Demolition of Deen by Naïve Preachers

Let us analyse an erroneous statement from a certain naïve who said:

"Then, how can we say that so and so is a Wali-Allah when we are not supposed to know who passed away in what condition."

It is a statement that is filled with spitefulness to mislead people. It is a bit like the excuses of the thugs who justify their roguery in saying: "No one is perfect on earth". Thus, they justify their misbehaviour. Just as this is not a good way, similarly using this statement as an excuse not to accept someone as a Wali, is also a futile excuse for those who do not have the decency to accept the truth and those who do not have any proof because if it is due to the fact that one does not know who passed away in what condition that prevents one from qualifying someone as a Wali, then one should reject many things. This will be an obstacle to accept someone as a Muslim because one does not know the state in which he passed away or in which he will pass away. Thus, when one is getting married or one is marrying off one’s child, one does not know if one is marrying a Muslim or a non-Muslim. One does not know if one is a Muslim or not because one does not know in which state one will die. One must refrain from eating meat because one does not know if the butcher is a Muslim. That is not all! One must stop accepting Hadith because one does not know the state of death of these narrators. Therefore, how can one accept a narrator as authentic when one does not know in which state he passed away: in the state of Imaan or other? This is how one will demolish and massacre the Deen with one’s childish reasoning. Also, on what basis will one say that this Deen is authentic? Thus, finally one will also have to reject the Deen. Thus, one will have to stop presenting the opinion or the Fatwa of such and such Sheikh because one does not know in which state he passed away according to this banal reasoning. If someone asks one if Hazrat 'Umar Bin Abdul Aziz was a Wali-Allah or if he asks ones if the 4 Aimmah (Rahmatullahi alayhim) were Auliya of Allah, then what will one answer? Would it be correct to say that we cannot say that they are the Wali of Allah because we are not supposed to know in which state they passed away? 

We know that such a response cannot emanate from those whose hearts are filled with Nur. However, those who are devoid of "Nur-e-Basweerah", due to their "allergy" to pious people, will not hesitate to answer in such a harsh tone.

If the Wilaayat (the state of being a Wali) of a Wali is something concealed and is difficult to know, Imaan also is not something which is written on the forehead of a person. And if Imaan has signs that indicate its presence in a person, the Wilaayat of a Wali also has signs that indicate its presence. If we have the right to consider a person as a Muslim on the basis of some signs, we do not understand why we cannot accept someone as a Wali on the basis of some signs. For example, if we believe sincerely in the Wilaayat of Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jeelaani (Rahmatullahi alayh), Sheikh Moinuddeen Chisti (Rahmatullahi alayh), Sheik Jalaaluddeen Rumi (Rahmatullahi alayh), etc., it is because they spent their whole life with a Taqwa of a very advanced degree and this was testified by everyone in their respective times. Now, a preacher who is spiritually blind says that one cannot say if they are the Auliyaa of Allah Ta’ala because we are not supposed to know in which state they passed away! That is impossible! But we must expect all this in life and we must not expect children to understand and know the value of pearls and diamonds. We should let them play with their marbles. At this age, they will not understand more than that. Let them consider the marbles to be pearl and diamond. Moreover, how can we allow ourselves to follow this naïve, whose Imaan is in danger because according to his own reasoning, one is not supposed to know in which state he will die!

This erroneous statement is not a simple statement. It is a statement that is attacking the foundation of Islam and it is preparing the ground for the detractors to reject Hadith with the excuses that "We are not supposed to know in what state the narrators passed away. Therefore, we cannot qualify any Hadith as authentic" because normally we accept a Hadith on the trust of the person who reported it. If we do not know the state of his death, how can we trust him? Thus, our naïve and stubborn preachers are giving the opportunity to demolish the basis of Islam. We know that they did not know the implication of this erroneous statement. But now, after knowing this, they must be quite responsible to retract without delay and without trying to import answers from abroad as usual.

[English version of "Démolition de Deen par banne prédicateurs ducal" – Al Jamiat – Vol. 4 No.6]