Letters to the Editor

Saif Hadi (via email)

Your magazine mentions the Jamaa’ah at-tableegh , Jamaa’at-al-islaamee etc. as among the ahl al-sunnah wa al-jamaa’ah. But the following article from fatwa-online says otherwise.

YMD

The length of the article forced deletion of its major portion. Below however, we reproduce relevant parts.

I respect the Ulema of Deoband, and also the scholars of ‘Hay’atu kibaar al ulema-KSA’, as well as others … but this article seems to say that their ‘aqaaid might not be the same. Specifically, my reference is to the Tableegh.

YMD

Although we are not sure how authentic the report is, but it is said that once an Arab scholar was given a detailed account of the supposed Shirk and Bid`ah of the Tableeghi Jama`ah. His reply to the long complaint was in a single sentence. He said: “A tree is known by its fruits.”

Whether the incident is authentic or not, the words of reply can be authentically applied to the Jama`ah Tableegh (or Jama`ah Islamiyyah if you will). Look at the fruits. Do you see the members of Tableegh visiting tombs, going around graves, distributing Kheer-poori on auspicious days, conducting Fatihah, Ghyarwheen, or involved in such other practices? If the answer is a vigorous no, then, you know the tree from the fruit. Online fatwas of this kind may be turned off-line.

Objection 1: It is said that there are teachings of Shirk in the Book “Fadaa’il A’maal” under the chapter “Fadaa’il Durood.” The Messenger of Allah (allegedly) said: “Whoever wants something from anyone should go to his grave and supplicate to Allah for it.”

YMD

This passage is a bit unclear in the original also. If the apparent meaning is taken, then, it is clearly stated that one should ask Allah, which negates shirk. But it is not clear what the Sheikh meant by “Whoever wants something from anyone.” It is likely that there was an error from the scribe (kaatib).

Objection 2: On page 109, Hikayat no. 48: Sh. Abu Khair Qattah said: I went to Madinah and stayed there for five days but did not achieve pleasure and satisfaction. I went to the graves of the Prophet, Abu Bakr and `Umar and said, “O Messenger of Allah I am your guest tonight.” Then I left the place and slept behind the minbar. I saw the Prophet in my dream with Abu Bakr on his right, ‘Umar on his left, and `Ali in front. `Ali shook me and said that the Messenger of Allah was coming to visit me. I got up and kissed the Prophet between his eyes. The Messenger of Allah gave me a piece of bread half of which I ate, half was in my hand as I woke up.”

YMD

We do not understand what is your objection to this story? It is a dream. Everyone experiences dreams at night of the kind and nature he dreams during the day. In this present case, the person was perturbed that he had not been able to achieve the spiritual satisfaction that he was longing for. He was rewarded – perhaps because of love – with the dream in question. What’s wrong in it? Dreams are merely dreams.

We know of a person who used to feel extremely vexed because of the little children he had who took away his time from studies and Da`wah works. One night he saw the Prophet in his dream playing with children. He got the message: giving time to one’s children is a kind of `Ibaadah.

As for the half piece of bread, either it was from Allah, or picked up from somewhere by an angel, or, perhaps someone passing by felt sorry for the haggard man and placed a piece in his hand while he was dreaming. The confluence of the real and the unreal during a dream is a well known phenomenon.

Objection 3: The ‘aqeedah being promoted about the Messenger of Allah is that he is Haadhir wa Naazir (Omnipresent).

YMD

This is not correct. On the contrary, the Ahl al-Bid`ah are angry with the Tableegh because they do not believe in this kind of things. They call them Wahaabis for their puritanical beliefs.

About YMD
Subscribe
Donate

Past Issues