Category Archives: `Aqida

Islamic Belief

Seeing The Souls Of The Prophets & The Awliya’

salamu `alaykum

It is narrated in the Sahih of Imam Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) met numerous other Prophets such as Musa, `Isa, Ibrahim, and so forth (Allah bless them all) during his lifetime. Rather, it is established that the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) witnessed them performing prayers and even led them himself. Abu Hurayra narrates that the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said:

فحانت الصلاة فأممتهم

“When the time of prayer came I led them.”

(Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Iman: Bab dhikr al masih ibn maryam wal masih al dajjal)

Similarly, it is narrated that the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said:

‏حين ‏ ‏أسري ‏ ‏بي ‏ ‏لقيت ‏ ‏موسى

“When I was taken for the night journey I met Musa (Allah bless him).”

(Ibid, Bab al Isra’ bi rasul Allah)

Maulana Ashraf `Ali Thanawi (May Allah sanctify his secret) states in regards to this:

“Together, these two narrations establish that despite the fact that Musa (Allah bless him) was present in his grave (s: in body) he was able to, along with the other prophets, meet the Messenger of Allah. There is no doubt that all these prophets were truly outside their graves (s: in spirit) and this shows the possibility of seeing the souls of the righteous gathered. However, remember that this is not a ever-continuous occurrence nor within one’s capacity.”

(al Takashaf, Pg: 397)

Mufti Lajpuri states in his Fatawa al Rahimiyya, in regards to the souls visiting the living, that:

“The soul can and does come. Events and observations bear witness to this fact. In the Kitab al Ruh of Ibn Qayyim it states, ‘It is the statement of this speaker that, no doubt, the souls of the believers residing in the barzakh go wherever they like. This has been reported by Salman al Farisi (May Allah be well pleased with him).”

(Vol 2, Pg: 252-253)

This is also confirmed by Ibn Hajar Haytami and Imam Suyuti – among many others. The former states in his Fatawa Hadithiyya (Pg: 393):

“Imam Yafi`i said: ‘… And they [s: the awliya] saw the Prophets (Allah bless them all) … which was like the vision of our Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) towards the congregation of Prophets in the heavens – and he heard and spoke to them. Verily, whatever is permitted for the Prophets as a miracle is permitted for the Saints as a miracle also.’

Ibn Mulaqin said: ‘There have been numerous visions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) , both in a state of wakefulness and sleep.’

The narrations in connection to this regarding [the vision of] the Friends of Allah are extremely plentiful and none denies them except one who is stubborn and dead.”

Ibn Hajar goes on to discuss the modality of such a vision, the permission of the souls of the Prophets to leave their graves, the fact that the vision of numerous people of a given prophet at a given moment is possible (he contrasts it to the sun), and how this does not make one a companion.

This is the position of those spiritually realized… They have removed the veils from their eyes within this world such that their “vision is piercing” (Quran) and therefore witness and see what many of us cannot.

And Allah Knows Best





Filed under Tasawwuf, `Aqida

What Is Superior: Knowledge Or Reason?

salamu `alaykum

Shaykh al Islam Ibn Hajar Haytami stated:

“There is difference [of opinion] among the scholars regarding this. The preferred opinion according to many of them is the superiority of knowledge (`ilm) because Allah Most High is categorized [fundamentally] by pre-eternal knowledge and not by reason (`aql). The actual attribute and qualifier is superior to what is from the genus [of that attribute].

Further, another proof for the superiority of knowledge is that it is connected to that which is more virtuous, and its merits have come in the narrations. No narrations have come on the superior merit of reason and verily all of them that have been narrated are fabricated and lies.

Some of the verifying scholars said: Knowledge is superior in relation to it being closer to the vastness of the knowledge (ma`arifa) of Allah and His attributes. Reason is superior in relation to it being the building block of knowledge and its basis.

The conclusion is that knowledge is superior in its essence while the superiority of reason is in its being a means to [attaining] knowledge.

(Fatawa Hadithiyya, Pg: 240 Dar Ihya al Turath Ed.)

[s: `Aql is a prerequisite to attaining `ilm. This is why the `ulum `aqliyya are so important in the shari`ah, as our master Ashraf `Ali Thanawi (May Allah be well-pleased with him) stresses often in his works. Further, one of the conditions for being morally responsible is being `aqil, which can be translated in this context as “sane”.

It is interesting to note here, in light of Ibn Hajar’s words (who was an Ash`ari), the Maturidi position on reason and intellect being sufficient in establishing and “knowing” the existence and oneness of God based on the various Qur’anic verses that command us to “reflect” on the creation in order to see the “purposeful design” behind it. Thus, one wonders, if reason is sufficient to establish this fundamental aspect of tawhid – the fountainhead of all knowledge – then how does this play into its superiority in contrast to `ilm?

Of course, there are alot of nuances involved in this discussion and details that need to be spelled out even before addressing such a question.]




Filed under General, `Aqida

Shaykh Nuh on Takfir & The Deoband-Barelwi Conflict

salamu `alaykum

Please see:


A very interesting and balanced analysis of the situation from one of the greatest (neutral) scholars of our times…

Also, see Sidi Hanif Kamal’s insightful and clear explanation:





Filed under General, `Aqida

Is it true that there is “blatant shirk” in many parts of the Qasida Burda?

Answered by Sayyidi Shaykh Faraz Rabbani (Seekersdigest)


Some learned scholars say that there is “blatant shirk” in many parts of the Qasida Burda–that it goes against Allah’s Oneness of Lordship, His Oneness in Names & Attributes, and also His Oneness in Divinity…


In the Name of Allah, Most Merciful and Compassionate. May Allah’s peace and blessings be upon His Beloved Messenger Muhammad, his noble folk, righteous companions, and all followers

No, the Qasida Burda doesn’t contain “shirk” (associating partners with Allah) or other deviations from sound Islamic belief. Rather, it is a pure expression of deep and passionate love for the Beloved Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), whose love is a condition of faith. [Read full answer]



Filed under Fiqh/Law, Hadith, Tasawwuf, `Aqida

Mulla `Ali Qari on Istiwa

Salamu `Alaykum wa Rahmatullah

Translated by Sidi Abu Hasan. This represents the Maturidi position on tafwidh.

Álī al-Ūshī [Badyi’l Amālī]:

wa rabbu’l árshi fawqa’l árshi lākin
bilā waşfi’t tamakkuni wa’t-tişāli

The Lord of Throne is on the Throne, but –

Without the attribute of ‘holding unto’ or ‘touching’ it.


Álī al-Qārī [Đaw al-Máālī] said:

‘Lord of the Throne’ that is, the Creator and the Owner of the Throne. The association is similar to ‘Lord of the House’ [rabbu’l bayt] or ‘Lord of Jibrīl’ [rabbi jibrīl.] The Throne is the greatest thing in the creation and that which encompasses everything. Allāh táālā has said: ‘Raĥmān has made Istawā on the Throne’ [ţā-hā, v.5]

The madh’hab of the latter scholars [khalaf] is to explain Istawā’a as Subduing [istiylā’a] and the chosen position of the predecessors [salaf] is not to explain it at all. [ádamu’t ta-wīl] Rather, to believe it as it has been revealed, that it is transcendent and unqualified [tanzīh] which negates similitude [tashbīh] and to submit the matter [tafwīđ] towards Allāh and His Knowledge concerning its meaning. Just like Imām Mālik has said: ‘Istawā’a is known; it’s modality is unknown; to ask about it is heresy; to believe in it is mandatory’ [al-istawā’a málūm, wa’l kayf maj’hūl, wa’s suālu ánhu bidáh, wa’l īmānu wājib]

This is also the opinion of our Imām al-Aážam regarding this and all such abstruse verses and traditions like ‘hand’ ‘eyes’ ‘face’ among other such attributes. The word ‘upon’ [fawq] is used like ‘He is Overpowering upon His slaves’ [Al-Anáām, v.18] or ‘They fear their Lord from above them’ [An-Naĥl, v.50] Our elders did not explain the word ‘upon’ or ‘above’ [fawq] as Greatness or Exaltedness like the latter scholars did.

The author [nāžim] replaced a synonym for the word used in the Qur’ān to align it with the poetic meter and then, he clarified the position by saying in the following distich: Above, and it does not mean ‘to take hold’ or ‘to touch.’ That is it doesn’t mean ‘to rest’ or the aspect of ‘reaching’ because these descriptions are inconceivable [muĥāl] concerning Allāh táālā.

In this verse is also the refutation of Karrāmiyyah and the anthropomorphists [Mujassimah] who attest a ‘direction’ [jihah] to Allāh táālā. Thus, the Karrāmiyyah attest the direction of height to Allāh without taking hold on the Throne [istiqrār]

And the anthropomorphists – they are the Ĥashwiyyah – insist that Allāh táālā ‘took hold’ [istiqrār] quoting the verse and taking its literal meaning even though they have no proof for that. Because Istawā’a has many meanings among which is the meaning of overpowering, subduing, control etc. [al-istīylā’a] like the poet says:

qadi’stawā bishrun ála’l írāqi
min ghayri sayfin wa damin mihrāqi

Bishr has subdued and overpowered Iraq,
Without using the sword or bloodshed.

Similarly is the saying of Allāh: ‘and when he reached his youth, and reached his full strength’ [al-Qaşaş/28:14] where Istawā’a is used to mean ‘complete’ or ‘perfected’ [tamām, kamāl.] and the saying of Allāh: ‘and it settled upon the mount Jūdī’ [Hūd v.44] where it means, ‘settled.’ [istiqrār]

Therefore one cannot use this as conclusive evidence when there is a possibility of having so many different meanings.

If someone asks: ‘Then what is the reason of these abstruse [mutashābihāt] verses being revealed?’ I answer: This is to show the incapacity and powerlessness of the creation and their shortfall of their intellect in grasping the meaning of the Divine Speech of their Lord [ižhāru ájzi’l khalqi wa quşūri fahmihim án kalāmi rabbihim] and to prove their slavery and their faith. Like the most knowledgeable among them say: ‘We bear faith [in all that has been revealed.] All of this is from our Lord’

They submit [tafwīđ] to Allāh and believe in the intended meaning of Allāh without trying to understand the meaning itself. [al-iýtiqādu bi ĥaqīqati murādillahi min ghayri an yúrafa murādahu] and this is the highest perfection a slave can attain. And this is the chosen position among our elders [salaf] and they turned away from describing or elucidating the meanings of abstruse verses. However, the latter scholars chose to explain these verses without insisting or being assertive about it claiming this is how it was intended by the Lord, glorified is He.

Slavehood [úbūdiyyah] is far robust than worship; because slavehood entails ‘being pleased with what the Lord does’ and worship is ‘doing what may please the Lord.’ Surely, pleasure of Allāh [riđā] is far greater than actions and deeds [ámal.] So much so that forsaking riđā is apostacy – but forsaking action, is disobeidience and sin [fisq.] Therefore, there is an end to worship – there is no worship in the hereafter, but there is no end to slavehood [úbūdiyyah] in either of the two worlds.

It is crystal clear that the madh’hab of our elders is the safest and the learned; whereas the madh’hab of the latter ones is excellent and more accurate. [madh’habu’s salaf aslam wa aálam wa madh’hab al-khalaf aĥkam]

Allāh táālā knows best.



Filed under `Aqida

Knowlege of the Tablet and the Pen: Imam Kawthari Explains

Imam Kawthari said in his Maqalat:

“Concerning those who criticize Busayri for saying that the Prophet knows the knwoledge of the Tablet and the Pen: neither does all that is hidden, nor does all knowledge reside exclusively in the Tablet. Therefore the denial of the knowledge of the Unseen does not necessitate that of the knowledge of what is in the Preserved Tablet. The denial mentioned in Allahs saying: “He discloses unto none His Secret” (72:26) presupposes exemption of all that is excluded from “His Secret,” signifying the negation of universal disclosure (no one knows all that Allah knows), not the universal application of such negation (no one knows anything that Allah knows). Therefore the meaning is the negation of the knowledge of all the Unseen; not the negation of the knowledge of some of the Unseen. This was demonstrated by Sa`d Al Taftazani in Sharh al maqasid.”

Further, for the Pen, the Prophet said, as related by Bukhari, that during the night of his Ascension he reached a level where he could hear the screeching of the pens writing the Decree, and this stands for his being granted its knowledge. Wallahu A’lam

And, lastly, for the Tablet, then one should know that one of the definitions of the Tablet is the Quran itself as cited in 85:21-22 which Allah has taught the Prophet . Similarly, Allah has granted him knowledge of it as cited in 75:16-19.

Shaykh Gibril Haddad explained this once as such.



Filed under `Aqida

Is Literalism Disbelief?

Salamu `Alaykum

The simple answer: No, not unconditionally.

Please see:


Ibn `Abidin states in his Rad al Muhtar, regarding one who states Allah is a body (we seek refuge!):

(قوله كقوله جسم كالأجسام ) وكذا لو لم يقل كالأجسام ، وأما لو قال لا كالأجسام فلا يكفر لأنه ليس فيه إلا إطلاق لفظ الجسم الموهم للنقص فرفعه بقوله لا كالأجسام ، فلم يبق إلا مجرد الإطلاق وذلك معصية ، وتمامه في البحر

It is stated in the Sharh Tariqa al Muhammadiya:


(ومن ) ( قال بأن الله تعالى جسم لا كالأجسام )

التي تتركب من الأجزاء وكان لها طول وعرض وعمق

( فهو مبتدع )

لعدم ورود الشرع ولإيهامه الجسم المنفي

( وليس بكافر )

؛ لأنه حينئذ يكون بمعنى الذات أو النفس أو الشيء وإطلاقها عليه تعالى جائز وهذا إنما لا يكون كفرا إذا لم يثبت شيء من خواص الجسم كالحيز ، والجهة إلى أن لا يبقى إلا اسم الجسم وإلا فكفر أيضا

It is stated in the Bahr al Ra’iq Sharh `ala Kanz al Daqa’iq of Imam Ibn Nujaym:

وإن قال إنه جسم لا كالأجسام فهو مبتدع

It is also stated in the Fath al Qadir:


وإن قال جسم لا كالأجسام فهو مبتدع ، لأنه ليس فيه إلا إطلاق لفظ الجسم عليه وهو موهم للنقص فرفعه بقوله لا كالأجسام فلم يبق إلا مجرد الإطلاق

Thus, he is not a disbeliever unless he stipulates “Like the body of created things”. However, he is an innovator.



Filed under `Aqida