Pages

Friday, December 27, 2013

RE: Ashura Amidst Misconception, Confusion And Misleads!



                                                                                ASHURA MUZAAHARA






Sheikh Muhammad Mahmud Turi addressed the above topic on page 64 of LEADERSHIP FRIDAY of November 22, 2013. Since the debut of his Discourse page on LEADERSHIP at the later part of 2013, Sheikh Turi has spared no effort in propagating Imaamiyyah and Raafidiyyah (Shi’ah) ideologies.  

For beginners, Shi’ah Imaamiyyah adherents have added belief in imam to articles of faith; that one has to accept that imamate is a divine position, like prophethood. To them Allah chooses His prophets and messengers in the same way He chooses the imam with textual evidence, revelation so that the imam will undertake similar tasks which Allah assigns to His messengers. This belief in imamate is the cornerstone of shi’ah faith, and the fundamental of their religion as no imaan is complete without it.

The Sunni scholars described this group and others with similar ideology as Raafidiyyah (rejectors or better still, rejectionists) due to their rejection of the Caliphates of Abu Bakr Assiddeeq, Umar bin Al-Khattaab and Uthmaan bin Affaan, may Allah be pleased with them. They do not in the least recognise these Rightly Guided Caliphs as leaders of this Ummah. To them Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (RA) usurped the right of Ali bin Abu Talib (RA) of becoming the Caliph. These trusted companions of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) are abused by the Shi’ites, and maligned undeservedly!

When I took on Adamu Adamu on these pages some time ago regarding the traces of shi’ism in his writings, some concerned readers faulted both of us for using newspaper columns to discuss such differences. I have a lot of respect for our brethren who desire concealment of strife among us to forestall exposing the weakness of the Ummah to its adversaries. Pray, in what medium would response be more apt other than the one through which a deviant ideology was propagated? Many may wrongly assume that whatever they read about Islam in publications like newspapers is true. The true and right position, therefore, should be presented, in the same medium, to make it plain to those who may not know that Islam has nothing to do with such heresy.

Consequently, I will not refrain from responding to any article that aims at corrupting the true teachings of Islam. I have resolved to present the right position of Islam on all the issues raised by Sheikh Muhammad Mahmud Turi on his page of LEADERSHIP FRIDAY, from the time he started onwards. Insha Allah I will answer him word for word on any shi’ah belief he presented in the past or will present in the future. I am starting with today’s topic that the Sheikh concluded just last Friday, December 6, 2013. This will be followed by my rebuttal to his – Imam Ali’s Undisputable Leadership Qualities, and, Did The Prophet (S) Really Certify His Successor Before Demise? - in addition to many others.

                                            Ashura Procession in Zaria, Kaduna State


In the first part of Ashura Amidst Misconception, Confusion And Misleads Sheikh Turi tried to make his readers believe that no caliph had any role in the adoption of the hijra calendar. He said, ‘And, in contrast to the claim that one of the earlier caliphs was the pioneer in the adoption of the hijra calendar, it was the prophet that set the calendar since his advent in Medina which marked the establishment of the first Islamic state on this planet where he corresponded based on d to the world with the same calendar!’  
Have I not informed you about their hatred of the Caliphs?

However, Umar (RA) it was that started the Muslim calendar counting it from the lunar month, Muharram, in the year of the Prophet's migration to Medinah, 16 July in 622 CE.
Umar Ibn Al-Khattab was the first "setter of dates" of the Islamic era. As the Commander of the Faithful, he would despatch correspondences to his appointed officials but they could not fathom which to obey due to confusion in dates. If a document dated [the month of] Sha'ban, for instance, they were at lost about which of the Sha'bans was meant: was it the month that had passed, or that which was to come?
Umar (RA) then gathered the Companions of the Prophet (SAW) and told them: "Money is flowing in, and what we have apportioned bears no date. How are we to reach a way of regulating this matter?"

After long discussions and presentation of date system by Persian and Jewish reverts to Islam, the assembly eventually agreed that Islamic history would begin with the Prophet's Hijra, ‘because none of those present disagreed on the date of that event, whereas that of the Prophet's birth, and when exactly he had received the first Divine message, aroused some controversy. Agreement on this matter was reached in the year 17 of the Hijra, the fourth year of the caliphate of 'Umar. Until then, each year (after the Hijra) was called after its main event, and this was used for dating purposes. The first year of the Prophet's residence in Medina was thus called: 'The permission to travel'. The second year was called: 'The year of the command to fight'. The third year: 'The year of the test', and so on. Afterwards, the custom of naming the year after the main events was abandoned.

When the need for toning up the administration of the Caliphate arose during the time of 'Umar bin al-Khattab, it became necessary to have a calendar so as to fix the dates. The Caliph, who was so well aware of the sunnah of the Prophet and of his temperament, instead of fixing the standard from the birth of the Prophet, which heralded an entirely new chapter in the history of man or his death which had placed such a heavy responsibility upon the shoulders of the Caliphs or some other event, he ordered the adoption of the Hijra as the basic date for the Islamic calendar.’

                                       Ashura and Display of Self-Affliction

Sheikh Turi quoted verse 23 of Ash-Shuuraa "No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin" in his attempt to prove that it refers to the Prophet’s daughter, Fatimah and his two grandsons, Hasan and Husain (Ahlul bait), people of the Prophet’s household, and that the verse enjoins believers to love them.

Let me state that all believers must love the Messenger of Allah (SAW) and his household by the authority of quite a number of texts, but Ash-Shuuraa, verse 23 is not part of that. To start with, Ash-Shuuraa is a Makkan Surah; all surahs in that neighbourhood that begin with haameem are Makkan surahs as well. So, Ash-Shuuraa was revealed completely in Makkah before Ali bin Abu Talib (RA) married Fatimah. The wedding took place in Madeenah two years after Hijra, and consummation occurred at the end of the Battle of Badr. Hasan and Husain were delivered in the third and fourth year after Hijrah respectively; so, how can the verse refer to them?  

Some hadeeth-fabricators even went further to say that when the verse was revealed, the companions said, ‘To whom does the verse refer, Oh Messenger of Allah?’ then he said, ‘To Ali, Fatimah, and their two sons.’ This is a blatant lie in the informed opinion of hadeeth scholars.

The verse rather refers to the entire clans of Quraish as all of them have one qarabah, kinship or the other with the Messenger of Allah (SAW).

                                                                       All For Husain


Sheikh Muhammad Mahmud Turi has introduced us to a new reality – the prevalence of shi’ah adherents in our midst. That is the import of maintaining a weekly column, (forget about its apparent deficiencies in grammar and syntax), dedicated to propagating shi’ism through subtle and subliminal messages to initiate the gullible. The feigned love of Ahlul Bait is the right bait to catch new converts. However, informed Muslims know that the Prophet (SAW) had addressed this Ummah concerning Ahlul Bait when he said, ‘I adjure you in the Name of Allah to look after my household.’ Thus, Muslims adore Ahlul Bait, seeking Allah’s countenance and pleasure; and at the same time believe that speaking ill of the Prophet’s household is the smack of hypocrisy. To real Muslims, Aishah (RA) is a bone fide member of the Ahlul Bait, and whatever grieves her hurts the Messenger of Allah (SAW). To malign Aishah is to malign her consort, the Prophet of Allah (SAW). How can Allah allow His Messenger to take an evil person into his household when He has said that evil women are for evil men (Qur’an 24:26)? Shi’ites, in spite of this, defamed and accused Aishah of debauchery. Their fabricated traditions are replete with words against Aishah: 1) that the Messenger of Allah once pointed to Aishah’s residence and remarked, ‘Disbelief springs from this place’ 2) that Aishah and Hafsah contrived to poison the Messenger of Allah (SAW), and so on.

How is it conceivable for shi’as to love the Messenger of Allah (SAW) and his household while, at the same time, they malign his wives whom Allah the Almighty has described as ‘Mothers of the Believers?’

The Qur’an says:     The prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and His wives are their mothers. (Qur’an 33:6)

Oh Allah! We hear, and we obey. Aishah (RA) is our mother in faith; just as all other wives of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) are our mothers in faith.

This feigned love of the Prophet’s household manifested itself in the second part of Sheikh Turi’s Ashura Amidst Misconception, Confusion And Misleads, (LEADERSHIP Friday, December 6, 2013), where he laboured to paint a picture of martyrdom as being the reason for Ashura ‘predestined by Allah’. I wonder why Sheikh Turi refused to mention the names of other martyrs along with Husain on that day at Karbala. He should have mentioned Husain’s brother and son, who were both named Abu Bakr. In addition, he should have mentioned Husain’s other brother named Umar. All these three were martyred along with Husain in Karbala. Will it be that Sheikh Turi conveniently avoided the mention of these martyrs because their appellations were that of the usurpers of Ali’s right to the caliphate, Abu Bakr and Umar?

                                                                 Ashura Shi'ah Style

On the issue of thirst that Husain and his followers were afflicted with during the battle, I am intrigued by the fact that the Shi’ites believe that their imams possess knowledge of the unseen (Ghaib). If this was the case, then, why was Husain not able to foresee this impending danger of death by thirst, and make provision for abundant supply of water so as to save many of his followers including ‘his six month old baby’ whose thirst was quenched ‘with a deadly poisoned arrow’ of ‘Yazid’s senseless army’? In every expedition, Muslims are to prepare state-of-the-art armour for the frontlines in order to have upper hand over the enemy (Qur’an 8:60). Of course, one who knows the unseen should have used this lawful means of making provision towards quenching the thirst of his followers, rather than demean himself by importuning his enemies for water.
Reading both parts one and two of Sheikh Turi’s piece under discussion, you see the killers of Husain in Mu’awiya, Yazid and their hosts, whereas, even by the confirmation of Shi’a sources, Husain was actually murdered by no other than his own followers!  “Twenty-thousand people in Iraq” wrote As-Sayyid Muhsin Al-Amin in A’yaan Ash-Shi’ah, “swore the oath to Al-Husain, but betrayed him and rose against him. They turned their backs on their pledge and murdered him.”

So, the same people, as related by Sheikh Turi, who said to Husain after his last address to them at the battlefield ‘O our master! We are all ready to defend you and your Ahlul-bait, and to sacrifice our lives for the cause of Islam’, they were the very ones that murdered Husain.

Husain himself confronted these murderers at Karbala and said to them:

Did you not write to me and say that the time had come, and that you were presenting me with new recruits? Woe betide you! You were driven to distraction and you called on me for help. You sharpened a sword for us that was already in our hands, and you kindled a fire that we had already set to consume your enemies as well as ours. Then, you turned against your friends and joined your enemies. You rushed to swear the oath of allegiance to me, falling upon me as you fall into your beds. Then you disregarded your oaths foolishly. Away with the tyrants of this Ummah!’

Husain then turned to Allah and supplicated:

O Allah, if you will spare them for a while, then split them asunder and never allow them to rise again. Let the imams (those in authority) never be pleased with them. They called on me and said that they would support me until victory. Then they turned to fight against me.”

Therefore, if you are looking for those who murdered Husain, unlike what Sheikh Turi was trying to depict, the above quoted Shi’ah sources have spared you the trouble. Husain’s killers were those who claimed to be his supporters and followers.

This article by Sheikh Turi purposed to change the face of Ashura from that taught by the Prophet (SAW) to one of expressing melancholy and grief for the loss of Husain through annual muzaaharaat, processions to commemorate the sad event. Why will Husain be singled out for this show of grief every year? If the answer is because of his being from Ahlul-bait, what about Hamza, the uncle of Prophet (SAW)? The polytheists, in the battle of Uhud, targeted Hamza, killed him and cut his chest open, ripped out his heart and mutilated his body. The Messenger of Allah was so distraught, angry and nonplussed by this murder that he prayed the janaazah salaah on Hamza for more than seventy times. We have not seen the Shi’ites commemorating the death of this honourable member of Ahlul-bait annually. Moreover, the death of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) was a greater loss to this Ummah than the death of any mortal. The Shi’ites do not organise annual procession to commemorate his death!

                                                            Ashura in Blood

Ashura is not an occasion for melancholy and sorrow as we see Shi’ites do every year, slapping their faces, tearing their clothes and striking their bodies with swords and sharp objects with blood gushing forth from their heads, backs and sides. To the Muslims who adhere to the true teachings of Muhammad (SAW), Ashura is a time to celebrate, and to be pleased for following the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW).

As reported in both Bukhari and Muslim, when the Messenger of Allah first entered Madinah, he found the Jews fasting on Ashura, the 10th of Muharram. When he asked them as to why they were fasting, they said, ‘This is a great day in which Allah saved Musa (Moses) and drowned Pharaoh.

The Prophet (SAW) then said to them, ‘I have a greater right on Moses than you.’
He fasted that day, and ordered the Muslims to do the same.

Nobody can distort or change this Prophetic Sunnah of fasting and exultation on Ashura to procession, walling in grief and melancholy!


                                                     Ashura With Blood and Public Display of Aurah





1 comment :

  1. All true muslims must owe you atleast a delightful appreciation for exposing the deceits of these hypocrites and stating the correct position. We are in possession of very important material published by highly placed Shia converts, where they further exposed the inner workings of the sect. We also have Video records of their eminent scholars in Iraq and Iran, taken during some of their pervasive lectures. As Turi and Adamu Adamu continue with these hypocritical write-ups, we are going to expose them to the whole world in Sha Allah. JazzakAllah Sheikh Abubakar for this educative piece. Iam glad your name happens to be Abubakar. let us see how they will adress you because this name seems to scare them so much so that they can't even repeat it. We shall consider calling on a "Sheikh Umar" to be part of our team in due course!. - Aminu

    ReplyDelete