REFLECTING ON THE RECENT DEVIATIONS OF MUDEER MARKAZ

By

Ibn Abdillah As-sudaisiy Al-Iloori

I have a video where Mudeer Markaz was rejecting and denying the concept of abrogation (Naskh and Mansuukh) and rajm (stoning) as a form of punishment for zina (adultery) under the shar'iah. He said it is only Allaah Who can order capital punishment (death penalty) and that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم does not have that capacity. What is clear from his words is his ignorance of the status of Sunnah in Islaam and refusal to seek proper clarification. 

In the first place, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم does not speak from his whims and caprices. He doesn't go against the wish of Allaah. You will never find any authentic hadith contradicting the Qur'an. Anyone who says an authentically reported hadith contradicts the Qur'an is an ignorant person. When Allaah wanted to make a law, He did so by the revelation of verses of the Qur'an through Angel Jibreel or He inspires law through hadiths of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. The Qur'an and Sunnah are the main sources of Islamic law and they are inseparable. This is how Sheikh Rabee' Ibn Haadee Al Madkhalee حظه الله  described the relationship between the Qur'an and Sunnah in his explanation of Usul Sunnah of Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله.

In Islamic jurisprudence, there is no discrimination between authentic traditions of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم (Sunnah) and the verses of the Qur'an. We do not need a clear-cut Qur'an verses to validate any aspect of the Sunnah because the Qur'an itself, in many verses confirms the sanctity of abiding by the Sunnah always. That is why Islaam is Sunnah and Sunnah is Islaam. So, it is erroneous for anyone to think the Sunnah would oppose any part of the Qur'an or that any part of the Qur'an would contradict an authentic Sunnah. This in itself is a prove of the comprehensiveness of Islaam. 

If anyone wants to know how hadiths are classified, it is better to go and learn science of hadith from those who know it. It is not something that can be decided with common sense or individual thought or opinion. So, being a head of an Islamic institution is not an automatic licence to dable into fields of knowledge that one is yet to be properly trained on. No reasonable person will experiment medical surgery without prior knowledge or training and qualification at the medical school. But when it comes to the matter of religion in our society, anyone can just say anything without knowledge and people would be following him blindly. This is the present situation of the Mudeer and his likes. May Allaah guide them.

The fact that someone understands Arabic doesn't give him the license to deal with any religious matter the way he likes. Arabic is just a language, it only assists a person in his pursuit for knowledge. It aids his understanding. Scholarship in Islaam goes beyond mere understanding of Arabic. Similarly, a person can't just be reading books without scholarly guidance. The real knowledge can only be acquired by sitting with its people and learning properly. The books are just part of the tools for acquiring knowledge. A person still needs a qualified teacher to put him through. This is how the real scholars are made and not just by mere claim or inherited institution.

Like Imaam al-Barbahaaree رحمه الله said in his Sharh us Sunnah, we should be careful the kind of people we listen to. We should not rush to listen to anyone without finding out who really he is. We should ask questions; where did he study, who were his teachers, what is his 'aqeedah, did any of the companions or trustworthy scholars say what he is saying and so on? By the time all these questions are answered, you will agree with me that Mudeer Markaz ought not to be taken serious at all when he speaks about classification of hadiths and perhaps other matters of the Deen. The reason why I have decided to respond to his recent vituperations is that a member of my congregation became so confused and kept asking strange questions in the masjid. The serious concern is the situation of the ignorant people who are following him blindly. We have to try our best to save those Allaah will permit us to save from his evils.

The true scholars of Islaam do not discriminate between Qur'an and Sunnah. They use any of the two (Qur'an and Sunnah) to prove the submission. They do not prefer a part of the Book and reject a part. Regarding the capacity of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم to make laws with his hadiths (Sunnah) whether or not there is a replica of it in the Qur'an, Allaah says in Suratun Najm:

وَمَا يَنْطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَى

Nor does he speak out of desire (Q53:3)

This verse alone is enough to shut up anyone who might be having doubt in the efficacy of authentically reported hadiths from the Messager  صلى الله عليه وسلم. If the Prophet makes any mistake in his actions or words, Allaah used to correct him instantly without any delay. So, it is not possible that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم could have applied the principle of rajm on his own or without divine guidance. The act of faulting prophetic hadith without adequate knowledge of science of hadith amounts to and indictment against the beloved Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم. 

In his words, the Mudeer jumped the gun when he said if Allaah had wanted to legislate rajm (stoning), He would have stated it clearly in the Qur'an. Subhanallah! This is an exhibition of terrible ignorance of the elementary principles of Islamic law of evidence. For instance, Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wanted us to pray five (5) times a day, but did not explain how we would observe the prayers. The explanation of how we are to pray can only be found in the Sunnah. Does this mean Allaah doesn't want us to pray. There are many things we do in this Deen that if the Sunnah is removed from them, there will be no Islaam. The Sunnah has come to supplement the provisions of the Qur'an and whatever the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم says or does will be deemed to be expatiating the provisions of the Qur'an. Allaah says:

وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ 

And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought. (Q16: 44)

The word message in this verse by consensus of scholars is "Sunnah" (Hadith). I watched a video of Sheikh Adam رحمه الله recently where he also explained the verse in the same manner. But unfortunately, the Mudeer has contradicted him thinking that we do not need hadith to understand the Qur'an and that we can reject any hadith that we don't understand or that is too technical for our understanding. Rejection of authentic hadiths or placing intellect over texts of hadith is a form of kufr. May Allaah save us from this. Allaah says:

وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ وَلَا مُؤْمِنَةٍ إِذَا قَضَى اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَمْرًا أَن يَكُونَ لَهُمُ الْخِيَرَةُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِمْ ۗ وَمَن يَعْصِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلَالًا مُّبِينًا 

It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error. (Q33:36)

In this verse, the use of و shows that Allaah deliberately gave the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم the power to legislate and there is no evidence to show that the prophetic power here is limited by any means. So, the assertion of Mudeer that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم does not have power to prescribe capital punishment of stoning is baseless because the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم wouldn't have done so on his own volition or free will. It must have been inspired by Allaah, his Lord. 

The Mudeer himself confirmed that Sheikh Yusuf Qardaawee (may Allaah rectify his affairs) said he used to hold that the punishment of rajm (stoning) is not in the shar'iah, but he was made to reverse his opinion after he was shown superior evidences on the matter. So, why can't he (Mudeer) also toe the path of humility by seeking more knowledge and retract his blasphemous opinions on many aspects of the shar'iah that he has little or no knowledge about? This calls for serious concern.

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم implemented the punishment of rajm (stoning) on two very popular ocassions. The case of Maa'iz and the Ghaamidiyyah are indelible in the history of Islaam. Sheikh Saalih Fawzaan حفظه الله mentioned in his explanation of Sharh us Sunnah how the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم offered funeral prayers for them after they had been executed through stoning. [See pg 128 of his nuskhah on Sharh us Sunnah]. Yet, Mudeer was saying the punishment of stoning doesn't give room for repentance. Perhaps, he doesn't know that anyone upon whom punishment of 'hadd' is implemented has been forgiven automatically.

Saying rajm (stoning) in a case of adultery is not in Islaam is like denying the Sunnah, and a denial of Sunnah is a denial of Islaam. Apart from that, it is like faulting the decision of the beloved Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم. I heard the Mudeer clearly when he said the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not have the power to order stoning despite the fact that there are hadiths and aathar pointing this fact. In a hadith, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbaas رضي الله عنه was reported to have said: ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab رضي الله عنه said, when he was sitting on the minbar of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم,

(إِنَّ اللَّهَ بَعَثَ مُحَمَّدًا صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بِالْحَقِّ ، وَأَنْزَلَ عَلَيْهِ الْكِتَابَ ، فَكَانَ مِمَّا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ آيَةُ الرَّجْمِ ، فَقَرَأْنَاهَا ، وَعَقَلْنَاهَا ، وَوَعَيْنَاهَا ، رَجَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَرَجَمْنَا بَعْدَهُ ، فَأَخْشَى إِنْ طَالَ بِالنَّاسِ زَمَانٌ أَنْ يَقُولَ قَائِلٌ : وَاللَّهِ مَا نَجِدُ آيَةَ الرَّجْمِ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ ، فَيَضِلُّوا بِتَرْكِ فَرِيضَةٍ أَنْزَلَهَا اللَّهُ ، وَالرَّجْمُ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ حَقٌّ عَلَى مَنْ زَنَى إِذَا أُحْصِنَ مِنْ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاءِ ، إِذَا قَامَتْ الْبَيِّنَةُ ، أَوْ كَانَ الْحَبَلُ ، أَوْ الِاعْتِرَافُ) 

"Allaah sent Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم   with the truth, and He revealed the Book to him. One of the things that Allaah revealed to him was the verse of stoning. We recited it, memorized it and understood it, The Messenger of Allaah (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) stoned [adulterers] and we stoned them after him. But I am afraid that with the passage of time, people will say, we do not find stoning in the Book of Allaah, so they will go astray and forsake an obligation that Allaah revealed. Stoning (is mentioned) in the Book of Allaah as a duty which must be carried out on those who commit zina if they are married, men and women alike, if proof is established or if there is pregnancy or a confession [Bukhari and Muslim]

In the version of this hadith as reported by Al Imaam Abu Daawud (No. 4418), he added that 'Umar رضي الله عنه said:

لَوْلَا أَنْ يَقُولَ النَّاسُ : زَادَ عُمَرُ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ، لَكَتَبْتُهَا

If not that people would say 'Umar has added to the Book of Allaah, the almighty and exalted, I would have written it. [Authenticated by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abu Daawud]

'Umar رضي الله عنه made that statement as if he had known people like Mudeer Markaz and his likes would later come and deny rajm (stoning) as a punishment for adultery. It wasn't only 'Umar رضي الله عنه who reported the verse of rajm and it's sanctity in the shar'iah, several other Companions رضي الله عنهم did report it. 'Aaisha رضي الله عنه was reported to have said:

 (لقد نزلت آية الرجم ، وكانت في صحيفة تحت سريري) 

Indeed the verse of stoning was revealed, and it is in a paper under my bed [See Sunan Ibn Maajah (No. 1944)]

Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله also had a report with a weak chain from 'Ali ibn Abi Taalib رضي الله عنه. Al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer رحمه الله also mentioned reports from Ubayy ibn Ka'ab and Zaid ibn Thaabit رضي الله عنهما in his book 'Fath ul Baari'. 

In another hadith, Jaabir ibn Samurah رضي الله عنه said: 

(رَأَيْتُ مَاعِزَ بْنَ مَالِكٍ حِينَ جِيءَ بِهِ إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ رَجُلٌ قَصِيرٌ ، أَعْضَلُ ، لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ رِدَاءٌ، فَشَهِدَ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ أَرْبَعَ مَرَّاتٍ أَنَّهُ زَنَى ، فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : (فَلَعَلَّكَ؟) قَالَ: لَا، وَاللهِ إِنَّهُ قَدْ زَنَى ، قَالَ : فَرَجَمَهُ ..)

I saw Maa‘iz ibn Maalik رضي الله عنه when he was brought to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم a short, well-built man who was not wearing a rida’ (upper garment). He testified against himself four times, saying that he had committed zina, and the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسل said: “Perhaps you (kissed her or embraced her)?” He said: No, by Allaah, this ignoble one has committed zina. So he stoned him... [Muslim].

Ibn al-Qayyim رحمه الله said said regarding rajm (stoning):

اَلَّذِينَ رَجَمَهُمْ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي الزِّنَا مَضْبُوطُونَ مَعْدُودُونَ، وَقِصَصُهُمْ مَحْفُوظَةٌ مَعْرُوفَةٌ. وَهُمْ : الْغَامِدِيَّةُ، وَمَاعِزٌ، وَصَاحِبَةُ الْعَسِيفِ، وَالْيَهُودِيَّانِ 

Those whom the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم stoned for zina were well known and few in number, and their stories were recorded and are well-known. They were the Ghaamidi woman, Maa‘iz, the woman who committed adultery with the hired worker, and the two Jews. [at-Turuq al-Hukmiyyah, pg 53 ]

There is no evidence in the shar'iah that says there must be clear cut Qur'an verse or verses on a matter before an aspect of the Sunnah relating to it can be applicable. Instead, what the Qur'an keep saying is for us to stick to Sunnah whether or not there is a clear cut provision for same in the Qur'an. A true Muslim must believe absolutely that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم would never lie, falsify information or invent judgments from his whims without the directive of Allaah. 

It was even reported that 'Umar ibn Al-Khattaab رضي الله عنه mentioned the verse of rajm (stoning) in a Jum'ah Khutbah in the presence of the scholars among the Sohaabah رضي الله عنهم and none of them went against him because they were aware of its revelation. The consensus of scholars on this matter is that the verse of rajm (stoning) is erased for reasons best known to Allaah. But the ruling derivable therefrom exist till eternity. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم implemented it and there was nothing to show that it was abrogated till the death of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.

The fact that the verse was erased from the Qur'an doesn't render its replica in the Sunnah inapplicable. Afterall, there is no clear cut provisions in the Qur'an on the details of how zakah as a pillar of Islaam is to be executed. It is the Sunnah that explained them to us in depth and we do not say they are not applicable because the Qur'an is silent about them. In a more direct sense, Allaah said regarding those who reject the judgments of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم : 

فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا 

But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission. (Q4:65)

This verse says no one will be said to have eeman until he believes firmly in the decisions of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in his hadiths (Sunnah). When the Mudeer keep rejecting hadiths on rajm, return of 'Isa عليه السلام and so on, these are the verses of the Qur'an he has been rejecting by all implications, and it is dangerous for him and his blind followers. You will not find a person who is in the habit of rejecting authentic hadiths except that he will be one of those who lack manner with the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Companions رضي الله عنهم. I heard him clearly when he was condemning Saheeh Bukhari, claiming that Imaam al-Bukhari used to fabricate hadiths and would put the name of a Companion that is close to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم so that people would find it easy to believe. Subhanallah! All his claims are baseless and worthless. 

Mudeer Markaz is only using his reasoning to override and attack textual proofs. This is a destructive mission. A lot of ignorant people would think what he has been saying is correct because they have failed to seek knowledge. Where as, he is only attempting to destroy the foundations of Islaam. He is apologetic of the insinuations of the orientalists against Islaam. Those who are well known for saying what he has been saying are the orientalists among the kuffar and enemies of Islaam. 

Mudeer has not just started, he had denied the existence of hijab in Islaam. He said the verses on hijab are applicable  to the wives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم alone and not the entire Muslim women, despite clear cut provisions from the Qur'an and Sunnah on it. He denied the hadiths of the Prophet صلي الله عليه وسلم on the return of 'Isa عليه السلام. He said women can vie for positions of authority without any limitation and so on. He is trying to modernize Islaam with his faulty reasoning. He is calling for the amendment of the shar'iah to conform with our present time. Where as, it is we that suppose to always compel ourselves to conform with the dictates of the Qur'an and Sunnah and not the other way round. The shar'iah suits every generation and it will never be obsolete or outdated. It conforms with every changing circumstances.

Mudeer is calling for the review of the hadiths in Saheeh Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim despite the consensus of scholars of the present and the past on its authenticity. He has failed to realize that the ummah of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم will never unite on falsehood. The scholars of the past whose generations are close to that of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم have done all the works for us. Any contribution that anyone might attempt to make today would only be constructed on the foundations they had laid and not otherwise. All we need to do is to follow our salaf (predecessors) in whatever we do because they were better than us in knowledge and experience. Allaah warn those who oppose the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم of the consequence of their actions. He says:

فَلْيَحْذَرِ الَّذِينَ يُخَالِفُونَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِ أَن تُصِيبَهُمْ فِتْنَةٌ أَوْ يُصِيبَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ 

...So let those beware who dissent from the Prophet's order, lest fitnah strike them or a painful punishment. (Q24:63)

The use of mere reasoning to  judge hadiths without learning and understanding the principles laid down by scholars of science of hadith is poor and unacceptable. 'Ali رضي الله عنه was reported to have said:

لَوْ كَانَ الدِّينُ بِالرَّأْيِ لَكَانَ أَسْفَلُ الْخُفِّ أَوْلَى بِالْمَسْحِ مِنْ أَعْلَاهُ وَقَدْ رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَمْسَحُ عَلَى ظَاهِرِ خُفَّيْهِ

“If the religion were based upon one’s opinion, one might expect the bottom of the leather sock to be wiped instead of the top, yet I have seen the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, wiping over the upper part of his leather socks.” [Source: Sunan Abī Dāwūd 162]

This shows that anyone who places intellect over authentically reported hadiths is upon misguidance and he is not to be followed. In all his assertions, Mudeer Markaz has not given us any reference in support of his claims. He was challenged to state the name of the book and the page he has been reading from, he hasn't been able to do that. Perhaps, if the identity of the person he reads from is unveiled, the secret of his deviations would become clear to everyone. 

On the relationship between the Qur'an and Sunnah, Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله said in his Usul us Sunnah:

والسنة تفسير القرآن, وهي دلائل القرآن وليس في السنة قياس , ولا تضرب لها الأمثال, ولا تدرك بالعقول ولا الأهواء, إنما هو الإتباع وترك الهوى

And the sunnah explains the Qur'an, it is a guide to the Qur'an. There is no use of analogical reasoning in the Sunnah and use of (baseless) examples or similitudes are not to be made on it. It is not comprehended with mere use of intellect or desire. Rather, it is to be followed (as it appears) and abandone desire. [See Sharh Usul Sunnah of Sheikh Rabee', pg 11]

The issue of abrogation is not something anyone can just discuss without adequate knowledge and understanding of the shar'iah. Al Imaam as-Suyuti رحمه الله said many sscholars have authored works specifically on the concept of abrogation, and they conclude that,

“No one is allowed to give explanation [tafsir] of the Book of Allah until they understand abrogation.” 

'Ali رضي الله عنه was reported to have sked a judge if he knew which verses abrogated others, and the judge replied in the negative. Ali رضي الله عنه then said, 

“You are ruined, and you have ruined others.” [Suyuti, Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an]

Besides, Allaah says clearly in Suratul Baqarah:

مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا ۗ أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ 

We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent? (Q2:106)

This verse clearly establishes the existence of the concept of abrogation in Islaam. 

May Allaah guide us aright.