Does the clarity of the Qur'an's language deserve a capital C? --- 'clear Arabic' or 'Clear Arabic'?

The Qur’an identifies the language it uses as Arabic.  This is confirmed in several verses throughout the Qur’an, however, in two instances it has added the qualification of mubīn (clear) to its Arabic. Thus, according to the Qur’an, the language it uses is not only Arabic but ‘arabī mubīn. 

Sayyid Sulayman Nadwi (d. 1953) asks whether mubīn here is intended as an adjective (clear Arabic) or a noun (Clear Arabic). For those acquainted with Arabic and the relevant grammar jargon, it is an enquiry into whether mubīn here is intended as a wasf or an ‘alam.

His position is an interesting one. Despite my own ambivalence towards it, and much of the work in which this opinion is articulated, I found it worth sharing, translating and bringing to the attention of friends and colleagues.  I await their thoughts and feedback.

———————————————————————————————-

وهذا لسان عربي مبين 

بلسان عربي مبين

“… This is [in] a clear Arabic tongue.” (16:103)

“… in a clear, Arabic tongue.” (26:195)

The lexical meaning of mubīn is someone who clarifies, makes clear and opens up (explains).  The bulk of exegetes have taken this lexical meaning in understanding mubīn in the above verses, which means the Qur’an has been revealed in a language that is incredibly eloquent, its meanings open up, message becomes clear, and no difficulty is found in understanding it. 

During the preparation of Vol 1. [of this work], it dawned upon me that mubīn here may not be referring to its lexical meaning and may in fact be a noun (‘alam).  That Arabic was divided into several dialects at the advent of Islam was discussed previously, the most eloquent [and captivating] of them was called lisān ‘arabī mubīn (lit. The Clear Arabic).  

Take the example of Urdu.  The dialects spoken in Lahore, Delhi, Lucknow, Banares, Patna, Calcutta, Dhaka, Hyderabad, Bombay and Madras are all considered Urdu.  Based on a number of factors each dialect varies considerably in its lexis, pronunciation, masculine and feminine rules, and grammar.  Despite this each are equally considered Urdu, however, it is agreed the most eloquent Urdu is urdu-i mu’alla (Higher Urdu), the dialect spoken at the Red Fort in Delhi or which is now used by our writers and poets.  

Likewise, despite the several differences in Arabic dialects, there was a formal and recognised tongue in which the poets of various tribes expressed themselves and would communicate with one another.  It was this dialect which is termed lisān mubīn.

This thought was in my mind as a theory.  Throughout my readings I found some material confirming this which made me realise I am not alone [in thinking this] and that there are other great scholars who think similar.  

Both al-Ḥākim al-Nīshpurī in his al-mustadrak and al-Bayhaqī in his shu’ab al-īmān narrate from the Companion Buraydah regarding the verse, “… in a clear, Arabic tongue.” (bi lisān ‘arabī mubīn) (26:195): “that it was in the tongue of Jurhum.” Al-Ḥākim accredited this report as saḥīḥ.

روى الحاكم في المستدرك وصححه والبيهقي في شعب الإيمان، عن بريدة رضي الله عنه، في قوله تعالى « بلسان عربي مبين » قال: بلسان جرهم.

The name Jurhum belongs to the grandmother of Quraysh, their first ancestor, as Prophet Ismā’īl married into the family of Jurhum.  Even if this narration is not authentic, it is nonetheless reflective of those who reported it.  Similarly, Yāqūt writes the following in his mu’jam (lit. dictionary) under “‘A-R-B” (Arab) through Hishām Kalbī:

واللسان السادس ممن أنطقه الله في عربة بلسان لم يكن قبلهم إسماعيل بن إبراهيم؛ نطقوا بالمبين، وهو السادس ممن تكلم بالعربية هو وبنوه 

ولسانهم المبين وكتابهم المبين، وهو الغالب على العرب اليوم

“The seventh language (lit. tongue) which Allah had the Arabs speak, and which was not present before them, was the language of Ismā’īl ibn Ibrāhīm: the language of mubīn. He is the sixth personage who spoke Arabic (its sixth dialect), him and his progeny.  Their tongue (lisān) is al-mubīn, their writing is al-mubīn, and this is the language which is prevalent amongst Arabs today.”

He then states, “al-mubīn li ma’ad ibn ‘adnān” — mubīn is the language of Ma’ad ibn ‘Adnān.  

It is recorded in authentic reports [that] when the Caliph and Companion ‘Uthmān ibn ‘Affān was having copies of the Qur’an made, he ordered his scribes that should they disagree on any word they should fix the pronunciation and reading according to the dialect of Quraysh.  He reasoned this was because the Qur’an was revealed in the language of Quraysh.

Lexicographers have largely explained the beauty and eloquence of the Qurayshi dialect through two factors, both of which are correct.  

Generally, it is held that a community which isolates itself and does not come into contact with others is able to keep its tongue pure and untainted.  This theory is correct to a large extent, however, (it) is worth amending in light of another.  The language of communities which keep to themselves and do not mingle with others is generally observed to be limited and restricted.  It is for this reason primitive (waḥshi) languages are unable to relate impressive and far reaching imaginary expressions.  

It is under this principle we find, based on their insular existence, village languages are indeed safe from coming under the influence of other languages, nonetheless, they unable to express intricate emotions and sophisticated thoughts.  

A century or two before Islam, Quraysh was the only tribe which had safe passage for trade throughout the whole of Arabia and beyond into neighbouring territories.  It is for this reason their language would have been more extensive and versatile in comparison. 

    

The expression of religious ideas which were not known hitherto, and for which there was no existent vocabulary, required a dialect which would have the capacity to express such ideas; a language which had some form of rapport with other ancient languages [and possibly dialects], based on which it would be able to appropriate suitable vocabulary.  Out of the entire Arabian peninsula only the Quraysh could have had such a dialect.

The second factor is that despite there being local temples dotted throughout Arabia, to which people would make pilgrimage and where carnivals would be held, Makkah is the only place where the entire peninsula would congregate on a nationwide scale.  People would come from every corner of the peninsula, and the carnival of ‘ukādh (a.k.a. Souk Okaz) was the Academy of Arabs.  Therefore it follows the language spoken in Makkah would have been the distillation of all the Arabic dialects. 

The poets too, given that attendees would have come from all parts of the peninsula, would have used a language that is shared and understood by all, and this would have been something very close to the Makkan dialect.  

It is for this reason we find, despite the great contrasts in the dialects of these poets, a type of language and style used in their poetry that is quite consistent and uniform.

To address all Arabs the divine revelation required such a language.

(Sayyid Sulayman Nadwi)  

Some Gujarati Muslim Families and their [Potential] Links to Arab Tribes

Genealogy, or the knowledge of tribes and ancestries, is a neglected but important branch of knowledge. It remains the preserve of a select few: family chiefs, village elders and tribal sages.  The Arabs had a knack for it because their life was shaped by tribalism, they were defined by their tribe and its relations with others.  Then there was the additional use of poetry. Each tribe had its share of bards and collection of poetry, standing the test of time and transmitted through generations, members would have memorised verses and odes in infancy and could produce them by rote at any given instance; poetry celebrating the legend of their tribe and partner tribes, all whilst versifying abuse and insults about their rival and opponent tribes. For this, in addition to data of historical events, they required intricate knowledge of their ancestry and the ancestry of others.

“O Mankind, We have created you from a male and female, and made you nations and tribes so that you may come to know one another. 

 Truly, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the most God-fearing among you.  

Truly God is the All-Knower, All-Aware.” (49:13)

For Muslims, apart from the fact that God speaks about creating humans with different complexions, ethnicities and languages, “so that you may come to know one another”, the importance of genealogy is compounded by hadiths such as, “whoever claims to have come from other than his father, and associates his name with other than his master (slaves associated with masters in the olden days), then upon him is Allah’s curse, the curse of the angels and all people. Allah will not accept any of his deeds.”

(Commentators interpret sarfan wa la ‘adla, which I have conveniently translated as “deeds” here, as “repentance and worship.” So according to this interpretation, such a person's repentance or worship will not be accepted. God forbid.)

There are several variants to this report. “It is kufr”, “Heaven is forbidden for such a person” and “he is in Hell” are all alternate expressions recorded in texts, which allude to the same point and emphasise the severity of this “sin”.

The hadith is talking about identity theft, someone claiming to be something or someone they are not.  This creates a host of problems, not least because discarding one’s tribal association for another is considered an affront to one’s own linage, it creates complications in inheritance laws, burial rites, marital regulations et cetera. Of late some have made a literalist reading of the hadith and have understood it to mean a wife is not allowed to take her husband’s surname. In my understanding of the custom, at least my custom and the ones under my observation, none of the above problems occur when a bride adds the groom’s family surname to hers. Allah knows best.

In light of the above, it should not come as a surprise then if we are to learn the Companions were masters of this knowledge. Abu Bakr, for example, was the most knowledgeable personage of the Quraysh family tree in his time.  He was equally well-versed in the genealogy of all Arabs and was considered an authority.  Similarly, the Companions Jubayr ibn Mut’im, Ibn ‘Abbas and ‘Aqil ibn Abi Talib were distinguished experts amongst their peers in this field.

Gujaratis are no different in this regard. I always marvel at how my granddad, hafizahullah, is able to draw connections between individuals out of thin air — “X person’s grandmother’s aunt was married to Y person’s granddad’s cousin”, “my great great granddad and X’s great granddad were brothers!”  I’m sure Gujaratis who are reading this post will know exactly what I’m talking about, as they will have encountered someone likewise in their clan. An outsider can be mistaken to associate such the intricate knowledge with incest, but incest it is NOT.  If anything, it demonstrates the importance and significance of genealogy amongst them and their culture.

What I reproduce here is an interesting and much sought-after chart found within an Urdu work titled, muqaddimah tarikh-i gujarat (lit. prolegomenon to the history of Gujarat), penned by the late Mol Ayyub Surti of Batley (d. 2012) rahmatullahi ‘alahyhi, and which was published in 1991.  I’m aware the chart was published separately too, however, I have no additional information about it apart from Bury Dar al-‘Ulum having something to do with it (as we shall see).

The chart is placed under the heading, “Arab tribes in Gujarat from the first century AH in light of new research” (jadid tahqiqat ki roshni mein pehli sadi hijri se qaba’il-i arabiyya gujarat hindustan mein). The chart bears a title in Arabic which has been translated into Urdu as, “Arab Tribes from the 1^st century AH in Gujarat (India)” (Al-qaba’il al-‘arabiyyah min al-qurun al-ula fi gujarat al-hind). I find “early centuries” is a more appropriate translation of “al-qurun al-ula” than “the 1^st century”, unless the migration dates of the enlisted tribes can be ascertained to fall within the first century, i.e. each of tribe was on the shores of Gujarat by the end of the first century hijri. “Earlier centuries” in the Islamic parlance refers to the first three centuries. No biggie.

The chart is made up of five columns, one Gujarati, one English and three Arabic.  The Gujarati column (far left) is titled atak, which means tribe or family name. The English column, titled Surname, transliterates the Gujarati atak into English whilst the Arabic ism al-‘a’ilah (third from left and lit. “Family name”) transliterates the English/Gujarati into Arabic.  Thus, each family name is scribed in three languages: Gujarati, English and Arabic.  These are then associated with Arab tribes which form the remaining two columns, ‘nearest tribe’ and ‘furthest tribe’.

To be identified in terms of one’s immediate and broader tribes was and is quite common amongst Arabs.  I guess this is common amongst us too, we identify ourselves differently based on context. I’m European, British, English, Northerner, Lancastrian, a Blackburner and from Whalley Range.  All of these are identities on different levels and are relevant in their context. I do note, however, the identities in my example are geographical, which are common in the Torah. The Arabs do not identify themselves based on geographical locations (Hijazi, Makki, Madani, Ta’ifi), rarely have I noticed this if ever, they identify with tribes (Qurashi, Ansari, Thaqafi etc.).  In fact, the Caliph ‘Umar can be said to have criticised the practice.

He once stated, “learn your family tree and connect with your kin. Do not be like the Nabateans of [southern] Iraq (Sawad), whom when asked who they are, reply, ‘I am from such and such a village.’  For, by Allah, there may be something between a man and his brother, were he to realise what blood relation is between them it would prevent him from hurting his brother.” 

 It is accepted that all arabs are descendants of two progenitors: Adnan and Qahtan. Adnan is a descendant of Prophet Ismail s.o. Prophet Ibrahim who had settled in the Hijaz, his family inhabited north of the Arabian peninsula and scattered as far north as the holy lands of Palestine, whilst Qahtan is the ancestor of Southern Arabia, primarily what is now Southern KSA (Najran), Yemen, Oman, and parts of Africa (Habash).  The so-called “extinct Arabs”, of Sheba, ‘Ad, Thamud came from Qahtan. Allah knows best.

The chart contains editorial and typographical errors, as well as spelling which does not agree with conventional orthography. I have decided to keep them and provide corrections separately at the end.  Since transliteration is between three languages, there are some linguistic restrictions. For example, Arabic and English both do not have the Hindi-Urdu H, which is called the do chashmi ha and popularly referred to as the “love heart H” or the “paan shaped H”, as with the word Bharat (بھارت). This sound cannot be created in either Arabic or English. 

Despite this, there are some very definite errors. For example, Fays ibn ‘Umlaan (فيس بن عملان) is a corruption of Qays ibn ‘Aylan (قيس بن عيلان), more commonly referred to as Qays ‘Aylan (قيس عيلان).  The Gujarati Batha (બાથા) shows the H is a Hindi one, not possible to reproduce precisely in Arabic or English, yet there was no need to alter the sequence of the H and omit the elongated vowel A (alif madda) in the Arabic (بهته). The Arabic transliterates as Bhutta or Bhatta, not baathaa (باتها). Similarly, (બુલબુલ્યા) Bulbulya appears as Bulbul without the suffix (-ya) in the English transliteration and which becomes Babul (بابول) in Arabic.  The Arabic configuration seems more like a predictable shift than a flagrant error. 

Other peculiarities are more understandable and predictable due to the temperament of the languages. It is common for languages to appropriate foreign words into more recognisable forms. The N in Kahlan has been dropped in Gujarati altogether (કાહલા). The nature of the errors or disparity in transliteration makes it difficult to detect a transliteration pattern and predict what is the original source language and what is the target, i.e. Was the English and Arabic transliteration based on the Gujarati and was the Arabic made by looking at the English or Gujarati or both etc.?

In any case, where I have felt it necessary to highlight such errors or peculiarities I have sufficed by marking it with an asterisk, and adding a brief remark below the chart.  I have not highlighted every mistake, nor critically analysed every name as I intend to give the chart a closer inspection and a more thorough study at another time insha Allah. 

Mol Ayyub provides no reference for the chart apart from a vague “courtesy of Dar al-‘Ulum Bury” (min janib: dar al-ulum al-arabiyyah al-islamiyyah, holcombe, bury, england, UK). This barely suffices as a reference, let alone evidence. I have asked several individuals associated with the Bury seminary, some have claimed knowledge of the chart but nothing more.  None were able to give further details about its provenance.  Therefore, whilst I find the chart most intriguing I maintain a skeptical reserve towards it, and whilst I find the chart credible as a whole its finer details are questionable. This is not because I have substantial evidence to discredit it but because the anonymity of its author(s) does not allow me to assert its credibility.  The chart raises more questions than it provides answers.  It is valuable nonetheless and a great place to begin, not end.  

I would appreciate it if anyone with relevant information could assist.

The chart can be accessed from the link below:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4MVNCPh8z62T2VtbWVHQzVOSjg/view?usp=sharing

[alternative link]:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/s42ml7xg6vls9qg/Gujarati%20Ansab.pdf?dl=0

“Imitation of the Disbelievers” Amongst the Ranks of the Islamists

By Sh. Al-Sharif Hatim ibn ‘Arif al-‘Awni

All too often we hear loose fatwas prohibiting things based on the “imitation of non-Muslims” argument/principle without differentiating between the circumstances in which the imitation of non-Muslims is prohibited and where it is not.

What is more serious and worrying in the case of many of these fatwas is that they are written by people who are themselves guilty of some of the worst types of imitation, about which there is no room for debate or doubt!

It has been authenticated from the Prophet that he said, 

‘You will most definitely follow the practices of those who came before you, hand span by hand span and arm span by arm span, to the point that if they entered into a lizard hole, you will follow them.’  We said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, are you referring to the Jews and Christians?’ He replied, ‘Who else?’

Thus the Messenger informs us in this hadith that his ummah will gradually follow wayward nations of the past, in steps or from one state to another, and that this following will be to the last degree, even in matters that are beyond reason/rationality and are not normally appealing.  This is understood from, “to the point that if they entered into a lizard’s hole, you would follow them.”

Let us then turn to some of the cases which illustrate how this group of Muslims imitate non-Muslims on matters that are prohibited without any doubt (qat’an).

1. Extremism and Fanaticism

Allah has said about the Jews and the Christians, “Say [Prophet], ‘People of the Book, do not overstep the bounds of truth in your religion and do not follow the whims of a people who went astray before you — they led many others astray and themselves strayed from the even path.’” (5:77)

قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ غَيْرَ الْحَقِّ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا أَهْوَاءَ قَوْمٍ قَدْ ضَلُّوا مِنْ قَبْلُ وَأَضَلُّوا كَثِيرًا وَضَلُّوا عَنْ سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ

Through their extremism and fanaticism, these people resemble the Jews and the Christians.

In an authenticated report the Prophet said, “Be aware of overstepping bounds in the din, for those before you only perished because of their extremism in the religion.”  

Abu Dawud reports the Companion Anas ibn Malik narrating from the Prophet, that he said, “Do not be excessive with yourselves, lest it becomes too hard for you, for a group of people went to the extremes with themselves, so Allah made it hard for them.  It is their remnants who are in the monasteries and nunneries: ‘and monasticism was something they invented, We did not ordain it for them…’” (57:27) Al-Diya’ al-Maqdisi has confirmed its authenticity.

2. Disunity and Group Mentality

Allah has prohibited us from resembling the Jews and the Christians in this regard.  He says, “Do not be like those who, after they have been given clear revelation, split into factions and fell into disputes: a terrible punishment awaits such people.” (3:105)  

وَلَا تَكُونُوا كَالَّذِينَ تَفَرَّقُوا وَاخْتَلَفُوا مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ وَأُولَئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ

Then there is the famous hadith forewarning the ummah from dividing into sects, which these people (have) use(-d) as evidence to divide the ummah.  Every day a sect splits into various splinter or dissecting sects, most often in the name of following the sunnah and the salaf (!!!), to the extent that the description of the [Koranic] Jews now fits us better.  It is as though we are being described in this verse and not them, “There is much hostility between them: you think they are united but their hearts are divided because they are people devoid of reason.” (59:14)

بَأْسُهُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ شَدِيدٌ تَحْسَبُهُمْ جَمِيعًا وَقُلُوبُهُمْ شَتَّى ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ

3. Resembling the Disbelievers in Fighting one Another

As the Prophet instructed his people, “Do not become disbelievers after me, striking each other’s necks.” His point was for them to not do as the disbelievers do in killing one another.  Many Muslim groups then took on the resemblance of the disbelievers in this, as they are killing one another on the premise of a false takfir or vile sectarianism.

4. Glorification of Scholars

To the extent that some of the Islamists found it appropriate to comment about Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, “were the office of Prophethood not sealed, Ibn Taymiyyah would have been a Prophet” or “was likely to be!”  If only if the matter were confined to a great intellectual personality like Ibn Taymiyyah (despite the grave error of this), but instead it has extended to activists and popular speakers who do not have any scholarly achievements, nor are they known by their scholarship. Allah has said about the People of the Book, “They have taken their rabbis and their monks as gods besides Allah…” (9:31)

اتَّخَذُوا أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ

5. Some Claimants of Knowledge and Pseudo-Jurists/Muftis Exercising Church Type Authority or Dogmatism.

What is meant by church type authority here (kahanut) is to treat a speculative opinion or interpretation of scripture, or an analogical deduction or an inference from it as an absolute statement from Allah the Exalted; almost as though the Mufti does not judge or speak except by the authority of Allah, and in His voice. This, among other things, is what the previous nations did before us, and which caused people to distance themselves from religion and what gave rise to secularism in the West. Now, here we are following in precisely their footsteps, and already we are beginning to see some Muslims claim that our salvation lies in separating religion from all aspects of life.

6. Creating Loopholes in the Religion as the Jews did with the Sabbath

As Allah narrates in the Qur’an, “… they broke the Sabbath when their fish surfaced for them in shoals only on their Sabbath, but did not come (likewise) on any other day…” (7:163)

إِذْ يَعْدُونَ فِي السَّبْتِ إِذْ تَأْتِيهِمْ حِيتَانُهُمْ يَوْمَ سَبْتِهِمْ شُرَّعًا وَيَوْمَ لَا يَسْبِتُونَ لَا تَأْتِيهِمْ

And as the Prophet said, “Cursed be the Jews! [Animal] fat was made unlawful for them, so they melted it and sold it.”  Thus the Prophet informed of one of their many loopholes: to rename things so as to make lawful what Allah had pronounced unlawful.  The Prophet also said, “People from my ummah will certainly drink alcohol, calling it by another name.”  

Keeping this in mind, take a look at what these people have done: they have named sectarian violence as “jihad”, they dub their apathy of not taking up [the necessary and appropriate] means for their decision to lay an offensive in what they have called jihad as “trusting in Allah’s promise.”  Similarly, neglect of any consideration of greater/wider interests and harms in enjoining good and forbidding evil is termed “leaving others without excuse [of ignorance].”  They call their inordinate fervour in matters of the Shari’ah as “intensity of faith”, engaging in sectarianism as “strictly following the sunnah”, and their excesses as “unfaltering piety and unwavering righteousness.” The list can go on. 

7. Fighting the Intellect (‘Aql) in the Name of Revelation (Naql)  

As if the intellect (‘aql) and scripture (naql) are opposites. Allah has described the Pagan Arabs and Jews as those who “have no sense” or are “devoid of reason” (la ya’qilun). The Qur’an also mentions the admission of the people of Hell, “They will say, ‘If only we had listened, or reasoned (na’qil), we would not be with the inhabitants of the blazing fire.’” (67:10) 

وَقَالُوا لَوْ كُنَّا نَسْمَعُ أَوْ نَعْقِلُ مَا كُنَّا فِي أَصْحَابِ السَّعِيرِ

These people resemble them in their assaults on the intellect! Examples of this are a rejection of [the need to make] a convincing argument on grounds of submission to the text, and contradicting absolute facts in the name of adhering to transmitted knowledge (naql), when in fact they are only contradicting them due to their erroneous and flawed understanding of the received knowledge (naql).    

8. Close Mindedness

Close mindedness, except in their restricted group.  They do not enter into discussions or debate with other Muslims who do not hold their positions and keep away from reading or listening to other Islamic schools of thought which have a lot of good and might correct their errors.  This is an un-Islamic tradition, and is amongst the oldest practices of the misguided.  Allah mentions Prophet Noah’s statement about his people, “Every time I call them, so that You may forgive them, they thrust their fingers into their ears, cover their heads with their garments, persist in their rejection, and grow more insolent and arrogant.” (71:7)

 وَإِنِّي كُلَّمَا دَعَوْتُهُمْ لِتَغْفِرَ لَهُمْ جَعَلُوا أَصَابِعَهُمْ فِي آذَانِهِمْ وَاسْتَغْشَوْا ثِيَابَهُمْ وَأَصَرُّوا وَاسْتَكْبَرُوا اسْتِكْبَارًا

 And Allah says about the disbelievers of Makkah, “The disbelievers say, ‘Do not listen to this Qur’an, but drown it in frivolous talk so that you may gain the upper hand.” (41:26)

وَقَالَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَا تَسْمَعُوا لِهَذَا الْقُرْآنِ وَالْغَوْا فِيهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَغْلِبُونَ

At the same time, Allah reminds us of the Prophetic method towards inviting others (da’wah). He reminds us that it is built on solid foundations, amongst the most important of which is arguing with them “in the most courteous way”, as per verse, “[Prophet], call [people] to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good teaching. Argue with them in the most courteous way…” (16:125)

ادْعُ إِلَى سَبِيلِ رَبِّكَ بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِ وَجَادِلْهُمْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ

 However these people have understood the statements of some of the salaf in a way that they contradict with Allah’s words in not allowing debate with the people of innovation.  Moreover, they have made the additional error of giving preference to their own erroneous understandings of the statements of (some of) the salaf over the Qur’an! 

This is just some of the several instances in which they imitate the disbelievers and conform to the ways of the pagans, Jews and Christians.

Yet, despite all of the above, these people are not ashamed of prohibiting what is not to be prohibited for its correspondence with non-Muslims in some of the mundane matters which are shared by all humans, simply because these matters [which they prohibit] coincide with non-Muslims. Instead they offer strong words to fellow Muslims and take up an hardline attitude towards them, considering them indecent/immoral (fasiq) if not pronouncing takfir upon them.  In this, they too, resemble the Jews and Christians in magnifying something which Allah has kept small, undermining the magnitude of something Allah has made great, prohibiting that which He made lawful and making lawful that which He made unlawful.

UN.

————————————————————————

The original Arabic can be accessed here:  http://www.al-madina.com/node/541501