly when calamity befalls her, and the woman who shaves her hair when calamity befalls her, and the woman who tears her clothes when calamity befalls her23” (agreed upon). [There is also a] narration when Ibn ‘Umar declared his innocence of al-Qadariyyah; narrated by Muslim.”24


However, the issue of abandoning the mubtadi‘ is based upon considering the benefits and increasing them and deterring evil and decreasing it; and the permissibility of abandoning the mubtadi’ is based upon this principle as Shaykh al-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah clarified (in many of his books).”25

The mubtadi’aah only increase in numbers and emerge if knowledge becomes scarce and ignorance becomes widespread, and it is about them that Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “For it is this category that increases and emerges if ignorance and its people increase, and where there are no people who possess knowledge of Prophethood and the following of it, who makes its light apparent: [the light] which erases the darkness of misguidance and exposes all that which opposes it including lies, association [of false partners with Allah], and contradiction.” So if you become strong in knowledge; then subdue the mubtadi’ and his bid’ah with an authoritative tongue and eloquent tongue, and peace be with you.


Footnotes

1. Derived from the word bid’ah. Perhaps the best definition of bid’ah is the definition of Imaam Shaatibee in al-I’tisaam (1/37) where he defined it as being: “A way innovated into the religion that vaguely resembles the Sharee’ah, and [the person] intends by practising it the extensive worship of Allah.” (M)
2. Al-Jaami’, (1/137)
   
3. These are terms used by the Sufis. As for ‘taste’ it means to practise worship by way of practising according to their taste, i.e. their desires. As for ‘ecstasy of passion’ it means in Sufis terminology a level of [spiritual] intoxication with the love of Allah that a person reaches through their innovated practices. (M)
4. Verse 255 from Suraatul Baqaraah (2), and the reason he said this is because this verse is the most severe upon the Shaytaan as in the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah in Sahih al-Bukhaari (M).
5. As-Siyaar (4/472).
6. The followers of Abul-Hasan al-Ash’aree before he came back to the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. As for his creed before he came back to the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah it was based upon misinterpretation and negation of the Attributes of Allah.
7. As-Siyaar, (21/129)
8. As-Siyaar, (8/61)
9. The name given to the zealous Shi’ites by ‘Ali ibn Zayd (the grandson of Husayn – the grandson of the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi sallaam)). Their first manfiestation was in the time of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib by the hands of a Jew from Yemen by the name of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’, who reverted to Islam outwardly for the purpose of corrupting Islam. Amongst their principal beliefs today is the belief that the Qur’an was corrupted by the Companions of the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallam) and that they (except for a few of them) became apostates, and they slander the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah, Aboo Bakr, and ‘Umar. They also renounce the Sunnah, go to extremes concerning the family of the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wa sallam) in a manner that resembles the Christians with regard to ‘Eesaa. (M)
10. A person who is affiliated to the Khawaarij which is a heretical sect who deem the one who commits a major sin to be a kaafir (disbeliever) and deny the rule of Muslim leaders based on their belief that they are apostates, hence their leadership becomes invalidated, so as a result they rebel against them causing much chaos and bloodshed. Their first manifestation was in the time of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib. (M)
11. A person who is affiliated to the Murji’ah which is a heretical group whose principal belief is that emaan (faith) is merely the affirmation of the heart and that emaan does not increase or decrease, and they comprise of many sects. (M)
12. A person who is affiliated to the heretical sect al-Qadariyyah, and they went astray with regards to the belief in the sixth pillar of faith (predestination) and the scholars passed different verdicts upon them depending upon their belief as some of them completely denied this pillar (as we will discover when I mention the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar) and such a group were regarded by the scholars as apostates but they have become extinct. However, a group of them still remain but are not considered apostates as they do not deny this pillar but they believe that Allah does not predestine evil and that it is the sole doing of a person. And there are many authentic hadeeths that warn against them. (M)
13. A name given to a person who claims that he is a Muslim yet he indulges in actions that contradict his claim such worshiping graves (the grave dwellers who are believed to be close associates with Allah) and seeking aid and wealth from them, invoking them, using them as intermediates between them and Allah, swearing oaths and sacrificing animals to them, and swearing by their names etc. Such actions are considered as major shirk and take a person outside the fold of Islam.
14. The reason why some of the salaf didn’t pray over the funeral of a mubtadi‘ (innovator) or pray behind them in congregational prayers is not due to its impermissibility as some may think because it is an established principle of the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah that it is permissible to pray behind the mubtadi‘, and pray for their funeral as Imaam at-Tahaawee stated in his renowned book al-Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah: “We allow prayer behind every pious or sinful person among the people of the Qiblah. Similarly we deem it permissible to pray the funeral prayer over both of them (i.e. pious and sinful people),” pg26, and in Saheeh al-Bukhari he stated: [The chapter of the leadership (in congregational prayer) of a corrupt person or an innovator] and under it he mentioned some narration’s from the salaf that indicate its permissibility; rather the reason behind the salaf not praying behind the mubtadi’ah or praying over their funeral, is to deter those who are affected by bid’ah from continuing upon what they believe or practise; so it comes under the category of abandoning Ahl-al-Bid’aah, and under the category of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil.
15. Ibn Abi al-Izz said in his explanation of at-Tahaawiyyah, (pg. 375): “…the prayer of the sinful person and the mubtadi’ is valid in itself; so if the person is lead by one of them; his salaat does not become invalidated. However, those who disliked prayer behind them disliked it due the fact that enjoining good and forbidding evil is obligatory. Therefore; if a person manifests a bid’ah or a sin then he should not be appointed as a leader for the Muslims because he deserves to be chastised until he repents, so if it is possible to abandon him until he repents it would be commendable. And if some people when they abandon prayer behind them, and pray behind someone else; would have a [positive] effect in: deterring their evil until they repent, or removing them [from their position], or deterring people from falling into there sin; then abandoning salaat behind such people would realise religious interests, but ensuring that by carrying out such an action no Friday and congregational prayers are missed…” After reading this you will notice that the Shaykh said: “…and if some people…” and not anybody, and in this statement the Shaykh is referring to people with status within the community; the people of such knowledge and virtue, and it does not apply to normal people because such an action on their behalf would not have the required affects that the Shaykh mentioned. To give further clarification to this point I wish to remind the reader of some incidents where such action was taken; for example the incidents where the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallam) refrained from praying over the funeral of the one who killed himself, and the one who died without paying his debts, and the one who died after stealing from the booty; amongst many other examples where the salaaf carried out similar actions, and they were considered as people with high status within their communities. Ash-Shawkanee commented on the latter hadeeth: “As for the Prophet (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallaam) refraining from prayer over him then it could be for the reason of deterring from stealing from the booty as he did with the person who died indebted.” Nayl al-Awtaar (4/58). For more information on this subject refer to Majmoo’ al Fataawa (23/343-344, 354, 360-361, 368), (3/286), Mawqif Ahlis-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah min Ahlil-Ahwaa’i wal Bida’h (1/367-368) by Shaykh Ibraaheem ar-Ruhaylee – may Allah preserve him.
16. At the beginning of this Ayaah Allah says: “He has forbidden you only maytah (an animal that dies without being slaughtered according to the Islamic Sharee’ah), and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that which slaughtered as a sacrifice for other than Allah. But if one is forced…” The scholars of tafseer spoke extensively on this Ayaah and gave varying explanations, and this one is one of the explanations given by the scholars of tafseer. However, the correct explanation of this Ayaah is the one chosen by Ibn Jareer at-Tabaree in which he said after mentioning the other explanations: “…and the first in choice out of these explanations of the verse is the opinion of those who said ‘…but if one is forced by necessity without wilful obedience in eating that which has been unlawful for him to eat, nor transgressing due limits…’ when eating of the flesh…” (2/88), i.e. he does not eat that which has been declared unlawful out of desire for it, nor does he transgress the limits of the religion in eating more than the necessary quantity in order to survive. (M)
17. See Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, (28/218).
18. The Shaykh is making a passing reference to the story because it is well known to the seekers of knowledge, but there is no harm in mentioning the full story for those who have not come across it: It was narrated that Yahya ibn Yahya said: “While we were in the company of Maalik ibn Anas a man came and said: “O father of ‘Abdullah ‘The Most Gracious is established over the Throne’ [Suraat Taa Haa (20):5]. How did He establish himself? So Maalik dropped his head until he became overwhelmed by the sweat (due to the severity of the question) and then he replied: The [meaning of] ‘establishment’ is not unknown [linguistically], and the way [in which He established Himself] is incomprehensible, and the belief in it is obligatory and asking about it (i.e. the way in which He established Himself above the Throne) is a bid’ah and I suspect you to be none other than a mubtadi’. And he ordered for him to be banished.” Narrated by Imaam Sa’eed ad-Daarimee in his book ar-Radd ‘alal Jahmiyyah, p.56, and al-Lalakaa’ee in his book Sharh Usool I’itiqaad Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah, (3/441), and al-Bayhaqee in al-Asmaa’i was-Sifaat (2/305-306) and adh-Dhahabee mentioned it in al-’Uloo (see Mukhtasar al-’Uloo by al-Albaanee p. 141-142) and it is authenticated by him, and Ibn Hajar in Fath-h al-Baari, (13/406-407). (M)
19. Amongst them are: al-Jaami’ by al-Khateeb, [the chapter of choosing the teachers if their characteristics differ], and in the book Manaahij al-’Ulamaa’ fil-Amri bil Ma’roofi wan-Nahyi anil-Munkar by as-Saamuraa’ee (p. 215-255) (which is important), and also at-Tahawwul al-Madh-habee taken from al-Isfaar by the author himself in which he made mention of some of the ill effects of mixing with them].
20. Honey in Arabic is ‘asal and when it is read left to right it becomes lasa’ which means poison, so what the Shaykh is saying is that these mubtadi’ah honey their speech, however it is not honey but poison. (M)
21. Al-Jaami‘, by al Khateeb (1/224).
22. Note: There is a subtle difference in acquiring knowledge in general and hadeeth in particular. For further clarification refer to Mawqif Ahlis-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah min Ahlil-Ahwaa’i wal Bida’h (1/367-368) by Shaykh Ibraaheem ar-Ruhaylee, (2/685). (M)
23. The actual name of the book is ‘Aqeedah as-Salaf wa As-haab al Hadeeth.
24. Such as the death of a beloved one.
25. Majmoo’ al-Fataawa Shaykh al Islaam ibn Taymiyyah (2/132, 5/119, 14/459-460, 36/218). [The Shaykh made a passing reference to the story of Ibn 'Umar when he was asked about the Qadariyyah; and it is the first hadeeth in Saheeh Muslim which he narrated that Yahya ibn Ya'mur said: The first person to [negate] qadar in Basra was Ma’bad al-Juhanee. So I set out on Hajj or on ‘Umrah with Humayd ibn ‘Abdir-Rahman al-Himyaaree, so we said to one another: If only we could meet with one of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (salallahu ‘alaiyhi wasallam) so that we might ask him about what is talked about about taqdeer (divine decree); so we were blessed with ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab who was entering the masjid, so we walked on either side of him, and I suspected my companion would leave the talking to me, so I said: “O father of ‘Abdur-Rahman! A group of people have emerged in our land; they read the Qur’aan and they seek the deep meanings of knowledge” = and he mentioned some of their characteristics – “and that they say that there is no Predestination and that all affairs [of creation] are recommended.” He said: “If you meet these people then inform them that I am innocent of them and that they are innocent of me, and by the One that Abdullah ibn ‘Umar swears by, if one of them was granted a mountain of gold the size of Mount Uhud Allah would not accept it from him until he believes in qadar…” he then narrated from his father the renowned hadeeth of Jibreel. (M)]
26. Mamjoo’ al-Fataawa Shaykh ul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, (28/213, 216-218).
    

• The Etiquette of Seeking Knowledge by Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd.
  

“Do not please anyone by angering Allaah?”

What is the status of the hadeeth,

“Do not please anyone by angering Allaah, do not thank anyone for the blessings of Allaah, and do not condemn anyone for that which Allaah did not give you. For the provision of Allaah does not come to you because of anyone’s efforts and it is not diverted from you because of anyone’s hatred. By His fairness and justice, Allaah has connected peace and joy to contentment and certain faith, and He has connected worry and distress to discontentment.”

Praise be to Allaah.

This hadeeth was narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer, 10/215.

Al-Haythami said:

It was narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer, and its isnaad includes Khaalid ibn Yazeed al-‘Umari, who was accused of fabricating hadeeth.

Majmaa’ al-Zawaa’id, 4/71.

It was also narrated – via a different isnaad – by Abu Na’eem in al-Hilyah (5/106) and by al-Bayhaqi in Shu’ab al-Eemaan, 1/221.

Its isnaad includes ‘Atiyah al-‘Awfi, who is da’eef (weak), and the comments of the scholars concerning him have been quoted above (p. 78); and it includes Muhammad ibn Marwaan al-Saddi, who is matrook al-hadeeth (his hadeeth is not to be accepted).

Yahyaa ibn Ma’een said:

he is not thiqah (trustworthy), and on one occasion he said: he is nothing.

Ibraaheem said:

he is kadhdhaab (a liar).

Al-Sa’di said,

he is dhaahib (i.e., his hadeeth is not accepted).

Al-Nasaa’i, Abu Haatim al-Raazi and al-Azdi said: he is matrook al hadeeth (his hadeeth is not to be accepted).

Al-Bukhaari said:

his hadeeth should not be written down. And on one occasion he said: they did not say anything concerning him.

Ibn Hibbaan said:

his hadeeth is not to be written down, and it is haraam to use his hadeeth as evidence.

See Meezaan al-I’tidaal, 6/328; al-Du’afaa’ wa’l-Matrookeen, 3/98

It was also narrated by Hannaad al-Sirri in al-Zuhd, 1/304; and by al-Bayhaqi in Shu’ab al-Eemaan, 1/221, with an isnaad which is mawqoof and stops at ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him).

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

A Magical Shirkmess…

First of all I cherish and love every good intention and love that was directed toward me under the name of Christmas, and I have no doubt as to the sincerity of my family and close friends. So this is not against anyone’s good will.

But despite many people’s good intentions to celebrate Christmas, I find that the holiday is deeply embedded in polytheism/paganism, which according to the monotheistic traditions boils down to satanism. (Monotheism in the sense that only God is supreme and should be worshiped.)

I do differentiate between people’s intentions and the outward rituals they do, but I do not take the popular opinion that the outward rituals have no meaning. I take the opinion that both our internal (faith) side and external (actions) side have meaning and are held accountable before God.

An analogy would be a husband who has internal love for his wife, but his outward actions are rough and mean toward her. No one would say this is a good situation, no matter how much he loves (or thinks he loves) his wife. His external side must to some extent reflect his internal side. In the same way people in the name of love and God do outward rituals and actions of Christmas that are directly opposed to what God asks of us in the scriptures.

The rituals of Christmas that are good, such as family gatherings, charity, good will, and giving children a reason to have wonderment and excitement, should of course be promoted all year long, no matter the sun and earth’s position (i.e. what day or month it is) and does not have to be connected to false superstitions.

I can see why the view that only the internal aspect matters is popular, especially among Christians. After all Christianity and Jesus’ teachings were a reaction and a correction to how the Jewish laws had become so focused on the details of the external side. Read the Gospels to see how Jesus spoke and dealt with the scribes. But at the same time Jesus said he did not come to change the law.

The monotheistic traditions that believe there is only one God Supreme say that polytheism, the worshiping of creation (people, statues, animals, stars, etc.) or that these things have a power in and of themselves, is satanic and filthy. You can find the condemnation of polytheism all across the Holy Bible and it’s not only in one verse. So despite good intentions of those celebrating Christmas, these intentions are covered with filthy rituals associated with polytheism.

As to the person who celebrates Christmas I put them into three categories or a combination thereof:

1) People who blindly follow the traditions of their surrounding culture without questioning the hows and whys of it.
2) People who are enlightened to the realities of the pagan traditions, but out of their fear to be different they continue the traditions and therefore pass them to following generations.
3) People who actually believe in the polytheistic structures of the holiday.

And perhaps as a fourth category: People who just don’t care. But they’re everywhere anyways.

How Christmas is polytheistic and goes against the message of God, Jesus and the Holy Scriptures:

1) The religious core of Christmas proclaims that on this holiday God had “an only son” and that that son was also God on Earth, and that that person is also the Prophet Jesus. Furthermore, this person is the “ultimate savior”, instead of God Almighty. This is the basic foundation of the Christian sects that have proliferated up into modern times and promoted by the so-called apostle Paul. (The fact that other Christian sects in early Christian history denounced that Jesus was God is well known.) But I ask the Christians to look at their own book, the Holy Bible, which says God is in no way like creation and that Jesus is the son of man and a spirit from God.

2) Consider the magical human called Santa Claus who takes account of your deeds and “sees when your sleeping and sees when you’re awake.” It is well known by Christians that only God is our judge. Unfortunately families and marketing/money promote the idea that a magical human has an omniscient (all-knowing) quality to take account of childrens’ deeds and then rewards them as such. There is no question that this myth and lie would confuse children’s concepts of the Ever Living and Subtle Lord who is well acquainted with our deeds; they may very well grow up fearing “Santa’s list” instead of “God’s list”. It also promotes the idea that children can wish for things (gifts or otherwise) from this magical man, while they should be taught to ask God for their needs and wants. This myth also involves lying to children, especially concerning supernatural and magical qualities, which is a sin.

3) Christmas has many similarities in its traditions to the pagan holiday of Yuletide devoted to made-up deities and forces, not God. It is well known by Americans that Christmas is or is very close to the old holiday Yuletide celebrated by the polytheistic Anglo-Saxons and Germans, of which many American Christians are the biological descendants.

I invite you to find Christmas in the Holy Bible or if Jesus asked his followers to practice this holiday. Other information that I’ve pointed to here is also in Western encyclopedias and dictionaries; it isn’t some kind of conspiracy. Please give up this holiday, make intentions to leave it, but continue your good will and cheer throughout the year.

It is my belief that if you leave something for the sake of God, God will replace it with something better.

The number of people in the region with HIV has risen by 8% in one year.

The latest figures from the UK’s Health Protection Agency show there were 2,641 people with diagnosed HIV in the East Midlands at the end of 2008 – up from 2,445 at the end of 2007.

HIV charity the Terrence Higgins Trust is calling for a new national HIV screening programme on the NHS.

Mick Mason, centre manager for Terrence Higgins Trust in the East Midlands, said around 6,000 people in the region probably had undiagnosed HIV which was “completely unacceptable”.

Editor’s Comment: There are generally four types of people who are getting HIV, only one of them innocent.

HIV affects intravenous drug users (shared needles, shared diseases), homosexuals (shoving things up holes where they dont belong causes a lot of blood and HIV spreads in bodily fluids) and promiscuous heterosexuals (those bodily fluids again).

The only innocents are those who are unfortunately married to one of the above types of people and are given the disease by them.

Therefore as Muslims we should condemn such disgusting behaviour, rightly say HIV is a punishment to this society from Allah for violating the laws of Allah and make sure our sons and daughters don’t marry fasiqoon (open evil doers) who engage in such evil behaviour.

Brothers and sisters, be wary of marrying those who follow evil sinful ways, you might be innocent but accepting such a marriage proposal just to please your family could lead to catching nasty diseases.

Allah tells us in the Quran, pure for the pure, and of-course people become pure again spiritually when they make Tawbah but if brothers and sisters, young or old, have made Tawbah for past behaviour it is best they go get a medical and make sure they’ve not picked up any nasty passengers along their journey in life whether HIV or other STD’s.

Assalaamu Alaykum brothers and sisters,

Here is a news story from today’s Metro newspaper

Some ‘Muslims’ in Bangladesh have been jailed for cruelty to some sacred crocodiles they kept at the Khan Jahan Ali shrine where people come and give offerings to the crocodiles in the hope their offerings will be accepted and Du’a answered.

OK,  animal cruelty is haram in Islam and we know it is a major sin which can lead to the hellfire.

But what will certainly lead to the hellfire for these mushrikeen with Muslim names is calling people to give offerings to these so-called holy crocodiles and seek their blessings.

There is no excuse for such actions, it violates the principles of Tawhid and is a matter known by necessity, i.e there is no excuse of ignorance for such people on the day of judgement.

This is what happens when the Shariah of Allah is not put over the people, shaitan will misguide some of them back to the Jahiliyyah of their ancestors – this case taking some of the people of Bangladesh back to a belief system identical to the hinduism that their ancestors wisely left.

What is the difference between the Hindus keeping Monkeys at their shines and ‘Muslims’ keeping crocodiles and both seeking their blessings?

Such practices as take place as this Khan Jahan Ali Temple shrine, (we should not call it a Masjid whilst these things take place) should be stamped out, destroyed totally by the Muslims as indeed it was authentically reported from Rasoolullah (saws)…

Muslim (969) narrated that Abu’l-Hayaaj al-Asadi said: ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib said to me: “Shall I not send you with the same instructions as the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent me? ‘Do not leave any image without defacing it or any built-up grave without leveling it.’”

Muslim (832) narrated from ‘Urwah ibn ‘Abasah that he said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “With what were you sent?” He said, “I was sent to uphold the ties of kinship, to break the idols, and so that Allaah would be worshipped alone with no partner or associate.”

So the Muslims of Bangladesh have a clear obligation to destroy this place of idolitry and Shirk and prevent the people from being harmed and drawn into Idol worship.

It is the secularism that is preventing them from doing so as the Shariah clearly demands it.

Do we not say at least 17 times a day during salaah…

You alone we worship, you alone we seek help from (translation of meaning of ayat 5, Surah Fatiha)

But here Muslims are not putting their trust in a false god, but in animals!

May Allah (swt) guide the Muslims, keep us on the straight path and help us bring back his law so we can lay waste to the temples of idolitry masquerading as Masaajid.

Assalaamu Alaykum,

Daw’ud, Editor