Nur & Bashar Imam Ahl al-Sunnah ‘Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar

7/22/2019 Nur & Bashar Imam Ahl al-Sunnah Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar

1/69

NUR & BASHAR

Extracted from various books of:Imam Ahl al-Sunnah Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar(May Allah have mercy on him)

Compiled by:Fayyaz Ahmad Khan Sawati

Translated from Urdu into English by:Muhammadullah Khalili Qasmi, Deoband


2/69


3/69

PREFACEPraise belongs to Allah and the end is in favour of the God-fearing. May blessing andpeace be upon the Final Prophet Muhammad, upon all his Family, Companions

(Sahabah) wives and followers!

Allah Most High, with His perfect power, created uncountable creatures includingthe jinn, angels and human being. But, the honour and status He gave to humanbeing did not grant to any of His creatures. He created the jinn with fire, made theangels of light and created man from clay. Allah, the Lord of the universe, states inthe Quran:

When your Lord said to the angels, I am going to create man from clay.(38:71)

'Man' here refers to Sayyiduna Adam (may peace be upon him). At another place,Allah Most High says:

Recall when your Lord said to the angels, I am going to create a human beingfrom a ringing clay made of decayed mud. (15:28)

These two verses clearly mention that Allah Most High created man i.e. SayyidunaAdam (may peace be upon him) from clay, but he regarded man superior to the jinnand the angels as numerous Quranic verses and hadiths prove the same. Avoidingto venture in detail here, we want to quote one or two verses and hadiths to

establish the earthen creature, i.e. human being is superior to the creature made oflight and fire, i.e. angels and jinn. So, Allah Most High states:

We have created man in the best composition. (95:4)

This verse establishes that every human being from Adam (may peace be upon him)to the last man until Qiyamah (Doomsday) share this favour provided they areMuslims, otherwise the Quran itself says:

They are like cattle, rather they are much more astray. (7:179)

Allah Most High says at another place:

And We bestowed dignity on the children of Adam. (17:70)

This verse also refers to the superiority of mankind. The hadiths also clearlymentioned that mankind is superior to all creature, as this hadith of Tirmidhi says:"Abu Wada'ah reports that Al-'Abbas came to the Messenger of Allah (Allah blesshim and give him peace) as if he heard any news, so the Prophet (Allah bless himand give him peace) stood at minbar(pulpit) and said: who am I? The Companionsreplied: you are the Messenger of Allah, blessing of Allah be upon you. Then he said:I am Muhammad bin 'Abdullah bin Abd al-Muttalib, Allah created the creatures and

placed me in the best of the creatures, then He divided them into two parts and putme in the best of them. Then, He divided them in clans and made me in the best of

3


4/69

the clans, and then He divided them in houses and made me in the best of housesand made me the best person. (Tirmidhi, 2:201, Amin Company, Delhi)

This makes it amply clear that mankind is superior to all creatures. Till this point,we discussed which creature out of the jinn, angels and human being is superior,

and we have proved from the Quran and Hadith that human being made of clay isbetter than the jinn and angels made of fire and light respectively. Now, we wouldlike to state that the prophets (may peace be upon them) are the best of all humanbeings. No jinn or angel was even sent down as prophet, as Allah Most High states:

Say, had there been angels (living) on the earth, walking about in peace, Wewould have certainly sent down an angel from the heavens as a messenger.(17:95)

The verse suggests that the angels were not sent as messengers and prophets,rather human beings were sent as prophets and messengers in order to get the

mankind on guidance and right path. All the prophets and messengers fromSayyiduna Adam (may peace be upon him) to Sayyiduna Muhammad (Allah blesshim and give him peace), appeared in human form, especially our Prophet as wehave already quoted the hadith ofTirmidhi. According to the teachings of theQuran, Hadith, Companions, pious Salaf, mufassirin, muhaddithin and the fourImams, we Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jamaahbelieve that all the prophets were humanbeing and Sayyiduna Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) is also ahuman being. At the same time, we believe that he is peerless bashar(human being),we neither deny his being human nor his being nur(light). We believe in him ashuman being as well as nur, but by nurwe mean the nurof guidance. This is ourbelief, as my respected uncle and teacher, Imam ofAhl al-Sunnah, Muhaddith Azam ofPakistan, Researcher of his time, Imam ofasma al-rijal, Shaykh al-Quran and Hadith,Mawlana 'Allamah MuhammadSarfarazSafdarKhanwrites in his book entitledTanqid Matin pages 84 and 85:

It is our belief and research that the leader of all messengers and Seal of theprophets, Sayyiduna Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) is basharaswell as nur; as per his genus and person he is bashar, but as per his attribute andguidance he is nur. Due to him, the dark world experienced light, the darkness ofkufrandshirk was dispersed and the surface of earth was lit with the rays of imanand tawhid. Those who were wandering in the darkness of carnal desires and lusts

and were falling in the deep pits of disputes and contentions, started marchingahead on the bright highway of peace and guidance. None of the Muslims can denythis reality. But, if he is considered nurin a sense that Allah forbid he is deniedabsolutely to be basharand human being, then we will oppose it tooth and nail as itis against the nusus (sources of Islam).

This is our belief and standpoint, and in this book we have discussed this matter inthe light of ours beliefs. On the contrary, the Barelvis hold other belief which waspublished on the first page of their monthly magazine HanafiLahore, (issue of April1964) with the title of Brief Aqaid of Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jamaah; some of which areas follows:

4


5/69

(4) Allah Most High, first of all, created the nurof the Prophet, Allah bless him andgive him peace, out of His personal (dhaati) Nurand then He created the wholeworld from that nur.

(7) The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in human form is the

inimitable (sui generis)nurof Allah Most High.Another Barelvi scholar, Khwaja Muhammad Yar (d. 1367 AH) writes [in poems]:

(a) One who is called Khuda (Allah) seems Mustafa, and one who is called slavelooks like Khuda. (Diwan Muhammadi, 71)

(b) Muhammad Mustafa will rise on the Day of Judgment as Taha lifting the coverofmim bright and open.He whose reality was difficult to be perceived, will rise vividly, one who iscalled salve will rise as qul huw Allah.Who used to chant the slogan ofinniAbduh (I am His slave) every time, will

rise on the Throne of Allah as inni ana Allah (I am Allah). (Diwan Muhammadi,103)

(c) O Muhammad (meaning the poet Muhammad Yar)! There is no differencebetween Ahmad and Ahad (One, meaning Allah); since the lovers havevarious types ofiman. (Diwan Muhammadi, 104)

(d) If Muhammad (meaning the poet Muhammad Yar) believed in Muhammad(Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace) as Khuda, then you shouldknow that he is Muslim not a traitor. (Diwan Muhammadi, 105)

(e) The feature of Muhammad is just like that ofKhuda, none can remove yourpicture from my heart. (Diwan Muhammadi, 122)

You saw what is the belief of the Barelwis about nurand bashar. We, in the secondchapter of the book, have mentioned their evidences also, so that the reality of theirmaslak is clearly known and the difference between the claim and evidences is seen.As far as the Barelvi and Deobandi contention is concerned, there is no room tomention it in this preface, but we would like to explain it briefly in principle. Aquestion that rises in the minds of common people, and many of them had posed usthe question that both the Barelvi and Deobandi groups call themselves asAhl al-Sunnah wa l-Jamaah, but they have so much differences that condemn each other askafiras well. Which one of the two is right, and what are the differences betweenthem?

We answer it in a way that in principle the Barelwis and Deobandis disagree at twopoints; first is the issue ofshirk and second is the issue ofbidah. The scholars ofDeoband regard believing in ilm al-ghayb, hadhir and nadhir, mukhtar al-kull, nur andbashar, seeking help from other than Allah, nadhr and niyaz, etc. for anyone elseother than Allah asshirk in the light of the Quran, Sunnah, the teachings of theCompanions, the salaf and the four Imams. While on the contrary, the Barelwisregard these as lawful. Likewise the same case is with bidah, e.g. durud and salambefore Azan, supplication after funeral prayer, cementing graves, covering graveswith cloth, kissing thumb in azan, calling azan on graves, celebrating mawlid al-Nabi (Allah bless him and give him peace), hila isqat, tija, satwan, daswan, biswan,

chaliswan and other such rituals and superstitions, which the scholars of Deobandconsider innovations, but the Barelwis not only consider them as lawful rather

5


6/69


7/69

With the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Very-Merciful

First ChapterIn the terminology ofShari'ah, nabi or rasul is a human being who was given Shariah(law) by Allah through revelation, and he was called rasul when he was ordained topreach the Shari'ah to others; since the mankind was entrusted the vicegerency ofthe earth; therefore it was wise to send human being for the rectification andguidance of human beings, as Allah Most High says:

Evidences from the QuranVerse 1:

Nothing prevented people from believing, when guidance came to them,except that they said, Has Allah sent a man as a messenger? (17:94)

It indicates that this perception of the polytheists and infidels that a man cannot beselected for prophethood stopped them from brining faith; therefore they explicitlyquestioned: Has Allah sent a man as a messenger?

These fools denied accepting man as prophet, but did not hesitate to regard thestones as worthy of being worshipped. As Ali bin Sultan known as Mulla Ali al-Qarial-Hanafi (d. 1041 AH) writes:

They denied that Allah can give prophethood to any man, but admitted that stonesare their Gods." (Sharh al-Shifa, 3:542, pub. Egypt)

Allah Most High replied this argument with the following verse:

Say, Had there been angels (living) on the earth, walking about in peace, Wewould have certainly sent down an angel from the heavens as a messenger.(17:95)

i.e. since the earth is populated by human beings, so Allah Most High sent human

beings as messenger for the guidance and good of the fellow humans, this was fullyin their interest. Had the angels been the inhabitants of the earth, Allah would havesent down angels for their reform.

Verse 2:He (Allah) said, O Iblis, what is the matter with you that you did not jointhose who prostrated? He said, I am not such that I should prostrate myselfbefore a mortal whom You have created from ringing clay made of decayedmud. He said, then, get out of here, for you are an outcast, and upon you isthe curse up to the Day of Judgment. (15:32-35)

7


8/69

When Allah Most High created Adam (may peace be upon him), he told the angelsthat he was planning to create man from ringing clay made of decayed mud. Havingcreated him and blown soul in him, He asked them to prostrate before him. Theangels complied to the commandment of Allah in unhesitant manner, but the Satan,the accursed, refused to obey the order. It proves that disdaining a human being is

the concept of the accursed Satan who will be accursed by Allah till Qiyamah and hewill remain rejected and discarded. While, giving high esteem to man is an angelicattitude. Accordingly, one who is pursuing an aspect of denying the virtues andmerits of bashar, he is following the way of the Satan and he himself should thinkwhat his abode is.

Verse 3:Say, Surely, I am but a human being like you. (18:110)

Allah Most High asked the Messenger to proclaim that he was but a human being

like them and he also possessed the human characteristics as they possessed. Butdifference between me and you is that Allah favoured me with wahy (revelation),this elevated my name and position greatly.

Verse 4:Say, I proclaim the Purity of my Lord. I am nothing but human, a messenger.(17:93)

The polytheists of Makkah, out of jealousy and bias, questioned the Prophet (Allahbless him and give him peace) to bring some signs which were against the will andwisdom of Allah. In reply to this claim, He said: Say, I proclaim the Purity of myLord. I am nothing but human, a messenger.

So far, four verses from the Quran were presented which are sufficient enough tounderstand the matter. In next lines, we are going to present Hadiths. (Fayyaz)

Evidences from HadithHadith 1:

The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) stated before the Companionsdescribing his position: I am nothing but a human being like you. (Bukhari, 1:85,Muslim, 1:213)

Hadith 2:He said: O Allah! I, Muhammad, am but a human being who also gets angry.(Musnad Ahmad, 2:493)

Hadith 3:He addressed the Companions at an occasion of eclipse saying: O people! I am but ahuman being and a messenger. (Mawarid al-Zaman, 185)

8


9/69

Hadith 4:After his farewell pilgrimage, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)delivered a sermon at an special occasion and said: Beware O people! I am nothing

but a human being. I am about to be visited by the emissary of my Lord the MostHigh, and I am to respond his call. (Musnad Ahmad, 4:276, Al-Darimi 424, Muslim,2:279, Sunan al-Kubra, 10:114)

Evidences from the Statements of the CompanionsSo far, we have quoted four hadiths narrated from the Prophet (Allah bless him andgive him peace), thereafter we are going to quote statements of the Companions.(Fayyaz)

Statements 1:Tarjuman al-Quran Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) delivereda sermon after the demise of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) inwhich he stated: The Messenger of Allah has certainly died and he was a humanbeing. (Al-Darimi, p. 23)

Statements 2:Sayyidah Aishah Siddiqah (may Allah be pleased with her) says that the Messengerof Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) was a human being. ( Shamail al-

Tirmidhi, p.24,Al-Adab al-Mufrad, p.79 by Imam al-Bukhari)

Statements 3:Sayyidah Aishah Siddiqah (may Allah be pleased with her) said that the Messengerof Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) was not more but a human being fromhumans. (Mawarid al-Zaman, p.525)

Statements 4:Another great Companion Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Umar also called him a human

being. (Talkhis al-Mustadrak, 1:108)

Statements 5:Several Companions of him (Allah bless him and give him peace) belonging toQuraysh tribe, at an occasion, called him human being. (Mustadrak Hakim, 1:106)

We have so far quoted fives statements of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah(Allah bless him and give him peace), while in the next lines we shall present thestatements of the ulmaa, fuqaha, mufassirin, muhaddithin and sufiya. (Fayyaz)

Statements of the Ulama, Mufassirin and Muhaddithin

9


10/69

All the Muslim ulama and fuqaha (jurists) of Islamic Shari'ah have unanimouslystated that all the prophets (may peace be upon them) were human beings. Theyexpress and declare it openly in clear-cut words in their books; out of which wepresent some.

Statements 1-3:Qadi Abul Fadhl Iyaz bin Musa al-Maliki (d. 544H) writes:

We have already mentioned that the Messenger (Allah bless him and give himpeace) and other prophets and messengers (may peace be upon them) were fromamongst the human beings and that his body and his physical structure was purehuman and it was liable to face what human body may face like troubles, changing,pains, maladies and tasting death, but this was not to affect his status adversely.(Al-Shifa, 2:157, published in Egypt)

The text, as per its meaning, is absolutely clear and unambiguous. Other scholarslike (2) Ghulam Muhyi al-Din al-Birkili al-Hanafi (d. 981H) and (3) Shaykh Abd al-Haq Muhaddith Dahlawi al-Hanafi (d. 1052H) also made similar statements as theysaid that the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) and other prophets(may peace be upon them) were human beings. For details see: Tariqah al-Muhammadiyyah, p 11, published in Egypt & Takmil al-Iman, published in Lucknow,p.37.

Statement 4:Imam Muhammad bin Muhammad al-Kardari al-Hanafi (d. 827H) writes: "Since theProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace) is a human being and every humanbeing can be liable to defect except one whom Allah protects." (Fatawa Bazzaziyyah,6:311, published as notes on Fatawa Hindiyyah, Egypt)

This text also suggests clearly that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)is a human being, but it is a different matter that Allah Most High has granted theprophets (may peace be upon them) the lofty status of infallibility ('ismat) and theyare infallible (masum).

Statement 5:'Allamah Jalal al-Din al-Dawwani al-Shafi'i (d. 928H) writes: "Nabi is an insan (humanbeing) sent by Allah to the people so that he preaches what He reveals to him."(Sharh Aqaid Jalali, p.2)

Bashar, adami and insan are synonyms conveying same meaning. It was explained inthe text that a prophet is always a human being.

Statement 6:Hafiz Ibn al-Humam, the great Hanafi researcher, writes: "Nabi is a human being

sent by Allah to the people to preach what He reveals to him, while rasul also has

10


11/69

similar meaning, so (according to this meaning) there is no difference between thetwo." (Al-MusayarahwithAl-Musamarah, 2:83, Egypt)

Statement 7-9:Similar words have been mentioned in the books of 'aqaid and munazarah (beliefsand debate), e.g. by 'Allamah al-Taftazani (d. 792H) in Sharh Aqaid on pages 14 and98, and Mulla Sadiq Ali on -Adhudiyyah page 12, and in Rashidiyyah page 5.

Statement 10:Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti al-Shafi'i (d. 911H) says: The well-known definition ofrasul is that it is human being who is given Shari'ah by Allah and is ordered to preachit, if he is not ordered then he is a prophet only." (Tadrib al-Rawi, p 19, Egypt)

Meaning if he is asked to preach his new Shari'ah and new rulings, he is a rasul, and if

he is not asked to preach new Shariah, rather to preach only previous one, then heis a nabi.

Statement 11:Amir Yamani Muhammad bin Ismail (d. 1182H) writes: "According to the Islamicterms, nabi is a human being who is given Shariah (law) by Allah through wahy(revelation), when he is asked to preach it to others he is called rasul." (Subul al-Salam, 1:9 Egypt)

Statement 12:'Allamah Muhammad ibn Abidin al-Shami al-Hanafi (d. 1252H) says that basharareof three types: [1] higher rank (khawwas) as the prophets (may peace be upon them)[2] middle rank like the Companions, etc, [3] and masses and common people. (Al-Shami, 1:492, Egypt)

Statement 13:Imam Muhammad bin Umar al-Razi al-Shafi'i (d. 606H) writes: "Muhammad (Allahbless him and give him peace) was a bashar." (Tafsir Kabir, 5:35, Egypt)

Statement 14:Shaykh al-Akbar Muhyyi al-Din ibn al-Arabi (d. 638H) writes: "The Messenger ofAllah (Allah bless him and give him peace), in spite of being on the high post ofrisalah (messengership) and khilafah (vicegerency) always said that he is a humanbeing (bashar) like others, so his high status did not prevent him to recognize hisreality." (Futuhat Makkiyah, 2:23, Egypt)

I.e. though Allah bestowed him the lofty status of risalah (messengership) andkhilafah (vicegerency), but he did not hesitate to admit himself as human being in

open and clear words, and he did not deny it.

11


12/69

Statement 15:Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 672H) has mentioned a story in his Mathnawi, thesummary of which is as follows. There was a child playing on a rooftop while hisparents were busy in some other work (or they were having sunbath). The roof had

an open gutter which drained the roof water to the street drain. Suddenly, the childfell in the gutter. As the gutter was a little ahead peeping towards the street, theparents feared lest the weak gutter should fail to carry his weight and fall killinghim. When the parents approached him in order to rescue him, the child moveddeeper inside the gutter out of indulgence. This increased the risk of falling downmore and more. He moved back with every call of return by his parents. Finally theylost hope and thought that this little idiot boy is not listening, if the gutter getsturned, he will be killed. A wise man saw him and advised to bring another child ofhis age and make him sit on the roof. When he will see the little boy, he will feelattraction to him and shall come out of the gutter. The advice was followed and assoon as another boy was taken to the roof, he got out of the gutter. Thus, his life was

saved and the trouble was warded off. Describing the event in his special style,Mawlana Rumi states: The prophets also were from amongst the human being, sothat their fellow beings tend to him for being like them.

Statement 16:Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi Mujaddid Alf al-Thani (d. 1034H) states: "O brother,Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), in spite of his lofty status, was abashar characterized with mortality and transience. (Letter 73, First Vol., p.177,Amritsar)

I.e. neither he was qadim and wajib (immortal and infinite) nor eternal andperpetual, rather he was a mortal human being. He says at another place: "Do notyou see that the prophets (may peace be upon them) are equal to other people inbeing basharand all are equivalent as per their reality and person. Yes, they werehigh in status as per their perfect attributes. (First Vol, part 4, p.128)

At another place, he writes: "However, there is a status of prophethood whichcannot be accessed by an angel. The status was obtained due to the element of soil,so this is characteristic to human being." (Maktubat, First Vol. Part 4, p.123)

Statement 17:'Allamah Busiri, the renowned Sufi, says: Our utmost knowledge about him saysthat he is a bashar (human being). He is the most distinguished and the best,out of all of Creation.Statement 18:The renowned Egyptian scholar Shaykh Muhammad Abduh (d. 1323H) writes: "Theprophets were the best among all the human beings." (Tafsir al-Manar, 7:608, Egypt)

Statement 19:

12


13/69

'Allamah Muhammad bin Abdul Baqi bin Yusuf al-Zurqani al-Maliki (d. 1122H)explained to an extent that one of the blessed names of the Messenger is bashar.(Sharh Mawahib, 3:124, Egypt)

Statement 20:Muhaddith Kabir, Imam Abu Hatim Muhammad bin Idris al-Imam al-Hafiz al-Kabir(d. 273H) states: "We do not see any merit greater of Abu Bakr and Umar than thisthat they were created out of the same clay from which the Messenger of Allah(Allah bless him and give him peace) was created." ( Mukhtasar Tazkira al-Qurtubi byAbd al-Wahhab Sha'rani, p.26, Egypt)

It is mentioned in hadiths that a man is returned to the soil from which he was bornand it is narrated with tawaturthat these three noblemen are buried side by side inthe holy Rawdha.

These short and solid references are sufficient enough for a just man, but a pile ofevidences and arguments is inadequate for a stubborn and obstinate.

Statements of the Fiqh ScholarsIt is to be noted that the scholars of Fiqh are those cautious group of people whoregard the least desecration of the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace)as kufrand hold its guilty to be deserving of being killed, but after all they regard allthe prophets (may peace be upon him), specially Sayyiduna Muhammad (Allah blesshim and give him peace) as human being and basharin unambiguous terms.

Statement 1:Imam Tahir bin Ahmad al-Hanafi (d. 542H) writes: "It is mentioned in Al-Muhitthatone who blasphemes the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) or desecrateshim or criticizes him in any matter ofShari'ah or his person or any of his attributes,it is permanently kufrwhether blasphemer is from among his Ummah, whether heis from the Ahl al-Kitab (People of the Book) or dhimmi (non-Muslim in an Islamicstate) or harabi (kafir citizen of non-Muslim state), whether the blaspheme,desecration and criticism is made intentionally or unintentionally, seriously orjokingly. If he repents, his repentance will not be accepted ever, neither before

Allah nor before people, he as per the pristine Shari'ah and according to theunanimous opinion of the later mujtahids and the earlier scholars, he should bekilled. The ruler and his deputy should not allow any carelessness and compromisein this regard. (Khulash al-Fatawa, 4:276)

See carefully this opinion of the fuqaha and then see how they regard the Prophet(Allah bless him and give him peace) a human being and bashar. Had this wordinvolved any slightest doubt of blaspheme and desecration, they would have notcalled him bashar, and at minimum they must have issued fatwas about those whocall him bashar.

Statement 2:

13


14/69

The fuqaha and the ulama have clarified that believing in the Prophet (Allah blesshim and give him peace) as a human being is a necessary part of the religion. Ifanyone, let alone denying him as a bashar, express his ignorance about the matter,he will turn kafir that he did not learn a fundamental belief, as the reliable andauthentic books of the Hanafi Fiqh state: "One who says that he does not know

whether the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was a human being or ajinn, he will turn kafir. (Fusul Imadiyyah, 1350, India; Fatawa Alamgiri, 2:291, Egypt)

This is because acceptance of his bashariyyatis a fundamental belief and the personis unaware of it.

Statement 3:'Allamah al-Zurqani al-Maliki writes in Sharh Mawahib: "If you ask whether havingknowledge of his being a basharand an Arab is a precondition for belief (iman) to bevalid or it isfardh kifayah (obligation if performed by some will be considered for all)

on parents, for example, if one teaches it to his mature son, his other partner willnot be questioned about.

Shaykh Wali al-Din Ahmad bin Abd al-Rahim al-Iraqi al-Hafiz ibn al-Hafiz repliedthat it is precondition for iman to be valid. So, if a person says: I believes inMuhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) as Messenger to all creation, but Ido not know whether he is from amongst the basharor angels or jinn, or he says: Ido not know whether he is an Arab or 'Ajam (non-Arab), he will undoubtedly be kafiras he rejects the Quran where Allah says: He is the One who raised amidst theunlettered people a messenger from among themselves. (62:2) and nor do I say toyou that I am an angel 96:50). Such a person also belies what was received by theMuslims generation to generation and it is known fully to all the classes and masses.According to me, there is no difference of opinion in this matter. (Sharh Mawahib,2:68, Egypt)

Statement 4:Allamah Sayyid Mahmud al-Alusi al-HanaFi (d. 1270H) writes: Shaykh Wali al-Dinal-Iraqi was asked whether having knowledge of the Prophet (Allah bless him andgive him peace) being basharand an Arab is a condition for iman to be valid or is itfardh kifayah? So, he replied that it is necessary for iman to be valid. He further said:

if a person says: I believe in Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) asMessenger to all the creation, but I do not know whether he is from amongst thebasharor angels or jinn, or he says: I do not know whether he is an Arab orAjam,then there will no de dount in his kufras he rejects the Quran and denies what wasreceived by the Muslims generation after generation and was essentially known toall the classes and masses. According to me, there is no difference of opinion in thismatter. If someone is ignorant and unaware of it, he should be informed of it, and ifhe denies it afterwards, we will declare him as kafir. (Tafsir Ruh al-Ma'ani, 4:101,Egypt)

Statement 5-6:

14


15/69

Allamah Sufi Umar bin Ahmad Kharputis (d. 1299) similar statement ccan be foundin Sharh Qasidah al-Burdah, p.98, Istanbul. And there is a brief mention of it in Al-Bahr al-Raiq, 5:121.

Ponder, how clearly these senior scholars of Islam regard that unknowing the

Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) as basharand Arab is kufras it is afundamental belief.

Proof of His Humanity from another AngleThe bashar(man) is created from clay, as it was already mentioned with thereference of the Quran and all the prophets (may peace be upon them) fromSayyiduna Adam (may peace be upon him) to Sayyiduna Muhammad, the seal ofprophets (Allah bless him and give him peace) were created from clay. There is noroom to doubt in the matter. The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) wasmaterially made of mud.

Statement 1:Mulla Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi writes: Ibn al-Jawzi narrates in his book Al-Wafa fromKa'ab al-Ahbar: When Allah Most High intended to create Sayyiduna Muhammad(Allah bless him and give him peace), He ordered Jibril (may peace be upon him) tobring white clay, so he descended in a group of the angels ofFirdaws (highest rank inparadise) and took a handful shining white clay from the place of his grave, so it waskneaded with the water ofTasnim. (Sharh al-Shifa, 2:201, Egypt)

Then after his death, he was buried in the same place which, according to our beliefand the belief of majority of Muslims, is even greater in virtue than the DivineThrone. Sayyiduna Abu Bakr and Sayyiduna Umar (may Allah be pleased withthem) had also this everlasting honour of being buried beside him.

Statement 2:The Bayhaqi of his time, Qadi Sanaullah Panipati al-Hanafi (d. 1225 H), may Allahhave mercy on him, writes:

Ruling:It is possible that some awliya are created out of the remnant clay of someProphets (may peace be upon them) or they are created out of the remnant clay ofthe Holy Messenger, (Allah bless him and give him peace). (Irshad al-Talibin, p 39)

Statement 3:(The confession of Mawlvi Ahmad Rida Khan, the supreme head of the Barelwi sect)

Mawlvi Ahmad Rida Khan also admits that the blessed body of the Prophet (Allahbless him and give him peace) was made of clay and he was a bashar. So, at one placehe narrates a hadith of Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Mas'ud from the bookAl-Muttfaq waal-Muftaraq by 'Allamah Khatib al-Baghdadi in which the Prophet (Allah bless him

and give him peace) states that he and Abu Bakr and Umar were made of same clayand we shall be buried in the same. (Al-Sunniyah al-Aniqah, p 85) This hadith was also

15


16/69

mentioned by Qadi Sanaullah Panipati (may Allah have mercy on him) as well. (SeeIrshad al-Talibin, p.40) Khan Sahib added a margin thereon that Sayyiduna Siddiq andSayyiduna Faruq were made of the pristine clay from which the Prophet (Allah blesshim and give him peace) was made of.

Establishing His Humanity from the Statements of the BarelwiScholarsStatement 1:Khan Sahib Barelwi writes about the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)that he was bashar, but he had hundred thousand times greater and higher humanbody than the celestial world and thousand time more ethereal than the souls andangels. He himself says: I am not like you, in another narration he says: I do nothave like your nature. Also, he said: Who among you is like me. Finally you have

read the statement of Allamah Khifaji

1

that his being basharis in no contradictionwith his being bright nur. (Nafy al-Fay, p.10)

Statement 2:Likewise, he writes at another place that as the Ahl al-Sunnah have agreed thatnone from amongst the mankind is masum (infallible) except the prophets (maypeace be upon them), one who considers anyone else as masum he is out of the foldof Ahl al-Sunna. (Dawam al-'Aish fi ann al-Aimma min Quraish, Vol. 1, p 27, Breilly1339)

Statement 3:The renowned Barelwi scholar Hakim Mawlvi Abul Hasanat Sayyid MuhammadAhamd, former khatib of Jami Masjid, Wazir Khan of Lahore, writes:

Question: Who is nabi and why he is sent down to the world?Answer: Nabi is a human being who is sent by Allah to guide people and who receivesthe divine commandment through revelation.Question: Whether all the prophets were basharor something else?Answer: All the prophets were bashar. (Hanafi Silsilah Diniyat, 1st vol., p.15-16published by Department of Publication in Markazi Anjuman Hizb al-Ahnaf, Lahore)

The text explicitly suggests that all the prophets (may peace be upon them) werebasharnot anything else.

Statement 4:Let us have some texts of Mawlvi Naim al-Din Muradabadi:

(1) Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) is Qurayshi whose lineage youknow well that he is most highborn among you and you are well aware of histruthfulness and trustworthiness, austerity and piety, chastity and purity and high

1Nasim al-Riyadh, 2:282

16


17/69

morals. (Hashiyah Quran, p.300, 307) Had he been nur, there would have been noquestion of being Arab and Qurayshi and lineage.

(2) The infidels first wondered and denied that rasul is a basharand when theyobserved his miracles and thought that they are beyond human power, they

regarded him as magician. This claim of theirs is false and baseless, but it alsoinvolves his perfection and their admission of helplessness. (Hashiyah Quran, p.300,note 3)

(3) The most excellent of the human beings, i.e. the prophets are better than thebest of angels and the pious human beings are better than the common angels. It ismentioned in hadith that a Muslim is more esteemed to Allah than the angels. Thereason is that the angels are born obedient, it is their instinct. They have reason butnot lust; the animals have carnal desires but not reason, while man has both reasonand lust. So, one who empowers his reason is better than the angels and one whoempowers his lust is worse than animals. (Hashiyah Quran, p.419, note 158)

Allah Most High has mentioned this in the Quran. When the prophets (may peacebe upon them) approached their communities for preaching and making them hearthe truth, the infidels responded: "You are no more than a human being like us. Youwant to prevent us from what our forefathers used to worship. So, bring us someclear authority. Their prophets said to them, we are no more than a human beinglike you, but Allah bestows His favour upon whom He wills from among Hisservants." (14:12)

It was translated so by Khan Sahib Barelvi, but Mawlvi Na'imuddin writes in itsnotes:

(4) Note 30: Know that we are really human being. He bestows his favour ofprophethood and messengership and honours with such a high position. (p.371)

See the complication in his mind, he is caught in lurch, neither he can swallow norcan eject.

(5) (Extracted from a long paragraph) So, no ummati (Muslim) is allowed to claim tobe equal to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace). It should be noticedthat his humanity is higher than ours and our humanity is in no way comparable to

it. (p 690, note 12)

Whatever was said is alright. But it admits that the Prophet (Allah bless him andgive him peace) was human being. He writes in the beginning of the note where heexplains the verse "I am none but a human being like you" (18:110): Seemingly, I amseen, heard and there is no gender dissimilarity between us and you, so how is itpossible that my words are not heard and accepted by you and there is somehindrance between you and mine. If, instead of me, there was some alien or angels,you could say that they are not seen, heard and understood by you, and the genderdissimilarity is a big hindrance, but the case is not so here. (p 690)

First, he accepted the prophets (may peace be upon them) as real bashar in aroundabout way, but here he wants to hide his mis-belief with the pretext of

17


18/69

'seemingly', but at the same time there is no way out but to admit that they werebashar. They are caught in dilemma, unable to move backward or forward.

(6) Mawlvi Na'imuddin has written a short treatise on beliefs entitled: Kitab al-Aqaid(first part). First it was published in his lifetime in India and now it is published in

Lahore by two publishers; (1) Nuri Kutub Khana, Bazar Data Sahib, Lahore (2)Weekly Sawad-e-Azam, Lahore. The page 4 of the treatise has a title: Nubuwwat(prophethood), it reads what follows: "The pure servants of Allah who were sent byHim to guide His creature and convey His message are called nabi. The prophets arebashar who receive the wahy (revelation) from Allah Most High." Now, thescrappers of the Nuri Kutub Khana have replaced the word bashar with nur, andwith this treachery they think that they have safeguarded their belief. (la Hawl wa laqauwwata illa billah)

(7) It is mentioned on the page 7 of the book:

Question: Whether the jinn and angels are also made nabi?Answer: No, prophets are only human beings and particularly men, no woman wasever made nabi.

These clear-cut texts suggest that all the prophets (may peace be upon them) werebasharand human being, especially Sayyiduna Muhammad (Allah bless him and givehim peace).

Statement 5Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Badayuni (and later Gujrati) writes: "Prophets are humanbeings; they are bashar not jinn or angel. (Ja'a al-Haq, p.164)

We want to conclude this chapter with the fatwa of Pir Mehr Ali Shah Golri. (Fayyaz)

Someone asked Pir Mehr Ali Shah Golri that the mufassirin have written that theProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was affected by magic and the last twochapters of the Quran were revealed as cure of the magic. What is the meaning ofmagic affecting him? It is apparently against the prestige of prophethood.

Pir Sahib replied as follow: As far as the matter of magic is concerned, it is a realityand according to all the mufassirin, the revelation of the two chapters of the Quranis linked with this incident as many traditions indicate to it. But this incident entailsno objection; since as other human characteristics like eating, drinking, sleepingand falling ill occurred with him being bashar, likewise being affected by witchcraftwas also a human characteristic which had no relation with his prophethood.(Fatawa Mahariyyah, 1:101, published Civil and Military Press, Sadar, Rawalpindi)

Further he says: And if it is not seen connected with prophethood, then it is not aimprobable that a nabi also feels hurt and pained, rather it is a human characteristic.As a nabi is not exempted from other human characteristics, similarly he is not free

from the worldly troubles and pains. (p.102)

18


19/69

Second ChapterIn this chapter, we shall present the responses of the arguments put by the rivalsect in the light of the Quran, Hadith and the statements ofmufassirin, muhaddithin,

fuqaha and sufiya. (Fayyaz)

Argument 1: The first argument to prove that the Messenger (Allah bless him andgive him peace) is nuris from the Quran where Allah says: "There has come to you,from Allah, a Light (nur) and clear book. With it Allah guides those who follow Hispleasure to the pathways of peace." (5:15)

They say that the word nur(light) indicates to the Holy Prophet (Allah bless him andgive him peace), and since it was mentioned with kitab using 'atf(conjunction), itmeans that both the clauses are opposite to each other. Thus, nuris something andkitab is something else.

Answer: Here the word 'nur' means the Quran and the atf(conjunction) is for moreelaboration in which the two clauses are not per se opposite to each other, ratherthey are different only as per the attribute. So it means that the Quran is light andit described the matter very clearly. The reason is that the Prophet (Allah bless himand give him peace) was permanently mentioned just in the beginning of the verse:"O people of the Book, there has come to you Our Messenger disclosing to you muchof what you have been concealing of the Book, while He overlooks much." (5:15) Thelater part of the verse mentions the kitab which is bright as well as clear. The otherpoint is that in the next verse i.e. 5:16, the pronoun is singular, had the word nur

and kitab meant two different things, then it would have been proper to bring dualpronoun indicating to both the things, but since the nurand kitab referred to thesame thing, therefore singular pronoun was befitting. As if the context and the firstand the last parts of the verse confirm that the word nurhere means the Quran.Apart from this, the Quran at many places was described as nure.g. it says:

O people, a proof has come to you from your Lord, and We have sent down to you avivid light." [4:174]

At another place, Allah says:

So, those who believe in him and support him, and help him and follow the lightsent down with him, those are the ones who are successful." [7:157]

And, Allah says at another place:

"In similar way, We have revealed to you a Spirit from Our command. You did notknow earlier what was the Book or what was Iman (true faith), but We have made it(the Quran) a light with which We guide whomsoever We will from among Ourservants. And indeed you are guiding (people) to a straight path." [42:52]

Likewise, He says:

"So, believe in Allah and His Messenger, and in the light We have sent down." [64:8]

19


20/69

At all these places, the Quran was depicted as nurand this is the reason that themajority of the mufassirin have meant the Quran by nurin the verse 5:15, but someexplicated the nurwith the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), but thesemufassirin have categorically explained his bashariyyat(humanity) at other places. So

how can it mean except that he was nuralong with being bashar.

First Objection: Whatever we have written about the verse 5:15 (There has come toyou, from Allah, a Light and clear book), it is very much clear, but the Barelwischolar Mawlvi Ghulam Rasul Sa'idi, the author ofTawdhih al-Bayan, objects to it:,There are several places in the Holy Quran where single pronoun was referred tomore than a noun alternately, but how can one understand it whose mind isaffected with enmity towards the Prophet. Mawlvi Sarfaraz noticed only this placein the entire Quran. (Tawdhih al-Bayan, p.147)

Answer: This explanation of the author is nonsense; since neither we have deniedthat single pronoun can be referred to several nouns nor that this is the only placein the entire Quran where single pronoun was referred to several nouns. As wewere discussing the words nurand kitab, therefore the discussion was limited to thatverse. We have mentioned it out of love towards Allah Most High and in followingthe Shari'ah brought by the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), while it isdifferent thing that a squint-eyed sees this love also in the form of hatred, so howcan it be remedied?

Second Objection: 'Allamah Abu Sa'ud writes in the commentary of the versementioned above: "The pronoun was used single since either it is referred to thesame thing (since the comprehensive human form of the Quranic commandmentcannot be contemplated except his holy person and if any all-round text can explainhis person and his attributes it must be the Quran) or that both carry same ruling(since both must be obeyed) and the pronoun is referred to both (and this is thereply which is generally given by the mufassirin and commentators at such places).

Like Shaykh Abu Sa'ud, 'Allamah Abdullah ibn Umar Baydawi in Anwar al-Tanzil,'Allamah Ismail Haqqi in Ruh al-Bayan and other scholars in their tafasirhave givensuch answers. (Tawdhih al-Bayan, p 147)

Answer: The said author did not quote the complete text of 'Allamah Abu al-Saud;since it indicates to his preferred opinion which is harmful for the said author. Hiscomplete text is as follows: Though nurand kitab refer to the same noun, but the'atf(conjunction) was used to regard the dissimilarity of nouns as the dissimilarityof titles. It was also said that the word nurmeans the Prophet (Allah bless him andgive him peace) and the word kitab means: the Quran, while the pronoun in thenext verse was used singular; since the reference is to the Quran only (which islight as well as clear book), or because both (the prophet and the book) are like onething (as both are source of guidance and light) or the single pronoun inyahdi refersto the aforesaid matter. (Tafsir Abu al-Saud, 2:14)

In this tafsir, 'Allamah Abu al-Saud, who is well-versed mufassir, has mentioned first

that nurand kitab refers one single thing and the conjunction was used just todifferentiate the titles. (We have explained this in Tanqid Matin, p.122: the word nur

20


21/69

refers to the Quran and the conjunction is just for explanation in which there is nodifference between the two clauses of the conjunction as per their nature, rather itis only as per the attributes.) Then, again he quoted another tafsirstating, it is saidwhich is normally used for a weak opinion. According to this tafsir, nurrefers to theProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and kitab refers to the Quran. And

then he gave reason of using the single pronoun that since nurand kitab refer to thesame thing i.e. the Quran; therefore the pronoun is singular, or the pronoun issingular because both the nabi and kitab are sources of light and guidance, or thesingular pronoun was used referring to the whole of whatever mentioned before.The majority of the mufassirin have meant the same which was mentioned by'Allamah Abu al-Saud. The aforesaid opponent author should think what advantagehe achieved by the tafsirof 'Allamah Abu al-Saud and what disadvantage weearned? Did 'Allamah Abu al-Saud not state all the things which we had alreadymentioned?

Third Objection: Mawlvi Ghulam Rasul Sa'idi writes criticizing: if you insist that incase of single pronoun, the referred noun should also be singular, we suppose so,but why is it necessary to believe that in case of single referred noun the words nurand kitab refer to the Quran, why is it not possible that both the words refer to theProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace)? Mulla Ali al-Qari in his Sharh Shifaand and 'Allama Alusi in Ruhul Ma'ani gave the same reply which we have alreadymentioned. (Tawdhih al-Bayan, p 148)

Answer: Mulla Ali al-Qari quoted this tafsir saying "some mufassirin have tried toexplain it" that kitab also may refer to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give himpeace) as nur also refers to his holy self and since the person is singular and wordsare different; therefore the pronoun was brought singular. So, we beg to say that theaforesaid author might was told by any able and expert teacher that when the word'badh' (some) is referred to plural it means one or two not a group of people. Thequestion is how one can base his belief on the foundation of 'some mufassirin' byleaving aside the context of the Quran, other mutawatirevidences and the opinion ofmajority of the mufassirin. It is only for quoting that some mufassirin explained theverse in this way as well. What kind of service of religion is it to leave the goldenprinciple and rule of "Allah's hand is on the group" and trailing behind the rarestand uncommon explanations. Likewise, 'Allama Alusi quoted this tafsir just as apossible explanation as he says: "it is not far away that both the words nur and kitabrefer to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)." Now you should decide

fairly whether any principle belief of religion can be established by such uncertainstatements. If such uncertain statements do not contradict the rules and principlesof religion, they can be acceptable, otherwise they need to be given properinterpretation or else they deserve to be rejected, as Lahori Qalandar says:

Utha ka pheink do bahar ghali meinThrow it out in the street

Fourth Objection: Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi writes under this verse: "There arevarious explanations; first the word nurmeans the Prophet (Allah bless him andgive him peace) and the book means the Quran, while the second explanation is

that nurmeans Islam and kitab means the Quran. The third explanation is that both

21


22/69

the words nurand kitab mean the Quran, but this opinion is weak as 'atf(conjunction) seeks dissimilarity."

Now, perhaps Mawlvi Sarfaraz might have known that the opinion which is the baseof his belief is the third grade opinion and is regarded by Imam al-Razi as very weak.

(Tawdhih al-Bayan, p.122)

Answer: We say though Imam Razi calls it weak (not very weak) but the majority ofmufassirin call it strong and better like 'Allamah Abu al-Saud whom we have quotedearlier. Moreover, Imam Razi explains nuras Islam (see: Tafsir Kabir, 2:189), why doyou discard this strong tafsir?

Fifth Objection: Mawlvi Ghulam Rasul Sa'idi quoted several views proving that theProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace) is nurand he wanted to give animpression to the public that all mufassirin regard him as nurwhile Mawlvi Sarfarazdenies it. So instead of writing their full text, their references are being quoted. See

Tawdhih al-Bayan, 142 and 143, where Imam Razi, Mulla Ali al-Qari and 'AllamahAlusi mention that nurmay refer to his holy self and 'Allamah Alusi says that he isnur al-anwar(light of all lights). On page 144, this tafsiris quoted by Qatadah andZajjaj and it was regarded better tafsir, while on page 145 it is quoted from Jalalayn,Sawi and Abu al-Saud that nurrefers to the Holy Prophet (Allah bless him and givehim peace). Likewise, on page 148 it is quoted from Tafsir Baydawi, Khazin and Nasafiand on page 149 from Ruh al-Bayan that nurrefers to the Prophet (Allah bless himand give him peace). On page 151, it is quoted from Imdad al-Suluk p.86, treatiseAl-Nur, p.31 of Mawlana Thanawi and Tafsir of Mawlana Uthmani that nurmay meanthe Prophet himself (Allah bless him and give him peace) while kitab means theQuran. Then, on page 152 it is quoted from treatiseAl-Tawassul, p.53, Shifa of QadiIyad p.10, and on page 154 from Mulla Ali al-Qari's Sharh Shifa1:41 and from TafsirKhazin, while on page 155 it is written with the reference ofTafsir Kabirthat theProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was nurand lighted lamp, etc.

Answer: All these references are genuine but none of them is against us, even allsupport our view. The author, by piling up the irrelevant references, hasunnecessarily increased the thickness of his book just in order to demonstrate hisacademic ability. Which Muslim denies it? We ourselves, after quoting the tafsirofthe verse "there has come to you, from Allah, a Light and clear book" (5:15) said thatin view of the evidences and context nurmeans the Quran and the conjunction is

just for more elucidation, but we have accepted the second tafsiras well, as it iswritten in Tanqid-i-Matin, p 124: "This is the reason that majority ofmufassirin haveinterpreted nuras the Quran, while some of them interpreted nur as the Prophet(Allah bless him and give him peace), but all these mufassirin openly admit at otherplaces in their tafsirthat the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was abasharand human being. So, what it means except that he was human being alongwith being nur, as we have mentioned in the beginning."

After such a clear explanation from our end, how it is useful for the said author topresent references of his being nurand how it is harmful for us! The majority of themufassirin have interpreted nuras the Quran. If the said author is in doubt in this

regard, all the books oftafsirare available and Allah willing the pen is also availableand all these mufassirin belong to Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama'ah, while some of the

22


23/69

Mu'tazili mufassirin also have joined their rank in this tafsirunder the Arabicgrammar rules.

Six Objection: Mawlvi Ghulam Rasul Sa'idi, the author ofTawdhih al-Bayan, writesthat those who deny the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) as nurthey

are Mu'tazili, as he says: "Ruh al-Ma'ani interprets the verse as: Abu Ali Jubai saidthat the nurmeans the Quran as it enlightens and reveals the ways of guidance andbelief. Al-Zamakhshari also mentioned the same thing in his tafsir."

What is the belief of Al-Zamakhshari, the author of al-Kashshaf? It is written on p.28that Al-Zamakhshari used to nickname himself as 'Abu al-Mu'tazila' (the father ofthe Mu'tazilah sect). Likewise, it is written on page 29 about Abu Ali Jubai that hisname was Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and he was Mu'tazilite from Basra. Boththese references reveal that Abu Ali Jubai and Al-Zamakhshari both wereMu'tazilah, and Ruh al-Ma'ani clarifies that these Mu'tazilah deny the Prophet beingnurand confine nuronly to the Quran. (Tawdhih al-Bayan, p.155-165)

Answer: What Mawlvi Ghulam Rasul Saidi Barelwi says that those who deny theProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace) being nur are Mu'tazilah is quitebaseless; since interpreting the word nur with the Quran is not a Mu'tazilite theory,rather the Ahl al-Sunnah scholars have also interpreted nur as the Quran, as ImamNasir al-Din Abu al-Khayr Abdullah bin Umar al-Baydawi (d. 791 AH) interprets theverse "there has come a light from Allah" 5:15: "i.e. the Quran as it disperses thedarkness of doubt and deviation and it is a clear miraculous book while some saythat the word nurmeans the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give himpeace). (Tafsir Baydawi, 1:268, Egypt)

This tafsir of Imam Baydawi makes two things clear; first the word nur means theQuran. Second, some scholars have interpreted nur as the Prophet Muhammad(Allah bless him and give him peace). If interpreting nur with the Quran is the creedof the Mu'tazila, whether Imam Baidhawi also will be included in the same cult? Youshould plant a similar fatwa on him as well. This tafsir of Imam Baidhawi supportsour stand. As far as some scholars' interpretation of nur with the Prophet (Allahbless him and give him peace) is concerned, we do not deny it absolutely, as it wasalready mentioned; since the mufassirin who interpreted nur with the Prophet(Allah bless him and give him peace), they also believe that nur means 'the light ofguidance' and they did not deny the Prophet being bashar. It is needless to lengthen

this discussion anymore, but we want to present one or two more references.

Imam Muhammad bin Yusuf known as Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi al-Gharnati (d. 754AH) says in the tafsir of the verse 5:15: "It is said that the Quran was called nur as itdisperses the darkness of polytheism and doubt or that it is clear miracle. (Tafsir al-Muhit 3:448, Beirut)

'Allama Shaykh Muhammad Abduh of Egypt (d. 1323 AH = 1905 AD) also writesunder the commentary of the verse 5:15: "There are three opinion abut the meaningof the word nur here; first is the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace),second is Islam and third is the Quran." (Tafsir al-Manar 6:304)

23


24/69

We have presented three references explaining that nur means the Quran and thistafsir is more preferable. As far as what Sa'eedi says that interpreting nur withQuran is the creed of Mu'tazila, it is nothing short of a clear lie, as the Ahl al-Sunnamufassirin have also interpreted it as the Quran. The text of Ruh al-Ma'anipresented by him means that the verse means the Quran alone, not any thing else.

'Allama Alusi disapproves that the Mu'tazila have confined the tafsir in thismeaning. And we also do not believe that no other interpretation can be made tothe verse, we say that the preferable tafsir is that of meaning the Quran, as themufassirin have interpreted the verse in different ways, as Sa'eedi Sahib has alsoadmitted that the Mu'tazila have confined the tafsir of the verse into the Quran.(Fayyaz)

Second Evidence: The second evidence of his being nur is that Imam Abdur Razzaqreported from Jabir bin Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him), he says that hesaid to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace): may my parents aresacrificed over you, which thing Allah Most High created first? He replied: O Jabir!

Before all things Allah created the nur of your Prophet out of His nur. (ZurqaniSharh Mawahib 1:7, Nashr al-Teeb 5)

This narration was presented as proof that he was nur. But, it is also not based onsolid foundations.

(1) Thesanad (chain of narrators) of this hadith is not known. Moreover, ImamAbdur Razzaq was Shia though not extremist, but he is munfarid (narrated somepeculiar things not reported by others). (Tazkirat al-Huffaz 1:331). Especially infazayil chapter he has narrated such narrations which are not reported by anyoneelse, as Abu Bakr bin Ayyub al-Hanafi writes: "Ibn 'Adi said that Abdur Razzaqnarrated traditions in fazayil which are not reported by anyone else." (al-Sahm al-Musib 130) Moreover, 'Allama Muhammad Tahir al-Hanafi (d. 986 AH) writes: AbdurRazzaq ibn Humam turned blind in his last time, his nephew (sister's son) Ahmadbin Abdullah inserted false traditions in his book for which he is known as kadhib(liar). Qanun al-Mawdhua'at 269) i.e. some people formed this view about him due tohis nephew's forgery and misdeed, otherwise personally he was authentic andreliable.

(2) Musannaf Abdur Razzaq is classified in the Hadith books of third category. ShahAbdul Aziz Muhaddith Dehlawi (d. 1239 AH) states: "Most of the traditions of this

category are not followed by the Fiqh scholars; rather ijma' was established againstmatters mentioned therein. ('Ujala Nafy'a 7) But all traditions of this category arenot baseless, rather most of them are so, especially ones contradicting the meaningof the Quran. Mawlana Sayed Sulaiman Nadwi (d. 1374 AH) writes about MusannafAbdur Razzaq: Since the said book contains false traditions along withsahihtraditions and his traditions are taken less reliable in fazayil chapter, therefore inprinciple I hesitate to accept this tradition. This hesitation is strengthened when wesee that pen has been clearly mentioned insahihahadith to be first created. (Sirat al-Nabi 3:776)

(3) This tradition is against the one which says that the Prophet (Allah bless him and

give him peace) sated: "First thing which Allah created was pen, then he ordered

24


25/69

her to write." (Abu Dawood 2:290, Tayalsi 71, Tirmidhi 3:167 he termed it as hasansahih gharib, al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya 1:8 he said that it was narrated by Ahamd)

Hafiz Ibn Hajar 'Asqalani (d. 852 AH) writes: "Among the traditions which describefirst thing created by Allah is only this hadith is reliable: First thing Allah created

was pen." (al-Mawdhu'at al-Kabir 31)

Thissahih hadith suggests that Allah Most High first created pen of destiny. So,when the creation of pen is known to take place first, then it is needless tounreasonably mean awwaliyat idhafi (relative primacy) instead ofawwaliyat haqiqi(real primacy). It should also be noted that the researcher commentators of hadithand the historians have sorted out many things like Pen, Throne, mind etc that havebeen classified to be first created, but they did not mention nur amongst them.What does it mean except that the hadith of nur is not reliable according to them,otherwise they would have mentioned it while mentioning the different hadiths.Yes, Mulla Ali al-Qari mentioned it in Miraqat 1:146 and Jam' al-Wasayil; but he

himself explained in these books that nur means ruh (soul).

(4) As his nur is mentioned to be first created, in the same way his ruh (soul) wasalso reported to have been created first, as Mulla Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi says: TheProphet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: "The first thing Allah created wasmy ruh." The other souls were created with the blessing of his soul and the nur ofhis person." (Sharh al-Shifa 1:17, Egypt)

He writes at another place: "Both the hadiths i.e. the first thing Allah created is mynur and the other hadith ofruh (soul); carry same meaning, as the souls are nuri, soit meant that the first thing Allah created amongst the souls is my ruh. (Mirqat1:167, Imdadiya, Multan)

In signifies that the hadith was narrated in two ways and nur means ruh; since ruhis also a light element and subtle substance which is absorbed in the entire body.'Allama Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Khifaji al-Hanafi (d. 1069 AH) said: "Allah MostHigh created his souls before other souls and blessed it with the nice costume ofprophethood. And this is meant by the words he spoke: Allah Most High created hisnur before He created Adam (may peace be upon him). (Nasim al-Riyaz 1:200,201,Egypt)

Perhaps, this is the reason that Hakim al-Ummat Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thnawi hasdescribed the nur Muhammadi as ruh Muhammadi. (Hashiya Nashr al-Tib 5) If thishadith is proven to be sahih as it was claimed by Shaykh Abdul Haq in Madarij al-Nubuwwa, then with this meaning it has no contradiction with any text of theQuran and Hadith. Therefore, there is nothing wrong to believe it. But, it isabsolutely baseless and absurd to reject, on its basis, the certain and clear-cut nusus(texts f the Quran and Hadith) and deny his being human being as it was adopted bymany innovators. According to our research, the issue ofhazirand nazir, 'ilm ghayband nur etc crept in the innovators from the Shias, but the authentic book of Shiasi.e. Usul Kafi clearly explains that nur means ruh. The text is as follows: "Allah MostHigh said: I created you and Ali as nur i.e. soul without body." (Usul al-Kafi 1:147, vol

2, Lucknow)

25


26/69

This indicates that Shias also take nur as ruh. However, according to this hadith,denying the humanity of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) which isproved by nusus (definite sources) is unacceptable altogether.

Note: There are other numerous words which convey the meaning of nur: forexample: "the first thing Allah created was my nur", "I was made out of Allah's nur,but the believers were made of mine", when Allah created the nur of his prophet, heasked him to see to the nurs of the prophets", and "when Allah created Adam, heentrusted the nur in his back", but none of these hadiths issashih. If anyone claimsthe otherwise, he will have to explain it with proof.

Another hadith says that Allah took a fistful nur of His face, the hadith further saysthat it was the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), the entire world wascreated out of it. Also, he was created before his parents were created. And that hememorized the Quran before Sayyidna Jibril came to him with it. Hafiz Ibn Taimiyaand Hafiz Ibn Kathir commented on the hadith that it is fabricated lie according to

all those who have the knowledge of hadith. (al-Athar al-Marfu'a 273, MawlanaAbdul Hayi Lucknowi)

Another hadith says Allah created me with His nur and created Abu Bakr also withit, but one of the narrators is Ahmad bin Yusuf al-Masihi. 'Allama Abul Hasan Ali binMuhammad al-Kanani (d. in 963 AH) writes that Imam Abu Nuaim said: he is false.Imam al-Dhahabi says: He is big liar. (Tanzih al-Sharia al-Marfu'a 337)

Muslims need not to pay any attention to such false and fabricated traditions andgive farther interpretations to the Quranic verses and sahih and mutawatir hadiths,and Allah forbid to reject them and deserve Allah's punishment and become fuel ofthe Fire.

First Objection: The explanation we presented in the reply of second argumentfrom our opponent is to the point and clear. But, our opponent has targeted it alsowith his objections. We are quoting those objections and reply them respectively.

Mawlvi Ghulam Rasul Sa'eedi writes: "We write the names of the elderly scholars ofAhl al-Sunna who have quoted the hadith of Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him).Had this tradition beenza'if(weak) or inapplicable these scholars would have notmentioned it in their books. For example those who referred to the hadith include:

the teacher of Imam Ahmad, the teacher's teacher of Imam Bukhari and ImamMuslim, Imam Abdur Razzaq in his Musannaf and Imam Baihaqi in Dalayil al-Nubuwwa narrate the hadith as marfu' (with continuous chain to the Prophet) from

Sayyidna Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that Allah created the nur ofyour Prophet before any thing out of His nur. While Imam Qustalani writes inMawahib Laduniya: when Allah Most High intended to create people and determinetheir livelihood, he brought about the haqiqatMuhammadiya (his existence) in thenur of His Divinity."

Explaining the text, Imam Zurqani writes in Sharh Mawahib: In deed the haqiqatMuhammadiya is base of all haqiqats (existences); since it is proved by .. (some text

not clear) which is exactly nur Ahmadi and was indicated by the Prophet (Allahbless him and give him peace) in his words that Allah Most High created his nur

26


27/69


28/69

Secondly, most of the references given by the author are from the books of hisAlaHadhratlike Nafy al-Fay and Silat al-Safa etc, while in Silat al-Safa Khan Sahibattributes this hadith to Imam Abdur Razzaq as he writes: The teacher of SayyidnaImam Ahamd bin Hanbal (may Allah be pleased with him) and the teacher's teacherof Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim i.e. Hafiz al-Hadith Imam Abdur Razzaq Abu

Bakr bin Humam narrated this hadith in Musannaf from Sayyidna Jabir bin SayyidnaAbdullah al-Ansari (may Allah be pleased with them). The book Musannaf AbdurRazzaq is published now. We shall be highly thankful to the author and his group tolocate the hadith in Musannaf. HisA'la Hadhrathimself writes in Silat al-Safa page 3:A similar hadith was narrated by Imam Baihaqi in Dalayil al-Nubuwwa. It indicatesthat the tradition narrated by Imam Baihaqi does not have the same words as thenarration of Imam Abdur Razzaq, otherwise A'la Hadhrat would have regarded itsame not similar; since Muhaddithin use such terms (like similar) in order todescribe riwayah bil-ma'na (non-literal reporting), see Tadrib al-Rawi 314 etc. andsince the main word of the narration is nur, therefore the context of Khan Sahibseemingly conveys that perhaps the word nur is not present in the narration of

Dalayil al-Nubuwwa of al-Baihaqi. Perhaps this was the reason that Khan Sahib didnot quote its words, otherwise he would not have overlooked it at such an occasion.However, the reality can only be known after observing the words of Dalayil al-Nubuwwa and thesanad of the hadith.

Thirdly, the said author has quoted detailed and short texts of some elders whichsupport the view that the nur of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)was created first, and this strengthens the position of the hadith. He refers to'Allama Busnawi as having said that the ruh of the Prophet was created first. But allthese references are of no use since a hadith is reliable only with continuous sanadand reliable condition of the narrators. Just quoting a hadith will not make it sahihand neither it will be considered reliable and authentic, specially when it ismentioned by those who are merely sufi and saint and have no expertise in thescience of scrutiny of haidth. Moreover, we have written in Tanqid Matin (p 129-131) with references that nur Muhammadi means ruh Muhammadi and weconcluded that nur Muhammadi is the same ruh Muhammadi.

Had this hadith been sahih as it was said by Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith inMadarij al-Nubuwwa 1:1, then also it is not contradicting any ayator hadith withthis meaning; therefore it is not wrong to believe so. But based upon this hadith it isabsolutely wrong and baseless to reject the clear-cut nusus and deny his being

bashar and human being as some bid'atis (innovators) do. It is regretful that neitherthe said author has quoted out text nor does he refer to it, let alone replying it,whereas it is incumbent upon him to give reference, but what he has to do withjustice and honesty? They just aim at collecting cheap applaud from theirsupporters and to quench their thirst of accusing the ahl haq.

In short, our objection that the sanad of the hadith and reliability of the narrators isunknown remains intact, it was not yet replied. It is nothing but childish perceptionthat you have given the reply by mentioning unrelated matters and quotingirrelevant texts and references. The referencedsanad of the hadith and verificationof the narrators from the books ofasma al-rijal is still in demand.

Second Objection

28


29/69

Mawlvi Ghulam Rasul Sa'eedi has posed second objection that we Deobandis saythat the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was not created first ratherpen was created, as he writes:

The reply of awwaliyat idhafi (Relative Primacy)(1) Sarfaraz sahib has posed second objection to reject the hadith of Jabir (may Allahbe pleased with him) saying that the Prophet was not the first creation, ratheraccording to Mawdhuat Kabir pen was first created. It is mentioned in Tanqid Matinp 110 that this sahih hadith shows that the pen of destiny was first created, so it isunacceptable to give pen relative primacy instead of giving it real primacy with noreason.

(2) Mawlvi sahib has silently admitted that his nur was referred as first created inMirqat p 149 and Jam'u al-Wasayil, while the same books assert that nur refers to

ruh. Mawlvi sahib knew that had he quoted the text of Mirqat the castle of Deobandwould crash down, so he ate it up smartly considering itpuris of Diwali.The textwhich he fears to quote is hereunder: "'Allama Ibn Hajar says that the narrations offirst creation are different, the summary of which, as I have mentioned in SharhShamayil Tirmidhi, is that certainly the first creation was the nur out of which theProphet was created, then the water and the Throne." Obviously, Mulla Ali al-Qaridoes not alone regard it real primacy but Ibn Hajar also asserts the same. The authorof Azhar and countless ulama have categorically declared the first primacy of nurMuhammadi, as we have already quoted the references.

(3) It is written in Azhar that Allah Most High wrote down the quantity of creationsfifty thousand years before the birth of the heavens and the earths, while HisThrone at that time was spread at water i.e. the Throne was created before the Penwas created and things were written, the Throne was brought into being and it wasspread over water. (Sahih Muslim) Sayyidna Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased withhim) was asked about the verse: " while His throne was on water" (11:7), that thethrone was on water and where the water was? He replied: the water was on air. (al-Baihaqi) So, it was known that the pen was created after air, water and throne, andthe first thing created was the nur Muhammadi, as we have explained in al-Mawridli al-Mawlid.

(4) Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlawi writes in Madarij al-Nubuwwa (2:2):behold! the first creation and the medium of creating the world and Adam was thenur of Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) as it is mentioned in sahihhadith that Allah Most High first created his nur. (In next lines he mentions thatmind was also called to be first created, but the hadith is not proved according tothe scholars of hadith, then he mentioned pen and concluded :) So it was knownthat some things were already created before pen and those were the Throne, Chairand souls, while nur Muhammadi was first of all created. So, we can say that makaan means the attributes and conditions of the nur and ma yakun means thematters which will appear later in the world.

The author writes: see the words of Mulla Ali Qari, the author of Azhar and the in-depth research of Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith and congratulate Mawlvi Sarfaraz

29


30/69

for his weak study. In his enmity towards the Prophet (Allah bless him and give himpeace) he madly proved that pen was first created while in fact it was created atfourth position. When the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)himself declared that the pen was created after the throne and water and thus itproved that nur had real primacy, so how he dared to contradict the Messenger

(Allah bless him and give him peace) by giving pen the same position. Whether theprophetic statement is insignificant in your unruly madhhab? The door oftawba(repentance) is not still closed, we sincerely advise you to turn to the hereafter andrepent to Allah, otherwise the book piles will be sufficient enough to destroy you,and the wealth accumulated out of it will be of no avail.

(5) It does not go against us what Sarfaraz Sahib has written that nur means ruh asMulla Ali Qari has stated. First, because whether it is nur or ruh, the result is thesame i.e. he was first created. Secondly, it does not support his view; it would havesupported him had there been difference between ruh and nur. Mulla Ali Qari says:as far as both the hadith in which he says that his nur and his ruh was created first,

both have similar meaning; since ruhs (souls) are made of nur.

(6) Sarfaraz Sahib writes that the researcher commentators of hadith and historianshave not mentioned nur when they discussed the first created things andmentioned pen, throne, mind etc. (Tanqid 110)

In response, we say that we have previously quoted the texts of Imam AbdurRazzaq, Imam Baihaqi, Imam Ahmad Qustalani, Imam Zurqani, Abdul Qadir al-Jazayiri, Mulla Ali al-Qari Hanafi, Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith and others.Deliberate the texts and see whether these elder imams mention nur Muhamamdito be first created or not? It is another matter that those who are occupied bymalice towards the Prophet are not able to see nur Muhammadi in the texts.

(7) Sarfaraz Sahib writes objecting to the hadith of Sayyidna Jabir (may Allah bepleased with him) that itssanad is unknown and Imam Abdur Razzaq was a Shiathough not a staunch one. He added that Imam Abdur Razzaq mentioned many alone traditions specially infazayil which are not narrated by others. (summarizedfrom Tanqid, p 108) It is not just to turn down the hadith of Imam Abdur Razzaqwith mere attribution of Shiaism. Shaykh Abdul Haq says in Muqaddima of SharhMishkwat about the narrations ofahl al-bid'a (innovators) that according topreferred opinion, the narration of an innovator is not acceptable if it helps his

thought or supports it, and it will be acceptable if it is not so. It is written with thereference of Jami' al-Usul that the imams of hadith have accepted the narrations ofKhawarij, Qadaris, Rawafidh and other ahl al-bid'a. Let Imam Abdur Razzaq if he wasa Shia, but Baihaqi was not so who has narrated this hadith in Dalayil al-Nubuwwa.Moreover, Imam Abdur Razzaq did not narrate it alone, rather outstanding ulamahave stated that nur Muhammadi was first created; we have already quoted theirtexts. Therefore, Sarfaraz Sahib is wrong to say that he narrated many suchtraditions which are not supported from any other side.

(8) Commenting the traditions of nur Muhammadi to be first created MawlviSarfaraz says why Muslims should give far explanation to the Quranic verses and

sahih mutawatirhadiths just for the sake of these false and fake traditions. Allah

30


31/69

forbid, why should Muslims deserve divine punishment by rejecting them and makethemselves fuel ofJahannam. (Tanqid 114)

Let us have a look at the group of Mawlvi Sarfaraz how much of their elite withjubba andturban have become fuel of Jahannam. The leader of Deoband Mawlvi

Qasim Nanotawi writes in response to the first mahzurof the ten mahzurs: See, theruh of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) is in fact characterized withoriginal nubuwwa while the ruhs (souls) of the other prophets depend on it;therefore he had to be advanced in time, but the spiritual createdness does notentail physical birth. If you think otherwise you must prove it and disqualify thestatements like "my nur was first created".

This text of the axis of Deoband establishes the following points: (1) The nurMuhammadi was first created. (2) The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)is mawquf alaih (base) for all prophets, may peace be upon them. (3) His prophethoodis bi al-zat(self-existent) while that of the other prophets is bi al-'rdh (dependent).

The hadith (awwlu ma khalaq Allah nuri) is not only reliable, but the founder ofDeoband rejected numerous Quranic verses by arguing with it, as we shall mentionit in-shaAllah.

Mawlvi Qasim says summarizing the proofs in Tahzir al-Naas, p 39: As far as hisbeing prophet as intermediary and self-existent and the other prophets being asdependent on him and emanated from him, it goes back to the sense ofkhatimiyat(finality of prophethood) which I have elaborated in detail."

Then, the author writes: It is not hidden from the scholars that one who is mawsuf bial-'arz (characterized with dependent quality), the quality is not attached to him,rather the quality is attached to mawsuf bi al-zat(self existent or characterised withoriginal quality), but the mawsuf bi al-'arz is given the position ofmawsufonly due tothe attachment of it with mawsuf bi al-zat. For example, movement is not attachedwith one who is aboard a ship, but he is called moving; since he is attached to shipwhich is link. So, this entails that the characteristic ofnubuwwa is not attached toother prophets and they were called nabi as metaphor just due to their comparisonwith the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace). Mawlvi Qasim by denyingthe prophethood of the prophets rejected the hundreds of the verses of the Quran.Allah Most High says in the Quran: "We make no division between any of Hismessengers" (3:285) 'Allama Abu al-Sa'ud said: therefore there should be made no

division between the messengers in the sense ofrisala (messengership), not in otherexclusive attributes. The said author says, now you should see the logic of themessenger of Deoband! He made differences between the risala of the Prophet (Allahbless him and give him peace) and other prophets. He regarded the quality ofnubuwwa as original and denied the same for others. This is based on the same claimwhich he sometimes expresses as mawquf 'alaih and sometime as awwal ma khalaqAllah nuri. How strange it is!

Now let me question Sarfaraz Sahib if this hadith is false and fabricated, what willhe comment when his ancestor believes it to be correct? Who, by sticking to such ahadith, is rejecting the texts of the Quran and sahih and mutawatirhadiths? And

who invented this belief based on a false hadith? As a poet said: "he used to blame me,whereas actually the blame turned to him."

31


32/69

Would you allow me to say that Mawlvi Qasim Nanotavi was caught in the cobweb ofSatan and misinterpreted the ascertained texts of the Quran and sahih mutawatirhadiths, and Allah forbid he made himself prey of Allah's punishment and madehimself fuel ofjahannam. Moreover, the fact is that thezilli and buruzinabi

prescribed by Qasim Sahib in Tahzir al-Nas, Mirza (Ghulam Ahmad) the accursedfollowed him by claiming prophethood and the Deobandis cannot get rid of thisargument.

If you are not satisfied, see this is Hakim al-Ummat who, according to yourstatement, has fallen in lower grades ofjahannam by narrating false hadith. Hementioned this hadith of Sayyidna Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) and thenput a note saying: "This hadith proves that nur Muhammadi was first created in realprimacy; since the other things which were called first created, the hadith clearlymentions that those things were created after nur Muhammadi. " (Nashr al-Teeb, p7) Now, see this hakim washed off all your efforts, you do not consider it real

primacy in any way, but the Hakim al-Ummat of Thana Bhawan regards the realprimacy as established. Now, either you admit your ignorance and kiss his feet orhurl him injahannam after calling him ignorant and hollowed. This matter isbetween you and your elders. We have showed you the midway of reconciliation.(summarized, p 160-170)

Answer: The said author, in all his objections, proved himself to be steeped inignorance in whose whirlpool he kept on divagating throughout the whole book andis finding no way out. He has fulfilled the custom of his elders as well that heoverlooking just like pigeon picked up incomplete texts out of original and completeones and then started wrangling. He gave the texts self expression and thereuponbegan easing his conscience. Alas to such knowledge and honesty, and woe to such aresearch! Now, please note the answers in the same order:

(1) As we have quoted the hadith of pen being first created with the reference ofhadith books along with itssanad and its reliable status, this was the moral andacademic obligation of the said author (and still is) to quote the hadith of nur to befirst created from any authentic hadith book along with itssanad and its reliableposition. But, he failed to do so and he can neither do so in-sha-Allah. So, when thehadith of pen (awwlu ma khalaq Allah al-qalam) is mentioned in hadith books and themuhaddithin have explicitly regarded itsahih, then why it should not be given first

primacy rather than the unfounded hadith; since according to yourA'la Hadhratahadith must be proved to be followed. And you and your group is unable to fulfilthis criteria. You must mention thesanad through which this hadith was narrated,so that the discussion comes to an end forever.

(2) We have explained in Tanqid Matin p 129, 130, 131 with the reference of Sharhal-Shifa of Mulla Ali al-Qari, Mirqat, Nasim al-Riyaz of al-Khifaji and Nashr al-Teeb p5 that nur Muhammadi means ruh Muhammadi. And later we said: if this hadith isproved sahih as Shaykh Abdul Haq has claimed in Madarij al-Nubuwwa 1:1 then it isnot contradicting with any other hadith in this sense; therefore there is no reasonto reject it. Yes, it is entirely wrong and baseless to reject the ascertained and clear

Islamic texts and deny the Prophet being bashar and human as some innovators do.(Tanqid Matin 131)

32


33/69

Now, tell me how after this explanation the castle of Deoband is under attack by thereference ofMirqat? Can it move any brick or clay or even plaster from its place?Rather the castle of Deoband is strengthened by such references, as the sense givenby Mulla Ali Qari in Mirqat is similarly explained by Hadhrat Thanwi in Nashr al-

Teeb. And the contradiction in our text (as this is obvious from the text of TanqidMatin) means that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) is believed as anur which entails to reject his humanity that is proved from the Quran andmutawatirHadiths, this thing is contradicting. But the said author, due to lack ofknowledge and because of ignorance considers that the hadith of pen iscontradicting the hadith of nur and some scholars interpret one as real first and thesecond as relatively first. Though to us the hadith of nur is not established withreference to itssanad, as we have already elaborated but if this hadith is proved toalright, then also the word nur will mean ruh as we have explained since this willnot contradict any other word of hadith and will entail no harm; because accordingto this explanation, he as person will be bashar and as quality will be nur.

We have explained in Tanqid Matin that undoubtedly Mulla Ali Qari mentions hisnur as first created and regards it as preferred, while Hafiz Ibn Hajar quotesdifference of opinions but prefers the hadith of pen and regards it sahih, as we havementioned this discussion in Tanqid Matin quoting from Mawdhu'at Kabir;therefore it is mere shamelessness to state that Hafiz Ibn Hajar and Mulla Ali Qarihold similar views. Hafiz Ibn Hajar rejects the hadith of nur technically to beincluded in the realm of first created things, not that he supports it, as the saidauthor thinks due to his ignorance. Likewise, the texts of Muslim Ulama and Azhaardeclare his nur as first created and many other ulama have mentioned so, but thepoint of dispute is what is established as first created thing according to sahihhadith? There is no dispute abut the statements and quotes of ulama. May Allah giveunderstanding to the said author!

(3) The hadith mentioned in the book Azhaar with the reference of Sahih Muslim is:"Allah wrote the destiny of the creature fifty thousand years before the heavens andthe earth were created, while His Throne was resting on water." (Sahih Muslim2:335)

Thissahih and marfu' hadith implies that the destiny of creatures was written fiftythousand years before the birth of heavens and earths, it no where mentions pen,

maybe the pen of destiny was created long before it, but wrote it fifty thousandyears before the creation of heavens and earth, as the material of earth was createdbefore the birth of heavens and earth was spread later on. However, the hadith ofSahih Muslim does not convey any sense about pen with surety. But, it indirectlyindicates that the throne and water were created before the heavens and earth, asImam Nawawi al-Shafi'i (d. 676 AH) writes: "[while His throne was at water] i.e.before the creation of heavens and earth. And Allah knows best. (Sharh Muslim2:335)

This conclusion of the author of Azhaar i.e. the throne was created before the birthof pen and writing and the throne was spread over water as Muslim narrated, is his

personal and homemade theory which is narrated by some other scholars as welleven some called it "al-asah" (most reliable) while some quoted the unanimity of

33


34/69

entire Muslim scholars about the same, but the hadith of Muslim makes no mentionof it. Similarly, the mawqufhadith of Sayyidna Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased withhim) proves only this extent that the water was resting on the back of air; neitherthis negates that pen was first created nor that it was created after the birth of thethings mentioned above, as this is obvious and not hidden from any sane person.

Likewise, the statement of the author in bracket (it proves that the pen was createdafter the air

Documents

Nur & Bashar Imam Ahl al-Sunnah ‘Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar