Welcome To My Islamic Writing's.

My blog is about my religion,and my writing's are related to my religion.

It contain's general islamic issues,my thougth's ect.

As my pictures also are islamic Image's.

Labbaik..….Allaahumm a Labbaik  

I pray that this finds you all well, and in the best of health and spirits. May Allah grant you all good and success in this life and the next. AMEEN

Various kinds of disbelief

Az-Zubayri says that he said to as-Sādiq (a.s.): "Tell me how many ways of al-kufr  (disbelief, infidelity, to cover) are there according to the Book of Allāh? Mighty and Great is He!

He (the Imām) said: `Disbelief, according to the Book of Allāh, is of five types. There is the disbelief of denial (and denial is of two kinds), and the disbelief by neglecting what Allāh has ordered, and the disbelief of disavowal, and the ingratitude.

As for the disbelief of denial, it is denial of the Lord­ship; it is the talk of those who say: "there is no Lord (i.e. Cre­ator), nor any Garden nor Fire". It is the word of two groups of disbelievers who are called atheists.

And they are those who say: "nothing destroys us but time" (45:24). It is a religion invented by them as it seemed good to them, but they have no proof to support their view.

That is why Allāh has said (about them): And they have no knowledge of that; they only conjecture (ibid.), that it is in reality as they say. And He also said: Surely those who disbelieve, alike is it to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe.' "(al-Kāfi)

And as for the second kind, it is the denial after knowing; it means that the denier denies (the existence of God), but he knows (very well) that He is the truth, and he is convinced of it (in his heart).

And Allāh has said (about such people): And they denied them unjustly and proudly while their soul had been con­vinced of them (27:14) ; . . . and aforetime they used to pray for victory against those who disbelieved, but when there came to them that which they did recognize (i.e. the Prophet) they dis­believed in him; so Allāh's curse is on the unbelievers (2:89).

So this is the explanation of the two kinds of denial.

And the third way of disbelief is ingratitude to the bounties (of Allāh) ; and it is as Allāh says quoting (the Prophet) Sulayman

"This is of the grace of my Lord that He may try me whether I am grateful or ungrateful; and whoever is grateful, he is grate­ful only for his own self, and whoever is ungrateful, then surely my Lord is Self-sufficient, Honoured " (27:40)

If you are grateful, I would certainly give you more, and if you are ungrateful, My chastisement is truly severe (14:7).

Therefore remember Me, I will remember you, and be thankful to Me, and do not be ungrateful to Me (2 :152) . (In all these verses Allāh has used the word al-kufr = disbelief, to denote ungratefulness, and in­gratitude. )

And the fourth way of disbelief is leaving out or neglecting what Allāh has ordered to do.

It is as Allāh says: And when We made a covenant with you: You shall not shed your blood and you shall not turn your people out of your cities; then you gave a promise while you witnessed. Yet you it is who slay your people and turn a party from among you out of their homes, backing each other up against them unlawfully and exceeding the limits; and if they should come to you as captives, you would ransom them - while their very turning out was unlawful for you. Do you then believe in a part of the book and disbelieve in the other? (2:84-85).

In this verse Allāh has charged them with disbelief because they did not follow the commandment of Allāh; (it should be noted that) Allāh has (in this very verse) linked them to belief, yet He did not accept it from them and it did not benefit them before Allāh.

So Allāh (further) said: What then is the reward of such among you as do this but disgrace in the life of this world, and on the day of resurrection they shall be sent back to the most grievous chastisement, and Allāh is not at all heedless of what you do (ibid.)

And the fifth way of disbelief is disavowal. It is as Allāh says, quoting lbrahim (a.s.) ". . . we renounce you, and enmity and hatred have appeared between us and you for ever until you believe in Allāh alone" (60:4), that is, we disavow and repudiate you.

And He says, describing Iblīs and his disowning his friends from mankind on the Day of Resurrection: ". . . surely I dis­believed in your associating me (with Allāh) before" (14:22).

And also He says: And he said: "You have only taken for yourselves idols besides Allāh by way of friendship between you in the world's life, then on the resurrection day some of you shall deny others, and some of you shall curse others . . . (29:25) , that is, some of you shall dissociate from others.

Interpreting the Qur'an according to one's own opinion

He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book, of it there are some verses decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are ambiguous; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity, they follow the part of it which is ambiguous, seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation, but none knows its interpretation except Allah; and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: "We believe in it, it is all from our Lord"; and none do mind except those having understanding. (3:7)

The Prophet said: "Whoever interprets (i.e. explains) the Qur'an according to his opinion, should settle himself in his seat of Fire." (as-Safi)

The author says: This matter has been narrated by both the Sunnis and the Shi'ahs. And there are many other traditions of the same import, narrated from the Prophet and the Imams of Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.).

It is narrated in Munyatu 'l-murid that the Prophet said: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an without knowledge, should settle himself in his seat of Fire."

The author says: Also, it has been narrated by Abu Dawud in his as-Sunan.

The Prophet said: "Whoever speaks about the Qur'an without knowledge, shall coming on the Day of Resurrection reined with a rein of fire." (Munyatu 'l-murid) The same book narrates that the Prophet said: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an of his own opinion (even if) he was right, he committed wrong."

The author says: This tradition has also been narrated by Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi and an-Nisa'i.

The Prophet said: "What I am afraid of, most of all, concerning my ummah after me, is the man who will take the Qur'an putting it in the wrong place (i.e. giving wrong interpretations)." (al-Munyatu 'l-murid)

Abu Basir said that Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said: "Whoever interprets the Qur'an according to own opinion, if he gets to the right interpretation, he shall not be rewarded; and if he errs then he shall be farther away from the heaven. (at-Tafsir, al-Ayyashi) The same book quotes Ya'qub ibn Yazid who narrated from Yasir that ar-Ridha (a.s.) said: "Opinion in the Book of Allah is infedility."

The author says: This theme is found in other traditions written in 'Uyunu 'l-akhbar, al-Khisal and at-Tafsir of al-Ayyashi among other books.

The words of the Prophet: "Whoever interprets (i.e. explains) the Qur'an according to his own opinion": ar-Ra'y (= opinion) means the belief reached after diligent research. It is also used for the opinion based on desire and one's own inclination.

The Prophet has used the phrase, "his opinion"; it shows that what is condemned is the interpretation of a verse independently without looking at other relevant verses.

It does not forbid striving hard and doing one's utmost to understand the meaning of the Qur'an; nor does it say that one should confine himself to waht has been said in the traditions of the Prophet and Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.) relating to the exegesis of the verses (as many traditionalists think).

Otherwise, it would be diametrically opposed to the many verses which show that the Qur'an is plain Arabic and whhich exhort the people to meditate on it; also it would be against many traditions that tell to turn to the Qur'an and judge the traditions by it.

What the words, "according to his opinion", refer to is explaining the Qur'an according to one's personal views by being independent of other Qur'anic declarations.

This happens when an exegete depends solely on the instruments of Arabic language and literature, which are used for understanding a human talk.

When we hear a speech of a man we at once look towards the rules of the language so that we may understand what the speaker means, and in this way decide its import; we use this method everywhere, even in legal matters like testimony and acknowledgement.

We use this method because human speech is based on the rules of language and rhetorics.

But the Qur'an's diction is not based on this foundation, as we have explained earlier.

The whole Qur'an is a speech whose sentences and verses are all related to one another; at the same time they are separate from each other; one part speaks with, and leads to the others, as 'Ali (a.s.) has said: "Obviously, it is not enough to look at a single verse in the light of the language and literature and decide what it means, unless one meditates on all the relevant verses and strives one's utmost to find out from all of them together what that particular verse means."

The verse 4:82 points to this very fact, as we have explained in the topic of brevity: "Do they not then meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy."

Explaining the Qur'an according to one's opinion is, thus, prohibited. And this prohibition is directed to the way of exegesis, and not to the exegesis itself.

In other words, the Prophet has forbidden the people to try to understand the Divine words by the same methods which are used to understand a human speech - it is irrelevant whether they succeed in comprehending its true meaning or not.

That is why he (s.a.w.a.) has said in another tradition: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an of his own opinion, (even if) he was right, he committed wrong."

This dictum clearly proves that the mistake lies in choosing the way; it does not matter whether that way takes one to the true destination or not.

The same is the explanation of the words, narrated in the tradition of al-Ayyashi: "if he gets to the right interpretation, he shall not be rewarded".

This view is supported also by the state of affairs in the days of the Prophet.

The revelation of the Qur'an was not yet completed; and what was revealed was not yet arranged; not all the Muslims had in their hands all the revealed verses - most of them had only a few chapters and verses with them.

Had they been allowed to explain every piece or verse separately, without comparing that piece with other relevant verses, they would almost certainly have fallen into error.

It appears from the above discourse that what the exegete has been forbidden is to interpret a verse of the Qur'an independently, relying on his own knowledge and opinion, without reference to another authority.

In other words, it is necessary, when one wants to explain a Qur'anic verse, to seek help from others by referring the matter to them. Who is that other authority? It could only be either other Qur'anic verses, or the traditions.

The second alternative is out of question because the prophet has ordered the Muslims to refer the traditions to the Qur'an; it cannot be the other way round.

The tradition's meanings and even their authenticity is tested by the Qur'an; how can tradition decide the meaning of the Qur'an? Thus, there remains only one valid and approved way of explaining the verses of the Qur'an, and that is with the help of other relevant verses.

This much is enough to show the irrelevance of numerous explanations written about the tradition of "interpreting the Qur'an by one's own opinion". The scholars have explained this tradition in not less than ten ways:

First: It means interpreting the Qur'an without expertise in those subjects which are essential for knowing its exegesis.

And as-Suyuti has said in al-itqan that there are fifteen in all: Language, syntax, conjugation, etymology, styles of literature, rhetoric, elocution, recitation of the Qur'an, roots of religion, fundamentals of jurisprudence, reasons and occasions of revelations (as well as the stories mentioned in the Qur'an), abrogating and abrogated verses, law of the Shari'ah, traditions that explain the general and unspecific verses, and the gifted knowledge.

This last phrase refers to a tradition of the Prophet: "Whoever acts upon what he knows, Allah gives him knowledge of what he does not know."

Second: It refers to the attempts of finding the interpretations of the ambigious verses, which no one knows except Allah.

Third: It is interpretation of the Qur'an to support a wrong belief or action. It happens when an exegete makes his own view or belief the foundation upon which he builds the exegesis of the Qur'an; he fits the verse on his own belief in any possible way - no matter how weak or far-fetched that might be.

Fourth: It is declaring, without any proof, that a certain explanation is the meaning really intended by Allah.

Fifth: It refers to explaining the Qur'an according to one's inclination and desire.

These five explanations of the said tradition have been narrated by Ibnu 'n-Naqib, as as-Suyuti has quoted in al-itqan. There are five other explanations which we enumerate here from other books:

Sixth: It is explaining the difficult passages of the Qur'an in a new way which was not narrated from the companions and their disciples - because such an interpretation would make the exegete liable to the displeasure of Allah.

Seventh: The tradition is about explaining the Qur'an in a certain way, while the speaker knows that it is not the true explanation.

These last two have been mentioned by Ibnu 'l-Anbari.

Eighth: The tradition forbids talking about the Qur'an without knowledge and without making sure - it does not matter whether the speaker knows or not that another explanation is true.

Ninth: It forbids reliance on the apparent meaning of the Qur'an. It is the explanation of those who think that the apparent meaning of the Qur'an is not a valid authority; to understand a verse, one must look to a clear tradition narrated from a sinless authority (i.e. the Prophet, his daughter and the twelve Imams, peace be on them all).

But in fact it shall not be an exegesis of the Qur'an; rather it shall be following the tradition. Anyhow, according to this group, exegesis of the Qur'an depends on the explanation of a sinless authority.

Tenth: There were some people who believed that the Qur'an had valid apparent meanings, but said that common people could not understand it.

According to this view also relying on the apparent meaning of the Qur'an was forbidden by this tradition. One must look for clear traditions of sinless authorities to interpret the Qur'an.

These are ten explanations of the said tradition - although some may in effect be identical to some others. In any case, none of these is supported by any proof.

Moreover, some are obviously wrong, or their inaccuracy may be understood from what we have earlier said about this tradition. There is no reason to point it out again.

There are many verses that support the traditions mentioned earlier:

Do they not meditate on the Qur'an? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82).

Those who made the Qur'an into shreds (15:91).

Surely they who distort Our signs are not hidden from Us. What! is he then who is cast into the fire better or he who comes safe on the Day of Resurrection? Do what you like, surely He sees what you do (41:40).

.....(there are those who) alter words from their places.....(4:46).

And pursue not that of which you have not the knowledge (17:36).

Such verses in conjunction with the above mentioned traditions make it clear that the prohibition contained in those traditions is about the method used for the exegesis; they show that when explaining the Divine Speech, one should not adopt the same means that are used for explaining human talks.

What is the difference between Divine and human speeches? It is not in the use of the words, the construction of sentences or style of elocution.

The Qur'an is in plain Arabic, and all norms of eloquence have been mentioned in it.

Allah Himself has said: And We did not send any apostle but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly (14:4); ....and this is clear Arabic language (16:103); Surely We have made it an Arabic Qur'an so that you may understand (43:3).

The difference between the two is about the meaning and its application. This statement needs some elaboration:

We are at home in this material world, and surrounded with its natural phenomena.

As a result, when we hear a word, our mind, first of all, looks at its physical connotation and application.

When a fellow human being describes a thing or an affair, we apply his words to what we are accustomed to in this world; because we know that the speaker too is governed by the same forces as we are, and his comprehension and cognition is not different from ours.

In this way the application of a word affects its meaning - it may particularize a general meaning or vice versa; the circumstances may manipulate a word's connotation in a lot of ways. It is what we call rational context, in contrast to textual evidence.

For example, if we hear a powerful and wealthy man saying, "There is not a thing but with us are the treasures of it", first we shall look at the literal meaning of this sentence, then will come the stage of its application.

At this stage, we shall say that he has many strong and well-protected buildings which have got a lot of containers of various types to store his treasures, that consist of a large quantity of gold, silver, currency notes, bonds, jewels, various commodities, ornamental items, arms and ammunition etc.

We get this picture in our mind because this is what we call treasure and that is how it is kept safe and secure. But we will never imagine that he has in his treasury, the earth and the heavens, the continents and the oceans, the sun and the moon, the animals and the human beings.

These too are "things", but they are not possessed, gathered and put in a treasury. Because of this rational context we do restrict the generality of the word "thing" and apply it to a few selected items only; and in those items too only a small quantity is preserved in strong, impregnable buildings to protect it from theft and other damages.

And this knowledge of ours has restricted the general meaning of the words, "thing" and "treasures".

But now we hear Allah revealing to His Apostle (s.a.w.a): And there is not a thing but with Us are the treasures of it (15:21).

If our mind is not developed, and is still on the lowest rung of comprehension, we shall interpret this verse in exactly the same manner.

Of course, we shall not have any proof to say that the verse has been used in the same sense; yet we shall rush to that explanation, because our mind is accustomed to it. This is, then, explaining the Qur'an according to our own opinion without knowledge.

Now let us say that our understanding is a bit more developed, and we know that Allah does not gather things to put them in a treasury.

We think over this verse and read the next sentence: and We do not send it down but in a known measure; and then we compare it with another verse: ......and (in) what Allah sends down sustenance from the cloud, then gives life thereby to the earth after its death.........there are signs for a people who understand (45:5).

We shall at once say that the word "thing", in the verse under discussion, refers to the sustenance like bread and water; and that "sending it down", in the next sentence, refers to the coming down of rain.

We shall give it this interpretation because we do not know of anything, except the rain, that comes down from the heavens; therefore, we shall say that accumulation of everything near Allah and then it coming down in measured quantity refers to the accumulation of rain and its coming down to the earth to produce food grains.

This too shall be interpreting the Qur'an according to one's own opinion "without knowledge".

What is our argument? It is that we do not know of anything, except the rain, that descends from the heaven. But "not knowing" that a certain thing exists is quite different from "knowing" that it does not exist.

If our knowledge is more advanced and our mind more developed, we shall try not to say anything concerning the Qur'an without knowledge.

We shall say that the words of the verse are general; they should not be restricted in any way. "Thing" includes everything, and the word, "treasures", covers every single item of everything.

We shall arrive at the conclusion that the sentence describes the affairs of the creation and the creatures.

Then will come the puzzling sentence, "and We do not send it down but in a known measure".

Doubtlessly, human beings, animals and vegetables do not come down from the heavens; they grow from, and are born on, the earth.

Faced with this difficulty, we shall say that the first sentence, "And there is not a thing but with Us are the treasures of it", is a metaphorical way of saying that everything in existence is subservient to the will of Allah; that the Divine will is like a treasure that holds every creature, and only as much issues forth from it as is willed by Allah.

But this interpretation also, like the previous two, is based on "not knowing". We "do not know" that the things descend (in the meaning known to us) from Allah, and , therefore, we explain away the sentence in an allegorical way.

If you look at the Divine names, attributes and actions as described in the Qur'an, or at the Qur'anic declarations about the angels, the Divine Books, the apostles and the Day of Resurrection and its details, or at the laws of the shari'ah and their significance as given in the Qur'an, and then ponder on the way people want to interpret them in the light of rational context, you will see that all such exercises are but interpretations according to one's own liking without knowledge; that they should better be called misinterpretations.

We have shown under the fifth heading (why the Book contains the ambiguous verses?) in the discourse of the decisive and ambiguous verses that the Qur'anic expressions vis-a-vis the Divine realities are like a proverb in relation to its significance; and those realities have been explained in various expressions and diverse wordings, so that all taken together may lead the hearers to their real significance.

That is why the verses are said to be witnesses of each other; and that is how they explain one another. Otherwise the Divine realities could never be correctly explained; and people would have fallen in the pitfall of interpreting the Qur'an without knowledge.

The above discourse shows that interpreting the Qur'an according to one's opinion is always accompanied by speaking about it without knowledge. The tradition of the Prophet points to this fact: "Whoever spoke about the Qur'an without knowledge should settle himself in his seat of Fire."

It is such interpretations that make it look as though the verses of the Qur'an were contradictory to one another. Interpreting the verses by one's own opinion, without true knowledge, disturbs the semantic flow of the Qur'an.

Thus the verses are misinterpreted, the words shifted from their right places and used in wrong contexts.

Then it becomes necessary for these exegetes to explain some or most of the verses in a way that is against their apparent meanings; Divine words and sentences are given such meanings which linguists have never heard of.

Thus we find a group explaining away the verses of free will and choice, and their opponents misinterpreting the verses of Divine decree and measure.

Most of the Muslim sects are guilty of this type of misinterpretation, especially in those verses whose apparent meanings go against their beliefs.

They seek refuge in clothing such verses with meanings of their choice, and their so-called arguments boil down to this sentence: The apparent meaning of this verse is against what has already been established by rational proofs; therefore it must be given a new meaning, against the apparent one.

This practice creates confusion; the logical sequence of the verses is disrupted, their semantic flow is disturbed and they seem to contradict each other. Thus both lose their validity.

It is known that there is no discrepancy in the Qur'an. If a certain explanation shows that two verses are contradictory to each other, the only defect would be in that explanation. 

This has been termed, in many traditions, as hitting one part of the Qur'an with the other. See for example the following traditions:

It is narrated in al-Kafi and at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi from as-Sadiq from his father (peace be on them both) that he said: "A man does not hit a part of the Qur'an with the other (part) but that he becomes an infidel."

Ma'ani 'l-akhbar, al-Mahasin (through their chains) and at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi: as-Sadiq (a.s.) said: "A man does not hit a part of the Qur'an with the other (part) but that he becomes an infidel."

as-Saduq says that he asked Ibnu 'l-Walid what this tradition meant. He replied: "It is replying to a man concerning the exegesis of one verse, with the exegesis of another one."

The author says: This reply of Ibnu 'l-Walid is somewhat vague.

If by this expression he means the above-mentioned mix-up - as the polemicists argue by offering one verse "against" another, adhering to the one and explaining away the other - then he is correct.

But if he wants to disallow explaining one verse with the help of the other and bringing the one as evidence for the other, then it is wrong, as may be seen from the following two traditions too:

It is narrated in at-Tafsir of al-Nu'mani, through his chains to Isma'il ibn Jabir that he said: "I heard Abu 'Abdillah Ja'far ibn Muhammad as-Sadiq (peace be on them both) saying: 'Verily, Allah - Benevolent and High is He - sent Muhammad and ended with him (the chain of) the prophets; thus there is no prophet after him; and He sent down to him a Book, and ended with it (the chain of) the Books; thus there is no (Divine) book after it.

He allowed in it the lawful (things) and prohibited in it the unlawful; so its lawful is lawful up to the Day of Resurrection, and its unlawful is unlawful up to the Day of Resurrection; there is in it your shari'ah, and the information of the people (who passed away) before you and (who are to come) after you; and the Prophet (may Allah have mercy on him and his progeny!) appointed it as a standard (that will remain) for ever in his successors.

But the people left them (those successors) although they were witnesses over the people of all times; and they (i.e. the people) deviated from them, then they killed them, and followed others and gave those others their unalloyed obedience.

(This continued) till they extended their enmity to him who showed his love of those invested with authority (from Allah) and who sought their knowledge.

Allah has said: .....and (they) have forgotten a part of what they were admonished with, and you will not cease to be informed of deceit from among them (5:14).

And it is because they hit a part of the Qur'an with the other; and they argued with the abrogated (verse) thinking that it was the abrogating one, and debated with the help of the ambiguous thinking that it was the decisive; and offered a particularized verse for their argument assuming that it was a general one; and stuck at the beginning of a verse leaving aside the reason of its interpretation; and they did not see what was beginning of the speech and what was its end; and they did not know its arrival or its departure, because they did not take it from its people; thus they went astray and misled others.

" 'And know, may Allah have mercy on you! that he who does not distinguish in the Book of Allah the abrogating verse from the abrogated one, and a specific from a general one, and a decisive from an ambiguous; and does not differentiate between permission and an obligation, and does not recognize a verse of Meccan period from a Medinite one, and does not know the reasons of revelation; and does not understand the difficult words of the Qur'an (whether simple or compound); and does not comprehend (what has been hidden in it of) the knowledge of (Divine) decree and measure; and is ignorant of advancing and delaying

(in its verses); and does not distinguish the clear from the deep, nor the manifest from the esoteric, nor the beginning from the termination; and is unaware of the question and the answer, the disjoining and the joining, and the exceptions and the all-inclusive, and is ignorant of an adjective of a preceding (noun)

that explains, the subsequent one; and is unaware of the emphasized subject and the detailed one, the obligatory laws and the permissions, the places of the duties and rules, and the meaning of the lawful and the unlawful (in which the unbelievers have perished); and does not know the joined words, and the words that are related to those coming before them, or after them -

then such a man does not know the Qur'an; nor is he among the people of the Qur'an; And if someone claims knowledge of these variations, without proof, then he is a liar, a doubting (person), and a fabricator of lies against Allah and His Apostle, and his resting place is the hell, and what an evil destination it is!' "

It is written in Nahju 'l-balaghah and al-Ihtijaj that 'Ali (a.s.) said in a sermon: "When a legal problem is put before one of them he passes judgment on it according to his opinion.

Then exactly the same problem comes before another of them and he gives the opposite verdict.

Then these judges bring this matter to their leader who had appointed them and he confirms all their (contradictory) verdicts, although their Allah is one and their Prophet is one and their Book is one.

Is it because Allah had ordered them to differ and they obeyed Him?

Or He had prohibited them from it but they disobeyed Him?

Or is it that Allah had sent an incomplete religion and sought their help to complete it?

Or, they are His partners, so that it is their right to say and it is His duty to agree?

Or is it that Allah sent a complete religion but the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) fell short of conveying it and handing it over (to the ummah)? 

And Allah, the Glorified, says: We have not neglected anything in the Book (6:38); and that in it is the clarification of everything; and He has said that one part of the Book confirms the other and that there is no discrepancy in it;

And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy (4:82).

And verily, the exterior of the Qur'an is elegant and its esoteric (meaning) is deep.

Its wonders cannot be enumerated, and its marvels will not cease; and the darkness cannot be removed except by it."

The author says: This narration clearly shows that every religious opinion and view must be based on the Qur'an.

The sentence, "in it is the clarification of everything", paraphrases a Qur'anic verse, ( . . . and We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything [16:89]).

Ibn Sa'd, Ibnu 'd-Durays (in his al-Fada'il) and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather: "The Apostle of Allah (s.a.w.a.) appeared before a group who were bandying arguments about the Qur'an, and he was very angry and said: 'This is how the nations before you went astray - they disputed with their prophets and hit one part of the book with the other.'

Then he said: 'And verily the Qur'an has not been revealed so that its parts would contradict each other; rather, it has been revealed so that its part would confirm each other.

Therefore, follow what you know (of it) and believe in what is ambiguous to you (from it)."' (ad-Durru 'l-manthur)

Ahmad has narrated in another way from 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather that the Messenger of'All5h (s.a.w.a.) heard some people disputing with one another.

So, he said: "That is how those who were before you had perished; they hit one part of the Book of Allah over the other.

And the Book of Allah has been revealed (and) its one part confirms the other; therefore, do not (try to) refute its one part with the other part.

What you know of it, you should believe in it, and what you do not know of it, you should leave it to him who knows it." (ad-Durru 'I-manthur)

The author says: As you see, these traditions count "hitting one part of the Qur'an with the other" as opposite to "confirming some of its parts with the others".

In other words, this "hitting" refers to confusing the meanings of the verses, disturbing their aims and objects, mistaking, for example, the decisive verses for the ambiguous ones and vice versa.

It means that speaking in the Qur'an according to one's own opinion, and explaining the verses without knowledge (described in earlier quoted traditions) and hitting some parts of the Qur'an with the others (mentioned in the above traditions) refer to one and the same thing, that is, explaining the Qur'an with the help of other than the Qur'an.

Question: No doubt, the Qur'an was revealed so, that the people may comprehend and understand it. See, for example, these two verses: -

Surely We have revealed to you the Book with the truth for the sake of men ... (39:41).

This is a clear statement for men (3:138).

Also there is no doubt that it was the Prophet who had the authority to explain it.

As Allah says: ... and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them . . . (16:44).

And surely he explained it to his companions, who transmitted it to their disciples.

What has come to us from the companions and their disciples is doubtlessly the explanation given by the Prophet, and we cannot disregard it, as the Qur'an tells us to follow what is given to us by the Prophet.

As for those explanations which the companions gave us without ascribing them to the Prophet, it is true that they cannot have the same authority as the Prophet's declarations-, yet we feel more at ease with them (instead of looking for them on our own).

Why?

Because either they had heard it from the Prophet, or they were led to it by their expertise in religion - the expertise they had acquired from the Prophet's instruction and exposition.

The same applies to their disciples and the disciples' disciples. Surely the meaning of the Qur'an could not be hidden from them they had deep rooted knowledge of Arabic language; they were keen on learning the Qur'anic interpretation from the Prophet himself; and they strived their utmost to acquire the knowledge of religion.

All this may be seen in biographical details of the early scholars of religion.

Looking at the above-mentioned details, we come to the conclusion that deviating from their method and tradition, going out of their company or explaining any verse in a way that is not found in their opinions and sayings, is an innovation; and that one must remain silent where they have not given any opinion.

What the companions and their direct and indirect disciples have said is enough for the purpose of understanding the Qur'an.

There are thousands of traditions on exegesis, and as-Suyuti has counted some seventeen thousand traditions on this subject, narrated from the Prophet and his companions and their disciples.

Reply: Its reply may be inferred from what we have written earlier.

There are numerous verses which invite the public in general, the believers as well as the unbelievers, those who were present at the time of revelation as well as those who came later or shall come in future, to understand the Qur'an and meditate and ponder on it.

For example, see the verse 4: 8 2 which has been quoted repeatedly: Do they not then meditate on the Qur’an?

And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy.

It clearly shows that the Qur'anic knowledge may be acquired through meditation and contemplation; and that by this process the apparent discrepancy between the verses disappears completely.

Remember that this verse puts a challenge to unbelievers that they would not find any discrepancy in the Qur'an if they pondered on it.

And in this context they could not be advised to go to the companions and their disciples if they wanted to understand its meaning; nay, even the advice to refer to the Prophet would have been irrelevant:

If the Prophet's explanation were in conformity with the apparent meaning of the verse, then people would understand that meaning from the verse itself on meditation and contemplation - and there would be no need to refer to the Prophet.

And if his explanation were against the apparent meaning of the Qur'an - a meaning that an average man would not understand from the words - then the challenge would be futile and the argument of the verse 4:82 would not stand.

Of course, so far as the details of various Qur'anic laws are -concerned, they cannot be known without the Prophet's explanation, as the Qur'an itself says: . . . and whatever the Apostle gives you, take it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back . . . (59:7).

Also, the details of the Qur'anic stories and of the Day of Judgment depend on his exposition.

It shows that the Prophet's responsibility, in this respect, was of teaching only.

A teacher guides and helps his student in understanding what would be difficult to comprehend without his help.

The teaching brings the meaning nearer to the mind; it does not create a meaning.

The teacher arranges the subject matter to make it easier to comprehend, so that the student is not obliged to waste his time and energy in self- education - a proposition that carries with it a risk of wrong deductions.

This aspect of the Prophet's responsibilities is mentioned in many verses.

For example, . . . and We have revealed to you the Reminder that you may make clear to men what has been revealed to them, and that haply they may reflect (16:44). . . .

And teaches them the Book and the Wisdom . . . (62:2).

The Prophet, therefore, teaches the people what the Qur’an itself says and the Divine Speech itself shows, and which the people themselves may understand even if it requires some meditation.

It is not the Prophet's function to bestow on the verses such meanings as cannot be normally understood from those words. Such an explanation would not conform with the following Qur’anic declarations:-

A Book of which the verses are made plain, an Arabic Qur’an for a people who know (41:3).

. . . and this is clear Arabic language ( 16:103).

Then there are the traditions of the Prophet exhorting the Muslims to hold fast to the Qur'an and to verify with its help the traditions attributed to him.

It necessarily follows that all what the Prophet has said may be known from the Qur'an.

Otherwise, he could not tell us to check with it all the sayings attributed to him.

Now, if we say that understanding of the Qur’an depends on the Prophet's explanation, it would be a vicious circle.

The Qur’an would be understood only if explained by the traditions, but the authenticity of the tradition could be established only if one understands the Qur’an.

Now we come to the traditions narrated from the companions.

First, we are faced with the problems concerning the chains of the narrators, because not all of them are free from one or the other defect.

Second, the companions have differed a great deal with one another in their expositions of the Qur'an.

Third, in many cases, divergent views have been ascribed to a single companion, as anyone may find out by looking in the books of traditions and exegesis.

What is one supposed to do when faced with such discrepancies?

We are told by these people that we should choose one of those diverse opinions and stick to it; that we should not destroy the "composite unanimity" of the companions, nor should we go outside their circle.

But the trouble is that the companions themselves were not averse to differ from each other; then why should we not differ from them?

They themselves never claimed that their opinions were vested with an authority which others were duty bound to accept; nor did they ever say that, although they differed from one another, others should not differ from them.

If we were stuck up with the Qur'anic exegesis narrated from the companions and their disciples, the forward march of knowledge would be arrested and academic research negated.

Look at the explanations transmitted to us from the early scholars, and study the books of exegesis written in early centuries.

You will find that they contain only simple word meanings, and are devoid of deep thoughts and fine ideas.

If we stop at those explanations, where we can find the vast and deep knowledge mentioned in the verse: . . . and We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything. . . ( 16:89).

Then it is said that it is unthinkable that the companions did not know the meaning of the Qur'an, in spite of their keen interest in religious knowledge and their understanding and serious efforts in this way.

But the very discrepancy in their various explanations belies this argument. Discrepancy and difference could not occur unless the truth was hidden from their eyes, and unless they were confused.

The truth is that the highway to the understanding of the Qur'an is wide open; and the Divine Speech itself leads one to its own understanding; it does not depend, for this purpose, on any other guide.

It is a Book introduced by Allah as the guidance, the light and the clear explanation of everything.

It cannot be said to need another guide, to seek illumination from another light or to depend on an outside factor for its own explanation.

Question: The correct traditions say that the Prophet said in his last sermon: "Certainly I am leaving among you two weighty things: The bigger one and the smaller one. As for the bigger one, it is the Book of Allah; and as for the smaller one, it is my progeny, the people of my house. Therefore, keep me in mind about these two things; because you shall never go astray so long as you hold fast to them."

This tradition has been narrated by both sects from a great many companions of the Apostle of Allah (s. a. w. a.); it has come to us through so many chains that one can entertain no doubt about its authenticity.

The traditionalists have counted that it has been narrated by thirty-five companions.

Some narrations contain the sentence: "They shall not separate from one another till they come to me on the reservoir (i.e., Kawthar)."

This tradition proves that the words of Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.)

on the Qur'an are a binding authority and that one must adhere to what has come down to us from them concerning the exegesis.

Otherwise, one would be guilty of separating the Qur'an from the Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.).

Reply: What was said earlier regarding the explanation of the Prophet applies here too.

The tradition quoted in the question is not intended to negate the authority of the apparent meaning of the Qur'an, nor does it say that the exegesis given by the Ahlu 'I-bayt (a.s.) is the only authoritative explanation.

The Prophet has used the words, "they shall not separate from one another". It means that authority belongs to the Qur'5n and the Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.) together; the Qur'an explains its meaning and makes manifest the Divine realities, and the Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.) guide to the true path and direct the people to the Qur'5nic aims and goals.

Moreover, like the Prophet, the Ahlu 'I-bayt (a.s.) too have directed the Muslims to hold fast to the Qur'an, to meditate on it and to verify from it the traditions attributed to them.

Furthermore, a considerable number of the exegetical traditions of the Ahlu 'l-bayt (a.s.) themselves have used the method of explaining a verse with the help of the other.

This method can be meaningful only if the Qur'anic verses may be understandable to an average man - provided the correct direction is followed.

Apart from these rational arguments, some traditions of the Ahlu 'I-bayt (a.s.) explicitly mention this fact.

al-Barqi has narrated through his chains from Abu Labid that Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said in a tradition: "Whoever thought that the Book of Allah was vague, fell in perdition and destroyed others."

Another tradition has been narrated in the same book as well as in al-Ihtijaj that Abu Ja'far (a.s.) said: "When I narrate to you anything, you should ask me where it was in the Book of Allah . . . "

The above discourse makes it clear that there is no conflict between those traditions which say that the Qur'anic knowledge is not unintelligible and that it may be understood with the help of the Qur'anic verses themselves, and those which are apparently against it.

For example, it is narrated in at-Tafsir of al-'Ayyashi from Jabir that he said: "Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) said: 'Verily, the Qur'an has an interior, and for its interior there is an exterior.'

Then he said: 'O Jabir! and there is nothing farther from the understanding of the men than it (i.e., the Qur'an). Verily, a verse, its first (part) is revealed about one subject and its middle (part) about another thing, and its end about something else; and yet it is a well-connected speech, (that) revolves in various ways.' "

This theme has been given in various other traditions. In some of them, the sentence, "and there is nothing farther from the understanding of the men . . . ", has been ascribed to the Prophet.

Also, 'Ali (a.s.) is reported as saying: "Verily, the Qur'an may be explained in many ways; it has many faces.

It is clear that what has been allowed, nay, encouraged, is explaining it through its own path, and what has been forbidden is explaining it through another path.

The prescribed way is exegesis of the Qur'an with the help of the Qur'an itself, explaining a verse with another verse.

A man can do so only when he is well versed in the traditions of the Prophet and his Ahlu 'I-bayt (a. s.); it gives him correct perspective and creates in him a discriminating taste.

It is after acquiring this taste that one may explain the Qur'an with confidence. And Allah is the best Guide.

Aminah.alqaem.org

www.aminah.shiahosting.com

Weakness Among Muslim's

I struggled with this question for many months until I realized that many Muslims are Muslim in name only and an astounding percentage do not know, let alone practice, their religion.

The Muslim Ummah is weak because we as Muslims are weak.

In the West, the enemies of Islam have cleverly segmented country and religion. Muslims in the West are now faced with choosing one over the other. In this there is no decision. Some have opted to serve two masters; a choice that fails to serve either. The enemies of Islam are cunning indeed. They have further fragmented Muslims into categories, from moderates to extremists. There is no such thing in Islam. There is neither compulsion nor compromise in the requirements laid out for us in the Qur’an or the Sunnah.

The enemies of Islam have taken one of our most sacred of acts, namely Jihad and reduce its meaning to military aggression waged by radical Islamists which it is not. This has created more fear amongst Muslims and many of our brothers and sisters have distanced themselves from the actions of our Mujahideen as the result. Every Muslim is obligated to participate in the defense of the Muslim people wherever they are attacked.

But in same time, weakness of Muslim's does not only come from the Western's..

To many Muslim's as they enter Western contry's looses there faith and there strong Iman.

Then Some would ask why?

It is not the West, it lay upon One Self !

See clearly inside your self and jugde!

Why Are You Weak?

Why Do You Go For Making Sin?

Do You Not Fear Allah?

Ask Your Self What Is The Purpose For Your Life?

The Muslim Ummah is riddled with fear and suspicion which Allah has also warned us about.

With tactics well known to the enemies of Islam, Muslims are now pitted against each other when it is abundantly clear in the Quran and the Sunnah that it is a duty for Muslims to support their fellow Muslims wherever they are in the world.

Sorry To Say, But Our Muslim Ummah Is In A Sorry State!

Muslim's Killing Muslim's!

We See Alot Of Our Sunni Brother's And Sister's Figthing Against Us..

Welknown They Do Know, We Never Surrender Our Belief !

Look Around And Watch!

In The West, Most Sunni But Surely Also Shia Muslim's Has Changed Them Self From Being A True Beliver To A Weak Muslim!

I Meet Alot Of Muslim's, Who As They See Me..A Revert..Who Praticy Islam Within All...Are Surprized..And Then Tell Me How Proud I should Be Off My Self!

Funny Isnt It ?

Cause it is Muslim's Who Dont Praticy There Religion, Muslimah's Without Hijab, Muslim's Who Go For All The Forbidding Thing's..

And Then They Tell Me..A Revert..Be Proud!

Are They Feeling Good Inside?

I dont Think So!

Dont Tell Me...That the Reason for Rejecting Religion is The Western Life !

It is NOT true!

Sure West has alot to offer for a human wich may have lived in a Islamic Contry, but it shouldnt be a reason to change one self.

Faith, honesty and strong Iman Then One is On the Rigth Way!

Dont Tell Me, That You Dont Fear Allah?

Do You Know What Happen To You When Its Time To Face Allah?

Oh Fellow Muslim!

Get Back In Line and Serve Allah Swt as You Are Supossed To Do!

We will only be able to stop this aggression, an aggression that ultimately will come to each and every one of our doorsteps, if we rise to the status that Allah has called us to; by first becoming knowledgeable in our religion and then putting into action the prescribed methods that have been laid down for us.

Surely We Have A Duty To Attempt To !

As long as Muslims allow the enemies of Islam to shred the very fabric of our beliefs that pits brother against brother, and we ignore the obligations Allah has prescribed for us and remain ignorant of our deen (religion), our Ummah will remain weak and we will continue to be the target of aggression.

And when we as individuals come to the realization that man’s laws will always fail us and that only Gods laws can bring peace and harmony, then, and only then, we will make true progress. The solution lies in Islam. 

All praise is to Allah, we praise Him and seek His help and ask for His forgiveness, We seek refuge from the evils, which are in ourselves and the wicked in our actions, whoever Allah guides, none can misguide, For whoever Allah guides, there is none to misguide him. For whoever Allah sends astray, there is none to guide him. And I bear witness that there is no God but Allah alone Who has no partner and I bear witness that Mohammed is His slave and His messenger.

Peace and blessings be upon those who follow His guidance.

Aminah.alqaem.org

Prisoner of Golden Chains

One day, I heard that somewhere, far away from here, people were imprisoned, then raped, tortured and dragged around on leashes like animals without any justification.

The pictures I saw showed me an evil I had never imagined before. I felt pain and anger, but I knew I could change nothing, so I told the pain to go away, and told the anger to shut up.

I told the sense of injustice I felt to be quiet, because that was somewhere else, far away from here- it was what we leave behind before coming here.

The next day, I heard that a group of kids, somewhere far away from here, were stopped at a checkpoint on their way to school.

Well-trained soldiers could only communicate with these kids by pointing guns at them, so the kids had to sit on the sidewalk and have their class right there. It made me want to cry, but I told the tears to go back.

On another day, I saw photos of a family who lived far away from here.

They were sitting n a beach, enjoying an outing, when suddenly they were attacked, their bodies were torn to pieces, their heads were cut from their bodies…all except one little girl, who cried endlessly, because she was holding in her arms her baby twin brothers, whose lives had been stolen even before they had properly begun. I jumped up, I turned away from the screen, I closed my eyes, I shook my head, I wanted some way out…but I sat down again, because there was nothing I could do.

On yet another day, I saw that somewhere, far away, little children had no food to eat and no clean water to drink.

They were sick- dying- their bellies inflated as if to point out some sick irony in their plight.

They came from a place whose earth was rich, but even their piece of earth had been raped, and only they had been left on it to rot.

But this time, there were no tears, no anger and no pain. I didn’t want to drown in my own helplessness.

I didn’t want to choke on my own weakness, this time, I didn’t want to leave any room in my heart for the suffering someone else was going through.

This time, I changed the channel before the pictures had their effect on me, this time, I ignore that newspaper article, this time, I switched on my Playstation, this time I turned up my music, this time, I give in to the pleasurable distractions designed to make me forget, so that those dying kids would rot even out of my memory.

This time I followed the mirage that pulled me from reality and took me to a hollow daydream.

This time, I closed my eyes to the world around me, unaware that soon cruelty would knock on my door and take me from the daydream and into my worst nightmare.

This time, I killed my conscience, and became a zombie- walking and talking, but rotting with the stench of death…………
Then the world shook again.

I was shocked back into life.

Why did I not care that my equal in humanity was being slaughtered, simply because it was out of my sight?

Why did I care more for how many dollars I saved that week than for how many children died in some corner of the Earth?

How could I see people consumed and pillaged by fire, but myself take a tentative step back, afraid that even a small spark of that fire may land at my feet?