The-two-Sects

Two Brothers of the Same Father: An Expose of the Illusionary Schism Between the Barelwi & Deobandi Quburi Sufi Sects

Compiled, Translated & Annotated
Abu Hibban & Abu Khuzaimah Ansari

 

Publishers foreword

ʿAudhu Billāhi min ash-Shayṭān al-Rajīm

Bismillāh al-Rahman al-Rahīm

Alhamdullilahi Rabbil A’lamīn, Waṣalatu Wasalam Ala Rasūlillahil Karīm, Wa Ala Alihi Wa Ashabi Wa Man Tabiahum Bi-Ehsan Ila Yaum al-Din; Wa  Ba’d

All Praise belongs and is directed to the Rabb of everthing

 that exists, Praise and Salutations be upon His

Final beloved Messenger, his revered family

 and his noble Companions and upon

 those who follow them in good

until the end of times,

 To proceed,

 

Two brothers of the same father: An expose of the illusionary schism between the Barelwi & Deobandi Quburi Sufi Sects

After the debate in which Abdur Rahman Hasan overwhelmingly subdued the arguments of the Mushrik apologists ie the Barelwi’s; the Deobandi’s-the step brothers of the Barelwi’s flocked to their defence and showed their true reality in defending Shirk and their brethren. In doing so they desecrated the Tawhid of Allah and confirmed what we have been saying all along; that the Barelwi’s and Deobandi’s are both on the same belief system of Shirk and grave worship and thus step brothers.

This response was written in July 2016 but for one reason or another publishing it was delayed.

Please read and share

www.salafiri.com

Our scholars have long written about the true concept of unity between the innovated modern Sufi sects known commonly as the Barelwi’s and the Deobandi’s. For many years each sect has deluded and deceived the masses into thinking that they are opposed to one another on the basis of creedal belief. This is simply a bare faced lie which the ‘two brothers,’ that is the Barelwi’s and Deobandi’s, have concocted and contrived so that to mislead the masses.

The relationship between the two brothers was no less evident than the remarks made by some Deobnadi forums concerning a debate recently held between Ustadh Abdur Rahman Hasan and the mushrik apologist, Asrar Rashid on the issue of istigatha [supplication seeking help in times of distress] from other than Allah. The Deobandi’s ran to the defence of their Barelwi brother and decided to defend him in his stance on the permissibility of calling upon other than Allah. This defence of course is nothing new from the Deobandi and one should expect nothing less from them.

Indeed, the Deoband founding fathers such as Ashraf Ali Thanwi and Rashid Ahmad Gangohi have even made the dog of the people of the cave as a wasilah and means of calling upon Allah for shifa. [Refer to Behshti Zewar, part 9, pg. 96, printed by Rahiymiyyah, Deoband, UP, India]

Furthermore, the super saint of the Deobandi and Barelwi’s Haji Imdadullah muhajir makki is according to the founding father of the Deobandi Ashraf Ali Thanwi answered a call from a murid in distress on a sinking ship by carrying the ship to safety and saving all the people from destruction. This has been relayed directly from Ashraf Ali Thanvi himself and one can refer to Karamat Imdadiyyah (pgs.14 and 36). This is the istigatha that the deobandis and Barelwi’s are debating for and inviting people towards!!

It is therefore hardly surprising that such a sect would do anything other than run to the support of its Barelwi brother. For further quotes about how the Deoband call upon Abdul Qadir Jelani and the dead refer to our compilation, The creed of the of Deobandi Hanafi’s (http://forum.salafiri.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=69)  and the book on the Creed of the Barailwi’s and Deobandi’s is the same.

Let’s not forget the istigatha that the Barelwi’s and there founding fathers have called to and we suffice with a few excerpts. Ahmad Ridda Khan states:

 “The order of the Helpers of the people (ghawth) and of those who are called for help begins from Ali, ending at al-Hasan al-Askari, the eleventh Imam of the Shia.” (Malfuzat of the Barelwi, pg. 212).

He said in al-Aman wal-Ula (pg.12-13):

“Ali removes calamity and obliterates misery from him who recites the well-known ‘Saifi supplication’, 7 or 3 times, or only once. This supplication is as follows:

“Call Ali for help who is the
manifestation of wonders; you will find
him a helper to you at the calamities.
Every calamity and misery will be gone by
your protection, O Ali, O Ali.”

See also

http://www.salafiri.com/al-barelviyyah-vol-2-their-history-beliefs-part-1/

He said in his Hadaaiq Bakhshish (pg.186):

“O Shade of the deity of Shaykh Abdal Qadir, give me something for Allah’s sake, Shaykh Abdal Qadir!

Affection, affection, O affectionate Abdal Qadir. Remove from us the vicissitudes of time, O Abdal Qadir.”

He said in his Malfuzat (pg. 307):

“During my life I did not seek help from anyone, and I do not ask anyone for aid except Shaykh Abdal Qadir. Whenever I seek help, I seek it only from him. Whenever I ask for aid, I ask him alone. Once I tried to ask for aid and seek help from another saint (hadrat Mahbub Ilahi). When I intended to utter his name for seeking help, I did not utter the words but Ya Ghauthan (the one whose help is sought). My tongue refused to utter the words for seeking help from anyone except him!”

He said further in the same book (pg.125-126):

“O Shade of Allah, Abdal Qadir.

O place of refuge, Abdal Qadir.

We are needy and indigent.

You are the possessor of crown and integrity.

Give me something for Allah’s sake, Shaykh Abdal Qadir!”

It is for this reason amongst numerous others that the Barailwi debater Asrar wanted to run away from his ‘mujaddid imam’ as he knew the shirk of his imam and his own would be exposed.

Note: some of the shirk and kufr akbar mentioned above can be found in the book Asrar ‘gifted’ to Ustadh Abdur Rahman Hasan of Ahmad Ridda ‘al-Aman wal ‘Ula.’ Asrar may have deceived the Deobandis and general masses but there is no doubt that he is upon what his ‘mujaddid’ is upon.

Moving on to the crux of the matter, what follows is a very brief reply to the Deobandi’s who ra in defence of their Barailwi brother; so that the reader can stay away from the feeble misconceptions brought forth by the Deobandiyyah. We will be writing this article in an extremely simple and easy to follow fashion so that two Sufi’s have no excuses left but to accept the truth Insha Allah. 

“Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Taghut. So fight against the allies of Satan. Indeed, the plot of Satan has ever been weak.” (Nisa:76)

Ahl al-Shirk wa’l Bid’ah Wrote

“According to Wahhābī belief, the Mushrikūn of Quraysh in the time of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) affirmed Tawḥīd al-Rubūbiyya; that is, they believed:
1. Allāh alone is the Creator, Sustainer and Bringer of benefit and harm
2. These qualities are not affirmed for any of their false gods. “

 

A BRIEF RELPY:

We begin in very simple terms by establishing that the concept of Tawhīd in the book and Sunnah and specifically Rububiyyah is something which is often discussed and there are a few principles and definitions that we should bear in mind when discussing this topic.

The Meaning of Ar-Rabb, the Lord

Ar-Rabb is the owner who has full authority over his property. Ar-Rabb, linguistically means, the master or the one who has the authority to lead. All of these meanings are correct for Allah. When it is alone, the word Rabb is used only for Allah. As for other than Allah, it can be used to say Rabb Ad-Dar, the master of such and such object. Further, it was reported that Ar-Rabb is Allah’s Greatest Name. [Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Fatihah)

Basic Evidence from the Texts Evidencing the Proof for the Definition of Rububiyyah.

One may enquire where is the evidence for such a premise and explanation? We say Allah has explained this in very clear terms in the quran he says,

Certainly creation and command are His alone. [Surah al-A’raaf:54]

And this is His being unique with regards to His creating and His controlling.

And to Allaah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the Earth. [Surah al-Jathiyah:27]
And this is His being unique in terms of sovereignty.

Rabb il ‘aalameen (Lord of all creation) [Surah as-Saffat:182]

Meaning: their Creator and their Sovereign Owner and the One who controls their affairs.

And an ‘aalam is: everything other than Allaah. And they are called ‘aalam because they are a sign for their Creator. So in everything from the created things of Allaah, there is a sign proving His Oneness and His Perfection.

In fact, Allah almighty in surah al-Fatir ayah 13 expressly states that he alone is the owner and sustainer alone of all the entire creation.

These very verses talk of Allah being the Rabb and lord and use as evidence the fact that he is the only sustainer, creator, sovereign. It is therefore very clearly established that tawheed ar rububiyyah is to accept that Allah can only be the true rabb as he has the characteristics and qualities he describes himself with.

So when the two brothers wrote above that this concept or definition of Tawhid al-Rubibiyyah is a Wahabi concept then they were very much mistaken as this concept has been evidenced above from the quran itself.

Indeed, the imams of the Deobandi’s and Barailwi brothers had no choice but to also give this same concept of tawheed rubibiyyah and the acceptance of the mushrikeen of Makkah concerning it. So will the two brothers now abandon their aimmah?

The Barailwi ‘Shaykh ul-Hadith and muffasir of the Quran’ which the likes of Asrar Rashid and even his teachers try to ascribe themselves to be his students, writes:

“Allah is saying O you you mushriks even though you know and attest that Allah is the provider of sustenance for the entire heavens and earth, the giver of life and death and the controller of all the affairs then why do you persist in your associating partners with him in worship” [Tibyan al-Qur’an, Ghulam Rasul Sai’di [5:363]

The Barailwi – Deobandi scholars Who Confirm our Definition of al-Rububiyyah and the fact that the Mushriks believed in this whilst rejecting to single out Allah alone in Worship.

‘Rububiyyah’ in the Quran revolves around a few pilliars such as accepting that Allah is the one who is the creator/originator of everything, the sovereign, the sustainer of all and the owner of all things. This definition of Rabb and rububiyyah has been expressly mentioned by the salaf of this ummah like, Imam ibn Kathir in Tafsir Ibn Kathir [2:324], Ibn Abi Izz in Sharh Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah, [pg.25], Ibn al-Qayyim, Madarij us-Salikin [3:468], Imam Tabari in Tafsir al-Tabari [23:305], Tashil al-Aqidah al-Islamiyyah of Ibn Jibreen [pg.41] and many others as will follow.

In fact, this is something which the scholars of the two brothers have more or less accepted by way of consensus. How the two brothers can then claim that the mushriks did not believe in Rububiyyah of Allah is nothing short of a fallacy without basis. They either accept that Tawhid al-Rububiyyah comprises of what we have defined or they provide a new explanation backed up by their aimmah and the salaf to prove otherwise.

They seem not to care that an entire plethora of textual evidence exists from there scholars who support our definition of al-Rubibiyyah and the fact that the mushrikeen belived in al-Rububiyyah of Allah whilst rejecting to single out Allah alone in worship. It should also be noted that the mushrikeen had within them many sects some of which denied Allah completely and some of which believed in the al-Rububiyyah lordship of Allah yet many of them also made partners with him in that thus falling short in singling him out.  Please refer to the following texts of the two brothers aimmah which evidences this fact which has been researched from their own books and websites:

Muhammad bin Pir ‘Ali al-Birgivi al-Hanafi (d.981H), (Ziyarat al-Qubur, (p.18)

Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dahlawi (d.1174H), (Tafhimat al-Ilahiyyah, (1:145)

Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, (al-Fawz al-Kabir fi-Usul al-Tafsir, (p.3-4)

Imam Ahmad bin Idris Shihab al-Din Qarafi al-Maliki (d.684H) (Anwar al-Buruq fi Anwa’ al-Furuq, (4:446)

Imam Shah ‘Abd al-’Aziz Dahlawi (d.1239H), (Tasfir-i-’Azizi, (p.162)

Imam Shah Waliullah Dahlawi in his magnum opus Hujjat Allah al-Balighah, chapter 74 titled “The explanation of what had been the condition of the People of Jahiliyyah which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) reformed”

‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawee (d.1304H), (Majmu’ah al-Fatawa, (1:73)

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606H), (Tafsir al-Kabir, (2:112)

Qadi Thana’ullah Panipati (d.1225H), (Ma la Budda Minhu, (p.80)

Abu Ghuddah, (Abd Al-Fattah, Kalimat Fi Kashf Al-`Abatil Wa `Iftira`at (pg.35-37)

Abu Ghuddah the Ash’ari actually said concerning the belief of the mushriks:

“As for the categorization of Tawhid into that which these scholars, Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah, his student ibn al-Qayyim, and Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, may Allah have mercy on them, mentioned, Tawhid al-Uluwhiyyah and Tawhid al-rububiyyah, then this is a technical categorization the scholars derived from what comes in the Book and Sunnah in innumerable places, by which Allah, Most Exalted, refuted the polytheists that used to believe in Tawhid al-Rububiyyah but not Tawhid al-Uluwhiyyah. There is evidence for this in Surah al-Fatihah, which a Muslim reads numerous times every day: All praise is for Allah, Lord of the Worlds. Master of the Day of Judgment. You alone we worship, and from You alone we seek help.” [Abu Ghuddah, ‘Abd al-Fattah, Kalimat Fi Kashf al-Abatil Wa `Iftira’at: [pgs. 35-37]

The two Barelwi-Deobandi apologists have found it difficult to comprehend this concept and in providing their evidences have mixed Tawhid al-Rubibiyyah with al-Uluwhiyyah which we shall explain further. In sha Allah

BELIEF IN ALLAH’S RUBUBIYYAH WAS AFFIRMED BY THE MUSHRIKS WHILST THEY HAD KNOWLEDGE CONCERNING IT.

The discussion thus far leads us to the following questions, did the mushriks believe in Tawheed Rububiyyah for Allah alone? Did they clearly know and accept the concept and consequences of Tawheed Rubibiyyah? The answer is yes as described below in opposition to the confusion spread by the two brothers.

Imam Uthaymin states:

“No one from amongst the people denied the rububiyyah of Allah except for the ones who did so not out of rejection but out of arrogance and opposing the truth after it was made clear. Such as Firawn but even concerning him Allah said,

“And they rejected them, while their [inner] selves were convinced thereof, out of injustice and haughtiness. So see how was the end of the corrupters.” (Surah al-Naml:14)

 and

“[Musa] said, “You have already known that none has sent down these [signs] except the Lord of the heavens and the earth as evidence, and indeed I think, O Pharaoh, that you are destroyed.” (Surah al-Isra:102)

[Sharh Usul al-Iman (pg.36), Dar Ibn Jawzi]

Even the Barailwi muffasir accepts whilst explaining the following ayat:

“The lightning almost snatches away their sight. Every time it lights [the way] for them, they walk therein; but when darkness comes over them, they stand [still]. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken away their hearing and their sight. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent. O mankind, worship your Lord, who created you and those before you, that you may become righteous, [He] who made for you the earth a bed [spread out] and the sky a ceiling and sent down from the sky, rain and brought forth thereby fruits as provision for you. So do not attribute to Allah equals while you know [that there is nothing similar to Him].[Surah al-Baqarah:20-22]

“This ayah shows that all of mankind accept Allah as their creator and even the mushriks of Makkah accepted this fact”

He adds:

“No one from amongst mankind [even Firawn who claimed rububiyyah for himself did so only on a limited basis claiming to be the sustainer of his people but not all of mankind], Jinn, angels, idol or stone have ever contended that they are the creators of the heavens and earth” [Tibyan ul-Quran, Ghulam Rasool Sa’eedi, [1:307]

(The note about firawn is from Sa’eedi himself)

Imam Ibn Katheer mentions the explanation of Ibn Abaas concerning ‘Then do not set up rivals unto Allah (in worship) while you know (that He Alone has the right to be worshipped),

وبه عن ابن عباس : ( فلا تجعلوا لله أندادا وأنتم تعلمون ) أي : لا تشركوا بالله غيره من الأنداد التي لا تنفع ولا تضر ، وأنتم تعلمون أنه لا رب لكم يرزقكم غيره وقد علمتم أن الذي يدعوكم إليه الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم من توحيده هو الحق الذي لا شك فيه . وهكذا قال قتادة .

‘Ibn Abbas said it means, do not associate partners with Allah those that cannot benefit nor harm you. Yet YOU ALL KNOW that there is no other RABB that provides sustenance for you other than him and indeed you all KNOW that which the messenger invites you to the tawheed [worship] is the truth in which there is no doubt. This was also said by Qataadah.’ [Tafsir ibn Kathir [1:32]

Thus it is clear that the mushriks affirmed and had knowledge of Allah’s rububiyyah hence Allah uses it as an evidence to establish his oneness in worship [tawheed uluwhiyyah through it.

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi writes:

“Know that there is no one in the whole universe who ascribes a partner with Allah who is at the same level with Allah in existence (wujud), power (qudrah), knowledge (‘ilm), or wisdom (hikmah). Not one person until today has been found [who believes that anyone is on the same level as Allah] except the Zoroastrians…” [Tafsir al-Kabir [2:112]

This is the same Fakhr al Din al-Razi that Asrar referred to as Asharee and one whom he relies upon in aqidah, yet Asrar claims that the mushriks denied rububiyyah by saying the idols had qualities of Allah and were equal to him [as the two brothers also suggest in the article in question]. Yet Razi says the complete opposite saying that only the Zorastrians made such a claim.

The Deobandee mufti Taqi Usmani writes an explanatory note:

‘The pagans of Arabia used to admit that all this is created by no other than Allah. Still they used to worship other than Allah and associated partners with him’ [English translation of quran by Mufti Taqi Usmani Deobandee, the meanings of the noble quran with explanatory notes]

Allah says:

Say (O Muhammad SAW): “Who provides for you from the sky and the earth? Or who owns hearing and sight? And who brings out the living from the dead and brings out the dead from the living? And who disposes the affairs?” They will say: “Allah.” Say: “Will you not then be afraid of Allâh’s Punishment (for setting up rivals in worship with Allah)?” [Surah Yunus:31]

Ibn Kathir states:

“Allah wanted to establish his rububiyyah and oneness upon the mushriks through these verses”, and “they say Allah, that is, they KNOW THAT [he is rabb] and acknowledge it” [Tafsir ibn Kathir [3:86]

Imam Sa’di mentions:

“Say to the mushriks using as evidence against them their belief in tawheed rububiyyah as to why they reject tawheed uluwhiyyah” [Taysir Karim al-Rahman Fi Tafsir Kalam al-Manaan [3:25]

The above Explanation about the mushriks knowing and accepting the rububiyyah of Allah is also given by the brewylwee in his tafseer. [Tibyan ul-Quran, Ghulam Rasool Sa’eedi [5:362]

Allah says:

“And most of them believe not in Allah except that they attribute partners unto Him [i.e. they are Mushrikûn –polytheists.” [Surah Yusuf:106]

Ibn Katheer states:

وقوله : ( وما يؤمن أكثرهم بالله إلا وهم مشركون ) قال ابن عباس : من إيمانهم ، إذا قيل لهم : من خلق السموات ؟ ومن خلق الأرض ؟ ومن خلق الجبال ؟ قالوا : ” الله ” ، وهم مشركون به . وكذا قال مجاهد ، وعطاء وعكرمة ، والشعبي ، وقتادة ، والضحاك ، وعبد الرحمن بن زيد بن أسلم .

وهكذا في الصحيحين أن المشركين كانوا يقولون في تلبيتهم : لبيك لا شريك لك ، إلا شريكا هو لك ، تملكه وما ملك . وفي الصحيح : أنهم كانوا إذا قالوا : ” لبيك لا شريك لك ” يقول رسول الله ، صلى الله عليه وسلم : ” قد قد ” ، أي حسب حسب ، لا تزيدوا على هذا .

Ibn `Abbas commented, “They have a part of faith, for when they are asked, `Who created the heavens Who created the earth Who created the mountains’ They say, `Allah did.’ Yet, they associate others with Him in worship.” Similar is said by Mujahid, `Ata, `Ikrimah, Ash-Sha`bi, Qatadah, Ad-Dahhak and `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam. In the Sahih, it is recorded that during the Hajj season, the idolators used to say in their Talbiyah: “Here we rush to Your service. You have no partners with You, except a partner with You Whom You own but he owns not!”

Praise be to Allah it is clear to see that the likes of Ibn Kathir and the salaf, companions and others than them ascribed a part of faith to the mushriks and this was belief in Rububiyyah. In fact, Ibn Katheer goes further in explaining that there shirk was actually in setting up partners with Allah that they would use as intermediaries to get closer to Allah, whom they believed was the ultimate sustainer and sovereign. This destroys the doubts of the mushriks who invite others to shirk.

We refer to the tafseer of Imam Ibn Jarir to exactly what the salaf which Ibn Kathir listed said about this. He said:

قال ابن جریر في تفسیر ھذه الآیة: (( یقول تعالى ذكره: وما یقر أكثر ھؤلاء الذین وصف عز وجل صفتھم بقولھ: {وَكَأَیِّن مِّنْ ونَ عَلَیْھَا وَھُم عَنْھَا ُّ ءَآیَةٍ فِي السَّمَوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ یَمُر (١ (مُّعْرِضُونَ} با أنَّھ خالقھ ورازقھ وخالق كل شيء إلا وھم بھ مشركون في عبادتھم الأوثان والأصنام واتخاذھم من دونھ أرباباً وزعمھم أنَّ لھ ولداً تعالى ا عما یقولون وبنحو الذي قلنا في ذلك قال أھل التأویل … )). فروى عن ابن عباس أنَّھ قال: (( من إیمانھم إذا قیل لھم من خلق السماء، ومن خلق الأرض ومن خلق الجبال؟ قالوا: ا وھم مشركون )). وعن عكرمة أنَّھ قال: (( تسألھم من خلقھم ومن خلق السموات والأرض فیقولون ا فذلك إیمانھم با ،وھم یعبدون غیره )). وعن مجاھد قال: (( إیمانھم قولھم: ا خالقنا ویرزقنا ویمیتنا فھذا إیمان مع شرك عبادتھم غیره )). وعن عبد الرحمن بن زید بن أسلم قال: (( لیس أحد یعبد مع ا غیره إلا وھو مؤمن با ویعرف أنَّ ا ربھ، وأنَّ ا خالقھ ورازقھ وھو یشرك بھ، ألا ترى كیف قال إبراھیم: {أَفَرَءَیْتُم مَّا ٌّ لِّي إِلاَّ رَبَّ كُنتُمْ تَعْبُدُونَ أَنتُمْ وَءَابَآؤُكُمْ الأَقْدَمُونَ فَإِنَّھُمْ عَدُو ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ (١ (سورة یوسف، الآیة ١٠٥ . ! القول السديد ٧٠ (١ (الْعَالَمِینَ } ، قد عرف أنَّھم یعبدون رب العالمین مع ما یعبدون، قال: فلیس أحد یشرك إلا وھو مؤمن بھ، ألا ترى كیف كانت العرب تلبي تقول لبیك اللھم لبیك لا شریك لك، إلا شریك (٢ (ھو لك، تملكھ وما ملك، المشركون كانوا یقولون ھذا ))

In summary ibn Jareer says they accepted Allah as there rabb [rububiyyah] yet they denied his oneness in directing all worship to him alone.

Ibn Abbas said they had a portion of faith. Ikrimah said that they had faith accompanied with shirk in worship. 

Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam said ‘None worship others alongside Allah except that they have faith in Allah and that he is there RABB. Do you not see what the prophet Ibraheem said to the mushriks:

‘He said: “Do you observe that which you have been worshipping, (75) “You and your ancient fathers? (76) “Verily! they are enemies to me, save the Lord of the ‘Alamîn (mankind, jinn and all that exists); “ [Surah al-Shura;75-77]. [Tafsir Ibn Jarir at-Tabari [7:89]

Praise be to Allah, how can the two brothers even dare to quote evidence contrary to this when the salaf are in clear opposition to them!

Furthermore, the two brothers rely heavily in there evidence below upon the tafseer of Ibn Jarir yet he is completely against them and accepts that the mushriks had faith in rububiyyah yet the two brothers use the same tafseer and make their own ijtihad, yet Ibn Jareer is far removed from them. Nowhere have the two brothers shown from the tafseer they quote that the mufassirs accept their stance. This is enough for the one who is seeking the truth!

Imam Baghawee comments upon the verse in his tafseer by saying:

مع هذا إن وجد منهم بعض الإيمان فلا { يُؤْمِنُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ بِاللَّهِ إِلَّا وَهُمْ مُشْرِكُونَ } فهم وإن أقروا بربوبية الله تعالى، وأنه الخالق الرازق المدبر لجميع الأمور، فإنهم يشركون في ألوهية الله وتوحيده، فهؤلاء الذين وصلوا إلى هذه الحال لم يبق عليهم إلا أن يحل بهم العذاب، ويفجأهم العقاب وهم آمنون.

‘They confirmed and accepted the rububiyyah of Allah, as they accepted him as creator, sustainer and the controller of all the affairs, instead they were disbelievers in the uluwhiyyah tawheed of Allah’ [Mu’alim al-Tanzil]

‘And If you were to ask them: “Who has created the heavens and the earth and subjected the sun and the moon?” They will surely reply: “Allah.” How then are they deviating (as polytheists and disbelievers)’ [Surah al-Ankabut:61]

Imam Ibn Kathir comments:

يقول تعالى مقررا أنه لا إله إلا هو ; لأن المشركين – الذين يعبدون معه غيره – معترفون أنه المستقل بخلق السموات والأرض والشمس والقمر ، وتسخير الليل والنهار ، وأنه الخالق الرازق لعباده ، ومقدر آجالهم واختلافها واختلاف أرزاقهم ففاوت بينهم ، فمنهم الغني والفقير ، وهو العليم بما يصلح كلا منهم ، ومن يستحق الغنى ممن يستحق الفقر ، فذكر أنه المستبد بخلق الأشياء المتفرد بتدبيرها ، فإذا كان الأمر كذلك فلم يعبد غيره ؟ ولم يتوكل على غيره ؟ فكما أنه الواحد في ملكه فليكن الواحد في عبادته ، وكثيرا ما يقرر تعالى مقام الإلهية بالاعتراف بتوحيد الربوبية . وقد كان المشركون يعترفون بذلك ، كما كانوا يقولون في تلبيتهم : ” لبيك لا شريك لك ، إلا شريكا هو لك ، تملكه وما ملك

“Allah states that there is no God but He. The idolaters who worshipped others besides Him recognized that He was the sole creator of the heavens and earth, the sun and the moon, alternating the night and day. They acknowledged that He was the Creator Who provided for His servants and decreed how long they should live. He made them and their provision different, so that some were rich and some were poor, and He knew best what was suitable for each of them, who deserved to be rich and who deserved to be poor. So, Allah stated that He has alone created everything, and that He alone is controlling them — if this is how it is, then why worship anyone else Why put one’s trust in anyone else Since dominion is His Alone, then let worship be for Him Alone. Allah often establishes His divinity by referring to their acknowledgement of His Unique Lordship, because the idolaters used to acknowledge His Lordship, as they said in their Talbiyah (during Hajj and `Umrah: “At Your service, You have no partner, except the partner that You have, and You possess him and whatever he has.”” [Tafsir Ibn Kathir [6:301]

So how will the two brothers escape from the fact that the imams of tafseer repeatedly confirm that that the mushrikeen had rububiyyah?

If it is said are there any verses in which the mushriks expressly confirmed Allah being the RABB so that no doubt remains then we say the following:

Allah says:

‘Say: “Whose is the earth and whosoever is therein? If you know!” (84) They will say: “It is Allâh’s!” Say: “Will you not then remember?” Say: “Who is (the) RABB Lord of the seven heavens, and (the) [RABB] Lord of the Great Throne?”They will say: “Allah.” Say: “Will you not then fear Allah (believe in His Oneness, obey Him, believe in the Resurrection and Recompense for every good or bad deed)?” [Surah al-Muminun:84-87]

Ibn Kathir comments:

يقرر تعالى وحدانيته ، واستقلاله بالخلق والتصرف والملك ، ليرشد إلى أنه الذي لا إله إلا هو ، ولا تنبغي العبادة إلا له وحده لا شريك له; ولهذا قال لرسوله محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم أن يقول للمشركين العابدين معه غيره ، المعترفين له بالربوبية ، وأنه لا شريك له فيها ، ومع هذا فقد أشركوا معه في الإلهية ، فعبدوا غيره معه ، مع اعترافهم أن الذين عبدوهم لا يخلقون شيئا ، ولا يملكون شيئا ، ولا يستبدون بشيء ، بل اعتقدوا أنهم يقربونهم إليه زلفى : ( ما نعبدهم إلا ليقربونا إلى الله زلفى ) [ الزمر : 3 ] ، فقال : ( قل لمن الأرض ومن فيها ) أي : من مالكها الذي خلقها ومن فيها من الحيوانات والنباتات والثمرات ، وسائر صنوف المخلوقات ( إن كنتم تعلمون )

“Allah states that the fact that He is One and that He is independent in His creation, control, dominion and guides one to realize that there is no God except Him and that none should be worshipped except Him Alone, with no partner or associate. He tells His Messenger Muhammad to say to the idolators who worship others besides Him, even though they admit His [RUBUBIYYAH] Lordship, that He has no partner in Lordship. But despite this they still attributed partners in divinity to Him, and worshipped others besides Him even though they recognized the fact that those whom they worshipped could not create anything, did not own anything, nor do they have any control over anything. However, they still believed that these creatures could bring them closer to Allah,

﴿ مَا نَعۡبُدُهُمۡ إِلَّا لِيُقَرِّبُونَآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ زُلۡفَىٰٓ ﴾

(We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah) (39:3). So Allah says:

﴿ قُل لِّمَنِ ٱلۡأَرۡضُ وَمَن فِيهَآ ﴾

(Say: “Whose is the earth and whosoever is therein”) meaning, “Who is the Owner Who has created it and whatever is in it of animals, plants, fruits and all other kinds of creation”

﴿ إِن ڪُنتُمۡ تَعۡلَمُونَ • سَيَقُولُونَ لِلَّهِ‌ۚ ﴾

(“If you know!” They will say: “It is Allah’s!”) means, they will admit that this belongs to Allah Alone with no partner or associate. If that is the case,

﴿ قُلۡ أَفَلَا تَذَكَّرُونَ ﴾

(Say: “Will you not then remember”) that none should be worshipped except the Creator and Provider.” [Tafsir ibn Kathir]

So we can see that the mushriks expressly called allah there RABB and not only that they admitted that he was the lord of all creation and of the heavans, earth and mighty throne!! Indeed, there can reamin no doubt that they acknowledged an dbelieved allah to the rabb.

Instead the two brothers said:

“Hence, the Mushrikūn’s perception of Allāh was nothing like the Muslim understanding of Allāh. They did not regard Allāh as All-Knowing, All-Hearing and All-Powerful.

Based on this, it can be said the Mushrikūn did not recognise a Rabb, let alone affirm tawḥīd in rubūbiyyah. Hence, the great ṣaḥābī, Mughīrah ibn Shu‘ba (رضي الله عنه), said about their condition in Jāhiliyya:

كُنَّا قَوْمًا نَعْبُدُ الْحِجَارَةَ وَالْأَوْثَانَ، فَإِذَا رَأَيْنَا حَجَرًا أَحْسَنَ مِنْ حَجَرٍ أَلْقَيْنَاهُ وَأَخَذْنَا غَيْرَهُ، وَلَا نَعْرِفُ رَبًّا 

“We were a people that would worship stones and statues. When we saw one stone-idol more attractive than another, we would throw it away and take that one! We did not recognise a Rabb.” (Mustadrak al-Ḥākim, Dār al-Ma‘rifah, no.3:451) Al-Dhahabī says it is ṣaḥīḥ (ibid. 3:451).”

It is clear to see the lies and opposition to the salaf of the two brothers as by trying to prove there shirk they are disapproving the way of the salaf.

Even if it is accepted that some mushriks did not believe in Allah being all powerful or recognise a rabb then this has much scope. There were groups amongst the mushrikeen and it was only out of their pride and arrogance held these beliefs whilst they truly knew about Allah’s rububiyyah. Indeed, some were what we call today atheists but this does not detract from the fact that the asl and foundation of their belief was to accept Allah’s rububiyyah.

Furthermore, if one analyses the saying of mughira it is linked to the uluwhiyyah and worship of one rabb rather than not recognising a rabb at all hence he said ‘“We were a people that would worship stones and statues. When we saw one stone-idol more attractive than another, we would throw it away and take that one!’. Then this is what Allah condemned them for that despite knowing about Allah being rabb they turned to other than him for worship. Therefore, this saying is an evidence against the two brothers rather than for them.

It is also evident from Mughiras statement that he does not deny that there is a creator but instead attributed qualities of Allah to the idols. That is, Mughira is suggesting that rather than recognising ‘a [single] rabb’ they recognised many hence he continues to say ‘we used to worship stones and statutes’ and it is evident that they worshipped them as they also saw them as rabbs. Hence to deduce from this statement that the mushrikeen as a whole in their entirety denied the existence of a rabb is completely farcical and nor was this the opinion of the salaf.  Therefore, this as an evidence does not assist the two brothers in any regard rather once again is an evidence against them.

We also take the two brothers back to the very basic concept and definition of tawheed rububiyyah, as above, and ask them how does this prove that the mushriks did not believe in Allah being rabb?

We also say, how is it that the two brothers have not quoted Haakim, Ibn Katheer or others whom they quote these very evidences and from them substantiate that they said that these evidences mean that the mushrikeen of Makkah denied Allah being rabb? This is in itself evidence to show that the two brothers are doing nothing but lifting evidences and giving it their own meanings.

The brothers, as their leader Asrar did in the debate have no right to use this narration as an evidence as it is not of a level of being from dalaail ul qatiyyah [according to there principles] so cannot be used to substantiate or negate any points pertaining to creed. Will they then not ponder?

We think it’s important to mention at this juncture that despite the words of Mughira and the interpretive angle that the two brothers have given them we find a litany of evidences that the mushriks did acknowledge a rabb. What will the two brothers do with the direct and precise verses of the quran where the mushrikoon in unison accept Allah as being the rabb and the fact that on the most part the mushriks recognised Allah and called upon him alone in times of distress? This is far removed from claiming that they did not acknowledge a rabb!! For example, Allah says:

‘Whatever blessing you have is from Allah. Then, once you are touched by distress, to Him alone you cry for help. (53) Then, as soon as He removes the distress from you, a group from among you starts ascribing partners to their Lord. (54) 

[Nahl 53-54. English translation of quran by Mufti Taqi Usmani Deobandee, the meanings of the noble quran with explanatory notes]

And once again the Deobandee translates:

‘And when you face a hardship at sea, vanished are those whom you used to invoke, except Him (Allah). Then, once He brings you safe to the land, you turn away (from Him); man is so ungrateful.’

[Bani Israael 67, English translation of quran by Mufti Taqi Usmani Deobandee, the meanings of the noble quran with explanatory notes]

And,

‘So when they embark on a ship, they invoke Allah, having their faith purely in Him. But when He saves them (and brings them) to the land, in no time they start committing shirk (ascribing partners to Allah)’

[Ankabut 65, English translation of quran by Mufti Taqi Usmani Deobandee, the meanings of the noble quran with explanatory notes]

Imam Ibn Katheer comments on this verse saying:

عن عكرمة بن أبي جهل : أنه لما فتح رسول الله – صلى الله عليه وسلم – مكة ذهب فارا منها ، فلما ركب في البحر ليذهب إلى الحبشة ، اضطربت بهم السفينة ، فقال أهلها : يا قوم ، أخلصوا لربكم الدعاء ، فإنه لا ينجي هاهنا إلا هو . فقال عكرمة : والله إن كان لا ينجي في البحر غيره ، فإنه لا ينجي غيره في البر أيضا ، اللهم لك علي عهد لئن خرجت لأذهبن فلأضعن يدي في يد محمد فلأجدنه رءوفا رحيما ، وكان كذلك .

‘Muhammad bin Ishaq reported from `Ikrimah bin Abi Jahl that when the Messenger of Allah conquered Makkah, he (`Ikrimah) ran away, fleeing from him. When he was on the sea, headed for Ethiopia, the ship started to rock and the crew said: “O people, pray sincerely to your Lord alone, for no one can save us from this except Him.” `Ikrimah said: “By Allah, if there is none who can save us on the sea except Him, then there is none who can save us on land except Him either, O Allah, I vow to You that if I come out of this, I will go and put my hand in the hand of Muhammad and I will find him kind and merciful.” And this is what indeed did happen.’ [Tafseer ibn Katheer]

In the above aayat narrations we clearly see that the mushriks called upon Allah in times of difficulty thus acknowledging his rububiyyah and it is far-fetched to say that they ‘did not even recognise a rabb’. 

In fact, we find a multitude of narrations that state not only did the mushriks call upon Allah alone in times of distress but that they also performed many acts of worship whilst joining partners with Allah which included the tawaf, prayer, zakah and many other things.

We also ask if they did not recognise Allah as being a rabb then what will the two brothers with the following verses in the quran in which the mushriks attempt to justify there shirk with Allah:

“And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: “These are our intercessors with Allah.” Say: “Do you inform Allah of that which He knows not in the heavens and on the earth?” Glorified and Exalted is He above all that which they associate as partners (with Him)!” [Yunus 18]

And

“Surely, the religion (i.e. the worship and the obedience) is for Allah only. And those who take Auliyâ’ (protectors, helpers, lords, gods) besides Him (say): “We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” [Zumr 3]

Had they not believed in Allah that what was the point in them saying that their actions were only done in order to get closer to Allah? Will the two brothers then not contemplate?

Thus, it is evidently clear from what has been said above that the mushriks as a mass of people believed in the rububiyyah of Allah and recognised a rabb. Anything away from this can only be an exception rather than the norm.

As a side point the two brothers commented on verse 3 of Zumr quoting Ibn Katheer that:

وأخبر أن الملائكة التي فى السماوات من المقربين وغيرهم كلهم عبيد خاضعون لله، لا يشفعون عنده إلا بإذنه، وليسوا عنده كالأمراء عند ملوكهم، يشفعون عندهم بغير إذنهم فيما أحبه الملوك و أبوه، فلا يضربوا لله الأمثال تعالى الله عن ذلك 

“Allāh explained that the angels in the skies…are all subservient slaves of Allāh, not interceding with Him but by His permission. They are not (as the Mushrikūn would believe) to Him like governors to their kings, with whom they intercede without permission, whether the kings approve or disapprove. So (O Mushrikūn ) not make comparisons of Allāh. Allāh is far beyond that.” (Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘Aẓīm, 12:112)”

This is a twisting of the words and cutting the meaning of what Ibn Katheer is saying. We relay exactly what Ibn Katheer said about this verse so there is no confusion. He said:

“Qatadah, As-Suddi and Malik said, narrating from Zayd bin Aslam and Ibn Zayd:

﴿ إِلَّا لِيُقَرِّبُونَآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ زُلۡفَىٰٓ ﴾

(only that they may bring us near to Allah. ) means, “So that they may intercede for us and bring us closer to Him.” During Jahiliyyah, they used to recite the following for their Talbiyah when they performed Hajj; “At Your service, You have no partner except the partner You have; he and all that he owns belong to You.” This pretentious argument which the idolaters of all times, ancient and modern, used as evidence is what the Messengers, may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon them all, came to refute and forbid, and to call people to worship Allah Alone with no partner or associate. This is something that the idolaters themselves invented; Allah did not give them permission for it, nor does He approve of it; indeed, He hates it and forbids it.

﴿ وَلَقَدۡ بَعَثۡنَا فِى ڪُلِّ أُمَّةٍ۬ رَّسُولاً أَنِ ٱعۡبُدُواْ ٱللَّهَ وَٱجۡتَنِبُواْ ٱلطَّـٰغُوتَ‌ۖ ﴾

(And verily, We have sent among every Ummah a Messenger (proclaiming): “Worship Allah, and avoid Taghut.”) (16:36)

﴿ وَمَآ أَرۡسَلۡنَا مِن قَبۡلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلَّا نُوحِىٓ إِلَيۡهِ أَنَّهُ ۥ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّآ أَنَا۟ فَٱعۡبُدُونِ ﴾

(And We did not send any Messenger before you but We revealed to him (saying): “None has the right to be worshipped but I (Allah), so worship Me.”) (21:25) And Allah tells us that the angels in the heavens, those who are close to Him and others, are all servants who submit humbly to Allah. They do not intercede with Him except by His leave for the one with whom He is pleased. They are not like the princes and ministers of their (the idolaters’) kings who intercede with them without their permission for both those whom the kings like and those whom they hate.

﴿ فَلَا تَضۡرِبُواْ لِلَّهِ ٱلۡأَمۡثَالَ‌ۚ ﴾

(So put not forward similitudes for Allah) (16:74). Exalted be Allah far above that.” [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]

As can be seen Ibn katheer is reiterating the fact that they called upon to get closer to Allah rather thinking that they had a hold over Allah as the two brothers suggest hence there saying about their intercessors in the hadeeth in Muslim which Ibn Katheer quotes them saying in talbiyah ‘You have no partner except the partner You have; he and all that he owns belong to You.’ That is they actually believed that those which they used as intercessors by themselves and all ownership and control belonged to Allah. Hence they acknowledged, “And who disposes the affairs?” They will say: “Allah.” [Yunus 31] that is they believed all control and ownership belongs to Allah whilst their intercessors are merely a means to get near to him. Had they believed that the intercessors could plead before Allah forcing his him then they would not have said ‘we seek that they bring us closer to Allah’. I reality, there calling upon them was so that they may intercede which incidentally according to ibn katheer is what the mushriks even at his time were using to justify their shirk hence him saying, ‘This pretentious argument which the idolaters of all times, ancient and modern, used as evidence’.

Hence, to twist the words of ibn katheer to say that which he does not say is a fabrication. In fact, Ibn katheer confirmed time and time again in his tafseer that the mushriks believed in Allah’s rububiyyah. For example, explaining Suran Ankabut verse 61 he says:

“قول تعالى مقررا أنه لا إله إلا هو ; لأن المشركين – الذين يعبدون معه غيره – معترفون أنه المستقل بخلق السموات والأرض والشمس والقمر ، وتسخير الليل والنهار ، وأنه الخالق الرازق لعباده ، ومقدر آجالهم واختلافها واختلاف أرزاقهم ففاوت بينهم ، فمنهم الغني والفقير ، وهو العليم بما يصلح كلا منهم ، ومن يستحق الغنى ممن يستحق الفقر ، فذكر أنه المستبد بخلق الأشياء المتفرد بتدبيرها ، فإذا كان الأمر كذلك فلم يعبد غيره ؟ ولم يتوكل على غيره ؟ فكما أنه الواحد في ملكه فليكن الواحد في عبادته ، وكثيرا ما يقرر تعالى مقام الإلهية بالاعتراف بتوحيد الربوبية . وقد كان المشركون يعترفون بذلك ، كما كانوا يقولون في تلبيتهم : ” لبيك لا شريك لك ، إلا شريكا هو لك ، تملكه وما ملك ” .

“Allah states that there is no God but He. The idolaters who worshipped others besides Him recognized that He was the sole creator of the heavens and earth, the sun and the moon, alternating the night and day. They acknowledged that He was the Creator Who provided for His servants and decreed how long they should live. He made them and their provision different, so that some were rich and some were poor, and He knew best what was suitable for each of them, who deserved to be rich and who deserved to be poor. So, Allah stated that He has alone created everything, and that He alone is controlling them — if this is how it is, then why worship anyone else Why put one’s trust in anyone else Since dominion is His Alone, then let worship be for Him Alone. Allah often establishes His divinity by referring to their acknowledgement of His Unique Lordship, because the idolaters used to acknowledge His Lordship, as they said in their Talbiyah (during Hajj and `Umrah: “At Your service, You have no partner, except the partner that You have, and You possess him and whatever he has.”

Why in Allah’s name would the two brothers try to use Ibn Katheer when he accepts the mushriks believed in Allah’s rububiyyah?

Similar was said regarding this verse about the mushriks affirmation in the rububiyyah of Allah by Maqrizee in his ‘Tajreed ut-tawheed ul mufeed pg. 8 and Imam Sanaani in his ‘tatheer ul itiqaad’ pg. 32.

THE INHERENT INCONGRUOUS FOUND IN THEIR STATEMENT ‘THE MUSHRIKS DID NOT RECOGNISE A RABB’ AND THE EVIDENCES UPON WHICH THEY RELY.

The two brothers have relied on the saying of Mughira that “we did not recognise a rabb” and deduces that Based on this, it can be said the Mushrikūn did not recognise a Rabb, let alone affirm tawḥīd in rubūbiyyah”. Yet the evidences they have given throughout their article completely contradicts this position of theirs. We cite a few examples word for word as written by the two brothers so as to expose the foolishness in their line of argument and contradiction therein. They said:

[a]

“The Qur’ān states that in the ākhirah, it will be said to the idolaters of Makkah: 

ظننتم أن الله لا يعلم كثيرا مما تعملون 

“You believed that Allāh does not know a lot of what you would do.” (Qur’ān, 41:22)”

If they did not even recognise a rabb then how is can they can believe such a matter about allah? Surely the two brothers would not dare to suggest that there is a conflict in the words of Allah?

[b] They also wrote:

The Qur’ān continues to says:

وذلكم ظنكم الذي ظننتم بربكم أردكم 

“This is your belief that you conceived of your Rabb that has ruined you.” (Qur’ān, 41:23)

Imām al-Ṭabari explains:

يقول تعالى ذكره: وهذا الذي كان منكم فى الدنيا من ظنكم أن الله لا يعلم كثيرا مما تعملون من قبائح أعمالك ومساوئها هو ظنكم الذي ظننتم بربكم فى الدنيا أردكم يعني: أهلككم 

“He – Exalted is His Mention – says: ‘Your belief in the dunyā that Allāh does not know much of what you do, of despicable and bad deeds, is your belief that you conceived of your Rabb in the dunyā. It has ruined you.’” (Tafsīr al-Ṭabari, Maktaba Hajr, 20:412)”

we ask the same question as above. The two brothers can’t have their cake and eat it as the contradiction in their stance that they did not recognise a rabb and these very evidences which they have given in their article completely contradict each other. Will they not ponder?

[c] They continued to write:

 “According to a ḥadīth of Bukhārī & Muslim, ‘Abdullāh ibn Mas‘ūd (رضي الله عنه) said:

اجْتَمَعَ عِنْدَ الْبَيْتِ ثَلَاثَةُ نَفَرٍ، قُرَشِيَّانِ وَثَقَفِيٌّ، أَوْ ثَقَفِيَّانِ وَقُرَشِيٌّ، قَلِيلٌ فِقْهُ قُلُوبِهِمْ، كَثِيرٌ شَحْمُ بُطُونِهِمْ، فَقَالَ أَحَدُهُمْ: أَتُرَوْنَ اللهَ يَسْمَعُ مَا نَقُولُ؟ وَقَالَ الْآخَرُ: يَسْمَعُ، إِنْ جَهَرْنَا، وَلَا يَسْمَعُ، إِنْ أَخْفَيْنَا وَقَالَ الْآخَرُ: إِنْ كَانَ يَسْمَعُ، إِذَا جَهَرْنَا، فَهُوَ يَسْمَعُ إِذَا أَخْفَيْنَا 

“Three people (from the Mushrikūn) gathered around the Ka‘bah…One of them said: ‘Do you think Allāh hears what we are saying?’ The second said: ‘He hears if we are loud and He does not hear if we are quiet.’ The third said: ‘If he hears when we are loud, then He (must) hear when we are quiet.’” (Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim)

This shows some Mushrikūn did not believe Allāh is All-Hearing, while others expressed doubts about it.”

We ask does the above hadith penned by their own hand not destroy their position based on the saying of mughira that ‘the Mushrikūn did not recognise a Rabb.’? If they failed to recognise a rabb then to argue about what Allah can hear holds no substance.

Furthermore, why did the two brothers commenting on this hadeeth only say “This shows some Mushrikūn did not believe Allāh is All-Hearing, while others expressed doubts about it” and not mention the fact that the hadeeth clearly also establishes ’ The third said: ‘If he hears when we are loud, then He (must) hear when we are quiet”. This of course completely destroys the theory of the two brothers that the mushriks did not believe Allah hears everything. Without going into the detailed tafseer of the salaf on this topic what will the two brothers do with the verse in which Allah says about the mushriks:

“And indeed if you ask them, “Who has created the heavens and the earth?” They will surely say: “The All-Mighty, the All-Knower created them.”[Az zukhruf 9]

Thus it is as clear as the sun they accepted Allah as the al aleem, that is the all knower and one who thus hears everything.

[d] They said:

Al-Khaṭṭābī comments in A‘lām al-Ḥadīth that this was the practice of the people of Jāhiliyya.

The Mushrikūn would not only refer to their false gods as “ālihah” but would also call them “rabb.” It is narrated with an acceptable chain to the great Tābi‘ī, Abu ‘Uthmān al-Nahdī, who lived in Jāhiliyya for a long time before accepting Islām at the hands of the ṣaḥābah:

 

كنا فى الجاهلية نعبد حجرا فسمعنا مناديا ينادي: يا أهل الرحال إن ربكم قد هلك، فالتمسوا ربا، فخرجنا على كل صعب وذلول، فبينا نحن كذلك، إذ سمعنا مناديا ينادي: إنا قد وجدنا ربكم 

“In Jāhiliyya, we would worship stone idols. We once heard someone call out: ‘People in the camps, your rabb is ruined, so go search for a rabb!’ We came out to every rough and smooth land. While we were so, we heard someone call out: ‘We have found your rabb!’…” (Siyar A‘lām al-Nubalā’, 4:176)”

so we ask how will the two brothers reconcile this with the statement of mughira they cited “we did not recognise a rabb” upon which they relied heavily with “: ‘People in the camps, your rabb is ruined, so go search for a rabb!’?

The contradictions are many more but we suffice with above. In reality it seems the two brothers are very selective in their discussion and will go any lengths to disprove the fact that the mushriks believed in the rububiyyah of Allah, even if it means them outright citing that the ‘mushriks did not even recognise a rabb’. They thought ‘for if you do not believe in a rabb then you will not be able to believe in tawheed rububiyyah and the discussion will end’. However, they fell on their own swords and Allah exposed their contradictions. Notwithstanding the fact that the mushriks called upon Allah in distress, made talbiyyah acknowledging Allah and accepted Allah to be the provider, nourisher, sustainer, one who gives life and death, provides vegetation and so on as shown above.

Incidentally, it is important to note that the crux of the evidences given by the two brothers show a rejection and kufr of the mushrikeen in calling upon other than Allah and this is there shirk in Uluwhiyyah as is evident from the statement of Abu Uthman al Nahdi. This kufr of theirs together with seeking rain via the stars etc does not detract from the fact that they continued to believe in the rububiyyah of Allah. The fact is they had many other rabbs alongside Allah in there worship and this is exactly what the mushrik of today does.

In reality Allah does not differentiate with the mushrik whether he calls upon a stone idol or a prophet the end result is the same it is shirk with Allah and the majority of the people fell into this shirk whilst having faith in Rububiyyah. If this was not the case, then the statement of Allah and explanation thereof of the likes of Ibn Abbas would contradict this in which Allah said:

“And most of them believe not in Allah except that they attribute partners unto Him [i.e. they are Mushrikûn -polytheists “[Yousaf 106]

Ibn Katheer states:

وقوله : ( وما يؤمن أكثرهم بالله إلا وهم مشركون ) قال ابن عباس : من إيمانهم ، إذا قيل لهم : من خلق السموات ؟ ومن خلق الأرض ؟ ومن خلق الجبال ؟ قالوا : ” الله ” ، وهم مشركون به . وكذا قال مجاهد ، وعطاء وعكرمة ، والشعبي ، وقتادة ، والضحاك ، وعبد الرحمن بن زيد بن أسلم .

وهكذا في الصحيحين أن المشركين كانوا يقولون في تلبيتهم : لبيك لا شريك لك ، إلا شريكا هو لك ، تملكه وما ملك . وفي الصحيح : أنهم كانوا إذا قالوا : ” لبيك لا شريك لك ” يقول رسول الله ، صلى الله عليه وسلم : ” قد قد ” ، أي حسب حسب ، لا تزيدوا على هذا .

Ibn `Abbas commented, “They have a part of faith, for when they are asked, `Who created the heavens Who created the earth Who created the mountains’ They say, `Allah did.’ Yet, they associate others with Him in worship.” Similar is said by Mujahid, `Ata, `Ikrimah, Ash-Sha`bi, Qatadah, Ad-Dahhak and `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam.

In the Sahih, it is recorded that during the Hajj season, the idolators used to say in their Talbiyah: “Here we rush to Your service. You have no partners with You, except a partner with You whom You own but he owns not!”

Therefore, when the two brothers said:

“Summary


In summary:

  1.  

    The Mushrikūn of Arabia did not believe Allāh is All-Hearing, All-Powerful and All-Knowing

2. They did not have full conviction (yaqīn) in the existence of Allāh or Him being the Creator and Sustainer


  • They believed Lāt and ‘Uzzā could inflict punishment, like leprosy, madness and blindness

 

4. They believed the stars could cause rain to fall


  • They believed Allāh has daughters and that the jinn are related to Him

 

6. They believed their false gods could intercede with Allāh against His will”

then the reply to them is that [i] Allah knew of all this kufr and shirk of the mushriks [ii] Despite this shirk of theirs Allah in the quran affirms that they had ‘belief’ with the kufr that they had and [iii] This belief has been explained by the companions and those who followed them to be the belief in Allah being the sustainer, creator and rabb, that is his Rububiyyah.

Why the mushrik of today will never accept this is for if they accept this then they will have no choice but to accept that [i] Belief in Rububiyyah on its own is not sufficient and this must be backed with uluwhiyyah, worship for Allah alone [ii] The mushriks called upon other than Allah and made shirk with him in his uluwhiyyah [iii] They called upon stones, idols, angels, prophets and other than that [iv] Allah called this shirk and did not differentiate between what type of kufr they had [v] Anyone today who make shirk with Allah cannot use his belief in rububiyyah as an excuse regardless of whether he claims to call upon the prophet or calls himself Muslim, distancing himself from mushriks of old, the judgement upon him of shirk will be the same as he has fallen into the same sin of falling into shirk with the uluwhiyyah of Allah.

Alhamduillilah very small child of the Sunni salafee knows this creed but the mujjadid, muftee and shaykh of the the two brothers does not. How true is the speech of Allah in which he said about the accursed shaytaan:

“(Iblîs) said: “Because You have sent me astray, surely I will sit in wait against them (human beings) on Your Straight Path (16) Then I will come to them from before them and behind them, from their right and from their left, and You will not find most of them as thankful ones (i.e. they will not be dutiful to You).”[Aaraaf 16-17]

Allah’s aid is sought from the evil of their plots and plans.

ALLAH USES THE FACT THAT THE MUSHRIKS BELIEVED IN HIS RUBUBIYYAH AS AN EVIDENCE AGAINST THEM TO ALSO ACCEPT HIS ULUWHIYYAH SINGLING HIM OUT IN WORSHIP.

Allah repeatedly uses in the quran the mushriks belief in his rububiyyah as an evidence against them that they should therefore unequivocally accept his uluwhiyyah and oneness in worship.

Had the mushrikeen not accepted Allah’s rububiyyah it would be inconceivable to conclude that Allah would then use this as an evidence against the mushrikeen as far removed is he from oppression of any form upon his creation.  We will cite a few verses in brief to substantiate this point.

[a] See above evidences from surah Baqrah 20-22, Yunus 31, Yusuf 106, Ankabut 61, Muminoon 84-87.

Allah explains in great detail this issue. He says:

Is not He (better than your gods) Who created the heavens and the earth, and sends down for you water (rain) from the sky, whereby We cause to grow wonderful gardens full of beauty and delight? It is not in your ability to cause the growth of their trees. Is there any ilâh (god) with Allah? Nay, but they are a people who ascribe equals (to Him)! (60) Is not He (better than your gods) Who has made the earth as a fixed abode, and has placed rivers in its midst, and has placed firm mountains therein, and has set a barrier between the two seas (of salt and sweet water).Is there any ilâh (god) with Allah? Nay, but most of them know not! (61) Is not He (better than your gods) Who responds to the distressed one, when he calls on Him, and Who removes the evil, and makes you inheritors of the earth, generations after generations? Is there any ilâh (god) with Allah? Little is that you remember! (62) Is not He (better than your gods) Who guides you in the darkness of the land and the sea, and Who sends the winds as heralds of glad tidings, going before His Mercy (rain)? Is there any ilâh (god) with Allah? High Exalted is Allah above all that they associate as partners (to Him)! (63) Is not He (better than your so-called gods) Who originates creation, and shall thereafter repeat it, and Who provides for you from heaven and earth? Is there any ilâh (god) with Allah? Say, “Bring forth your proofs, if you are truthful.” [Naml 59-63]

Thus Allah establishes his uluwhiyyah through establishing his rububiyyah and he establishes this upon the mushriks who believed in his uluwhiyyah leaving no excuses for them on the day of recompense. It was this call to have one ‘ilaah’ which made the mushriks commit shirk with Allah [see surah saad 5 below] rather than them denying Allah’s rububiyyah.

[b] The fact that that Allah sent his prophet with the message to the mushriks to accept his uluwhiyyah is also a clear evidence that they had already accepted his rububiyyah yet continued to join partners with him. In fact, all the messengers came with the message of uluwhiyyah and one can refer to surah Araaf in the quran and Anbiyaa where this is explained fully.

It is worth noting that it was the call to tawheed uluwhiyyah to single out Allah alone for all forms of worship which made the mushrikeen respond by saying:

“Has he made the âlihah (gods) (all) into One Ilâh (God – Allah). Verily, this is a curious thing!”

[Surah Saad:5]

Imam Ibn Katheer mentions in his tafseer the cause of revelation for this verse:

“Abu Ja`far bin Jarir recorded that Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said, “When Abu Talib fell sick, some of the people of the Quraysh, including Abu Jahl, entered upon him and said, `Your brother’s son is insulting our gods; he does such and such and says such and such. Why don’t you send for him and tell him not to do that’ So he sent for the Prophet and he entered the house. There was space enough for one man to sit between them and Abu Talib, and Abu Jahl, may Allah curse him, was afraid that if (the Prophet) were to sit beside Abu Talib he would be more lenient with him, so he jumped up and sat in that spot, and the Messenger of Allah could find nowhere to sit near his uncle, so he sat by the door. Abu Talib said to him, `O son of my brother, why are your people complaining about you and claiming that you insult their gods and say such and such’ They made so many complaints against him. Thereupon, he said,

« يَا عَمِّ إِنِّي أُرِيدُهُمْ عَلَى كَلِمَةٍ وَاحِدَةٍ يَقُولُونَهَا تَدِينُ لَهُمْ بِهَا الْعَرَبُ، وَتُؤَدِّي إِلَيْهِمْ بِهَا الْعَجَمُ الْجِزْيَة »

(O uncle, all I want from them is one word which, if they say it, the Arabs will become their followers and the non-Arabs will pay Jizyah to them.) They were worried about what he said, so they said, `One word Yes, by your father, (we will say) ten words! What is it’ Abu Talib said, `What word is it, O son of my brother’ He said,

« لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا الله »

(La ilaha illallah.) They stood up in agitation, brushing down their clothes, saying,

﴿ أَجَعَلَ ٱلۡأَلِهَةَ إِلَـٰهً۬ا وَٲحِدًا‌ۖ إِنَّ هَـٰذَا لَشَىۡءٌ عُجَابٌ۬ ﴾

(Has he made the gods into One God. Verily, this is a curious thing!) Then this passage was revealed, from this Ayah to the Ayah:

﴿ بَل لَّمَّا يَذُوقُواْ عَذَابِ ﴾

(Nay, but they have not tasted (My) torment!)” This is the wording of Abu Kurayb. Something similar was also recorded by Imam Ahmad and An-Nasa’i, and At-Tirmidhi said, “Hasan.” [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]

It is therefore clear that the mushriks argument with the prophet was not one of rejection of Allah’s rububiyyah but one of challenging why they had to direct all worship to him alone. Had their argument been about denying Allah’s rububiyyah they would have said questioned him as to why he says Allah is the provider, controller and sustainer but yet this is not found I the texts and instead the challenge was that of Allah’s uluwhiyyah. This in itself clearly substantiate they believed in Allah’s rububiyyah and this was acknowledged by the prophet himself.

Indeed, even the two brothers themselves quote tabari under this ayah saying:

““These disbelievers who say Muḥammad is a lying magician, say: ‘Does Muḥammad make all the gods one, Who hears all our supplications, and knows the worship of every worshipper who worships Him? This is surely a strange thing.’” (Tafsīr al-Ṭabari, Maktaba Hajr, 20:18)”

In another place they actually pen with their own hands the following:

“Some verses say the Mushrikūn would affirm qualities of rubūbiyyah for Allāh”

Thus it is clear that even they accept that the mushriks believe in Allah’s rububiyyah. However, the two brothers whilst acknowledging this claimed that they doubted in Allah’s rububiyyah. We find it completely mind boggling that the verse which they have quoted and tafseer for it completely points in the opposite direction. They said: 

“There is no deity but Him. He gives life and He causes death. Your Rabb and the Rabb of your forefathers. But, they are in doubt, playing.” (Qur’ān, 44:8-9) 

Ibn Kathīr also pointed out that they had no certainty in what they were saying:

و هذا إنكار عليهم في شركهم بالله, و هم يعلمون أنه الخالق وحده لا شريك له, و لكن عدم إيقانهم هو الذي يحملهم على ذلك 

“This is a denunciation of them in associating partners with Allāh, while they know that He alone is the Creator having no partner. But their uncertainty is what drove them to this.” (Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘Aẓīm, 13:239)

We say that this verse does not say that they denied Allah’s rububiyyah but according to their own quote of ibn katheer it was a doubt in that despite knowing about Allah being the creator and having no partner they made partners with him. We have highlighted the text in red above just to show this. Hence, the very ibn katheer they are using as evidence is suggesting that their doubt was what DROVE them to the shirk, associating partners rather than them doubting the rububiyyah of Allah.

Furthermore, both Ibn Katheer and Ibn Jareer whom the two brothers quote as evidence have said elsewhere in there tafseers [see above their explanations of Yusuf 105 and Baqrah 20-22] that the mushrikeen believed in Allah being the rabb, called upon him in times of need etc as above but their dispute and rejection was in uluwhiyyah. Therefore, the statement by the two imams under this verse should be read as a whole and not in isolation as it can very easily be misconstrued and against what the imams are trying to say. 

It would have been more prudent for the two brothers to bring an authentic hadeeth or statement from the salaf to substantiate their claim in creed rather just to misinterpret the saying of the scholars.

[c] 

As a side point we would like to very quickly reflect on the fact that the two brothers have used evidences to suggest that that the mushriks believed in other gods, that Allah can’t hear everything, the denial of the day of resurrection etc as an evidence to say that they denied Allah’s rububiyyah. However, it is important to note that that there rububiyyah on its own together with the other kufr they would do meant that it was not sufficient to save them. The fact that they denied certain powers of Allah, the resurrection does not detract from the fact that they believed Allah as the sustainer, creator, owner and provider and this cannot be denied as it is mention continuously throughout the Quran.

Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah says:

“There affirmation of tawheed rububiyyah will not assist them on its own rather it shall be used as an evidence against them” [Mamjmoo al Fataawa 1/23]

Shaikhul Islam Ibn ul Qayyim said:

“As for tawheed rububiyyah then all the Muslims, disbelievers, people of rhetoric and other than them accepted it but it will not benefit them but will rather be an evidence against them” [Igaathat ul Lahfaan 1/58]

A more detailed discussion on this point can be found in the works of Imam Sanaani Tatheer ul Itiqaad pg. 31 onwards.

As for the two brothers saying they denied resurrection then this was not the case with all of them as some of them acknowledged and accepted the last day and its trials but no doubt as a whole they rejected it.

Ibn Katheer quotes the renowned Jahli poet of the maccan period whose poetry was hanged in the kaabah Zuhayr Bi Abi Sulma. In his famous muallaqah [suspended] poetry he spoke about two waring tribes and said:

“”Do not conceal from God what is in your breast that it
may be hidden; whatever is concealed, God knows all about it.

“Either it will be put off and placed recorded in a book,
and preserved there until the judgment day;

 or the punishment be hastened and so he will take revenge.”

Ibn Katheer said,

“This Jaahili poet knew about god and about the writing of deeds in a recorded book as well as acknowledging the day of judgement and recompense” [Tafseer Ibn Katheer 4/238].

Imam Ibn Jareer also mentions further poetry concerning the belief of the Jahli poet Salaama Bin Jandal AT-Tuhwi belief in Allah’s rububiyyah.

 Shah Waliyullah mudaaith Dehlwee cites Aamir Bin Matrab, Abdullah Bin Qadaah, Alaaf Bin Shihaab Taymee as well as others who accepted the day ofressurection and questining. Some would sacrifice animals hoping that they would be there riding beasts on the day of judgment.  [See Hujjatullah ul Baaligah 1/131, Bazl al majhood 4/211 and Subul as salaam 2/168]

In fact, the Jews and Christians who also joined partners with Allah in uluwhiyyah accepted his rububiyyah yet they denied his uluwhiyyah. They also believed in the day of judgment and resurrection together with recompense believing it would only touch them only for a while and one can refer to surah Baqrah for this.

The point is that the mushriks shirk with Allah was not based on them denying his rububiyyah but it was there kufr in his worship. The fact that they denied the resurrection was there kufr despite accepting his rububiyyah and there kufr of this type does not detract from the fact that they believed Allah to be the sustainer, lord provider ad one who gives life and death.

It is preposterous that that the two brothers deny the rububiyyah belief of the mushriks despite there open belief in this as per surah muminoon [as above] when they are asked who the RABB of the seven heavens and mighty throne is in which they respond it is Allah. Therefore, it is of no benefit to the two brothers to quote such evidences as do not support their stance that the mushriks denied Allah being the rabb.

How true was Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah when he said:

“Indeed there is no person who brings a proof by which he tries to justify falsehood, except that it

becomes a proof against him and not a proof in his favour.” [Majmoo 3/65]

Thus, in conclusion we have attempted to discuss in this very brief research paper that those from amongst the disbelievers in the time of the prophet and those that came before him clearly knew and accepted the fact Tawheed Rububiyyah in its essence, yet their arrogance and desires did not allow them to submit. Had they fully submitted their belief in Rububiyyah would have led them to accept Allah alone is the only one worthy of worship alone, which is called Tawheed al Uluwhiyyah. Instead, they made spurious and ill-founded arguments in order to accept Tawheed al Uluwhiyyah.

The two in need of Allahs aid and forgivness

Abu Hibban & Abu Khuzaimah Ansari

July 2016

Check Also

300px-DargahAlahazrat

[Part 9] – The Anti Wahhabi, Salafi & Saudi Narrative from Barely – Ahmad Raza Khan on the British & Their Values

Compiled, Translated & Annotated Abu Hibban & Abu Khuzaimah Ansari   READ >>> PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 PART …

Untitled-1

[Part 8] – The Anti Wahhabi, Salafi & Saudi Narrative from Barely – Terror, Extremism & Jihad Against the British Rule in India – The Barelwi Ancestry and Lineage

Compiled, Translated & Annotated Abu Hibban & Abu Khuzaimah Ansari   READ >>> PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 PART …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *