Risale-i Nur:The Rays: The Fifth Ray: Nineteenth Matter: Regarding the Appearance of the Great Mahdi by Bediuzzaman Said Nursi

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi

In the narrations are various different prophecies about the Mahdi (May God be pleased with him), who is one of the signs of the end of time and will be from the Family of the Prophet. In fact, some scholars and saints stated long ago that he had appeared.

God knows best what is right, one interpretation of these various narrations is this: the Great Mahdi will have numerous functions. He will carry out duties in the world of politics, the world of religion, the world of government, and in the many spheres of the world of jihad. Similarly, since every century at a time of despair people are in need of a sort of Mahdi to strengthen their morale or for the possibility of a Mahdi appearing at that time to assist them, through Divine Mercy, every age or perhaps every century a sort of Mahdi has appeared from among the Prophet’s (PBUH) descendants, and preserved his forefather’s Shari‘a and revived his Sunna. The narrations about the Mahdi are various because Muhammad (Peace and blessings be upon him) saw persons who would perform some of the Great Mahdi’s works; for example, the ‘Abbasid Mahdi in the world of politics, and Gawth al-A‘zam, Shah Naqshband, the four spiritual poles, and Twelve Imams in the world of religion. For this reason some of the people of reality said that he had already appeared. Anyway, since this matter has been explained in the Risale-i Nur, we refer discussion of it to that and here only say this:

There is no family in the world so mutually supportive, nor a tribe in such agreement, nor so enlightened a community or society as the family, tribe, community and society of the Prophet’s Family.

Yes, the Prophet’s Family has raised hundreds of sacred heroes, and produced thousands of spiritual leaders of the Umma, and has been nurtured with the leaven of the reality of the Qur’an and the light of belief and honour of Islam, and has thus been perfected. It is therefore totally reasonable that through reviving the Shari‘a of Muhammad (PBUH) and his Sunna and the reality of the Qur’an at the end of time, and proclaiming them and putting them into practice, they should display to the world the perfect justice and veracity of the Great Mahdi, their Commander-in-Chief. This is also both necessary and essential and demanded by the principles of human society.

Monarchy’s royal treatment signals govt’s long-term cultural agenda: experts

TORONTO – Depending who you ask, the Conservative government’s high-profile attempts to strengthen Canada’s ties to the monarchy over the past year are either a savvy attempt to lure votes or a finger in the eye of Quebec.

Whatever the pundits may think, however, they agree on one thing — the strategy is rooted more in a vision for the country’s future than deference for its past.

Political observers of all stripes believe the revival of interest in Canada’s colonial history is part of a broader Conservative effort to rekindle patriotism and reshape Canada’s culture more in the government’s own image.

Tom Flanagan, a former adviser to Prime Minister Stephen Harperwho now teaches at the University of Calgary, said that vision took root many years ago — and originated at the top.

“Stephen once said to me that a conservative party in any country ought to be party of patriotism,” Flanagan said in an email.

“He is now creating a conservative version of Canadian patriotism.”

Harper’s brand of national pride relies heavily on elements common to many right-wing political movements, including unwavering support for the military and a push to lay claim to the country’s far-flung northern regions, Flanagan said.

But strong affiliation with the monarchy is another key building block of that vision, one that received considerable attention over the past 12 months.

Ottawa greeted news of Prince William’s engagement with enthusiasm, issuing a silver and crystal commemorative coin in honour of the event. Harper himself was slated to attend the nuptials and was prevented only by a federal election.

When the Duke of Cambridge and his new bride Kate made their inaugural visit to Canada as a married couple, the government spared no effort in promoting their visit. Officials even whisked the newlyweds to Harper’s personal retreat at Harrington Lake, Que., for a reprieve from the unrelenting public spotlight.

The most controversial move, however, came in August when the government rechristened Canada’s military institutions to reflect their royal heritage.

The air and maritime divisions of the armed forces both had the word “royal” added back into their title, resurrecting the nomenclature last used in the 1960s.

Opponents decried the move as a needless expense — the government has resisted releasing the cost of the switch — and a retrograde step.

Carolyn Harris, a Queen’s University PhD candidate specializing in the monarchy, said the move marked a surprising about-face for a government that initially took a more diffident approach to the royal family.

Harris said the government had deliberately refrained from inviting royal representatives to the anniversary of the founding of Quebec City in 2008, adding the move would have been politically damaging.

Harper was focused on wooing the Francophone vote at the time, and Harris said a royal presence would have been perceived as a slap in the face by the many Quebecers who regard the royals as a symbol of an oppressive colonial past.

That priority has clearly shifted now, she said, adding the Tories have done more than any other modern Canadian government to foster royal connections by promoting the monarchy’s presence in the country, both on state and charitable visits.

“It’s difficult to tell what approach the Conservative government may have going forward, but they certainly seem to be encouraging royal visits and royal involvement in Canadian institutions,” she said.

The Department of Canadian Heritage declined requests for an interview, but a spokeswoman emphasized the Queen’s role as Canada’s head of state in an email.

“As an enduring institution, the Crown serves to safeguard Canadians’ rights and freedoms,” wrote spokeswoman Dominique Collin.

Bryan Evans, associate professor of politics at Ryerson University, said the Conservative government’s growing emphasis on royal involvement is just one phase of a project to shift Canadian society in a new direction.

By emphasizing English symbols at the expense of French-Canadian history and making them the focus of the Canadian narrative, Evans said the government is trying to undercut the traditions of bilingualism and multiculturalism that flourished under generations of Liberal leadership.

“This is very much an ideological, cultural campaign,” he said. “It’s not so much about the monarchy in and of itself. It’s about a reshaping of Canadian identity along more Conservative lines.”

Flanagan dismissed the notion that Harper was trying to uproot the Liberal legacy, but acknowledged it will take a back seat to the Prime Minister’s emerging narrative.

“Except for anti-Americanism, he has not repudiated the Liberal version of patriotism, but he is layering the Conservative elements on top,” he said. “Get used to it.”

Feds hire consultant to inject war into Canada Day bash
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120109/canada-day-war-120109/#ixzz1iz8hpO6x

OTTAWA — The Harper government has hired a consultant to inject a little war into this year’s Canada Day bash on Parliament Hill.

A Toronto theatre expert has been asked to find ways to insert a War of 1812 commemoration into the July 1st festivities that typically include pop music, dance and pyrotechnics.

“I do big-ass special events all the time, so they asked me to do that,” artistic producer Paul Shaw said in an interview. “It’s sort of tricky to do a War of 1812 theme when you’ve got so many modern things in and around it.”

The Conservative government, which has been promoting Canada’s military culture and heritage, has earmarked money and resources throughout the year to commemorate the bicentennial of the outbreak of War of 1812 in North America.

The hostilities led to a stalemate almost three years later between the United States and Britain’s budding settlements in Canada, and some historians consider the war a pivotal moment in Canadian nationhood, though it is little known outside academia.

The Canadian Heritage Department normally injects patriotic themes into the Canada Day noontime show on Parliament Hill, giving the National Capital Commission a free hand to organize the evening show with singers and fireworks in a party atmosphere.

But a recently posted document indicates that the war theme will appear in both shows.

“The events on Parliament Hill also present a key opportunity of the federal government to foster enthusiasm and excitement around other significant events,” says a tender document from the commission.

“In 2012, the Government of Canada is commemorating the War of 1812 and this theme must be incorporated in both the Noon and Evening Shows.”

Last year, the noon show plans were carefully vetted by the Prime Minister’s Office, a May 13 briefing note to the prime minister shows. Prince William and Catherine, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, attended and the prince gave a short speech praising the work of the military.

Embassies ordered to display Queen’s portrait

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/09/08/pol-queen-portrait-embassies.html

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney says a directive to Canadian embassies to display a portrait of the Queen is nothing new and is in keeping with the government’s policy to acknowledge Canada’s head of state.

“We’re talking about the head of state. I think virtually every country has a picture of their head of state in their missions abroad,” Kenney told reporters Thursday in Ottawa before a meeting of Conservative MPs.

“Virtually all of the Canadian missions I’ve been to already have a picture of our head of state and this just confirms the policy, I think, for the few missions that don’t. So there’s a consistency. I think consistency makes sense.”

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said much the same, telling CBC News, “It was already there. There isn’t much to say.”

A spokesman for Baird told The Canadian Press that Canadian missions were instructed this month to hang the Queen’s portrait.

“Like virtually every other country in the world who display pictures of their head of state in their missions, we expect all Canadian missions abroad to display pictures of Canada’s head of state, the Queen; along with the Governor General, the Prime Minister and relevant Ministers,” Rick Roth said in an email to The Canadian Press.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government has taken several steps recently to entrench the monarchy as one of the country’s most important heritage symbols.

Late last month, the Tories renamed the Maritime Command and Air Command the Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force, restoring names that had been in use before a change in 1968.

In late June, Baird ordered two historic paintings by Quebec master Alfred Pellan replaced with a portrait of the Queen in the reception area of his department. The new “Sovereign’s Wall” was designated in time for the royal visit of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in July.

While some have welcomed the moves amid a royal visit this summer and in advance of the Queen’s diamond jubilee next year, others, particularly in Quebec, have criticized them as a return to colonialism.

British Israelism

British Israelism (also called Anglo-Israelism) is the belief that people of Western European descent, particularly those in Great Britain, are the direct lineal descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. The concept often includes the belief that the British Royal Family is directly descended from the line of King David. There has never been a single head or an organisational structure to the movement. However, various British Israelite organisations were set up across the British Commonwealth and America from the 1870s, and many still continue to exist.   Adherents may hold a diverse set of beliefs and claims that are ancillary to the core genealogical theory, however there are central tenets all British Israelites follow, including Two House Theology which is the core essence of British Israelism. A central teaching of the British Israelites’ Two House Theology is that while Jews are considered to be Israelites, not all Israelites are considered to be Jews. British Israelites believe that Jews descend only from Judah (and the tribe of Benjamin), while the House of Israel they believe are the White British or Anglo-Saxon-Celtic kindred peoples of North-Western Europe today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

His Holiness Qutb-ul Aqtaab Naqib Al Ashraaf Syed Abd ar-Rahman al-Qadri al Gillani (1841–1927)

H.E. Naqib al-Ashraaf Abd Al-Rahman Al-Gillani, 1st Prime Minister of Iraq In office Nov 11, 1920 – Nov 20, 1922

His holiness Qutb-ul Aqtaab Naqib Al Ashraaf Syed Abd ar-Rahman al-Qadri al Gillani (1841–1927) was the first Prime Minister of Iraq, and its head of state. He is 15th direct descendant of Abdul Qadir Jilani, the Cardinal Sufi Saint in Sufi Islam. Al Gillani was chosen in 1920 to head the Iraqi Council of Ministers following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. He used his influence to oppose the appointment of Faisal I as King of Iraq and resigned his post when his efforts were defeated. Nevertheless, Faisal reappointed him as prime minister in order to curb opposition.

In 1922 Gillani negotiated the first Anglo-Iraqi Treaty, which ensured nominal independence for the country, though Britain maintained control of the military and foreign affairs, essentially establishing a Mandate in the country. Opposed to these results, Gillani resigned shortly after.

Sir Percy Cox states in page 128 of the HAND BOOK OF MESOPOTAMIA that he was the most influential “Sunni” and official head of the Arab Community. He continues, “It is worthy of note that extreme deference is paid to the Naqeeb of Baghdad and his family by many of the most influential and wealthy as well as the humble and poorest, of Indian and Afghan Muslims”.

When chosen by the British to head the government, it was felt doubtful that he would accept, in view of his old age, ill health and habitual seclusion, and a statement in an interview declaring his reluctance to take part in political activities, even if it would save IRAQ from disaster. The British Administration, however, persuaded him to accept. This is portrayed by Gertrude Bell, who writes:

In came Mr. Philby and others and on top of them Sir Percy. Every one but Mr. Philby melted away, and we two turned to Sir Percy breathless with excitement. ‘Well he said, he has accepted’. He had come straight from the Naqeeb who had agreed to undertake the formation of the Provisional Government. So the first success is scored and not one but Sir Percy could have done it. Indeed, that even he should have inducted the Naqeeb to take a hand in Public affairs is nothing short of a miracle^[1]

Despite the formation of the Council of Ministers, the question as to the form of permanent Government and of the person of its ruler was constantly under discussion in the Coffee houses, in the tents of the Sheikhs, or wherever Iraqis met in social and political gatherings.

It is reported that the throne was offered to the Naqeeb of Baghdad, but under such conditions and limitations as would have made him, in his own words no more than an “Iraqi Rajah”. He himself never sought it and felt that if it had been freely offered to him by the people he would be obliged to accept the honor and the duties (Ireland, p. 304).

During another interview with Bell, replying to a question regarding his or one of his sons’ candidatures for Sharaf or Emir of Mesopotamia, he said,

“I am a relative of the Sharaf. I come of the same stock and I share the same religious opinion, you therefore understand that I am not actuated by difference of blood, of thought when I tell you that I would never consent to the appointment of myself or of my sons as Emir. The Hejaz is one and IRAQ is one. There is no connection between them out that of faith. Our politics, out trade, our agriculture is all different from those of Hejaz. The Hejaz is the Holy Land of Islam. It must remain a separate and independent state by which all Muslims can profit”.

He was asked again, “If for political reasons it were necessary to put an Emir at the head of Iraq would you accept the responsibility with British help and support”? He said,

“Can you put a question as that to me? I am a Darwesh, concern is not with the things of this world. It would be contrary to the deepest principles of my creed to become the political head of the state. In the time of my ancestor, Syed Abdul Qadir al Gillani, the Abbasid Caliphs were accustomed to consult him as you and your colleagues consult me, but he would never have consented to take an active part in public affairs. Neither would I, nor any of his descendants consent to do so. This is my answer on the ground of religion, but I will give you also an answer, based on personal reason I am an old man. These five or six years of life, which remain to me, I wish to spend in reflection and study. When you came to day, I kept you waiting. I was busy with my books. They are my constant preoccupation”.^[2]

He was a scholar, and his personal Library consists of thirty six thousand books on various subjects. Of these, about two thousand were manuscripts. The Present Makteba Qadiria (Qadri Library) is in fact, the altered name of his personal library. A 700-year-old copy of the Quran written in gold was, after his death, presented to the King Idris of Libya, by Pir Ibrahim Saif-ud-din, who became Naqeeb after the son of Syed Abd al-Rahman passed. “Tarikh Ahwarat IRAQIA” by Abdul Razak Al Hassani states that he was well known for his exemplary piety and charity, and as a great Alim (Scholar) who loved books and had acquired abundant knowledge. He was also a man devoted to prayer and considered to be a great Wali (Saint) of his time. He had millions of Murids (Disciples) and devotees.

Among his well renowned grandsons are H.E. Pir Sayed Tahir Allauddin, the Shaykh of internationally renowned Sunni Muslim scholar Shaykh al Islam Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri and H.E. Sayed Ahmed Zafar al-Jilani, the elder brother of H.E. Pir Sayed Tahir Allauddin and the current Naqib of Iraq.^[3]

References

1. Ireland, Philip Willard. Iraq: A Study in Political Development. p. 82.
2. Wilson, Arnold (1931). A clash of Loyalties Vol. II Mesopotamia 1917-20. Oxford University Press.
3. Naqib Al Ashraaf at www.alsunnahfoundation.org

Naqib al-Ashraaf Pir Ibrahim Saif-ud-din and his son Pir Najm ud-Din Gillani

The Sacrificial Son of Abraham By Sayyid Ahmed Amiruddin

Q. What is our position regarding the sacrificial son of Abraham?  The Christians and Jews argue that the covenant was with Isaac, and not Ishmael

A.  Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem.   “And say: “Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.” (Holy Quran, Sura 17, V. 81)

In his masterpiece “Anwaar i-Muhammadiyya” [Urdu edition, p.22-29]” Imam Allamah Yusuf ibn Isma’il Nabhabani (may Allah have mercy on him), narrated the following hadith from Wathila ibn al-Aska, “The Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “”Allah chose Kanana from the sons of Isma’il, and Quraysh from Kanana, and from Quraysh the sons of Hashim, and finally chose me from the sons of Hashim.“

In his book, “Virtues of Arabic“, Shaykh ul-Hadith Mawlana Zakariyya Kandhlawi cites the following virtue of the Arabs:

Mulla Ali Qari has quoted the following Hadith of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family: “To have love for the Quraysh is Iman whilst having hatred for them is kufr.  Accordingly, whoever has love for the Arabs has expressed love for me (Prophet) and whoever has hatred for the Arabs has in reality shown his hatred for me” (Iqtidaus Siratil Mustaqeem, p.156)

Some people mistake “Arabs” to be all people who reside in the Middle East, or all persons who speak the Arabic language, however, this is incorrect.  According to Islamic tradition, real “Arabs” are specifically and only the direct descendents of Abraham and Ishmael, the Builders of the Kaba at Makkah, through the twelve sons of Ishmael, also known as the 12 Tribes of Ishmael.

With that said, I would like to mention now that the answer to your question is that some of the Children of Israel who went astray did so due to their false belief that God chose the Israelites over the Ishmaelites.  The mention in the Holy Qur’an about the Children of Israel being blessed is directly related to their connection to Prophets and the Ark of the Covenant, both of which point towards the Seal of Prophets and the Final Revelation, the Holy Qur’an, in Arabic, to the Ishmaelites.  Some of the Children of Israel were so adamant in emphasizing the bloodline of the House of David, the descendent of Judah, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, that some of them during the time of Jesus even accused the Holy Virgin Mary of a heinous sin and they denied the miracles of Christ, although he raised the dead, healed the lepers and spoke from the cradle as the Spirit of God, solely because he was not the son of one of them (ie. he was born without a father, like Adam, and hence not from the House and bloodline of David).  With that said, it becomes clear that this conspiracy has existed from even before the actual Mawlid (birth) of the Messenger of Allah, the Seal of Prophets Muhammad (upon whom be peace) and as such, we find that some of their religious scribes tampered with the original scriptures and changed the point of emphasis from Ishmael the eldest son of Abraham, to Isaac, the younger son.

As such, it is our belief that the Holy Bible has been changed, and the correct position is that the sacrificial son of Abraham (alaihi salam) is Ishmael (upon whom be peace).  Our proof that the Holy Bible has been changed can be cited from the inconsistencies we find in it regarding Ishmael and his mother, and since the “literal Word of God” is beyond flaws, it will be appropriate to conclude after examing the evidences that it had been altered.

What follows is the belief of Muslims, based upon the Quran and Sunnah of Allah’s Most Perfect Messenger, Sayyidina Muhammad ibn Abdullah (peace and blessings be upon him) in regards to the “sacrificial son of Abraham”.  The Qur’anic version of the sacrifice is as follows:

“My Lord! grant me (a son) of the righteous. So We gave him tidings of a gentle son (Ishmael). And when he was old enough to strive with him, he said: O my dear son, I have seen in a dream that I must sacrifice you. So look, what do you think? He said: O my father! Do that which you are commanded. Allah willing, you shall find me of the steadfast. Then, when they had both surrendered (to Allah), and he had placed him upon his forehead, We called unto him: O Abraham: You have (already) fulfilled the vision. Lo! thus do We reward the good. Lo! that verily was a clear test. Then We ransomed him with a tremendous ransom. And We left for him among the later folk (the salutation) :’Peace be unto Abraham!’ Thus do We reward the good. Lo! he is one of Our believing slaves. (The Noble Qur’an in Al-Safat (37): 100-113)

Quranic commentators are unanimous that the gentle son mentioned in the verse is Ishmael. Furthermore, the Holy Quran states about the outcome of the sacrifice Abraham made,

“When Abraham was tested by his Lord in certain matters and completed it (with success), (it was) said (unto him): “I shall raise ye as Leader of Mankind.” (Abraham said): “And from my descendants too?” (Allah) said, “My Promise shall not be for evil doers.” (Quran, 1:124).

A tradition of the Prophet refers to Ishmael as the sacrificial son.  The Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) is reported to have stated, “I am the son of the two Sacrificed”.  Commentators write that this statement is a reference to his father Hadrat Abdullah (rad), who was offered as a sacrifice to Allah by his father Hadrat Abdul Muttalib (rad) when he was ordered to dig for the well of ZemZem, and to Hadrat Ishmael (as), the sacrificial son of Abraham (as).

Furthermore, the Apostle of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) is also reported to have said, “I am what Abraham my father prayed for (the Imam of mankind, as the Prophets are the leaders of men, and the Holy Prophet lead all Prophets in prayer on the Night of Mi’raj at al-Aqsa) and the good news of my brother Jesus. When my mother was carrying me she saw a light proceeding from her which showed her the castles of Syria …”

H.E. the Grand Mufti of Cyprus Mawlana Shaykh Nazim Adil al-Haqqani commented, “Moses even informed his people that Allah Almighty was going to send a new Prophet from their cousins, who would be like Moses.  It was clear, that he would not be from the same line as Moses.  So from the line of Moses, no more Prophet would come who would be like him.  The line of that cousin was the line of Ishmael.  They were told these good news.” (Power Oceans of Light, p.63)

Biblical Account

Here is the Biblical account of the story of Abraham’s sacrifice:

 1 And it came to pass after these things that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.

2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

3 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him.

4 Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.

5 And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.

6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.

7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?

8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

9 And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.
10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.

11 And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.

12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.

14 And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen.

15 And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,

16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:

17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

19 So Abraham returned unto his young men, and they rose up and went together to Beersheba; and Abraham dwelt at Beersheba. (Genesis 22: 1-19)

The Bible’s Incoherence

According to the Biblical verses above, Abraham was told to sacrifice his only son, but specifies that it was Isaac, not Ishmael.  However, according to the very same Holy Bible, Ishmael was Abraham’s first born son, thereby bringing the entire Biblical account of the Sacrifice into question, due to this major incoherence.  To elaborate further, the Bible states Isaac was born when Abraham was 100 years old (Genesis 21.5) while Ishmael was born to Abraham when Abraham was 86 years old (Genesis 16.16). Ishmael was therefore 14 years older than Isaac. During his first 14 years Ishmael was the only son of Abraham; at no time was Isaac the only son of Abraham, thereby substantiating that the Biblical account of the Sacrifice has been tampered with and changed, and that the ‘only son’ mentioned in it at the time of the sacrifice of Abraham, which resulted in the Covenant of Leadership (Imamate) could only have been Ishmael and not Isaac.

Continued Denial

Nevertheless, even after coming to the conclusion that Ishmael was the eldest son of Abraham according to the Bible, and hence the only of the two who could ever have been an “only son” to Abraham, some illogical Christians and Jews will argue that even though Ishmael may have been born earlier, Ishmael was not a legitimate son of Abraham, because he was born to his ‘hand maiden’ Hagar (the daughter of Pharaoh Senusrit I and Queen Nufrit), and not his first wife Sarai, who was barren and jealous of Hagar, and as such, because he was illegitimate, he cannot be considered the son of Abraham (Allah forbid!).

Before proceeding further to address such darkness, it is important to point out here that it is the belief of the Sufi sages of Islam that on an esoteric level, the direct effect of Sarai’s jealousy of the first lady; Hajra (Hagar), which was confirmed by the traditions of Ibn Abbas (radi Allahu anhu) found in Ibn Kathir’s ‘Qisas ul Ambiya’; Sarai forever tainted her bloodline through her son Isaac (upon whom be peace).  In fact, while it was due to the pure lineage of Abraham that his sons were blessed as well, it was due to his wife Sarai that so many of the Children of Israel (her descendents) went astray, and persecuted Prophets from within their own family, as mentioned in the Holy Quran, and the Holy Bible, Sarai’s jealousy is also why although so many Prophets were born into that bloodline, the Anti-Christ (Dajjal) also belongs to it.

Getting back to the topic of whether Ishmael could then be considered a legitimate son of Abraham, because his mother was a ‘hand maiden’, and “not a wife”, the Holy Bible itself bears witness to the fact that Ishmael was Abraham’s son:

“And Abraham took Ishmael his son.” Genesis 17:23

Furthermore, the Bible tells us that Ishmael remained the legitimate son of Abraham until even after his death,

“Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full [of years]; and was gathered to his people. And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Mchpelah “Genesis 25:8-9

In regards to the absurd Christian claim that Hagar was not a legitimate wife of Abraham, the Bible itself address’ this in Genesis 16:3 “And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid….and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife…”

Therefore, it is our position that such false claims against the House of Abraham and Ishmael are not only baseless from an Islamic viewpoint, but are also baseless as per the Holy Bible.

The Position of Jesus Christ According to Barnabas

To elaborate further on this topic, I wish to bring to your attention the Gospel of Saint Barnabas.  Our Master, Mawlana Shaykh Muhammad Nazim Adil al-Haqqani, the Grand Mufti of Cyprus, the island wherein the original Gospel of Barnabas and his tomb was discovered, stated,

“When the Archbishop of Cyprus dreamt about the tree under which St. Barnabas was buried and then found him there with his Gospel, he was very happy and brought the Gospel straight to Constantinople , where the Pope was at the time.  In exchange for that Gospel, which the church did not want publicized, the Archbishop got an independent church for Cyprus.  That was the beginning of the Orthodox Church.  The original Gospel of Barnabas is in the library of the Vatican .

Barnabas was for Jesus like Abu Bakr was for Muhammad, may peace be upon them.  He was the youngest, but most important of the disciples, because Jesus Christ knew that only his Gospel would mention the reality of Jesus Christ and of the coming Prophet.  All others disappeared, and his Gospel is still alive until today and is declaring the unity of God and the prophesy of the Seal of Prophets.  It denies everything concerning Trinity and crucifixion.  In the Gospel of Barnabas, Muhammad is translated as Ahmed, as Paraklitos, the most respected person.
(Power Oceans of Light, Moulana Sheik Nazim Al-Haqqani Nasqshbandiya, p. 93)

Here is the position of Jesus Christ, the blessed and pure son of the Holy Virgin Mary (may Allah be pleased with her), as recorded in The Gospel of Barnabas, Chapter 43: Promise to Ishmael

“James answered: ‘O master, tell us in whom this promise was made; for the Jews say “in Isaac,” and the Ishmaelites say ‘in Ishmael.’”

Jesus answered: ‘David, whose son was he, and of what lineage?’

James answered: ‘Of Isaac; for Isaac was father of Jacob, and Jacob was father of Judah , of whose lineage is David.’

Then said Jesus: ‘And the messenger of God when he shall come, of what lineage will he be?’

The disciples answered: ‘Of David.’

Whereupon Jesus said: ‘Ye deceive yourselves; for David in spirit calleth him lord, saying thus: “God said to my lord, sit thou on my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool. God shall send forth thy rod which shall have lordship in the midst of thine enemies.” If the messenger of God whom ye call Messiah were son of David, how should David call him lord? Believe me, for verily I say to you, that the promise was made in Ishmael, not in Isaac.”’

Thereupon said the disciples: ‘O master, it is thus written in the book of Moses, that in Isaac was the promise made.’

Jesus answered, with a groan: ‘It is so written, but Moses wrote it not, nor Joshua, but rather our rabbins, who fear not God. Verily I say unto you, that if ye consider the words of the angel Gabriel, ye shall discover the malice of our scribes and doctors. For the angel said: “Abraham, all the world shall know how God loveth thee; but how shall the world know the love that thou bearest to God? Assuredly it is necessary that thou do something for love of God.” Abraham answered: “Behold the servant of God, ready to do all that which God shall will.”

‘Then spoke God, saying to Abraham: “Take thy son, thy firstborn Ishmael, and come up the mountain to sacrifice him.”

 How is Isaac firstborn, if when Isaac was born Ishmael was seven years old?

Then said the disciples: ‘Clear is the deception of our doctors: therefore tell us thou the truth, because we know that thou art sent from God.’

Then answered Jesus: ‘Verily I say unto you, that Satan ever seeketh to annual the laws of God; and therefore he with his followers, hypocrites and evil-doers, the former with false doctrine, the latter with lewd living, to-day have contaminated almost all things, so that scarcely is the truth found. Woe to the hypocrites! For the praises of this world shall turn for them into insults and torments in hell.

‘I therefore say unto you that the messenger of God is a splendor that shall give gladness to nearly all that God hath made, for he is adorned with the spirit of understanding and of counsel, the spirit of wisdom and might, the spirit of fear and love, the spirit of prudence and temperance, he is adorned with the spirit of charity and mercy, the spirit of justice and piety, the spirit of gentleness and patience, which he hath received from God three times more than he hath given to all his creatures. O blessed time, when he shall come to the world! Believe me that I have seen him and have done him reverence, even as every prophet hath seen him: seeing that of his spirit God giveth to them prophecy. And when I saw him my soul was filled with consolation, saying: “O Mohammed, God be with thee, and may he make me worthy to untie thy shoe latchet, for obtaining this I shall be a great prophet and holy one of God.” ‘

And having said this, Jesus rendered his thanks to God.”
(Gospel of Barnabas, Chapter 43-44: ‘Promise to Ishmael’, ‘Sacrifice Ishmael’)

Conclusion

In conclusion, I would like to remind you that according to the Islamic position and that cited from Barnabus above, even Christ faced denial when he preached the Gospel and highlighted the virtues of the Ishmaelites (due to their connection to Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)) to the Children of Israel, as too did the Seal of Prophets (salllahu alaihi wa sallam) face similar denials from the People of the Book during his blessed life.  I believe it may be the best policy to convey the Truth of the Prophethood of Muhammad, the Seal of Prophets (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)  to them through a practical example (ie. encourage them to interact with the Awliya (Sufi Saints) etc.) and pray for their guidance, that they may be lead to the truth in this matter.

Allama Shabbir Ahmad Uthmani, the author of Tafsir Uthmani (English), states on p.206 of Vol. 1

“God ordered that if the Najran Christians did not accept after so many arguments and clear facts, they should be invited for a ‘Mubahela’.  The practical form of Mubahela was so devised that both contending parties should gather at an appointed place with their-selves and their children and humbly pray that God’s curse should be laid upon those who were liars…When the Najran Deputation heard this challenge they asked time for consultation.  In private consultations, their wise and experienced members said, “You have believed and known by your hearts that Muhammad is the Messenger of God and he has given exact decisive proofs about Jesus Christ.  You know that God had promised to raise a Prophet among the Bani Ismaeel (Children of Ishmael)…With this resolution they went to the Holy Prophet.  The Holy Prophet was coming out with (his Ahlul Bayt) Hasan, Husein, Fatema and Ali.  Seeing their enlightened faces, the Archbishop of the Najran Christians said, “I am looking at such holy faces, that their prayer can move the mountains even. Don’t destroy yourselves by accepting the Mubahela, otherwise no Christian will be left on earth”.  At last, they forsook the Mubahela…and made a peace treaty and returned home.  In a Tradition the Holy Prophet has said if they had done Mubahela, a rain of fire would have fallen on them in the valley and God would have exterminated Najran and within one year all the Christians would have perished.”

 (Tafsir Uthmani, Allama Shabbir Ahmad Uthmani, trans. Muhammad Ashfaq Ahmad. Bombay: Taj Publishers, 1992. Vol. 1, p. 206)

And Allah Knows Best!

Re: Boasting and Claiming to be “Shi’ite” of the Ahlul Bayt

The entrance to Khwaja 'Abdullah Ansari's tomb in Afghanistan with the names of the Twelve Imams inscribed in Kufic script. Khwaja 'Abdullah was initiated into the Golden Chain by Khwaja Abul Hasan 'Ali al-Kharqani.

Excerpted from the Tafsir of Imam Hasan al-Askari  , p. 356-359:
A man came to Imam Hasan ibn ‘Ali and said, O son of the Prophet!  I am from your Shia.  His Eminence  said: O servant of Allah, if you are really obedient in our commands and prohibitions, then indeed you are true.  If not, then you must not increase your sin by claiming an excellence you do not deserve, and do not say that you are from our Shia.  Just say you are our friend and muhib (supporter) and enemy of your enemies.  In this way also, you would be upon righteousness.
Someone said to Imam Husayn ibn ‘Ali : O son of Allah’s Messenger, I am your Shia.  His Eminence  said: Fear Allah, and do not claim that for which Allah labels you as a liar and transgressor because our Shias are those whose souls are immune from all kinds of deceit, hypocrisy and cheating.  Rather, say you are our muhib (supporter).
Someone said to Imam Zayn al-Abidin ‘Ali ibn Husayn : O son of Allah’s Messenger, I am your sincere Shia.  His Eminence said: O servant of Allah, you have become like Prophet Ibrahim Khalilullah [1] regarding whom Allah says:

“Wa inna min Shi’iatihi laibrahim.  Idh jaa a rabbau bi qalbin salim” (37:83-84)
“And most surely Abraham was among the Shi’ite (of Noah).  When he came to his Lord with a free heart” (37:83-84)

If your heart is perfect like the heart of Prophet Ibrahim [2], then indeed you are our true believer and if you are not purified of all deceit and treachery, you are not our Shia.  And know that if you are purposely lying, you will be involved in paralysis and it will not be cured until death or you will be inolved in leprosy, so that it will be expiation of this lie of yours.
Imam Muhammad al-Baqir  said to a man who proudly claimed to be a Shia of the purified progeny of Muhammad: By the Lord of the Holy Ka’aba, your pride on this, beside a lie, is increase in your deceit.  O servant of Allah, do you like to spend your wealth for yourself more than you like to spend on the faithful believers? The man said that he liked to spend on himself.  His Eminence said: There you have it, you are not our Shia.  Instead, you can say: I am your muhib (supporter) and hopeful of salvation in the Hereafter because of affection towards you.
…Someone said in presence of Imam Musa al-Kadhim: I saw a man in the market who was saying: I am a sincere Shia of Muhammad and Aale Muhammad and he was calling out aloud: I will sell these clothes to one who pays the highest price.  His Eminence said: One who knows the quantity of his own substance, does not act foolishly and does not become a loser.  Know that the example of this man is like someone  who says: I am like Salman or Miqdad or Abu Dhar etc.  But inspite of this he inflates the rate of goods that are being sold, who conceals the defects from customers and demands a higher rate from a stranger. And when the customer goes away, he says, I purchase at this rate, though he does not want to purchase it.  Now tell me, can he be like  Salman, Miqdad, Abu Dhar or Ammar? By Allah such a man cannot be like them.  But we do not forbid him to say: I am a muhib (supporter) of Muhammad and the Aale Muhammad.  I am a friend of their friends and an enemy of their enemies.

Source: [The Tafsir: Commentary on the Qur'an ascribed to Imam al-Hasan al-Askari. English translation by Syed Ather Husain S.H. Rizvi. The Tafsir: Commentary on the Qur'an ascribed to Imam al-Hasan al-Askari, p. 356-359. 2009. Ansariyan Publications, Qum, Islamic Republic of Iran]

_______________________________________________________________________

[1]. Abu Nu’aym al-Asbahani relates a Hadith on similar lines in “Hilyat-ul-Awliya”:

On the authority of Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud  the Messenger of Allah said:

“Forty men from amongst my Ummah are such whose hearts are like that of Ibrahim’s  heart. By virtue of them, Allah Almighty protects His creation from calamities; it is they who are known as Abdaal.”
[2]. Tabarani reports a Hadith in his “Al-Aswat”: On the authority of Anas ibn Malik, the Messenger of Allah said:

“The earth shall never be without forty men, whose hearts shall be upon Ibrahim.  By virtue of them, the earth is in existence and by virtue of them (Allah Almighty) provides rain to you. From among them none dies but Allah Almighty replaces him with another.”

Shaykh Nazim: “There is no cursed one among the Arabs, but evil ones other than Arabs have sneaked among them”

“There is no cursed one among the Arabs, but evil ones other than Arabs have sneaked among them” [07:12-07:19].

“And We revealed the Quran in Arabic so that you may understand” [Quran 12:2]

In his masterpiece “Anwaar Muhammadiyya” [Urdu edition, p.22-29]” Imam Allamah Yusuf ibn Ismail Nabhabani (may Allah have mercy on him), narrated the following Hadith from Ibn Umar, who said,

“The Apostle of Allah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Allah examined His creation and chose the children of Adam from among them; He examined the children of Adam and selected the Arabs from among them; He examined the Arabs and chose me from among them, so I was always the choicest of choices. Behold, people who love the Arabs, it is out of love for me that they love them, and those who hate the Arabs, it is out of hatred for me that they hate them.”

The Hon. Jim Karygiannis P.C. M.P. Liberal Critic for Multiculturalism

Re: Shaykh Nazim said Mahdi’s father is “Abdullah” by Sayyid Ahmed Amiruddin

Q. In this video: http://vimeo.com/23086599 Shaykh Nazim clearly states that the name of the father of the Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi is “…like my father’s name, meaning Abdullah”.  How do you reconcile this statement from Mawlana with the other one regarding him being the son of Imam Hasan al-Askari?

A. According to the venerable Khwaja Parsa’s Fasl al-Khitaab, there are twelve main Aqtaab.  Their Chief is known as the Qutb al-Aqtaab.  He is charged with the authority to terminate and appoint a Wali.  The spiritual name of the Qutb al-Aqtaab is “Abdullah”.  The title “Abdullah” or spiritual name belongs to those who are chosen to help herald in the era of the Mahdi, and is not their literal name.  In the Holy Qur’an, Jesus the son of Mary, who was the last Prophet sent to the Children of Israel, and whose mission was to pave the way for the advent of the Seal of Prophets (S) and the establishment of the Kingdom of Heaven for the Mahdi, identifies himself as, “Qala innee Abdullah ataniya alkitaba waja Alanee nabiyya” meaning, “He said: “I am indeed Abdullah. He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet” (Qur’an, 19:30).  The Holy Qur’an and the ahadith are clear that the actual name of the son of Mary is “Isa”, and never is he referred to as literally “Abdullah the son of Mary”, even though he clearly identified himself as “innee Abdullah” in the Holy Qur’an and not as “Isa ibn Mariam“.   The father of the Mahdi is the Imam of this state, hence is “Abdullah”.

“Fas aloo ahla aldhikri in kuntum la ta’lamoon” (16:43)

Was salam.

Arabs, Democracy, Separation of Church and State, and a Definition of “Israel”

Q. A true democracy mandates the separation of Church and State.  However, leaders of Western democracies constantly speak in favor of a “Jewish” State of Israel, and how the State of Israel is their only true democratic ally in the Middle East.  Is it not strange how the Jews are supported for a “Jewish” state, yet certain Muslim countries are scrutinized and targeted for not separating Mosque/Church from State?  

A. By definition, “Israel” and “Israelites” must always have the throne of King David ruling over them (see, I Chron. 17: 12; II Sam. 7: 13), what you see today as the State of Israel can only be correctly defined as actually the Jewish state of Israel, and not the idea of “Israel” in itself. Jewish in the context of the State of Israel in the Middle East is referring to the tribe of Judah, not the religion of Judaism specifically.  Since Her Majesty the Queen is the head of the House of David, and the monarch of the twelve tribes of the Israelites, it is correct to say only the nations of the ‘British crown’ are Israel, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In the highest levels of political and economic power, Western democracies do advocate the belief that “white” people of Western European descent, particularly those in Great Britain, are the direct lineal descendants of the ten lost tribes of Israel, including the French through the doctrine of Franco-Israelism, and the people of Denmark, who believe their nation descends from the tribe of Dan, from the twelve tribes.  These democracies are actually founded on religious doctrines, and as such their constant anti-Semitic vilifying of the Arabs, and their Prophet and religion in the media, and their historic vilifying of the Jews (as a religious community for their rejection of Christ) is actually expected.  These nations in the West, including Canada, are under Her Majesty the Queen, and this form of democracy is not a real “democracy” as is being sold to the Arabs today as the source behind Western progress, since our Royal Family and Her Majesty the Queen rules by Divine Right.  Her Majesty the Queen is accepted by some Arab rulers like the Saudis and the Jordanians because of Her blood relations to the family of the Prophet (S) through the Arab Kings of Seville.  The Arabs also had monarchs after the Ottomans, however, they threw them out and replaced them with the likes of Qaddafi and Saddam Hussein so they are paying the price for their actions.  There is no such thing as a Shariah/Islamic government without a King, nor is there such thing as an “Islamic State” without a King, nor can “jihad” be declared without a King.  Here is a list of some of the ethnically Arab monarchies which descend from the ishmaelites through the quraysh and who ruled the Middle East and beyond, posted at qedar.org:

The ‘Alid Dynasties:

1. The Zaydid Dynasty of Tabaristan
2. The Ukhaydhirite Dynasty of Najd, Arabia
3. The Sulaymanid Dynasty of Yemen
4. The Alid dynasty of Yemen
5. The Alid Dynasty of the Isaaq clan of Somalia
6. The Alid Dynasty of Sharifs of Sousse (Tunisia)
7. The Alid Dynasty of Sharifs of Morocco
8. The Idrisid Dynasty of Morocco
9. The Hammudid Dynasty of Algeciras, Málaga, Sevilla and Grenada
10. The Banu Katuda of La Mecca
11. The Banu Fulayta
12. The Alid Dynasty of the Muse clan of Somalia
13. The Banu Salih of the old state of Ghana
14. The Sulaymanid Dynasty of Sharifs of La Mecca
15. The Fatimid Caliphs
16. The Safavid Dynasty

Other ishmaelite  monarchies through the quraysh bloodline  include the Umayyad Caliphate, the Abbasid Caliphate, the Fatimid Caliphate,  the Rassids (Zaydi Imams), Caliphate of Córdoba,
the Caliphs of Morocco, the Hashemite Dynasty, the Hashemite Kings of Iraq, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, the Senussi Dynasty of Libya, the Sayyid Dynasty of Delhi, the Sayyid Dynasty of Kashmir, and the Asaf Jahahi Dynasty of Hyderabad, Deccan.

You must not concern yourself with what Western nations say or do among each other, rather as an Arab and a Muslim, you would be better to wake up and stop excepting things from a false vision.  Be proud of who you are and what your ancestors achieved. Create awareness of Truth and recognize it in the family of Muhammad (S), and pray for al-Faraj as Mawlana recently stated.  Al-Faraj is the relief, meaning the establishment of the Kingdom of the Family of Muhammad (S) with the Mahdi.

Shaykh Nazim: “Mahdi’s (A.S) hand is still active in the occurring events, but he Mahdi (A.S) is not visible”

This year was Hajjul Akbar but they delayed it (to Saturday) because on Friday, the Saints were there on Arafat.  They did not want to have the public.

Mureed: MashaAllah! The beginning of the month of Muharram, is Saturday, the 29th?

Mureed: This month, the month of Dhul Hijja is 29 days.

Mawlana Says: So from next Saturday, it is correct then, that it is next Saturday. There are events & Allah (SWTA) knows best, what will happen. Therefore, if it is not necessary – do not travel or go around & about to Europe or America. The area is under siege you have to be attentive. Maybe a war will begin in the Middle East and the army from Banu Asfar will come to go to Amuq (Syria). The plain of Amuq, not the valley.

Mureed:  the valley of Amuq.

Mawlana Says : The plain of Amuq

Mureed.: O yes, plain of Amuq.

The war will take place & Allah (SWTA) will support Islam & will open the way up to Turkey up to Istanbul. From there will come the Sultan, who will go to Istanbul and Mahdi’s (A.S) hand is still active in the occurring events but he, Mahdi (A.S), is not visible. Maybe if the order comes in Rajab, before or after, Mahdi (A.S) will go to Istanbul. This means that the region now is on fire! It is on fire. An army from Sham will come to fight against Banu Asfar & the hand of Mahdi (A.S) is supporting them, but he is not visible.

I am not afraid, but cautious but I am being cautious about the event of the war of Armageddon. The time is very near, therefore in Muharram take caution. People they should not move around if it is not a necessity.  Everyone should stay where they are. “Adkhulu Masakinakum” (27:18) (Enter your dwellings).  This means do not go out. Keep yourselves in your homes. The home… who stays home is in safety & security. Who goes out of his home will perish, something will come on them.

Therefore, every person according to what is possible should keep in their homes stocks of (food). So they may not be needy, because also the grocery shops will be closed and they will have nothing, except the little of what is in their homes. If you buy what is enough for you for 20 days God willing it will last 40 days. Maybe if you buy something more, more than your needs you can give to the poor people who may come to you. You may give from this excess. Allah (SWTA) with His Power, His favors’ & Blessing, if you provided to the poor servants of Allah (SWTA). He (SWTA) will increase the provisions in your home without you realizing it. Astaghfirullah! You understand?

Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim.. (dua)

May Allah (SWTA) bless who provided this food & those who are eating it may what we ate & drank give power to our bodies, light to our hearts & cure to our chests. For the Honour of the Prophet (SAW), his companions, our Shaykhs, Um Hiram, Hajja Amina S.& those who are following and the believers, Al Fatiha.

H.R.: These instructions are for everybody?

M: Of course. Of course, they are for everybody, especially for the Middle East.

Mureed: Tamam.

Because the time of Sahibul Zaman (Mahdi (AS) Imam Al Zaman, just arrived. Therefore no need to move outside country. It is possible to keep themselves. If anything happening come to your home make wudu/ablution make 2 rakaat, and then sit there. Nothing touching to you…Hamdulillah, barakat

Mureed : When is this?

M: Muharram, the whole of Muharram. Everywhere will be turned upside down!