THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BIBLE AND THE QUR'AN

Dr. Gary Miller[1]

The Bible is a collection of writings by many different authors. The Qur'an is a dictation. The speaker in the Qur'an - in the first person - is God talking directly to man. In the Bible you have many men writing about God and you have in some places the word of God speaking to men and still in other places you have some men simply writing about history. The Bible consists of 66 small books. About 18 of them begin by saying: This is the revelation God gave to so and so… The rest make no claim as to their origin. You have for example the beginning of the book of Jonah which begins by saying: The word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Elmitaeh saying… quote and then it continues for two or three pages.

If you compare that to one of the four accounts of the life of Jesus, Luke begins by saying: “many people have written about this man, it seems fitting for me to do so too”. That is all… no claim of saying “these words were given to me by God here they are for you it is a revelation”, there is no mention of this.

The Bible does not contain self-reference, that is, the word 'Bible' is not in the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible talk about itself. Some scriptures are sometimes pointed to in the Bible, say: Here where it talks about itself, but we have to look closely. 2nd Timothy 3:16 is the favourite which reads: “All scripture is inspired of God” and there are those who would say, here is where the Bible it talks about itself, it says it is inspired of God, all of it. But if you read the whole sentence, you read that this was a letter wrote by Paul to Timothy and the entire sentence says to Timothy: “Since you were a young man you have studied the holy scriptures, all scriptures inspired by God” and so on… When Timothy was a young man the New Testament did not exist, the only thing that stems he was talking about are scriptures – which are only a portion of the Bible - from before that time. It could not have meant the whole Bible.

There is at the end of the Bible a verse which says: “Let anyone who takes away from this book or adds to this book be cursed”. This to is sometimes pointed to me saying: Here is where it sums itself as a whole. But look again and you will see that when it says: Let no one change this book, it is talking about that last book, number 66, the Book of Revelation. It has too, because any reference will tell you that the Book of Revelation was written before certain other parts of the Bible were written. It happens today to be stacked at the end, but there are other parts that came after, so it can not be referring to the entire book.

It is an extreme position held only by some Christian groups that the Bible – in its entirety - cover to cover is the revealed word of God in every word, but they do a clever thing when they mention this, or make this claim. They will say that the Bible in its entirety is the word of God; inerrant (no mistakes) in the original writings. So if you go to the Bible and point out some mistakes that are in it you are going to be told: Those mistakes were not there in the original manuscript, they have crept in so that we see them there today. They are going on problem in that position. There is a verse in the Bible Isaiah 40:8 which in fact is so well known that some Bibles printed it on the inside front cover as an introduction and it says : “The grass weathers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever”. Here is a claim in the Bible that the word of God will stand forever, it will not be corrupted, it won't be lost. So if today you find a mistake in the Bible you have two choices. Either that promise was false that when God said my word wont fade away, he was mistaken, or the portion which has the mistake in it was not a part of the word of God in the first place, because the promise was that it would be safeguarded, it would not be corrupted.

I have suggested many times that there are mistakes in the Bible and the accusation comes back very quickly: Show me one. Well there are hundreds. If you want to be specific I can mention few. You have for example at 2nd Samuel 10:18 a description of a war fought by David saying that he killed 700 men and that he also killed 40000 men on horsebacks. In 1st Chronicles 19 it mentions the same episode saying that he killed 7000 men and the 40000 men were not on horsebacks, they were on foot. The point be what is the difference between the pedestrian and not is very fundamental.

Matthew 27:5 says that Judas Iscariot when he died he hung himself. Acts 1 says that no he jumped off a cliff head first. If you study Logic very soon you will come in your course to what they call an “undecidable propositions” or “meaningless sentences” or statements that can not be decided because there is no contextual false. One of the classic examples sited is something called the Effeminites paradox. This man was Cretan and he said “Cretans always lie”, now was that statement true or false? If he was a Cretan and he says that they always lie is he lying? If he is not lying then he is telling the truth then the Cretans don’t always lie ! You see it can not be true and it can not be false, the statement turns back on itself. It is like saying “What I am telling you right now is a lie” would you believe that or not? You see the statement has no true content. It can not be true and it can not be false. If it is true it is always false. If it is false it is also true.

Well in the Bible at Titus 1:12 the writer is Paul and he is talking about the Cretans. He says that one of their own men – a prophet - said “Cretans always lie” and he says that what this man says is true. It is a small mistake, but the point is that it is a human mistake, you don’t find that if you carefully examine the true content of that statement. It can not be a true statement.

Now I come back to the Qur'an, and as I mentioned the speaker in the Qur'an is - in the first person - is God. The book claims throughout that it is the word of God. It names itself 70 times as the Qur'an. It talks about its own contents. It has self-reference. The Qur'an states in the first Sura after Fatiha that “This is the book, there is no doubt in it, it is a guidance for those who are conscious of God” (Qur'an 2:1) and so on and so on… It begins that way and continues that way stressing that. And there is one very amazing statement in the Qur'an when you come to the fourth Sura 82nd Ayah which says to those who say Qur'an is something else than the word of God. It challenges them saying: “Have they not considered the Qur'an, if it came from someone other than God they will find in it many mistakes” (Qur'an 4:82). Some of you are students, would you dare to hand in a paper after you completed a research work or something at the bottom you put down there “You wont find mistakes in this”. Would you dare to challenge your professor that way?. Well the Qur'an does that. It is telling: If you really think you know where this came from then starts looking for mistakes because you wont find any. Another interesting thing the Qur'an does is that it quotes all its critics. There has never - in hundreds of years - ever been some suggestion as to where that book came from but that the Qur'an does not already mention that objection and reply to it. Many times you will find the Ayah saying something like: Do they say such and such and so, say to them such and such and so. In every case there is a reply. More than that the Qur'an claims that the evidence of its origin is in itself, and that if you look at this book you will be convinced.

So the difference in Christianity and Islam comes down to a difference of authority and appeal to authority. The Christian wants to appeal to the Bible and the Muslim wants to appeal to the Qur'an. You can not stop by saying: This is true because my book say it is, and somebody else would say something else is true because my book says differently, you can not stop at that point, and the Qur'an does not. The Christians may point to some words that it is recorded Jesus said and say this proves my point. But the Muslim does not simply open his book and say: No, no the Qur'an says this, because the Qur'an does not simply deny something the Bible says and say something else instead. The Qur'an takes the form of a rebuttal, it is a guidance as the opening says (Huda lil mutakeen). So that for every suggestion that the Christian may say: My Bible say such and such, the Qur'an will not simply say: No that is not true, it will say: Do they say such and such then ask them such and such. You have for example the Ayah that compares Jesus and Adam. There are those who may say that Jesus must have been God (Son of God) because he had no father. He had a woman who was his mother, but there was no human father. It was God that gave him life, so he must have been God’s son. The Qur'an reminds the Christian in one short sentence to remember Adam - who was his father ? - and in fact, who was his mother ? He did not have a father either and in fact he did not have a mother, but what does that make him? So that the likeness of Adam is the likeness of Jesus, they were nothing and then they became something; that they worship God.

So that the Qur'an does not demand belief - the Qur'an invites belief, and here is the fundamental difference. It is not simply delivered as: Here is what you are to believe, but throughout the Qur'an the statements are always: Have you O man thought of such and such, have you considered so and so. It is always an invitation for you to look at the evidence; now what do you believe ?

The citation of the Bible very often takes the form of what is called in Argumentation: Special Pleading. Special Pleading is when implications are not consistent. When you take something and you say: Well that must mean this, but you don’t use the same argument to apply it to something else. To give an example, I have seen it in publications many times, stating that Jesus must have been God because he worked miracles. In other hand we know very well that there is no miracle ever worked by Jesus that is not also recorded in the Old Testament as worked by one of the prophets. You had amongst others, Elijah, who is reported to have cured the leper, raise the dead boy to life and to have multiplied bread for the people to eat - three of the most favorite miracles cited by Jesus. If the miracles worked by Jesus proved he was God, why don’t they prove Elijah was God ? This is Special Pleading, if you see what I mean. The implications are not consistent. If this implies that then in that case it must also imply the same thing. We have those who would say Jesus was God because he was taken up in the heaven. But the Bible also says the a certain Einah did not die he was taken up into the heaven by God. Whether it is true or not, who knows, but the point is if Jesus being taken up proves he is God, why does not it prove Einah was God? The same thing happened to him.

I wrote to a man one time, who wrote a book about Christianity and I had some of the objections I mentioned to you now. And his reply to me was that I am making matters difficult to myself, that there are portions in the Bible that are crystal clear and that there are portions that are difficult, and that my problem was that I am looking at the difficult part instead of the clear parts. The problem is that this is an exercise in self deception - why are some parts clear and some parts difficult? It is because somebody decided what this clearly means, now that makes this very difficult. To give you an example, John Chapter 14 a certain man said to Jesus: Show us God, and Jesus said: If you have seen me you have seen God. Now without reading on the Christian will say: See Jesus claimed to be God, he said if you have seen me you have seen God. If that is crystal clear then you have a difficult portion when you go back just a few pages to Chapter 5 when another man came to Jesus and said show us God and he said you have never seen God you have never heard his voice. Now what did he mean there if on the other occasion he meant that he was God? Obviously you have made matters difficult by deciding what the first one meant. If you read on in Chapter 14 you will see what he went on to say. He was saying the closest you are going to seeing God are the works you see me doing.

It is a fact that the words “son of God” are not found on the lips of Jesus anywhere in the first three Gospel accounts, he was always calling himself the Son of Man. And it is a curious form of reasoning that I have seen so often that it is established from Bible that he claimed to be God because - look how the Jews reacted. They will say for example he said such and such and the Jews said he is blaspheming, he claimed to be God and they tried to stone him. So they argue that he must have been claiming to be God because look ! - the Jews tried to kill him. They said that’s what he was claiming. But the interesting thing is that all the evidence is then built on the fact that a person is saying: I believed that Jesus was the son of God because the Jews who killed him said that’s what he used to say ! His enemies used to say that, so he must have said it, this is what it amounts to. In other hand we have the words of Jesus saying he would keep the law, the law of Moses and we have the statement in the Bible, why did the Jews kill him ? Because he broke the law of Moses. Obviously the Jews misunderstood him, if he promised he would keep the law, but they killed him because he broke the law, they must have misunderstood him, or lied about him.

When I talk about the Bible and quote various verses here and there I am often accused of putting things out of context, to say you have lifted something out of what it was talking about and given it a meaning. I don’t want to respond to the accusation as such, but it doesn’t seem to occur to many people that perhaps those who wrote portions of the Bible in the first place were guilty of the same thing. Maybe they – some of those writers - believed a certain thing and in order to prove it quoted from their scriptures – the Old Testament, the Hebrew writings - quoted out of context to prove their point. There are examples of that kind of thing. In Matthew 2 it said that a king wanted to kill the young child Jesus so he with his family went to Egypt, and they stayed there until that king died, and then they came back. When the writer of Matthew, whoever he was, because the name Matthew wont be found in the book of Matthew; when he described this event saying that he came back out of Egypt, he said: “This was to fulfill a prophecy which is written” and then he quotes Hosea Chapter 11 “Out of Egypt I called my Son”. So he said because Jesus went to Egypt and then came back out of Egypt and we have this passage in the Hebrew scriptures “Out of Egypt I called my son” Jesus must have been the son of God. If you look and see what he was quoting, Hosea 11:1 he quotes the second half of a complete sentence, the complete sentence reads: “When Israel was young I loved him and out of Egypt I called my son”. Israel the nation was considered as the son of God. Moses was told to go to Pharaoh and say to him: If you touch that nation of people, you touch my son; warning him, warning Pharaoh: don’t touch that nation, calling the nation “the son of God”. So that this is the only thing talked about in Hosea 11:1. “Out of Egypt I called my son” can only refer to the nation of Israel. I mentioned this point some months ago here in another talk, to which a young lady with us objected that Israel is a symbolic name for Jesus. You will have a hard time finding that anywhere in the Bible because it isn’t there. You can take an index of the Bible and lookup the word “Israel” everywhere the word occurs and you will find no where in any place that you can connect the word Israel with Jesus. But never mind - suppose it is true, read on, the second verse says “and after that he kept on worshipping Bal”, because this is what the Israelites were guilty of, very often they kept falling back into Idol worshipping. So if that “Israel” really meant Jesus and it means that Jesus is the son of God that came out of Egypt they must also mean that Jesus from time to time used to bow down to that idol Bal. You have to be consistent, and follow through on what it says. So the point is whoever wrote Matthew and Chapter 2 was trying to prove a point by quoting something out of context, and he undid himself, because if you follow through on it, it can not be so.

Now I can come back to the claim the Qur'an makes that it has internal evidence of its origin. There are many many ways that you can look at this. As one example, if I single out somebody here and say: You know, I know your father - he is going to doubt that, he has never seen me with his father. He would say: how does he look like, is he tall short does he wear glasses? and so on, and if I give him the right answers pretty soon he will get convinced, “Oh yes, you did meet him”. If you apply the same kind of thinking when you look at the Qur'an, here is a book that says it came from the one who was there when the universe began. So you should be asking that one: So tell me something that proves it. Tell me something that shows me you must have been there when the universe was beginning. You will find in two different Ayahs the statement that all the creation began from a single point, and from this point it is expanding. In 1978 they gave the Noble prize to two people who proved that that is the case. It is the big bang origin of the universe. It was determined by the large radio receivers that they have for the telephone companies which were sensitive enough to pick up the transmissions from satellites and it kept finding background noise that they could not account for. Until the only explanation came to be, it is the left over energy from that original explosion which fits in exactly as would be predicted by the mathematical calculation of what would be this thing if the universe began from a single point and exploded outwards. So they confirmed that, but in 1978. Centuries before that here is the Qur'an saying the heavens and the earth in the beginning they were one piece and split and says in another Ayah : “of the heavens we are expanding it”.

Let me tell you about a personal investigation, it occurred to me that there are a number of things you can find in the Qur'an that give evidence to its origin – internal evidence. If the Qur'an is dictated from a perfect individual; it originates with God, then there should not be any wasted space, it should be very meaningful. There should be nothing that we don’t need that you can cut off, and it should not be missing anything. And so that everything in there should really be there for a specific purpose. And I got to thinking about the Ayah which I mentioned before, it says, the likeness of Jesus is the likeness of Adam. It is an equation, it uses the Arabic word (mithel), it says Jesus, Adam, equal. You go to the index of the Qur'an, you look up the name ISA it is in the Qur'an 25 times, you lookup the name Adam it is there 25 times. They are equal, through scattered references but 25 of each. Follow that through and you will find that in the Qur'an there are 8 places were an Ayah says something is like something else, using this (mithel), you will find in every case and take both sides of it whatever that word is look it up in the index and it will be lets say 110 times and lookup the other word and it will be said to be equal to the same 110. That is quite a project of co-ordination if you try to write a book that way yourself. So that everywhere you happened to mention that such and such is like such and such that then you check your index, filing system, or your IBM punch cards or whatever, to make sure that in this whole book you mentioned them both the same number of times. But that’s what you will find in the Qur'an.

What I am talking about is built on a thing that is called in Logic: Use and Mention of a Word. When you use a word, you are using its meaning. When you mention a word, you are talking about the symbol without the meaning. For example, if I say Toronto is a big city - I used the word Toronto as I meant this place Toronto is a big city. But if I say to you Toronto has 7 letters, I am not talking about this place Toronto, I am talking about this word - Toronto. So, the revelation is above reasoning, but it is not above reason. That is to say we are more up not to find in the Qur'an something that is unreasonable, but we may find something that we would have never figured out for ourselves.

The author of this sentence said if this book came from someone besides God then you will find in it many Ikhtalafan (inconsistencies). The word Ikhtilaf is found many times in the Qur'an. But the word Ikhtalafan is only found once in the Qur'an. So there are not many Ikhtilafan in the Qur'an, there is only one - where the sentence is mentioned. So you see how things are put together perfectly. It has been suggested to mankind: Find a mistake. Man could not get hold of a mistake, and he is very clever, because this sentence could also mean: Find many Iktilafan and so he quickly goes to the index to see if he can find many of them and there is only one... Sorry clever person !

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] * Dr. Gary Miller (Abdul-Ahad Omar) - A former missionary who has embraced Islam.

Peace

In Name Of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Innal-Hamdalillah was-Salaatu was-Salaam `alaa Rasoolillah

as-Salaamu `alaykum wa-RaHmatullahi wa-Barakatuhu

"O My Lord! Increase me in knowledge!" - Qur'an 20:114

Some Words to Heal the Broken Heart

Shaykh ul-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullaah

Taken from "Diseases of the Hearts and their Cures"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the sickness of desire and passionate love then this is the soul loving that which would harm it coupled with this is a hatred of that which would benefit it.

Passionate love is a psychological sickness, and when it’s effects become noticeable on the body, it becomes a sickness that afflicts the mind also. Either by afflicting the mind by the likeness of melancholy, or afflicting the body through weakness and emancipation. But the purpose here is to discuss its effect on the heart, for passionate love is the fundament that makes the soul covet that which would harm it, similar to the one weak of body who covets that which harms it, and if he is not satiated by that then he is grieved, and if he is satiated then his sickness increases. The same applies to the heart afflicted with this love, for it is harmed by its connection to the loved, either by seeing, hearing, touching or even thinking about it. And if he were to curb the love then the heart is hurt and grieved by this, and if he gives in to the desire then the sickness becomes stronger and becomes a means through which the grievance is increased.

In the hadeeth concerning the saying of Moosa reported by Wahb*, which is recorded by Imam Ahmad in az-Zuhd:

Allah says: Indeed I drive away My friends from the delights of this world and its opulence and comfort just as the compassionate shepherd drives away his camel from the dangerous grazing lands. And indeed I make them avoid its tranquility and livelihood, just as the compassionate shepherd makes his camel to avoid the resting placers wherein it would be easy prey. This is not because I consider them to be insignificant, but so they may complete their portion of My kindness in safety and abundance, the delights of the world will not attract him and neither would desires overcome him.

*Wahb ibn Munabbih is a noble taabi’ee, but this hadeeth is reported from him directly to the Prophet (saaw) and is not authentic.

Therefore the only cure for the sick lies in his removing the sickness by removing this blameworthy love from his heart.

There are some whose hearts contain the disease of desire and whose perceptions are only skin deep. When the object of the desire submits, the sickness is satiated, and this satiation strengthens the desire and pursuit of the object and hence strengthens the sickness. This is in contrast to the one whose objective is not met, for this failure results in the removing the satiation that would strengthen the sickness and thereby the desire is weakened, as is the love. This is because the person definitely intends that there be action accompanying his desire, for otherwise all his desire would be is just whisperings of the soul, unless there is some speech or looking accompanying this.

As for the one who sis afflicted with this passionate love but holds back and is patient, then indeed Allah will reward him for his taqwa as occurs in the hadeeth:

That the one who passionately loves someone yet holds back, conceals this and is patient, then dies upon this, will be a martyr.

(A da’eef hadeeth . refer to the discussion concerning its authenticity in al-Jawaab al-Kaafee and Rawdha al-Muhibbeen of Ibn al Qayyim and Silsilah ad-Da’eefah of al-Albaanee.)

This hadeeth is known to be the report of Yahya al-Qataat from Mujaahid from Ibn Abbas from the Prophet (saaw) but it is problematic and such a hadeeth is not to be depended upon.

But it is known from the evidences of the Shareeah that if one were to hold back from performing that which is unlawful, be it looking, speaking or acting, and he conceals this and does not articulate it so as not to fall into that which is prohibited and he is patient in his obedience to Allah and keeps away from disobedience to Allah, despite the pain that his heart feels due to this passionate love (similar to the case of the one who is patient through a calamity), then indeed this person would gain the same reward as those who have feared Allah and been patient.

Verily, he who fears Allah and is patient, then surely Allah makes not the reward of the doers good to be lost. [surah Yusuf: Ayah 90]

But as for him who feared the standing before his Lord, and restrained himself from impure evil desires and lusts. Verily, Paradise will be his abode. [surah an-Naaziaat: Ayah 40]

When the soul loves something, it will do all it can to attain it, so the one who does this out of having a blameworthy love or hatred then this action of his would be sinful. For example, his hating a person due to envying him and thereby harming whosoever is linked to that person.

As one poet affected by this said:

For the sake of a Sudanese girl he loved Sudan to the point that he loved the black dogs due to his love of her.

Ibn al Qayyim al Jawziyyah’s al Fawaaid (p111-112)

“The slave is not afflicted with a punishment greater in severity then the hardening of the heart and being distant from Allah. For the Fire was created to melt the hardened heart. The most distant heart from Allah is the heart which is hardened. If the heart becomes hardened, the eye becomes dry.

If four matters are exceeded in quantity, beyond what is necessary, the heart shall become hardened:

Food, sleep, speech and sexual intercourse. A body afflicted by disease does not derive nourishment from food or water, similarly a heart diseased by desire does not benefit from admonishment and exhortation.

Whosoever desires to purify his heart, then let him prefer Allah to his desires.

The heart which is clinging to its desires is veiled from Allah, commensurate to the degree that it is attached to them, the hearts are the vessels of Allah upon his earth, hence the most beloved of them to him, are the ones most compassionate, pure and resistant to deviation.

They (the transgressors) preoccupied their hearts [in the pursuance] of the Dunya, would that they preoccupied them with Allah and the hereafter, then surely they would have reflected upon the intended meaning of his poignant words and verses. Their hearts would have returned to their masters with wisdom, marvelously curious and [in possession] of the rarest of precious gems.

If the heart is nourished with remembrance, its thirst quenched with contemplation and cleansed from corruption, it shall witness remarkable and wondrous matters, inspiring wisdom.

Not every individual who is endowed with knowledge and wisdom, and assumes its character is form amongst its people. Rather the people of knowledge and wisdom are those who infused life into their hearts by slaying their desires. As for the one who slays his heart and vitalized his desires, then knowledge and wisdom is naked upon his tongue.

The destruction of the heart occurs by security [in this Dunya] and negligence, its fortification occurs by fear and remembrance. If the heart renounces the pleasures of the Dunya, it settles upon the [pursuance of] pleasures of the Hereafter, and amongst those who call towards it.

Should the heart become content with the pleasures of the Dunya, those pleasures [of the hereafter] cease [to continue].

Yearning for Allah and his meeting is like the gentle breeze blowing upon the heart, extinguishing the blaze of the Dunya. Whosoever caused his heart to settle with his Lord shall be in a state, clam and tranquil, and whosoever sent it amongst the people shall be disturbed and excessively perturbed.

For the love of Allah shall not enter a heart, which contains the love of this world, except as a camel, which passes through the eye of a needle.

Hence, the most beloved servant before Allah is the one whom He places in His servitude, whom He selects for His love, whom He causes to purify his worship for Him, dedicates his objectives for Him, his tongue for His remembrance, and his limbs for His service.

The heart becomes sick, as the body becomes sick, and its remedy is al-Tawbah and protection [from transgression].

It becomes rusty as a mirror becomes rusty, and its clarity is obtained by remembrance. It becomes naked as the body becomes naked, and its beautification is at-Taqwa. It becomes hungry and thirsty as the body becomes hungry and thirst, and its food and drink are knowledge, love, dependence, repentance and servitude.”

Asalamu ALAIKUM

Tarbiyyah: The Key to Victory

Shaykh ‘Alee Hasan al-Halabee [1]

-----------------------------------------------------

The Ways in which Creation Operates

Jubayr ibn Nufayr said: Once, when Cyprus was conquered and its people were divided and they used to cry to each other, I saw Abud-Dardaa sitting alone crying. So, I said: O, Abud-Dardaa! What makes you cry on this day in which Allaah has strengthened Islaam and its people? So, he said: “Wo be to you O Jubayr. How significant the creation is to Allaah when they abandon His commands. Between us is a nation, who were evidently strong and had dominion, they abandoned the commands of Allah, so see what has become of them!” [2]

So, this is a clear and indisputable evidence that cultivation and education upon the commands of Allaah – with the beneficial knowledge and righteous actions – is the basis for achieving the help of Allaah; whilst abandoning this is the cause for defeat. “Indeed, Allaah – the One free from all defects, the Most High – has established certain Sunan (ways and causes) upon His creation, whosoever fulfills them will achieve success and felicity, but whosoever turns away from them has indeed gone astray. Allaah – the Most High – explains this Sunan with regards to those who disbelieve:

“Similar Sunan (ways) were faced by people before you, so travel through the earth and see what was the end of those who disbelieved.” [3] And He – the Most Perfect – says: “Such was the Sunnah (way) of Allaah with those who lived before. Indeed, in the Sunnah of Allaah you will find no change.” [4] ” [5]

to read coplete article

go here http://www.memphisdawah.com/article/tarbiyyah.htm

Asalamu Alaikum

[img:02f5cb4c5b]http://www.aljazeera.net/mritems/images/...9_1_17.jpg[/img:02f5cb4c5b]

مسؤولون أميركيون يتهمون السعودية بتمويل الإرهاب

اتهم عدد من أعضاء مجلس الشيوخ الأميركي ومسؤولون وخبراء المملكة العربية السعودية بتمويل ما أطلقوا عليه حركات وهابية يمتد تأثيرها ونفوذها إلى الولايات المتحدة وتشكل بزعمهم تهديدا جديا.

وزعم هؤلاء أنه يبدو أن سبعة أشخاص يشتبه في تورطهم بالإرهاب كانت المباحث الفدرالية (FBI) اعتقلتهم الجمعة في منطقة واشنطن, ينتمون إلى هذا التيار. وتتهم السلطات الأميركية المعتقلين بتقديم الدعم لمنظمة لشكر طيبة التي تقاتل ضد القوات الهندية في إقليم كشمير.

وقال رئيس اللجنة القضائية في مجلس الشيوخ السيناتور الجمهوري عن أريزونا جون كيل أثناء جلسة استماع برلمانية الخميس "إن المشكلة التي نواجهها هي قيام دولة برعاية وتمويل أيديولوجية متطرفة توفر مكان التجنيد والبنى التحتية والمصدر المالي لإرهابيين دوليين".

وذكر أعضاء أخرون في مجلس الشيوخ وخبراء في شؤون الإرهاب ورئيس قسم الشؤون القانونية في وزارة الخزانة الأميركية ديفد أوفهاوسر أن مسؤولين ومؤسسات سعودية تنفق مبالغ طائلة لتمويل مدارس قرآنية ومساجد حيث يجري

-بزعمهم- تلقين عدم التسامح الديني وأيديولوجية معادية للغرب.

واتهم السيناتور الديمقراطي تشارلز شومر من ولاية نيويورك ما سماها الإيديولوجية الوهابية بالدعوة للحقد والعنف وعدم التسامح حيال "الإسلام المعتدل والعالم اليهودي المسيحي". ووصف شومر العلاقة بين الحكم السعودي ورجال الدين بأنها "عهد مع الشيطان".

واعتبر ديفد أوفهاوسر أن "العربية السعودية تشكل من نواح عدة مركز تمويل تنظيم القاعدة الذي يتزعمه أسامة بن لادن إضافة إلى منظمات إرهابية أخرى". وأضاف "أن الوهابية ومواقفها المتطرفة هي -من هذا المنطلق- عامل مهم جدا يجدر أخذه بالاعتبار في مكافحة تمويل الإرهاب".

وأعلن ألكس ألكسييف, الخبير في شؤون الإرهاب في معهد مركز السياسة الأمنية الخاص في واشنطن, نقلا عن أرقام الحكومة السعودية, أن الرياض أنفقت 70 مليار دولار بين الأعوام 1970 و2002 بصفة مساعدات للخارج من دون احتساب الهبات الخاصة. وأوضح أن تنظيما خاصا يقوم سنويا بطباعة 13 مليون نسخة من الكتب الإسلامية ويمول ثلاثة آلاف رجل دين وأكثر من ألف مدرسة ومسجد.

وقال الخبير إنه وبفضل هذا التمويل, يمتد نفوذ الحركة الوهابية إلى الولايات المتحدة ويدخل حتى إلى المنظمات الإسلامية الكبرى في البلاد والمدارس والجيش كما ذكر السيناتور شومر. ورأى السيناتور أن أحد أنصار الوهابية "نجح هكذا في السيطرة على التعاقد مع كل المرشدين في نظام السجون في ولاية نيويورك" قبل أن يتم استبعاده.

[b:5d95c529ce]AL WALA' WAL BARA' ACCORDING TO THE AQEEDAH OF THE SALAF [/b:5d95c529ce]

By Muhammad Saeed al-Qahtani / Translated by Omar Johnstone

Chapter one

THE DECLARATION OF FAITH

What the Declaration of Faith Confirms and What it Denies

The meaning of the first part of the declaration of faith, 'There is no god but Allah', is that nothing other than Allah is worthy of worship. This denies the attribution of divinity to all other things, and affirms it as a quality which belongs to Allah alone. (Shaykh Abdar-Rahman ibn Hassan, Fath al-Majid, p.36)

Ibn Taimiyah said: "The heart will not find complete happiness except by loving Allah and by striving towards what is dear to Him. It is not possible to achieve this love except by rejecting all things that compete with it. This is what the words, 'There is no god but Allah' mean; this is the spirit of the deen of Ibrahim and of that of every other prophet." (Ibn Taimiya, Majmu' al-Fatawa, vol 28, p.32, Riyadh)

When someone says, 'There is no god but Allah', he has denied one thing and affirmed another. With these words the believer first denies all those who reject faith, worship created things, obey the tyrant, rule by injustice or remain content under oppression; and then he affirms his allegiance to Allah, to His deen, to His Book, to His righteous servants, and to the Sunnah of His Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace : "Whoever rejects false deities and believes in Allah has grasped a firm handhold which will never break." [2:256]

As for the second part of the declaration, 'Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah', this means that we do what the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, has told us to do, and stop doing what he has told us not to do. According to Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, "No one truly believes until he rejects the forces of disbelief." This is supported by ayah 2 :256 just cited. The declaration of faith is a declaration of complete loyalty to the Shari'ah : "Follow that which is sent down to you from your Lord, and follow no protecting friends beside Him. Little do you recollect!" [7:3]; and : "So set your purpose (O Muhammad) for the deen as a man by nature upright - the natural way of Allah, in which He has created man." [30:30]

You must also denounce the rule of Ignorance: "Is it the judgement of the time of ignorance that they seek? And who is better than Allah for judgment for a people who have certainty (in their belief)?" [5:50] Indeed you must deny all other religions: "And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him, and he will be one of the losers in the Hereafter." [3:85]

The declaration of faith is thus a denial and an affirmation. In fact, it denies four things and affirms four others. It denies false deities, the tyrant, intermediaries, and ordained authorities, who are bogus. If you think a thing can help you or protect you from harm then you have taken it as a god. A tyrant demands that you worship and adore him. An intermediary, whether family, community or property, distracts you from faith: "And from among mankind are some who take for themselves (objects of worship as) rivals to Allah loving them as they should only love Allah." [2:156]

Bogus authority advises you to act against truth and to disobey Allah: "They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks." [9:31]

It also affirms four things: that the object of your worship is Allah; that glorification and love are for Allah alone; that hope and fear are due only to Allah; and that you are aware of Allah's power and might, this awareness is taqwa. The single and unique goal of the believer is to worship Allah and none other than Him. Thus, the believer's love is for Allah alone: "And those who believe are stronger in their love for Allah." [2:156] Hope, too, is exclusively in Allah and one fears nothing but Him: "If Allah afflicts you with some hurt, there is no one who can remove it except Him; and if He desires good for you, there is no one who can repel His bounty. He strikes with it whom He wishes of his servants. He is the Forgiving, the Compassionate." [10:107]

Lastly, the believer is conscious of Allah and aware of the danger of His displeasure and of His wrath. It is taqwa that causes a person abandon disbelief and disobedience, to devote himself entirely to Allah and to obey His law and His command. Ibn Mas'ud said: "When you act in obedience to Allah, in the light of Allah, you hope for Allah's reward. When you abandon disobedience of Allah, in the light of Allah, you fear Allah's punishment." (Majumu'at ar-Rasa'il wal-Masa'il al-Najdiyya, Muhammad Rashid Rida, eds. vol4, p.99)

Whoever recognises these things must sever all links to anything other than Allah and free his heart from falsehood. Thus Allah tells us that Ibrahim, as well as our own Prophet, may the blessings and peace of Allah be on them, smashed the idols that their people tood as gods and rejected all who worshipped them: "There is a good example for you in Ibrahim and those with him, when they told their people: Surely we disassociate ourselves from you and all that you worship beside Allah. We have done with you. And there has arisen between us and you enmity and hate forever until you believe in Allah only." [60:4]

>From beginning to end the Qur'an is a clarification of the meaning of the words, 'There is no god but Allah'. This statement is both a denial of shirk and of those who commit it, and an approval of sincerity and of those who strive for it. Every word and every deed that is dear to Allah is in some way connected to this declaration. It is the source of all noble action, its definition and its guide. This is why Allah has called it the 'declaration of fear'.

The Prophet's Companions and the Declaration of Faith

The following account illustrates the Companions' understanding and experience of the Kalima. In 170 AH someone asked Imam Sufiyan ibn Uyaynah al-Hillali * about faith. He said:

"It is in both speech and action." "But does it increase of decrease?" asked the man. "It increases as Allah wishes, and it decreases as He wishes until no more of it than this remains," and held out his hand. The man said,"So what should be our attitude towards those among us who assert that is is speech and not action?"

"This is what people used to say before the nature and limits of faith had been made clear. Of course Allah, Glorious and Mighty is He, sent his Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, to all of humanity to tell them that there is no god but Allah and that he is the Messenger of Allah. Once they had accepted this, the security of their money and their lives was assured and they became accountable to Allah alone."

"When Allah was satisfied with their sincerity, He commanded His Prophet to order them to pray. He ordered them to do this and they did it. By Allah, had they not done this their first act would not have helped them."

"When Allah was satisfied with the sincerity of their prayers, He told His Prophet to order them to migrate to Madinah. By Allah, had they not done this neither their first act nor their prayers would have helped them."

"When Allah was satisfied with the sincerity of their hearts in this, He commanded them to return to Makkah to fight their fathers and their brothers until these said the Word which they had said, established the same prayer and joined the same migration. He commanded them to do this and they did it. One of them even came with the head of his father and said,'O Messenger of Allah, here is the head of a leader of the disbelievers.' By Allah, had they not done this their first act, their prayers and their migration would not have helped them."

"When Allah was satisfied with the sincerity of their hearts in this, He told His Messenger to order them to complete the rite of tawaf and to shave their heads in humility, which they did. By Allah, had they not done this their first act, their prayers, their migration and their combat with their fathers would not have helped them."

"When Allah was satisfied with the sincerity of their hearts in this He told the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, to take a part of their money by which to purify themselves. He commanded them to do this and they did, giving much and giving little. By Allah, had they not done this their first act, their prayers, their migration, their combat with their fathers and their tawaf would not have helped them."

"When Allah was satisfied withe the sincerity of their hearts which were now in harmony with the nature and limits of faith, He said to them: "This day I have perfected your deen for you and have completed My blessings to you, and have chosen for you as your deen al-Islam [5:3]."

Imam Sufiyan continued: "Whoever abandons any part of faith is a disbeliever as far as wer are concerned. If this from neglect we would correct him, but he would be lacking in our eyes. This is the Sunnah. Relate it on my behalf to whoever may ask about it." (Al-Shar'a, Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al-Hussain al-Ajari, p.104)

* Imam Sufiyan ibn Uyaynah al-Hillali (107-198 AH): Imam Shafi'i said of him: "Were it not for Imams Malik and ibn Uyaynah, the learning of the Hijaz would have been lost." Imam Ahmad said, "I have not seen anyone more knowledgeable in the Sunnah than ibn Uyaynah."

In the Name of Allah: Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Muslim American Society Update

June 27, 2003

1) FLIER FROM SENATOR ANGERS MUSLIMS (BOSTON GLOBE)

2) MAS-BOSTON ISSUES STATEMENT REGARDING SENATOR'S COMMENTS

3) MAS FREEDOM FOUNDATION TO LAUNCH VOTER REGISTRATION

DRIVE NATIONWIDE

4) ICNA-MAS CONVENTION JULY 4TH WEEKEND IN PHILADELPHIA

_________________________

1) FLIER FROM SENATOR ANGERS MUSLIMS

By Yvonne Abraham, Boston Globe

http://www.globe.com/dailyglobe2/178/metro...ier_from_senato

r_angers_Muslims+.shtml

Senator Guy W. Glodis has angered Muslims and a civil rights

group over a flier he sent to fellow senators that says

terrorist attacks could be deterred if convicted Muslim

extremists were buried with pig entrails.

The flier, which Glodis's 39 colleagues received Wednesday,

said an execution of Muslim extremists in the Philippines

was ordered by General John Joseph ''Black Jack'' Pershing

before World War I, in which the terrorists were shot with

bullets dipped in pigs' blood, then buried with ''pigs'

blood, entrails, etc.'' According to the flier, contact with

the blood and entrails of pigs ''instantly barred'' Muslims

from paradise, dooming them to hell. It said news of the

burial deterred other terrorist attacks for ''the next

forty-two years.''

''Maybe it is time for this segment of history to repeat

itself, maybe in Iraq,'' the flier concluded. ''The question

is, where do we find another Black Jack Pershing?''

A Muslim group denounced the flier as ''slanderous

garbage.'' Internet websites cast doubt on the authenticity

of the killings as described in the flier, with at least one

referring to the description as a fictional chain.

The Auburn Democrat would not say yesterday whether he

agreed with the contents of the flier, which he circulated

to his colleagues with a note that said ''thought this might

be of interest to you.''

''I didn't write it,'' he said. ''I just passed it along to

my colleagues. I often share news items of interest with my

colleagues.''

The flier merely recounted historical fact, Glodis said, and

should not have offended anyone.

''If some of my colleagues are so weak-kneed and politically

correct and cannot accept historical fact, I suggest they

lodge a formal complaint with the secretary of the Army,''

Glodis said.

But a national Muslim society took a different view and

plans to call for Glodis's censure today.

''I am outraged and I am offended, and I think that the

senator owes an apology to his Muslim constituents,'' said

Raeed N. Tayeh, public affairs director of the Muslim

American Society Freedom Foundation, in Washington, D.C.

''The inflammatory nature of passing this around and the

recklessness with which he's done it -- he hasn't checked

his history, and I think it's ludicrous.''

Islam does not teach that people would be barred from heaven

by being buried with pigs, Tayeh said.

''It's a canard, it's a lie, a fable,'' he said. ''It is one

of those urban legends that keeps getting passed on like a

terrible chain letter. God admits people to heaven based on

their actions. This is what Muslims believe.''

Tayeh said he would join local Muslims today to call on

Senate President Robert E. Travaglini to censure Glodis.

Travaglini's office did not return several calls requesting

comment.

''This is just a sad commentary on the ignorance of people

who are entrusted to represent Americans, that they would

pass around such offensive, distasteful, and slanderous

garbage to members of an esteemed body such as the

Massachusetts Senate,'' Tayeh said.

A local civil rights leader concurred.

''It's deeply troubling,'' said Andrew Tarsy, civil rights

director for the Anti-Defamation League's New England

office. ''Discourse on difficult issues in this country

requires a fundamental respect for human rights. Appeals to

bigotry are not a part of the constructive discussion about

the war on terrorism. His role is to lead a discussion, and

that can be done without this kind of recklessness.''

Most of the senators called for comment on Glodis's mailing

yesterday did not return calls, but two defended his First

Amendment right to circulate it. ''I respect Guy. He is a

friend, and this isn't something I would support or send

out, but he has a right to do it,'' said Senate Minority

Leader Brian P. Lees, an East Longmeadow Republican.

''If there was any indication that we would repeat something

like that, I would never agree to anything like that, but he

has a right to any opinion he wants,'' he said.

Senator Jarrett T. Barrios said he found the flier

offensive, and threw it away.

''I get offensive things sent to me all the time,'' said the

Cambridge Democrat.

''The First Amendment of the United States allows people to

be eloquent in how they express themselves or to be

troglodytes. It doesn't discriminate. Clearly, the senator

is able to exercise his First Amendment rights and has

chosen to do so. And I am free to throw it in the garbage.''

2) MAS-BOSTON ISSUES STATEMENT REGARDING SENATOR'S

COMMENTS

Contact: Ms. Sadaf Kazmi 617) 834-0849

(Boston, MA - 6/27/2203) The Boston chapter of the Muslim

American Society* (MAS) is deeply outraged over the

circulation of a fabricated flier by State Senator Guy

Glodis in the esteemed chambers of the Massachusetts General

Court.

The flier in question includes a fictitious story claiming

that in 1913, General Jack Pershing, then a military

governor in the Philippines, carried out a mass execution of

Muslim rebels using bullets soaked in pigs' blood, and then

buried the bodies with the blood and entrails of the pigs in

order to deprive these "Muslim extremists" from entering

heaven.

The canard goes on to say that this act deterred "terrorism"

in the world for the following 42 years, and it closes with

the sentence: "Maybe it is time for this segment of history

to repeat itself, maybe in Iraq? The question is, where do

we find another Black Jack Pershing?"

Senator Glodis attached a message to the flier that he sent

to his colleagues saying, "Thought this might be of interest

to you."

Well it might be of interest to Mr. Glodis to know that the

"lesson from history" that he passed around is a total

fabrication, kept alive by bigots who wish to vilify and

demonize Muslims and the Islamic faith.

It might be of interest to Mr. Glodis to know that as far as

Islam goes, God controls the gates of heaven, not maniacal

savages who would commit mass murder in such a foul and

inhumane way.

It might be of interest to Mr. Glodis to know that the

Constitution of the United States of America, a document he

swore to uphold, forbids "cruel and unusual" punishment for

any and all crimes committed.

Such ignorance, recklessness, and disrespect is something

that our community has come to anticipate from right-wing

bigots, not from a Democratic state senator from the

distinguished Commonwealth of Massachusetts, who has been

entrusted to represent and inform his people, not mislead

and disgrace them.

We call on Senate President Robert Travaglini to begin

censure proceedings immediately, and we call on the Senate

Ethics and Rules Committee to investigate the matter as

well.

3) MAS FREEDOM FOUNDATION TO LAUNCH VOTER REGISTRATION

DRIVE NATIONWIDE

The MAS Freedom Foundation, the public affairs arm of the

Muslim American Society, plans to kick off it's nationwide

voter registration drive over the 4th of July weekend in

Philadelphia. The theme of the drive is "I'm Muslim, I

Vote!"

The drive will begin in the birthplace of American Democracy

during the annual Islamic Circle of North America

(ICNA)-Muslim American Society (MAS) joint convention (see

below for more details). Simultaneously, MAS chapters

around the country, including the Maryland, Illinois,

Massachusetts, and North Caroline chapters, will launch the

drive in their local areas.

"Our goal is to get a head-start on the forthcoming

elections. We want to be ready, with votes in hand for

those who support our issues, or against those who oppose

us," said Raeed N. Tayeh, public affairs director for the

MAS Freedom Foundation. "It is our absolute responsibility

to vote and bring our issues and perspective into the

political realm."

To find a chapter in your area that is participating in the

drive, please visit www.masnet.org/chapters.asp, or send an

email to raeed@masnet.org.

4) ICNA-MAS CONVENTION JULY 4TH WEEKEND IN PHILADELPHIA

ICNA & MAS Annual Convention

Friday - Saturday - Sunday July 4,5,6 2003

Pennsylvania Convention Center

Philadelphia, PA

Convention Theme -- America at a Crossroads: The Struggle

for Liberty and Justice

Confirmed Speakers

Imam Siraj Wahaj w Dr. Mohammed Nur Abdullah

Imam Zaid Shakir w Dr. Ihsan Bagby

Dr. Suheil Ghannouchi w Dr. Ali Mazrui

Dr. Mumtaz Ahmed w Dr. Salah Sultan

Dr. Muzamil Siddiqui w Dr. Talat Sultan

Dr. Ahmed Turkistan w Dr. Zahid Bukhari

Dr. Zulfiqar Ali Shah w Dr. Ibrahim Negem

Dr. Hassanuddin Ahmed w Dr. Muhammed Yunus

Sheikh Shakir El-Sayed w Mr. William Baker

Sheikh Mokhtar Maghroui

For more information or to register, please visit

www.icna.org

_____________________________

Muslim American Society

P.O. Box 1896

Falls Church, VA 22041

Tel: (703) 998-6525

Fax: (703) 998-6526

Email: communications@masnet.org

Web: www.masnet.org

[b:52475af13f]Humbleness [/b:52475af13f]

Shaykh Salman al-`Awdah

Moral Character of the Daa`iya

Translated by Muhammad Buneef

Humbleness is to know the value of oneself, to avoid pride, or disregarding the truth and underestimating people. As the Prophet sallallahu `alaihi wa sallam said, according to Muslim and others, "Al-Kibr is rejecting the truth and looking down upon people" [Muslim, Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud]. Humbleness is for one who is important and significant and he fears to gain notoriety or to become too great among people. As it was said, "Humble yourself, you will be as a glimmering star to the viewer on the surface of the water even if it is lofty." We don't say to an ordinary person, "Humble yourself." But it is said to him, "Know the value of yourself, and do not place it in the wrong place!"

It was narrated by al-Khattabi in al-Uzlah that Imaam `Abdullah bin al-Mubaarak came to Khuraassaan [in Persia] and went to a person who was known for his zuhd and wara' [asceticism and cautiousness in piety], so when he entered where the man was, he (the man) did not turn around nor give him any consideration at all. When 'Abdullah bin al-Mubaarak left, some of the people who were inside with the man said to him, "Don't you know who that was?!" He said, "No," He was told, "This is the 'Amir of the believers...this is... this is... this is... `Abdullah bin al-Mubaarak." So the man was astonished and came out to Ibn al-Mubaarak in a hurry apologizing and absolving himself from what happened, saying, "O Abu 'Abd al-Rahmaan! Forgive me and advise me!" Ibn al-Mubaarak said, "Yes... whenever you come out of your house and see someone, assume that he is better than you!" He knew that the man was conceited. When Ibn al-Mubaarak inquired as to what the man's profession was, he found out that he was a weaver!! [see comments of adh-Dhahabi in aI-Mizaan concerning Waasil bin Ata'a]. Therefore, this educated Imam noticed that this mutazahid (devoted pious person) possessed a kind of arrogance, conceitedness and feeling of superiority over others.

This disease sometimes envelops pious people; this is why he offered advice that was easy for him. Many times we find this characteristic in some of the pious people, as well as some of the duaat. But when it reaches the small students who misbehave with their shaykhs, scholars and teachers this really hurts inside! There is no objection if you differ in opinion or judgement with a scholar or a daai'ya as long as you are qualified to do so The problem occurs when this difference of opinion becomes a destructive element to the scholar's dignity, diminishes his value, disregards and disrespects him. This may be accepted from the common people, or from the people of innovation and misguidance, but it is not allowed in any circumstance for Ahl-As Sunnah and from the students of `Ilm al-Shariyyah. Surely the scholars of Ahl as Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah in particular, are requested to call for that which is good and to forbid the forbidden, as well as to take into consideration the prominent people... if they are disappointed by the closest people to them, then they are not expected to react in the same manner. Therefore one of them is like a brave knight who is only supported by women! That is, if the Ahl as Sunnah protected their scholars' honor, and knew their value, and encircled them, they could have carried the duty of calling for that which is good and forbidding the forbidden in the correct way. But when a scholar is disappointed from among his own circles, he can't say anything. How sad it is that some people of innovation on the contrary reached the point that they even grant their shaykhs and masters some kind of sanctity, blindly follow behind them.

This is in reality a kind of slavery and dissolution of the follower into the followed. This is the practice of the Batiniyya groups through the ages, in such a manner that it conditions its individuals to give a certain degree of al-`isma (protection from error) to their leaders and Imams. Even the Mu`atazila, the ones who practice "rationalism" and almost have no place for emotions... one of their poets said about their Shaykh Waasil bin Ata'a, "He has, behind the sea of China to it's farthest parts, and in every place behind the barbarians, men (duaat) whose leader is not weakened by the irony of a tyrant... nor by the plot of a deceiver ... They are the people of Allah's religion in every place, and the lords of its fatawa and the science of dispute." And the people of the Sunnah are worthier of evaluation and respect of their scholars. There is no good in a nation where the young do not respect the older, and the older do not have mercy on the younger. It is from the humbleness, from knowing the self value that the young beginner should not look at himself as a rival to this or that scholar, and say, "They are men... and we are men"!! As a matter of fact, manhood differs, that is, the description of manhood in the Noble Qur'an was addressed in a form of glorification in many places, "...in it are men who love that they should be purified…" (Surat al-Tawba:108) and, "In houses which Allah has ordered to be raised, and that His name may be remembered therein; they glorify Him in the mornings and the evenings. Men whom neither merchandise nor trade divert from the remembrance of Allah and keeping to prayer and giving zakah. They fear a day in which the hearts and eyes will [fearfully] turn about..." (Surat al-Nur: 36-37). Manhood also refers only to masculinity in other places: "And that men from among people used to seek refuge with men from among jinn..." (Surat al-Jinn:6) Therefore, men are not all the same.

Humbleness is that one should humble himself with his companions. Frequently when the spirit of competition and envy is agitated between companions and rivals, a person may feel superior over his companion, he may be pleased by harming him, degrading his value and importance, accusing him of defects or exaggerating his faults. Faults that may have come to light when seeking advice, or correction. In reality this is what is called jealousy. It is amazing that the daa`iya becomes jealous about the gathering of a thousand or two at a meeting of knowledge or da`wah but he will not have any kind of reaction if he heard that twenty of thirty thousand people attended a concert or a sports event. By Allah, this is sad, for even if you were not pleased with your brother about something, it should be sufficient for you that he is calling to Allah ta`ala and teaching people the Deen and is sincere in general. In fact, he may even be correct in some of the things that you criticized him about.

Humbleness is to humble oneself to one who is below you. If you find someone who is younger than you, or of less importance than you, you should not despise him, because he might have a better heart than you, or be less sinful, or closer to Allah than you. Even if you see a sinful person and you are righteous, do not act in arrogance towards him, and thank Allah that He saved you from the tribulation that He put him through. Remember that there might be some riyaa' or vanity in your righteous deeds that may cause them to be of no avail, and that this sinful person may be regretful and fearful concerning his bad deeds, and this may be the cause of forgiveness of his sins.

According to Jundub, may Allah be pleased with him, the Messenger of Allah a mentioned that a man said, "By Allah, Allah will not forgive so-and-so," and that Allah Ta`ala said, "Who is swearing by Me that I will not forgive so-and-so? I surely have forgiven so-and-so and nullified your deed" [Muslim]. Therefore, do not act in arrogance towards anyone. Even when you see a sinner, do not act superior towards him, nor treat him with arrogance and domination. If you feel that the sinner may perform some acts of obedience which you do not, and that you may also posses some defects which the sinner may not, then deal kindly with him, and gently give da`wah which will hopefully be the cause of his acceptance and remembrance.

Humbleness is that your deed should not become too great in your eyes. If you do a good deed, or attempt to get closer to Allah ta`ala through an act of obedience, your deed still may not be accepted, "Allah only accepts from those who have taqwa." (Surat al-Maida: 27) This is why some of the Salaf said, "If I knew that Allah accepted one tasbeeh from me, I would have wished to die right now!"

Humbleness is that, when you are advised, if Shaytaan calls you to reject the advice, you must negate him. Because the purpose of advice is that your brother points out the defects that you have. As for he who Allah ta`ala has protected, if he finds one who will advise him and show him his defects, he'll overcome his nafs, accept from him, thank and make du`aa for him. This is why He sallallahu `alaihi wa sallam said, "Al-Kibr is rejecting the truth and despising the people" [Muslim, Tirmidhi, and Abu Dawud]. The arrogant never gives credit to anybody or mentions good about someone, and if he needed to do so, he would also mention five defects of that person. But if he hears somebody reminding him about his own defects, he will not be flexible nor comply due to his inferiority complex. This is why it is among man's moral integrity to accept criticism or comment without any sensitivity or discomfort or feelings of shame and weakness. Here he is, The 'Amir of the Believers `Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, raising the flag and lifting the motto,

"May Allah have mercy on a person who informed us of our defects."

http://www.islaam.com/Article.aspx?id=433

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

[b:d89b319c1e]Send this Letter to 13 Friends![/b:d89b319c1e]

[u:d89b319c1e]Shaikh Salman Al-`Awdah[/u:d89b319c1e]

[b:d89b319c1e]One year the people were looking for the new crescent of Ramadhan and did not see it. A man came to the town’s judge and said, “In my dream I saw the Messenger of Allah – may Allah bless him and grant him peace – and he informed me that tonight is the first night of Ramadhan. He ordered me and all the Muslims to begin the fast!”

The judge said, “The one you claim to have seen in your dreams … the people have seen him in broad daylight and he told them, “Fast when you see it [the new crescent] and break the fast when you see it”. So we have no need of your dream!”

A short while ago the following rumor spread among the young women: a certain young woman saw the Prophet – may Allah bless him and grant him peace – in the dream and he told her that the Last Hour will be soon, and that its sign is that you will open an old copy of the Qur’an and you will find a hair or a blank page! This fabricated dream had more effect on the ignorant than the statement of Allah,

“Yet for all you know, the Last Hour may well be near” [Al-Qur’an 33:63]

Sometime later this young woman gave a talk in one college, and she gave out a leaflet with the following story:

“A young woman became seriously ill, and doctors failed in their attempts to treat her illness. One night she cried until she fell asleep. In her sleep she saw Zaynab - Mother of the Believers - who put in her mouth a few drops of Syrup. She ordered her to write the story [that is related above] 13 times, and to tell the other people to duplicate and distribute it. When she woke up she found herself completely cured, and she made 13 copies of the story and distributed it them. The result was as follows:

1. The first copy fell in the hands of a poor man, so he made 13 copies and distributed them. After 13 days he made a huge fortune!

2. The second copy reached a wealthy man who ripped it up, so he lost all his wealth in 13 days!!

3. The third copy was given to a person with a very prestigious job. He ridiculed it, and so was fired after 13 days.

My Muslim brother/sister, you should copy this story and distribute it so that you can get from Allah what pleases you”

This silly fairytale reminded me of the fairytale of “The will of Shaikh Ahmed” which resurfaces every once in a while in a way that makes people believe there is something behind it!

This fairytale also reminded me of what I read in some of our magazines – unfortunately – about the “Curse of the Pharaohs” whereby they claimed that this curse is after everyone who disturbs the Pharaohs or their graves, “One man kicked one of their skulls so his leg broke … the other who discovered one of their cemeteries, his plane fell from the sky … on the same night electricity was cut-off in the whole of Cairo … etc!!”

It is a kind of destructive “mental terrorism”. It is saying, “Don’t think! Don’t discuss! Otherwise the same things will happen to you; and beware, DON’T RIP UP THAT PAPER!! Otherwise you may lose your job, your wealth, … or even your religion”. This is their claim.

But we know that revelation finished and does not come to anyone after Prophet Mohammed, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Yet you find some Muslims inventing new legislations in the religion and warn those who do not conform to what they tell them with punishment, and promise those who conform with success. How can a Muslim believe in this after reading the statement of Allah,

“Today have I perfected your religious law for you, and have bestowed upon you the full-measure of My blessings, and willed that self-surrender unto Me shall be your religion.” [Al-Qur’an 5:3]

We know for a fact that a person can leave the greatest of our religion’s practices – the five obligatory prayers - and still receive his sustenance from Allah, and not be afflicted by any illness. This is because this world’s life is not an abode of account and recompense – the punishment and reward will be in the here-after. Indeed, you will find disbelievers, who neither believe in Allah nor the Last Day, yet Allah has expanded their sustenance and given them more worldly knowledge and material civilization than others … that is because this world’s life is a trial and not an abode of recompense.

How come then, that some people insult our intelligence claiming that he who does not conform will be punished within days, and he who does will be rewarded?

Moreover, what we have been asked to do is neither obligatory nor recommended … nor is it even lawful (in Islam). It is an evil innovation and a crude fairytale. Let us ask ourselves: is copying and distributing this leaflet an ‘act of worship’ or is it a purely worldly act?

If it is an act of worship then it is rejected because the person’s motive was to preserve his worldly possessions, wealth, job and health. Allah says,

“As for those who care for [no more than] the life of this world and its bounties – We shall repay them in full for all that they did in this [life], and they shall not be deprived therein: [yet] it they who, in the life to come, shall have nothing but fire – for in vain shall be all that they wrought in this [world], and worthless all that they ever did” [Al-Qur’an 11: 15-16]

Therefore, this act of duplicating the leaflet is a worthless – indeed false – act, whose recompense is The Fire.

On the other hand, if it is merely a worldly act, then again it is rejected, for it does not rely on the necessary material means. For example, the one who wants to keep his job should not be late coming into work, he must fulfill his duties in the best way, he should receive clients warmly and politely, and he should establish his relationship with his bosses on a correct foundation.

Likewise with wealth, health, etc. , all these have well-known material means and ways of preserving them, and this act of duplicating the leaflet is not in anyway one of them.

Then, why this number 13 in particular?

If I am not mistaken, the English regard this number as a bad omen. Is this fabricated story in anyway connected to this? In the Shari’ah the acts of remembrance are repeated once, three times, seven times, ten times or a hundred times, but never 13 times.

Finally, who narrates this lie?

A sick girl? Who is she? Who says she is truthful? And who narrated it from this girl? It is a long chain of liars and unknown people. Their witness is not to be accepted in a dispute over an onion or less! How then can we accept their narration in a matter like this?

Even had this tale had been narrated by the most trustworthy of narrators, once they start relating these clear-cut lies then their trustworthiness will cease, and we will stop listening to them, and it is obligatory to censure them, and stop them from playing with the minds of the silly – may Allah help us. But then again, the trustworthy narrators would not relate something like this?

[/b:d89b319c1e][/color:d89b319c1e]

Asalaamu alikum,

I am wondering if any of you knows of a hadith that states that the prayer of a women is not valid if she is seen by a man, or praying either in front of the men, or alongside the men?

Jazak Allah Khair,

Jennifer

Assalaamoalaikum

I just wanted to know.

-- Ali