A letter by Sayyed Abdulhakîm bin Mustafâ Arwâsî (rahmatullahi
ta’âlâ ’alaih):
Imâm-i Busayrî (rahmatullahi ta’âlâ
’alaih) the greatest of the Awliyâ educated by Shaikh Abul-Abbâs Mursî
‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ alaih’, a man of karâmats and a disciple of shaikh Abul-Hasan-i
Shâzilî (rahmatullahi ta’âlâ ’alaih), who was one of the great ones from the
Sôfiyya-i aliyya[1],
wrote a book entitled Qasîda-i hamziyya that was read by Islâmic
savants with enthusiasm. In this book he praises our Prophet and says, “The
mothers and fathers of the Best of Mankind were all good. Allahu ta’âlâ, of His
human beings, picked out the best fathers and mothers for him.”
In all the books of Mawlid written in
various Islâmic languages, it is written that his parents were extremely
innocent. [Poems describing the Prophet’s life are called “Mawlid.”]
None of the ancestors [fathers and
mothers] of our Prophet (sall Allahu ’alaihi wa sallam) nor of any prophet was
a disbeliever or base (’alaihimussalâm). The following are the âyat-i-kerîmas
and hadîth-i-sherîfs proving our statement correct:
1 – In a hadîh-i-sherîf in Bukhârî-i sharîf, the
most valuable and the most correct book after the Qur’ân al-kerîm, our Prophet declares: “I was born from
the distinguished, the best ones of people living in every century, in every
era.”
2 – In a hadîth in the book of Imâm-i Muslim, which
has, of the thousands of hadîth books, won second place, Rasûlullah declares: “Of the descendants
of Hadrat Ismâil ‘alaihis-salâm’, Allahu ta’âlâ
selected a person named Quraysh. And of the descendants of Quraysh, He selected
the Hâshim Family. And among them He placed me.”
3 – In a hadîth communicated by Tirmuzî, he
delares: “Allahu
ta’âlâ created everyone. He made me from the best group of humans. Then He
created the best of these groups in Arabia. He made me from them. Then,
choosing the best of homes, the best of families, He created me from them.
Then, my soul and body are the best of creatures. My ancestors are the best
people.”
------------------------------------
[1] Great men of Tasavvuf, that is, the
Awliyâ.
4 – In a hadîth in a book by Tabarânî, one
of the most valuable hadîth savants, he declares: “Allahu ta’âlâ created everything out of nothing. Of all
things, He liked human beings and made them valuable. Of mankind He made those
whom He selected settle in Arabia. And of the distinguished in Arabia, He chose
me. He placed me among the distinguished, the best of the people in every age.
Then, those who love the ones in Arabia who are obedient to me, love them for
my sake. Those who feel hostility towards them feel hostility towards me.” This
hadîth-i-sherîf is also written at the beginning of Mawâhib-i Ladunniyya.
5 – As it is informed in Mawâhib-i-Ladunniyya
and in the explanation of Zerqânî ‘rahmatullâhi
ta’âlâ alaih’, it is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf quoted by Abdullah bin Abbâs
‘radiy-Allâhu anhumâ’: “None of my grandfathers committed adultery. Allahu ta’âlâ made me
from beautiful and good fathers and pure mothers. If one of my grandfathers had
had two sons. I would be in the most useful, the best of these.” Before
Islâm, adultery was usual in Arabia. A woman would not marry a man before
having been his mistress for a long time. [Today’s disbelievers do the same.]
Hadrat Âdam (’alaihi’s-salâm), when he was
about to die, said to Hadrat Shis (’alaihi’s-salâm), his son, “My son! This nûr
shining on your forehead is the nûr of Hadrat Muhammad, the Last Prophet.
Deliver this nûr to pure and chaste ladies, who believe in Allah, and tell your
son to do so in your last request!” Up to Muhammad (alayhissalâm), all fathers
told their sons to do so. Each of them fulfilled this will by marrying the
noblest, the chastest girl. The nûr, passing through pure foreheads and chaste
women, reached its owner. Allahu ta’âlâ calls the disbelievers foul in the
Sûra-i-Tawba. Since Rasûlullah (sall-Allahu ’alaihi wa sallam) declares that
all his grandfathers were innocent, Âzar, who was a foul disbeliever, must not
be Ibrâhim’s (’alaihi’s-salâm) father. To say that Âzar was Hadrat Ibrâhim’s
(’alaihi’s-salâm) father would mean to disbelieve the hadîth above. Molla Jâmi
(rahmatullahi ’alaih) says in his Persian book Shawâhid-un-Nubuwwa, “A nûr (holy light)
shone on Âdam’s forehead (’alaihi’s-salâm) because he bore a mote of hadrat
Muhammad (’alaihi’s-salâm). This mote was passed on to Hadrat Hawwa [the first
mother] and from her to Hadrat Shis, thus passing from innocent men to innocent
women and from innocent women to innocent men. The nûr, together with the mote,
passed from foreheads to foreheads.”
It is written on the forty-eighth page of
the book Qisas-i-Anbiyâ
(History of Prophets), “If one of Rasûlullah’s grandfathers had had two sons or
if a tribe had been divided into two branches, the descendants of the Last
Prophet would be on the best side. In each century, the person who was his
grandfather was evident by the nûr on his forehead. Ismâil ‘alaihis-salâm’ also
had the nûr on his forehead. It shone like the planet Venus. This nûr, an
inheritance from his father, passed from him on to his descendants, thus
reaching Me’add and Nizâr.
‘Nizâr’ means ‘a little.’ He was named
Nizâr due to the following event: When he was born, his father Me’add, being
pleased to see the nûr on his son’s forehead, gave a feast and said that the
feast was only a little thing for such a son, thus causing his name to remain
as Nizâr. This nûr was the nûr of Hadrat Muhammad. Passing from son to son
since Hadrat Âdam, it came to its owner, Khâtem-ul-anbiyâ, i.e. Hadrat
Muhammad.
Thus, among the sons of Hadrat Âdam, there
was a distinguished race carrying Hadrat Muhammad’s nûr; in each century, the
face of a person of this race was very beautiful and very bright. By this nûr
he was conspicuous among his brothers, and the tribe he belonged to was more
exalted and more honourable than other tribes.”
6 – It is declared in the two hundred and
nineteenth âyat of Sûrat-ush-Shu’arâ of the Qur’ân al-kerîm: “You, that is, your nûr has reached you after having always been
transferred from one worshipper to another.” Interpreting this âyat,
the Ahl-i sunnat savants ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ alaihim ajma’în’ have inferred
that “All his fathers and mothers were Believers and were innocent.” As it is
explained in the booklet Ashâb-i kirâm, there are also some people who
suppose that the Ahl-i sunnat savants are Râfidîs and who say that these are
the words of Râfidîs.
The great ones of the Ahl-i-sunnat
‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ alaihim ajma’în’ say that his father and his mother,
Âmina, were in the religion of Hadrat Ibrâhîm. That is, they were Believers.
Allahu ta’âlâ enlivened these two and had them hear the word ‘Shahâdat’ from
our Prophet and express it, not for giving them îmân, but in order that they
might be honoured with being in his Ummat [See article 46 for the word
‘Shahâdat’.] The âyat, “Do not ask a blessing on your relative,” was intended
for Abû Tâlib. It was not intended for his parents. It is written in the
translations of Imâm-i A’zâm’s book Fiqh-i Akbar, of which there are many copies
in the world, that they (his parents) died without belief. Yet it is written
in Imâm-i A’zam’s manuscript that they
died with îmân. Later, it was discovered that his enemies made this mistake on
purpose by erasing the word ‘mâ’[1].
The manuscript of Fiqh-i Akbar by
Imâm-i A’zam Abû Hanîfa, along with a part of the Qur’ân al-kerîm, which was written by
the blessed hands of Hadrat ’Uthmân, the Amîr-ul-mu’minîn, and which was
coloured with his blood of martyrdom, and a number of valuable books were taken
to Samarkand in
Some pages of the copies of the Qur’ân written
by the blessed hands of the Khalîfas ’Umar-ul-Fârûq, ’Uthmân-i Zinnûrayn and
Alî-yul-Murtadâ ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ anhum’ exist in the Museum of Islâmic
Works, which is next to the Süleymâniye Mosque in Istanbul. Those who wish may
see them.
The enemies of religion laid their hands
on the books of great men of the religion, as they had at one time defiled the Tawrât and
the Injîl, the
books of Allahu ta’âlâ. For example, they mixed some fables with the books Fusûs and
Futûhât by
Muhyiddîn-i Arabî. Yet, they were soon discovered. The great savant Hadrat
Abdulwahhâb-i Sha’rânî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ alaih’ explains this policy of the
irreligious in his books Kibrît-i Ahmar and Al-yawaqît. And
today, the policy of misrepresenting Islâm to youngsters is being carried out
far and wide; we notice with regret that the world no longer has any real
savants to silence them.
For this reason, Hadrat Celâleddîn-i Rûmî
wrote his Mathnawi in
a rhyme scheme, thus leaving no possibility for Islam’s enemies to defile it.
The following books give valuable
information by explaining the words of Islâmic scholars: While beginning the
discussion
------------------------------------
[1] In Arabic, the words ‘mâ’ and ‘lâ’ make
the meaning of the verb negative. ‘Mâtû’ means ‘they died.’ ‘Mâ-mâtû’ means
‘they didn’t die.’ When ‘mâ’ in front of the sentence ‘They didn’t die as
disbelievers’ is erased, it becomes ‘They died as disbelievers.’
concerning the marriage of disbelievers in
the annotation of Durr-ul-mukhtâr by Ibni Abidin (alaihirrahma), chapter al-Hazar-wal-ibâha in
the annotation of Eshbâh by Hamawî (rahmat Allahu
ta’âlâ ’alaih), and the book Mir’at-i kâinat write, “According to great
savants, who have realized the truth, we shouldn’t talk on whether our
Prophet’s ‘sall-Allâhu alaihi wa sallam’ parents had or did not have îmân, and
we should watch our manners when discussing it. It has been stated in a
hadîth-i-sherîf, ‘Do not hurt the living by talking ill of the dead.’ It
does not bring harm upon one not to talk about it or not to learn it, nor will
it be asked in the grave or on the Last day of Judgement.” [See fn. (5) in
article 18 for Ibni Âbidîn.] And again, they say, “Allahu ta’âlâ, as a blessing
on our Prophet, enlivened his parents during his farewell hajj. They believed
in His Prophet. The sahîh hadîth[1]
quoted by Muhammad bin Abû Bakr and Ibni Nâsir-ud-dîn declares this fact. By
the same token, His enlivening a man killed by the Banî Isrâil and the man’s
giving information about his murderer and His enlivening many dead people with
the prayers of Hadrat Îsâ and Hadrat Muhammad were all blessings. It is
incorrect to say that the âyat ‘Do not ask My pardon on behalf of those who are for Hell’ is
about Rasûlullah’s blessed parents. As for the hadîth-i-sherîf ‘My father and your
father are in the fire,’ which is communicated in Muslim; it
was said with ijtihâd. It was declared afterwards that they had îmân.” It is
written in the book Ahwal-u atfâl-il-muslimîn that it had ben
declared so about the two sons of Hadrat Khadîja, too, but afterwards it was
communicated that they were not in Hell.
As it is understood from âyat-i-kerîmas
and hadîth-i-sherîfs and as it is written in thousands of Islâmic books, all
the fortunate people who were honoured with being Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu
alaihi wa sallam’ fathers and mothers were the noblest, the most honourable,
the most beautiful and the purest people of their times and in their countries.
They all were cherished, blessed and respectable. Therefore, Hadrat Ibrâhîm’s
father was a Believer and was far from having evil habits or abominable, low
attributes. Âzar, who was a disbeliever, was not his father, but his uncle.
As it is declared at the beginning of Sûrat-u Âl-i
’Imrân, the Qur’ân’s âyats are of two kinds.
Firstly, the âyats with clear, obvious meanings, which are called “Muhkamât.” Secondly,
there are âyats called “Mutashâbihât” which are not apparent, plain
or
------------------------------------
[1] A kind of hadîth.
usual, but which contain unusual meanings.
That is, it does not conform with the mind or with the Sharî’at to give them
their clear, known meanings; it is necessary to give them unusual meanings,
that is, ta’wîl (to
interpret)
them. It is a sin to give them their obvious meanings. For example, the savants
of Tafsîr (interpretation) have interpreted the word yad (hand) as
‘power’ which means capability. By the same token, it is written in The Intepretation
of Baydâwî that in the âyat “When Ibrâhîm (alayhissalâm) told his father Âzar...” Âzar
is an atf-i bayân[1]
for the word ‘father.’ When a person has two names and these two names are
mentioned together, it is understood that one of them is famous and the other
is not famous, which is called “atf-i bayân.” For this reason, according to
the rules of belâghat, fesâhat and i’jâz[2],
Hadrat Ibrâhîm calls two persons father. One of them is his own father, and the
other is somebody else whom he refers to as father. The meaning of the âyat is:
“When Hadrat Ibrâhim told his Âzar father.” If it weren’t so, it would be
enough in the Qur’ân to declare: “When he told Âzer,” or “When he told his
father,” instead of declaring: “When he told his father Âzer.” If he were his
own father, the word ‘his father’ would be superfluous.
All of the scholars of the Taurât (Torah)
followed the religion of Mûsâ (’alaihi’s-salâm) for a 1800 year period and
along with them the Apostles of Jesus (’alaihi’s-salâm) and the priests who
followed them said that Âzar was not the real father but that he was the uncle
of Ibrâhîm (’alaihi’s-salâm). As it is inferred from the undefiled old
namescripts of the Torah and the Bible, the name of the father of Ibrâhîm
(’alaihi’s-salâm) was Târuh. The word Târuh is not the Hebrew synonym of Âzar
as some ignorant people write. It means that they both are not names for the
same person. There are many verses in the Qur’ân-al karîm in accord with those
in the Torah and the Bible. In the thirtieth page of the Turkish version of his
book, Bayân-ul-haq,
Rahmatullah Efendi (rahmat-Allahî ’alaih), one of
the Islâmic scholars of India, says, “Naskh; i.e., anything to be made invalid
by Allahu ta’âlâ, involves only the commandments and the prohibitions. In the
------------------------------------
[1] In Aabic, the second noun, which is
written for explaining the meaning of a noun, is called “atf-i-beyân.” Its
English counterpart is ‘appositive’.
[2] These words are the
names of literary arts that make a statement valuable.
commentary Ma’âlim-ut-tanzîl al-Imâm al-Baghawî says
that Naskh did not occur in the qisas (narrations) and akhbâr (information)
[nor scientific and experimental knowledge] but only in the commandments and
prohibitions. Naskh does not mean to change them but to inform as to the ending
of their period of validity. The Qur’ân-i karîm did not invalidate the whole
Torah and Bible but a part of them.” [There is some information about Naskh in
this fascicle in a letter by Imâm-i Rabbanî, Vol. 3-22]. Therefore, the ta’wîl
(explaining away) of the above-mentioned âyat-i karîma becomes necessary.
Allahu ta’âlâ declares in the hundred and
thirty-third âyat of the Sûrat-ul-Baqara that Hadrat Ya’qûb’s (Jacob’s) sons
said to him, “And the creator of your fathers Ibrâhîm, Ismâ’il and Ishaq....” This
may come to mean that hadrat Ismâ’il is the father of Hadrat Ya’qûb. However,
Hadrat Ya’qûb is the son of Hadrat Ishaq ‘alaihis-salâm’, who is the son of
Hadrat Ibrâhîm ‘alaihis-salâm’. And Hadrat Ishaq ‘alaihis-salâm’ is Hadrat
Ismâ’il’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ brother. Then, Hadrat Ismâ’il ‘alaihis-salâm’ is not
Hadrat Ya’kûb’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ father but his uncle. This means to say that in
the Qur’ân
al-kerîm ‘uncle’ means ‘father.’ It is written in the
interpretation of this âyat in many books of interpretation that the word
‘father’ is used for uncle in various Arabic lexicons. It is written in many
books that our Prophet used to call an Arabian villager and his uncle Abû Tâlib
and also Abû Lahab and Abbâs, father. It has been a custom in every nation, in
every language, in every age to use the word ‘father’ for uncle, for
step-father, for father-in-law, and also for any protecting or helping a
person. Besides, Âzar was both the uncle and step-father of Hadrat Ibrâhîm. Also
Fîrûzâbâdî confirms this fact in Qâmûs by saying, “Âzar is the name of Hadrat
Ibrâhîm’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ uncle. His father’s name is Târuh.” The statement,
“The unanimity that Âzar is the uncle is unsound. According to the sound
unanimity, Âzar is his father,” is an unsound and worthless claim against such
a clear declaration in religious books. It results from misunderstanding the
subtlety in the words of savants.
It cannot be a document for the
interpretation by Baydâwî to give the seventy-fourth
âyat in Sûrat-ul-An’âm its plain meaning instead of interpreting it, [and that
this âyat-i karîma and the hundred and fifteenth âyat of Sûrat-ut-Tawba were
explained away with an improper ta’wîl in the commentary Rûh al-bayân.]
Nor can it abrogate the unanimity among the savants of interpretation, the
savants of hadîth, the savants of kelâm, and the
Sôfiyya-i aliyya. For it is only Muhammad
(alayhissalâm) who has given the Qur’ân al-kerîm its correct meaning and who
has intrepreted it correctly through his hadîth-i-sherîfs. None of the Ashâb-i
kirâm or Tâbi’în-i ’Izâm thought of Âzar as the father when they heard this
âyat-i-kerîma, nor did any of them say so. They understood that he was his
uncle. This is the belief of the Ahl-i sunnat.
It is written at the end of Fatâwâ-i Khayriyya,
“It is written in Qâmûs that Âzar is the name of
Hadrat Ibrâhîm’s uncle. His father’s name is Târuh. It is written as Ibrâhîm
bin Târûh in Târîh-i Hanbalî. It says that Âzar is the
nickname of Târûh. In The Interpretation of Jalâlayn it is written that the
name Âzar in the âyat is Târûh’s last name. Ibni Hâjar writes in his revision
of Hamziyya: ‘Âzar
was a disbeliever. It is declared in the Qur’ân that he was Hadrat Ibrâhîm’s
‘alaihis-salâm’ father. The ummats with holy books say that Âzar was not Hadrat
Ibrâhîm’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ own father, but he was his uncle, for the Arabs call
the uncle father. So the uncle has been called father in the Qur’ân. It
has been declared, ‘The creator [Allah] of your father
Ibrâhîm and Ismâ’il’ about Hadrat Ya’qûb.
Nonetheless, Hadrat Ismâ’îl was Hadrat Ya’qûb’s uncle, not his father. When the
words of savants do not conform with one another, it is wâjib to interpret an
âyat in a manner agreeable with hadîths. Choosing the easier way, Baydâwî and
others did not interpret the âyat.”
Abdul-Ahad Nûrî Bey wrote a special
booklet for proving the fact that Rasûlullah’s parents were Believers. This
booklet is in Turkish and consists of eighteen pages. It is kept with the call
number ‘3612’ in the Es’ad Efendi section in the library of Süleymâniye,
Istanbul.
Hadrat Imâm-ý Suyûtî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ
aleyh’ proves that Âzar is not Hadrat Ibrâhîm’s father, but that he was his
uncle, through documents in his book Kitâb-ud-darj-il-munîfa. This book is available
in the Süleymâniye, library. Its call number 1150 is in the Raîs-ul-kuttâb
Mustafa Efendi section.
It is written in Anwar-ul-Muhammadiyya
that it is declared in the hadîth-i-sherîf quoted
by Hadrat ’Alî, “From Hadrat Âdam up to my father Abdullah, I always passed through
married fathers and mothers. None of my fathers had any child through adultery,
without nikâh.” Rasûlullah communicated the names of his
twenty-one fathers back up to Adnân, as follows:
His father is Abdullah. The fathers of
Abdullah successively are Abdulmuttalib, Hâshim, Abdu-Menâf, Kussayy, Kilâb,
Murra,
Kâ’b, Luwayy, Ghâlib, Fihr, Mâlik, Nadr,
Kinâna, Huzeima, Mudrika, Ilyâs, Mudar, Nizâr, Me’add and Adnân. All of them,
with a brief description of each, have been written in alphabetical order at
the end of the Turkish version of our book.
The passages announcing the purification
of the ascendants of our Prophet in the book Metâli’un-nûr by Abdullah-i Rûmî, the
annotator of the book Fusûs, are written in our book Ni’mat-i kubrâ.
Hadrat Sanâullah-i Dahlawî [pâni-pûtî],
who had deep knowledge in branches of Tafsîr, Hadîth, Fiqh, Tasawwuf and
Islâmic knowledge, and who performed great services to human beings by showing
them the way to endless bliss, says in the first and third volumes of Tafsîr-i Mazharî that
the word ‘Âzar’ in
Sûrat-ul-an’âm is an atf-i bayân for the word ‘Abîhi.’ Documents stating that Âzar
was not Hadrat Ibrâhîm’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ father but that he was his uncle are
more correct. In Arabia, an uncle is called father. In the Qur’ân Hadrat
Ismâ’il ‘alaihis-salâm’ is called the father of Hadrat Ya’qûb. Whereas, he is
his uncle. Âzar’s real name was Nâhûr. Nâhûr was formerly in the
righteous religion of his ancestors. When he became Nimrod’s vizier, he turned
into a disbeliever, changing his faith for the world. Also, Fakhraddîn Râzî and
most of the salaf-i sâlihîn have conveyed that Âzer was an uncle. Zerqânî,
while explaining the book Mawâhib-i ladunniyya, writes the words,
“Those who believe holy books and also historians have unanimously said that
Âzar was an uncle,” by Ibni Hajar-i Haytamî, as a document. Imâm-i Suyûtî says
that Ibnî Abbâs has communicated that Âzar was not Hadrat Ibrâhîm’s father and
that Hadrat Ibrâhim’s father was Târûh. This word of Ibni Abbâs has also been
communicated by Mujâhid, Ibni Jarîr and Suddî through documents. Again, it is
communicated by Suyûtî, that also Ibni Munzîr clearly explains in his
interpration that Âzar was an uncle. Imâm-i Suyûtî wrote a booklet
communicating that Rasûlullah’s grandfathers, up to Hadrat Âdam were all
Muslims. Despite this fact, Muhammad bin Ishaq, Dahhâk, and Kelbî said that
Hadrat Ibrâhim’s father was Âzar whose other name was Târûh. “Ya’qub
‘alaihis-salâm’ had two names, too. His second name was Isrâil,” they said.
Also, mukafil and Ibnî Habban said that Âzar was the nickname for Hadrat
Ibrâhim’s father, Târûh. As noted by Baghawî, Atâ communicates from Ibni Abbâs
that when Rasûlullah wondered about his parents, the hundred and nineteenth
âyat of Sûrat-ul-Baqara descended, declaring: “Do not ask about the states of the
inhabitants of Hell!” Yet Ibni Jarîr has stated that this
information was not dependable. If we should say that this information is true,
then Ibni Abbâs communicated his own supposition. And even if his supposition
were true, it is not explained clearly that his (Rasûlullah’s) parents are in
Hell. Even if they were in Hell, still they could not be said to be
disbelievers, for there will be those Muslims who will go to Hell. It is
declared in a hadîth: “As I am the best of you, so my father is better than your
fathers.” The translation from the book Tafsîr-i Mazharî is
completed here.
It is written in the Al-hazar section
of the book Uyûn-ul-Basâir, “Qadî Abû Bakr Ibnul-Arabî
‘rahmatullâhi aleyh’, one of the savants of the Mâlikî madhhab, said that he
who said that Rasûlullah’s parents were in Hell would become accursed. Every
Muslim has to abstain from saying something that will hurt Rasûlullah. Allahu
ta’âlâ has cursed the person who hurts him. Nothing could cause bitter pain
than saying that his grandfathers were disbelievers!”
It is written in the book, al-Mustanad (p. 33): “Al-Imâm as-Suyûtî
proves that Âzar is the uncle, not the father of Ibrâhîm (alaihi’s-salâm). The hadîth-i sharîf: ‘My father and your father are in Hell’
means that Abû Lahab is in Hell.” The book, on its hundred and seventy-fifth
page, refutes with documents the assertions of ’Alî al-Qârî, who slanders
as-Suyûtî. Translation of these pages exists in the section Din Adamý Bölücü
Olamaz (A Man of Religion Cannot Be A Separatist) of the book Fâideli Bilgiler (Useful Teachings).