Questions per Authors

 72 Questions
 20 Questions

Questions per Subjects

All Questions








After the death of the Prophet (saw) a prominent Sahabi Malik Numera was killed for not paying Zakat. Is there any law in Islam condemn a Muslim to be killed if refuse to pay Zakat?



In addition after Malik was killed, immediately his wife was raped. To cover up, the word used instead of rape was that the she was married to the person who raped her. Under which Islamic law allow a Muslim to kill a Muslim and at the same day married his wife without edah (days require to remain unmarried after the death of a husband) and without her approval?



Abu baker, Umar and Uthman




We have the right to ask “Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama‘a” this question. Rather, we challenge them to bring about one Qur’anic verse, or one hadith, making it compulsory on the Muslims to love Abu Bakr or Umar or Uthman or any other sahabi!



Conspiracy at Saqifa


We do not agree and reject THE SECRET MEETING OF SAQIFA which happened without the awareness and knowledge of the Muslim Ummah. Only few people met there, made their own decisions and selected their own man among themselves. Worst in this meeting the discussion was about the tribalism NOT ISLAM. There are several questions have risen in this meeting which require A TRUE MUSLIM TO ANSWER THEM.



When the second caliph came to be informed about the meeting in Saqifa, why he came in secret in the mosque and informed only two people Abu Baker and Abu Ubaida?



Among all the Muslims in the mosque he only selected Abu Baker and Abu Ubaida. Other important Companions of the Holy Prophets (s.a.w) did not have the right to attend that meeting?



How can he left out Ali at the time the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said "Ali mal Haq wal Haq ma Ali?"



How can he left out Salman at the time the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said "Salman minal Ahle Bait?"



How can he left out Khuzaima Ibne Thabit (Dhush-Shahadatain) at the time the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said that his witness is equal to two people? Was he not important and necessary at the serious moment?



How can he left out Ammar Yasir at the time the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said that he would be killed by rebellious, meaning Firqa Baghiya?



How can he left out Abu Dhar at the time the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said “Heaven has not shaded, nor has the earth carried a person more straight forward than Abu Dhar. He walks on earth with the immaterialistic attitude of Jesus, the son of Mary?"



How soon Omar and his friends forgot the saying of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) "Paradise longs for three men, Ali, Ammar and Salman?"



Other Muslims particular those who were at the Mosque, did not have the Feeling of Safety and Love for Islam, only those few people felt the danger?



The event of Ghadir Khum just passed only few days before Saqifa took place which they Abu Bakr, Omar and Abu Ubaida were present and heard what the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said. They not only heard what the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said, but they were the first people to congratulate Ali (a.s). Was it possible that they quickly forgot this Important event and Hadith of Holy Prophet (s.a.w) of Ghadir Khum and rushed to Saqifa?



If Abu Bakr, Omar and Abu Ubaida did not have ANY DESIRE for Caliphate, what made them to leave the Dead Body of the Last Holy Prophet (s.a.w) and Beloved of Allah aside without attending his Funeral?



We know that after the death of Omar, there was three days gaps and then a Caliph was selected. Why could they not delay the selection of Caliphate to take place after the burial of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w)?



The same Abu Ubaida bin Jarrah was a grave digger for the Muslim of Makkah. How he managed to leave such a golden opportunity to dig the grave of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) and ran for the selection of Caliphate?



Which one was it important for Abu Ubaida the golden opportunity to dig the grave of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) or the worldly power of Caliphate?



Since when the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) in his life ever attended Saqifa and sent any delegation there?



Were not the same Saqifa which was infamous and the secret meeting place of the criminals to discuss their bad movement?



Was the Mosque not preferable and the right place for the selection of the Khilafa than Saqifa?



The Mosque did not have enough space for the Muslim gathering so they should go to Saqifa?



The decision of war, peace, people coming to the Holy Prophet (saw), lecture and the solving of Muslim problems during the time of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was taking place in Saqifa or in the Mosque?



Why during debate in Saqifa, there were not mentioned any Quranic verses or the Holy Prophet (saw) traditions?



The Holy Prophet (saw) tried his best to remove the problem of tribe and treated all Muslims equal, if this was the selection of the Muslim Khalifa why the subject of tribelism was brought forward in this meeting?



Was it not conspiracy that Omar prepared a speech instead Abu Baker read exactly what Omar wanted?


Volume 8, Book 82, Number 817:

     Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:


     When the speaker had finished, I intended to speak as I had prepared a speech which I liked and which I wanted to deliver in the presence of Abu Bakr, and I used to avoid provoking him. So, when I wanted to speak, Abu Bakr said, 'Wait a while.' I disliked to make him angry. So Abu Bakr himself gave a speech, and he was wiser and more patient than I. BY ALLAH, HE NEVER MISSED A SENTENCE THAT I LIKED IN MY OWN PREPARED SPEECH, BUT HE SAID THE LIKE OF IT OR BETTER THAN IT SPONTANEOUSLY.




Traditions in praise of Abu Baker, Umar and Uthman



There are several traditions in praise of Abu Baker, Umar and Uthman. If truly those traditions were genuine, then in Saqifa was the right place and right time to bring forward those traditions in their favour against those who opposed Abu Baker and Umar and to give strength for their selection of a Khalifa. Why Abu Baker or Umar never brought forward any traditions regarding them if they were truly existed in their favour and Prophet (saw) said regarding them?



Similar, if truly those traditions in praise of Abu Baker, Umar and Uthman, were genuine, then in Mubahila those type  of people who were very closed to Allah where Allah could quickly and easily accept their Duas were required, where were they during Mubahila against Christians where by their Dua can wipe out Christianity?




Collection and transmission of Prophet's traditions (Sunnah)



The three Caliphs, Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman, prohibited the writing and even the discussion of the traditions of the Prophet (saw).


Abu Bakr gathered the people during his Caliphate and said to them: "You relate traditions from the Prophet of God and differ about it. The people after you will differ even more, [therefore] do not relate anything from the Prophet. If anyone asks you, say: 'Between us there is the book, so consider as lawful what is lawful in it, and prohibit what is forbidden in it'".


Similarly, 'Umar was another one who forbade the people from narrating traditions from the Prophet. Qarza b. K'ab said: "When 'Umar b. al-Khattab sent us to Iraq, he walked with us and said: 'Do you know why I followed you?' They said: 'To honour us'. He said: 'Besides that, you are going to the villagers. The Qur'an reverberates in them like the reverberation of a bee. Do not occupy them with traditions. So make them busy and recite the Qur'an, and reduce the narrations from the Prophet and I am an associate to you [in this]'".


Then 'Uthman came after him. He continued the trend and notified all the people that: "It is not permitted for anyone to narrate a tradition which was not heard during the times of Abu Bakr and 'Umar".


Since the interests of the ruling authority and the dominant political line dictated the obliteration and the burning of the Sunnah and the prohibition of quoting hadith, the sahaba who supported such caliphate obeyed those orders and burnt such Sunnah and ceased quoting hadith. Thus, they left themselves and their followers no option except resorting to personal views expressed as ijtihad, or following the "sunnah" of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Mu`awiyah, Yazid, Marwan ibn al-Hakam, al-Waleed ibn Abd al-Malik, Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik....  This continued till [Umayyad caliph] Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz came to power and asked Abu Bakr al-Hazmi to write down what he remembered of the ahadith and Sunnah of the  Messenger of Allah or the "sunnah" of Umar ibn al-Khattab.[49] 


How come they started transmitting and collecting the traditions (Sunnah) of the Prophet (saw) after they were forbidden and prevented by Abu Baker, Umar and Uthman not to do so?



Why they follow their Sirahs and all their sayings with the exception of this prohibition of traditions collections and started collecting and transmitting Prophet (saw)'s traditions against the wishes of their leaders Abu Baker, Umar and Uthman?



Can those traditions which were compiled by "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah" be taken for granted especially since those who compiled them belonged to Banu Umayyah and their supporters who represent Quraysh's caliphate?



Let us take example of Imam Ali (a.s) and Abu Huraira in Bukhari and see who provide more hadith of Holy Prophet (s.a.w)


Total number of traditions in 9 volumns of Bukhari:       7068

Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb:   79 (1.11%)

Abu Hurairah:            1100  (15.56%)


I do not think it require any comment, just question, do you follow Ali (a.s) who is part of Ahlel Bait and whom you are told to follow him in Hadith Thaqalain or Abu Huraira?



How in short time, around two years Abu Huraira could have such hadith and supersede Imam Ali who since childhood live his life with the Prophet (saw)?



Examples of Traditions devalued the Prophet (saw)



Can learn Sunni scholars carry their wives in their shoulders in public and dancing with them as they accept the tradition which claimed that the Holy Prophet (saw) did that, can they do this?



Can learn Sunni scholars urinate in public while standing as they accept the tradition which claimed that the Holy Prophet (saw) did that, can they do this?



Jabr and Qadr



How can you then accept traditions, reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, that Allah has preordained the actions of His slaves before He [even] created them? Al-Bukhari has reported in his Sahih: "Adam and Moses argued with each other. Moses said to Adam: 'O Adam! You are our father who disappointed us and turned us out of paradise'. Then Adam said to him: 'O Moses! Allah favored you with His talk (talked to you directly) and He wrote [the Torah] for you with His Own Hand. Do you blame me for an act which Allah had written in my fate forty years before my creation?' So Adam confuted Moses, Adam confuted Moses, the Prophet added, repeating the statement three times".



How can we believe in this religion which petrifies human reasoning, [teaching] the human being is a puppet which the hand of fate moves according to its wishes, only to put it into an oven later on? This belief which prevents the human mind from creation, discovery, invention, progress and competition which have brought about such wonderful things; and leaves a person stagnant and contented with the state he is in and with what he has, claiming that he is proceeding towards what has been decreed for him?



How can we accept these traditions which conflict with sound reason and portray a picture that Allah, Glory be to Him, is the Creator, Almighty, Strong and Overpowering and it is up to Him to create weak slaves so as to put them into the hell fire simply because He does what He wills?


Do the intelligent beings call this Lord a wise, merciful or just God?



What would happen if we discuss this with non-Muslim erudite scholars and they know that our Lord has these attributes and that our religion has decreed misery upon the people before they were born, will they then accept Islam and enter into the religion in great numbers?



Fatima with 2 caliphs



If the tradition which Abu Bakar claimed to hear that the Prophet (saw) said "We prophets do not leave behind any legacy; whatever we leave as inheritance is charity" (i.e., the property of umma), then how possible Aisha could inherit the house and allow Abu Baker and Umar to buried there and Fatimah (as) has no right to inherit?



Which right or under which law could Aisha allow Abu Baker  and Umar to be buried there while Fatimah (as) or Imam Hassan could not be buried there?



Ali with 3 Caliphs



Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama‘a” call Uthman "Dhul-Noorayn,” justifying it by saying that he had married Ruqayya and Ummu Kulthoom who, according to them, were the Prophet’s daughters. This is not true.  The truth is that they were his step-daughters. Even if you suppose [erroneously] that they were his daughters, how can they be described as “noorayn,” two lights, since the Prophet never narrated any of their merits?  Why not attach this title to Fatima whom he described as the Leader and the light of all the women of the world? Why did they not call Ali “Dhul-Noor” based on such a premise? 



Why Ali (a.s) was not given any authority in the government of the first three Caliph?



Rebellion against Imam Ali



The late Wahabie scholar Sayyid Abul A’la Maudoodi , in his book “Murtad ki Saza” (Punishment of the apostate) states that those who did not pay Zakat became apostates because they rebelled against the Khalifa of the time. Murtad ki Saza, page 24 – 25 Karachi edition 1954 Curiously when the companions rebel against Ali (as) and wage war against him the same thinking is not applied.






How can we comprehend [the fact that] Mu'awiya, the freed man, son of a freed man and accursed son of the accursed one, ascending the Caliphate, [a position] which represented the status and the Caliphate of the Prophet of Allah, (S.A.W.)?



Why sunnis try to damage the character of Abu Talib, this great man while they are happy to accept that people like Abu Sufyan and Moaviya were UNQUESTIONABLY(!!!!!) pious muslims.



Real Prophet (saw) Successors (Imams)



There are two type of the hadith of Thaqalain, one says “Kitab and Sunnah” and other “Kitab and Itrat Ahlel Bait.” If you try all your best to search all Sahih books, you will not find hadith of “Kitab and Sunnah” anywhere except in Muwatta of Imam Malik which is without any ASNAD (Chains). It is only one person saying. While if you try to find “Kitab and Itrat Ahlel Bait” you find that it has been told by more than 20 Sahabas. Hadith which has come from more than 6 Sahaba this one becomes as “Hadith Mutawatir.”


Why “hadith Mutawatir” which is like verse of Holy Quran has been ignored and other one without Asnad (Chains) has been embraced and treated as first class?



If we accept the hadith of “Kitab and Itrat Ahlel Bait”, why we do not treat Ahlel Bait the way we treat Quran? Meaning why we do not take their guidance and their sayings rather than going through other channels to get Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) which resulted many contradicting sayings and in turn it splintered into different schools, groups, offshoots?



None of the Prophet’s (saw) wives or Banu Hashim ever claimed this verse 33 of chapter Al-Ahzab was revealed for them. But Ayesha and Umme Salma themselves have admitted and agreed to say that the Prophet (saw) has taken Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain wrapped them under the cloak and then call 'These are MY AHLEL BAIT’. How could then other claim that this verse was revealed for the wives of the Prophet (saw) or others?



During Mubahila against Christians, why did Prophet (s.a.w) not select even one of Sahabis (companions) or one of his wives? Where were those great Sahabis (companions) or wives of the Prophet (saw) who by their Dua could wipe out Christianity?



The Holy Prophet (s.a.w) said: "Man mata walam yaarifu Imamul Zaman mata mita Jahilia."

“Whosoever dies without recognizing the Imam of his time dies the death of the jahiliyyah.”   

- Ahmad b. Hanbal, al Musnad, p. 96, Kanzul Ummal, Sharah-e- Aqaid


 Who is Imam of Our Age?




We know that Christians has number 666, if you able to know this number you will know who is this BEAST meaning DAJJAL. This Dajjal was never mentioned by name only by number. In this way the Christians try their best to suit anyone to this number, even our Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was not spared. You will see that Pope was called as Beast by Protestant, Henry Kissinger and now even the government of American included to be Beast of number 666.


If we come to the Muslims we will see this type of game is also there. The Muslims has number 12 and this is according the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) saying when he said :-


Sahih Muslim Book 19, Number 4483:

     Narrated Jabir ibn Samurah:


     It has been narrated on the authority of Amir ibn Sa'd ibn AbuWaqqas who said: I wrote (a letter) to Jabir ibn Samurah and sent it to him through my servant, Nafi', asking him to inform me of something he had heard from the Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). He wrote to me (in reply): I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) say on Friday, the day on which al-Aslami was stoned to death (for committing adultery): The Islamic religion will continue until the Hour has been established, or you have been ruled by twelve Caliphs, all of them being from the Quraysh. I also heard him say: A small force of the Muslims will capture the white palace, the palace of the Persian Emperor or his descendants. I also heard him say: Before the Day of Judgment there will appear (a number of) imposters. You are to guard against them. I also heard him say: When God grants wealth to any one of you, he should first spend it on himself and his family (and then give it in charity to the poor). I heard him (also) say: I shall be your forerunner at the Cistern (expecting your arrival).



Sunan Abu Dawud Book 36, Number 4266:

     Narrated Jabir ibn Samurah:


     The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The religion will continue to be established till there are twelve caliphs over you, and the whole community will agree on each of them. I then heard from the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) some remarks which I could not understand. I asked my father: What is he saying: He said: all of them will belong to Quraysh.


You can also find in Sahih Tirmizi and Yanabee ul-Mawadata vol 3 page 105.


Who are these twelve Khalifa, did our Holy Prophet (s.a.w) left us to guess their names without informing us? According to this hadith the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) did not mention who are these 12 Khalifa. Therefore the Muslims started to guess and name anyone who can fit and suit them, even the murder of the Sayyid Shababe Ahle Jana – the master of the youth of Paradise (Imam Hussain a.s) is included in the list. 



We know that our Prophet (s.a.w) is the last of the prophets and who brought COMPLETE MESSAGE from God, would it be difficult for him to mention those twelve Khalifa by name and leave in the hands of Muslim to guess just like Christians?







Ahle Sunnah Sects and Imams



Before the appearance of those schools and groups, such as Al-Ash’ari, Mutazalite, Hanafi, Shafi, Maliki, Hanbali, Jaafari, Zaydi, Ibadhi and other, what would be the status of those Muslims who did not get chance to follow them, in which sects would they be?



If only one group out of 73 will go to paradise, then surely only one group of Ahlel Sunnah out of four  (Hanafi, Shafi, Maliki and Hanbali ) should be the success one as far as the Law concern because all of them have different interpretation of Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). The question is which one out of these four groups are the success one?



If only one sect out of  4 of Sunni sects would be a success one, where the other 3 groups of Ahle Sunna will be?



If one group out of 73 will go to paradise, then surely one group of Ahlel Sunna out of two (Ashaari and Hanbali) as far as the Doctrine concern because all of them have different interpretation of Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). The question is which one out of these two groups are the success one?



Where another group out of these two groups of Ahle Sunna will be?



Where can we find that any of these Imams ever said that ‘I am the most learned man of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) Ummat and Muslims have to follow me!’



On whose authority should we follow them, the authority of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) or God, and where can we find their names if their names ever mentioned by them?



If they were selected by men, how can we trust those men who selected them?



Why should we only chose those four selected Imams and reject other great Imams who came during their time and after them such as Imam Sufyan Sauri, Imam Sufyan ibne Ainiya, Ibne Jareeh, Imam Ghazali, and others?



Also do you mean to say that those Imams like as Imam Sufyan Sauri, Imam Sufyan ibne Ainiya, Ibne Jareeh, Imam Ghazali, Imam Jaafar Sadiq (who taught Abu Hanifa and Malik) and others WERE NOT GREAT? What is your proof that ONLY THESE FOUR IMAMS WERE GREAT?



If you are true in your words and say that we should not reject Imam Sufyan Sauri, Imam Sufyan ibne Ainiya, Ibne Jareeh, Imam Ghazali and others then why are you STICKING WITH THESE FOUR IMAMS ONLY?




Tell me if the early Muslims did survive without these four Imams then what was necessary for these Imams:



Wahabi who came from the offshot of Hanbal are another new sect, where would they stand? There are several books written by scholars of Ahlel Sunna against them.








Who allowed the door of Ijtehad to be closed, Holy Prophet (s.w.a), God or man, if man on whose authority?



In case of the advance technology, how can we cope with new regulations if the door of Ijtehad is closed when we are only suppose to follow those four Imams? 







Tell me were all early Muslims believed that God can be seen like Hanbal or not believed like rest of three schools?








Tell me were all early Muslims doing Qunut at the morning like Shafi and Malik or they were not doing like Hanafi and Hanbali?



Tell me were all early Muslims folding their hands like three schools or not folding like Malik?




Marriage Muta


In Bukhari we learn from Imran that the Aya 4:24 regarding Muta WAS NEVER ABROGATED so Muta should have been forbidden!


Volume 6, Book 60, Number 43:

Narrated 'Imran bin Husain:


The Verse of Hajj-at-Tamatu was revealed in Allah's Book, so we performed it with Allah's Apostle, and nothing was revealed in Qur'an to make it illegal, nor did the Prophet prohibit it till he died. But the man (who regarded it illegal) just expressed what his own mind suggested.


See the original Arabic Bukhari is written as : “Anzalta Ayatul MUTA FI KITABILLAH” See book 3 page 105 but in English it has been changed from the word MUTA TO HAJJ-AT- TAMATU, typical Christian style of changing their Bible!


The only person to make MUTA AS UNLAWFUL WAS NOBODY ELSE EXCEPT OMAR WHO SAID, “TWO TYPES OF MUT’A WERE (LEGAL) DURING THE TIME OF THE PROPHET AND I FORBID THEM BOTH, and I punish those who commit it. They are: Mut'a of pilgrimage and Mut'a of women.”  See Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Fakhr al-Razi, volum 3, page 201 under verse 4:24; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, volume 1, page 52 and Al-Mughani by Ibnu Quddama volume 7 page 572. Also Bukahri confirm that it was Omar who MADE UNLAWFUL WHAT WAS MADE LAWFUL BY ALLAH


How can Omar prohibit something which the messenger of Allah did not?




 "WHOEVER I AM HIS MASTER, ALI IS HIS MASTER. O God! Love those who love him. Be hostile to those who are hostile to him. Hate those who hate him. Help those who help him. And keep the truth with him wherever he turns." (repeating this paragraph three times). 


Copyright ©2011
All rights reserved

وَنَجَّيْنَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَكَانُوا يَتَّقُونَ     اللهم صلى على محد و ال محد.... و عجل فرجهم