Al-Najd - What is it?

[Sa1eem]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

@psyah

I would doubt it as true and probably wager my life on it being untrue ... However, I could not lay claim to it actually being a fabrication until I prove it. The only way to prove it as authentic or inauthentic is to trace its transmission.

Chalo ... you win ... aap mahan ho. You have bigger common sense than I could ever think of. :)

For me, I would say that A prophet (AS) may tell about future, but people (be they Sahaba) could not have asked something from Prophet (SAW) that did not existed at the time.

Worse is that, from wording 'our Najd', it is obvious that Najd at that time was under Muslim rule with Muslim population, and that is the reason they asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for 'our Najd'.

My common sense tells me that they could not have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for a place that was under the rule of Kuffar and people (if there were), they were non-Muslim too ... still call that land as our land.

Can you tell me according to your common sense and religious belief, that Sahabas could have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for a land that was under Kuffars and where only Kuffar used to live, calling that land as our land?

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

@Sa1eem

Chalo ... you win ... aap mahan ho. You have bigger common sense than I could ever think of. :)

For me, I would say that A prophet (AS) may tell about future, but people (be they Sahaba) could not have asked something from Prophet (SAW) that did not existed at the time.

Worse is that, from wording 'our Najd', it is obvious that Najd at that time was under Muslim rule with Muslim population, and that is the reason they asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for 'our Najd'.

My common sense tells me that they could not have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for a place that was under the rule of Kuffar and people (if there were), they were non-Muslim too ... still call that land as our land.

Can you tell me according to your common sense and religious belief, that Sahabas could have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for a land that was under Kuffars and where only Kuffar used to live, calling that land as our land?

Peace brother Sa1eem

I was talking about hadith 1 ... Yes it can be argued how can Iraq be shown with the hand? But if that is how it is written down, I'm not going to argue how this and that.

This other hadith of Shaam, Yemen and Najd is a prophetic hadith. None of the areas were in complete Muslim contol, Yemen was waivering and Najd too. Shaam was so distant and so was Iraq. Yet if I am to entertain your argument for "our Iraq" not being valid then the same argument should be used for "our Yemen" to a lesser extent and "our Shaam" to an equal extent. Yet we know there were Shabah present in the Hijaz who were from all of these areas. All you need is two or more of them to render the phrase "our country" ...

The term Iraq possibly originated from a variant of Uruk one of the major cities in the south of the region. The term Syria was wrongly applied by the Greeks on the region that bordered Assyria which was mostly current day mid and north Iraq and Eastern Turkey. This happened in the time of the Seleucids. Later after Christ (AS) the area known by the Arabs as Faris was ruled by the Sassinids and their main rivals were the Byzantines, known as Rum. Surah Rum was revealed when the Sassinids made a huge blow to the Byzantine territory. This is around 620s ..

Linguistically in Arabic 'Iraq means well watered and that follows the Greek word Mesopotamia (between two rivers) ... Tigris and Euphrates flood plains, which are low lying land and green on maps are flanked by the Zagros mountain range in the north east, the plataeu of the Najd in the south. Iraq as a term was around at least from the 6th century ... So it is possible for someone to use that word and say "our Iraq" ... However, I agree with you that Najd and Iraq are two different places.

I would not include Iraq into what we know as Shaam. Shaam durng this time of the hadith was very much in the control of the Byzantines, yet we allow the term "our Shaam" to remain. This is Levant area ... Geographically it is different to the East and that is why it was harder to hold for the Sassinids. Ironically Syria may sound like Assyria but it has little to do with the hub of the Assyrian empire which was always in Iraq.

Now do you understand why I am forced to conclude that Iraq may be considered a place of fitnah but not the same one as the Najd?

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

@Sa1eem

But there is one way I can retract my conclusion of Iraq being a place of the horn of Satan is for someone to show me that the ahadith pertaining to it actually were fabricated or manipulated because had that been the case the evidence would easily be obtainable because such a fabrication should not be older than 150 to 100 years old.

[Ali_Syed]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

Iraq is mentioned here: Masnad Hanbal hadith 6302

Musnad-e-ahmad bin hanbal : Rashid Hanfi : Free Download, Borrow, and...

[Das_Reich]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

So what is the conclusion? Can someone summarize

Is it centrally Arabia or iraq which is cursed or blessed?

[Sa1eem]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

So what is the conclusion? Can someone summarize

Is it centrally Arabia or iraq which is cursed or blessed?

Bhai, aap sawal kartay hou. Why don't you use intelligence that Allah gave you and come to the conclusion, leaving others to rest peacefully. ? :)

Chalo, since you started the question, I feel obliged to add and answer brother Psyah posts. :)

[Sa1eem]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

@psyah

Peace brother Sa1eem

I was talking about hadith 1 … Yes it can be argued how can Iraq be shown with the hand? But if that is how it is written down, I’m not going to argue how this and that.

This other hadith of Shaam, Yemen and Najd is a prophetic hadith. None of the areas were in complete Muslim contol, Yemen was waivering and Najd too. Shaam was so distant and so was Iraq. Yet if I am to entertain your argument for “our Iraq” not being valid then the same argument should be used for “our Yemen” to a lesser extent and “our Shaam” to an equal extent. Yet we know there were Shabah present in the Hijaz who were from all of these areas. All you need is two or more of them to render the phrase “our country” …

The term Iraq possibly originated from a variant of Uruk one of the major cities in the south of the region. The term Syria was wrongly applied by the Greeks on the region that bordered Assyria which was mostly current day mid and north Iraq and Eastern Turkey. This happened in the time of the Seleucids. Later after Christ (AS) the area known by the Arabs as Faris was ruled by the Sassinids and their main rivals were the Byzantines, known as Rum. Surah Rum was revealed when the Sassinids made a huge blow to the Byzantine territory. This is around 620s ..

Linguistically in Arabic 'Iraq means well watered and that follows the Greek word Mesopotamia (between two rivers) … Tigris and Euphrates flood plains, which are low lying land and green on maps are flanked by the Zagros mountain range in the north east, the plataeu of the Najd in the south. Iraq as a term was around at least from the 6th century … So it is possible for someone to use that word and say “our Iraq” … However, I agree with you that Najd and Iraq are two different places.

I would not include Iraq into what we know as Shaam. Shaam durng this time of the hadith was very much in the control of the Byzantines, yet we allow the term “our Shaam” to remain. This is Levant area … Geographically it is different to the East and that is why it was harder to hold for the Sassinids. Ironically Syria may sound like Assyria but it has little to do with the hub of the Assyrian empire which was always in Iraq.

Now do you understand why I am forced to conclude that Iraq may be considered a place of fitnah but not the same one as the Najd?

Brother, I asked you simple question (that would have given answer to your above question too). That is:

**Is it allowed for Muslims (from where ever they came from) to pray for the area they came from, even if that area is Darul-Kufr and people living there are non-Muslims? … **

[Note: There is no evidence that anyone from present day Iraq, that was part of Persian empire, became Muslim during the time of Prophet (SAW). Only person from Persian empire who became Muslim was Salman Farsi (RA), and he was from present day South-western Iran, south of Khuzestan-Iran)

Anyhow, I am asking you because, even if we take your argument correct that some people from Iraq who became Muslim may have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for Iraq, than it is obvious that since Iraq at that time was non-Muslim area (Dar-ul-Kufr) and people living there were mostly Zoroastrians, living under Persian empire, than how can these people ask Prophet (SAW) to pray for that ‘Dar-ul-Kufr’ area and kuffar of that area.

If it was not people who asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for ‘our Najd’ than situation could have been different, as being Prophet (AS) of Allah, Prophet (SAW) could have prayed for an area that was not Muslim at the time, and we could have assumed that he had knowledge about that area from Gaib (given to him by Allah, that other would not know), but here situation is that people asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for Najd (our Najd), and since no one other than Prophet (SAW) used to get wahi, people could not have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for Najd that was Darul-Kufur and where Kafirs used to live at the time (Zoroastrians).

So, when Najd (actually, our Najd … mera Najd) was present at the time people asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for that area (our Najd), referring that area as ‘our Najd’ (Mera-Najd), than I believe any person who does not fall amongst people mentioned in ayah 9:22 … that is, deaf and dumb who do not use reason … would surely going to believe without doubt that people referred to area by saying ‘our Najd’ cannot be any area other than ‘Najd’ that is even present today in Saudi Arabia.

[Please read ayah 8:22 … Inna sharra addawabbi AAindaAllahi assummu albukmu allatheena layaAAqiloon

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL: Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb who do not use reason.]

Second thing is that, if Iraq was mentioned (that I do not believe at all), then how can you say that it was Iraq (of present day) and not Uraq in Pakistan (near Quetta), where mostly Pakhtuns are living since 1000s of years?

As for your argument about Shaam, than I have answered that question earlier, that is, Arabia north of Hijaz was known as Shaam, and when Prophet (SAW) prayed for Shaam, he (SAW) prayed for these areas, that was north of Hijaz and under Muslim rule. On the other hand, even if Prophet (SAW) prayed for an area that at the time was not under Muslim rule, than also that can be accepted, as Prophet (SAW) might be praying from his knowledge of Gaib, about future of that area … though, I believe, that is not the case and when Prophet (SAW) prayed for Shaam, he only prayed for the area that was Dar-ul-Islam at the time (immediate north of Hijaz).

As for area that were under Muslim rule during Prophet (SAW) time, it was whole of Arabian Peninsula that includes all of Najd and Yemen. Even after passing of Prophet (SAW), most of Najd stayed under Muslim rule, though some areas revolted (according to history) against Khalafat and Abu Bakr (RA) sent army to subdue them. Nevertheless, most areas stayed Muslim and did not challenged Islam. Since hadith is from time of Prophet (SAW), you cannot say that people asking Prophet (SAW) to pray for ‘our Najd’ was wrong, as they were only asking Prophet (SAW) to pray for area that was under Muslim rule (Dar-ul-Islam at the time), where mostly Muslims used to live.

I believe, once Muslim rule got extended to include Persian and Roman Empire, and since most of southern Iraq got inhabited by Arabs of Arabian Peninsula, many hadith got concocted by people (as they concocted 1000s of hadiths) not even thinking that all the areas that was then called Iraq came under Muslim rule after the passing of Prophet (SAW).

@psyah

@Sa1eem](http://www.paklinks.com/gs/members/sa1eem/)

But there is one way I can retract my conclusion of Iraq being a place of the horn of Satan is for someone to show me that the ahadith pertaining to it actually were fabricated or manipulated because had that been the case the evidence would easily be obtainable because such a fabrication should not be older than 150 to 100 years old.

You have given a good challenge, that if I want to claim that particular hadith is wrong or concocted, than I should prove that the hadith was not there 150 years ago. I am not fond of hujjat and I believe you know that I discard hadith that seems illogical (I do not believe on anything as deaf and dumb, without using reason … because I would not like to be worst of creation, according to Ayah 8:22), so it does not matter when the hadith is written, as long as they are illogical and senseless, for me, they are concocted … something I believe you may not agree.

Anyhow, I do not want you to retract your conclusion, as that would be asking too much. … What I would do is, I would like you to walk the talk or comment and discuss on what you believe. I am quoting one hadith from old books (Sunnan abu Dawud), that obviously is at least over thousand years old (much older than 100 or 150 years) and I believe you must have no problem believing them. So, please reply my question with reference to that hadith (I can bring 100s of such hadith, so one I am quoting is not something uncommon):

Dawud :: Book 38 : Hadith 4396
Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: A thief was brought to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him). He said: Kill him. The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah! Then he said: Cut off his hand. So his (right) hand was cut off. He was brought a second time and he said: Kill him. The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah! Then he said: Cut off his foot.
So his (left) foot was cut off.
He was brought a third time and he said: Kill him.
The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah!
So he said: Cut off his hand. (So his (left) hand was cut off.)
He was brought a fourth time and he said: Kill him.
The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah!
So he said: Cut off his foot. So his (right) foot was cut off.
He was brought a fifth time and he said: Kill him.
So we took him away and killed him. We then dragged him and cast him into a well and threw stones over him.

Now, please do not shy away, but do comment and answer my query (what you think about the hadith and what it mentions?):

For me, this hadith is concocted, as I fear associating such hadith to Prophet (SAW), because to me, Hadith is absurd, and I could not expect such ruling from Prophet (SAW). Obviously, for you, if hadith is more than 150 years old than it must be true … hence:

If you believe that above hadith is true, than please let us know what you think about what above hadith says? … Let me elaborate:

From above hadith: Prophet (SAW) used to give wrong verdict (judgement) when judging a crime (stoning for theft instead of cutting of hand) and people used to remind Prophet (SAW) that it is theft and that he (SAW) is giving wrong verdict, than Prophet (SAW) used to correct his verdict regarding that crime, from stoning to cutting of hand, as mentioned in hadith … Well, even feet and at last his judgment that culprit should be stoned even when his crime was theft got obeyed. Most surprising is the that thief who lost his both hands and both feet, was so adamant that he still managed to steal … shows that cutting hands and feet is no deterrent, and claim that it causes deterrent in society, that reduces such crimes, becomes invalid.

Most surprising thing is that, 4 times Prophet (SAW) gave wrong judgment and corrected himself when people reminded him that he is giving wrong judgment … and 5[SUP]th[/SUP] time when Prophet (SAW) gave wrong judgment, stoning for theft when it should have been cutting of hand (or feet, that at time did not existed), people also gave up and stoned the thief to death because thief was left with no limbs.

Further, according to Islam, if a criminal get punished for the crime, and that punishment is death, than Muslims are not supposed to mutilate his dead body, rather assume that Allah will forgive him, and thus his Namaz-e-Janaza and proper burial becomes duty of Muslim, but this unfortunate thief was thrown in well. How sad.

Now, I do not know or can say that if it is crime itself (murder) to kill someone who only did theft, or it is valid punishment for thief in Islam. But from hadith, it seems that is what happened, that a person was brutally killed (stoned to death) for theft on order of … (if one accept the hadith).

For me, I get away by saying that this whole hadith is concocted, as it is illogical and senseless hadith, and one cannot expect Prophet (SAW) making such mistakes, giving punishment of stoning when person only stole. But, what you think?

By the way, can you clear my confusion and tell me how long Prophet (SAW) stayed in Mecca and how long in Madina?

What I learned till now is that, Prophet (SAW) stayed in Mecca 53 years of his life and 10 years in Madina. … Though after getting wahi first time and declaration of Prophet-hood … initially Prophet (SAW) declared Prophet-hood to his close ones … still, Quran was revealed to Prophet (SAW) for 13 years in Mecca… and 10 years in Madina.

This is the first time (from hadith) I learned that Prophet (SAW) stayed in Mecca 10 years and in Madina 10 years. … Nice hadith, isn’t it? And it is hadith from most respectable hadith book, Bukhari Shareef. Narrators are also most respected, one being Aisha (RA) and other being ibn Abbas (RA).

Bukhari :: Book 6 :: Volume 61 :: Hadith 502
Narrated 'Aisha and Ibn 'Abbas:
The Prophet remained in Mecca for ten years, during which the Qur’an used to be revealed to him; and he stayed in Medina for ten years.

Well, there are many hadith that give me shiver associating them to Prophet (SAW), as to me it seems obvious lies or illogical in every respect, but then … I am not blind followers (accept like deaf and dumb, without reasoning) like some, who accept things but do not understand or think, so I accept them as concocted hadith. Here is one hadith from Bukhari:

Can you put your money where your belief is?

Would you invest in hospital (abortion centre) proposal, where according to proposal, all known black snakes would be kept, and would be shown to any women who would like to get abortion, hoping that looking at snake would cause her to abort? … No operation, no illegal abortion, no law breaking activity, as looking at snake cannot be called illegal or abortion in this way be classified as crime. Here are several hadith to back the business proposal:

Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 518
Narrated Ibn Umar: He heard the Prophet delivering a sermon on the pulpit saying, “Kill snakes and kill Dhu-at-Tufyatain (i.e. a snake with two white lines on its back) and ALBATROSS (i.e. a snake with short or mutilated tail) for they destroy the sight of one’s eyes and bring about abortion.” …

Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 527
Narrated 'Aisha: Prophet said, “Kill the snake with two white lines on its back, for it blinds the on-looker and causes abortion.”

Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 528
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet ordered that a short-tailed or mutilated-tailed snake (i.e. Abtar) should be killed, for it blinds the on-looker and causes abortion."
**
Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 529**
Narrated Abu Mulaika:
Ibn Umar used to kill snakes, but afterwards he forbade their killing and said, "Once the Prophet pulled down a wall and saw a cast-off skin of a snake in it. He said, 'Look for the snake. 'They found it and the Prophet said, “Kill it.” For this reason I used to kill snakes. Later on I met Abu Lubaba who told me the Prophet said, ‘Do not kill snakes except the short-tailed or mutilated-tailed snake with two white lines on its back, for it causes abortion and makes one blind. So kill it.’ "

Sahi Muslim :: Book 26 : Hadith 5545
Ibn 'Umar reported: I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanding the killing of dogs and the killing of the striped and the short-tailed snakes, for both of them affect the eyesight adversely and cause miscarriage. …

Muslim :: Book 26 : Hadith 5550
Nafi’ reported that Abu Lubaba b. 'Abd al-Mundhir al-Ansari (first) lived in Quba. He then shifted to Medina and as he was in the company of 'Abdullah b. 'Umar opening a window for him, he suddenly saw a snake in the house. They (the inmates of the house) attempted to kill that. Thereupon Abu Lubaba said: They had been forbidden to make an attempt to kill house snakes and they had been commanded to kill the snakes having small tails, small snakes and those having streaks over them, and it was said: Both of them affect the eyes and cause miscarriage to women.

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

Brother, I asked you simple question (that would have given answer to your above question too). That is:

*Is it allowed for Muslims (from where ever they came from) to pray for the area they came from, even if that area is Darul-Kufr and people living there are non-Muslims? … *

[Note: There is no evidence that anyone from present day Iraq, that was part of Persian empire, became Muslim during the time of Prophet (SAW). Only person from Persian empire who became Muslim was Salman Farsi (RA), and he was from present day South-western Iran, south of Khuzestan-Iran)

Anyhow, I am asking you because, even if we take your argument correct that some people from Iraq who became Muslim may have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for Iraq, than it is obvious that since Iraq at that time was non-Muslim area (Dar-ul-Kufr) and people living there were mostly Zoroastrians, living under Persian empire, than how can these people ask Prophet (SAW) to pray for that ‘Dar-ul-Kufr’ area and kuffar of that area.

If it was not people who asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for ‘our Najd’ than situation could have been different, as being Prophet (AS) of Allah, Prophet (SAW) could have prayed for an area that was not Muslim at the time, and we could have assumed that he had knowledge about that area from Gaib (given to him by Allah, that other would not know), but here situation is that people asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for Najd (our Najd), and since no one other than Prophet (SAW) used to get wahi, people could not have asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for Najd that was Darul-Kufur and where Kafirs used to live at the time (Zoroastrians).

So, when Najd (actually, our Najd … mera Najd) was present at the time people asked Prophet (SAW) to pray for that area (our Najd), referring that area as ‘our Najd’ (Mera-Najd), than I believe any person who does not fall amongst people mentioned in ayah 9:22 … that is, deaf and dumb who do not use reason … would surely going to believe without doubt that people referred to area by saying ‘our Najd’ cannot be any area other than ‘Najd’ that is even present today in Saudi Arabia.

[Please read ayah 8:22 … Inna sharra addawabbi AAindaAllahi assummu albukmu allatheena layaAAqiloon

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL: Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb who do not use reason.]

Second thing is that, if Iraq was mentioned (that I do not believe at all), then how can you say that it was Iraq (of present day) and not Uraq in Pakistan (near Quetta), where mostly Pakhtuns are living since 1000s of years?

As for your argument about Shaam, than I have answered that question earlier, that is, Arabia north of Hijaz was known as Shaam, and when Prophet (SAW) prayed for Shaam, he (SAW) prayed for these areas, that was north of Hijaz and under Muslim rule. On the other hand, even if Prophet (SAW) prayed for an area that at the time was not under Muslim rule, than also that can be accepted, as Prophet (SAW) might be praying from his knowledge of Gaib, about future of that area ... though, I believe, that is not the case and when Prophet (SAW) prayed for Shaam, he only prayed for the area that was Dar-ul-Islam at the time (immediate north of Hijaz).

As for area that were under Muslim rule during Prophet (SAW) time, it was whole of Arabian Peninsula that includes all of Najd and Yemen. Even after passing of Prophet (SAW), most of Najd stayed under Muslim rule, though some areas revolted (according to history) against Khalafat and Abu Bakr (RA) sent army to subdue them. Nevertheless, most areas stayed Muslim and did not challenged Islam. Since hadith is from time of Prophet (SAW), you cannot say that people asking Prophet (SAW) to pray for ‘our Najd’ was wrong, as they were only asking Prophet (SAW) to pray for area that was under Muslim rule (Dar-ul-Islam at the time), where mostly Muslims used to live.

I believe, once Muslim rule got extended to include Persian and Roman Empire, and since most of southern Iraq got inhabited by Arabs of Arabian Peninsula, many hadith got concocted by people (as they concocted 1000s of hadiths) not even thinking that all the areas that was then called Iraq came under Muslim rule after the passing of Prophet (SAW).

You have given a good challenge, that if I want to claim that particular hadith is wrong or concocted, than I should prove that the hadith was not there 150 years ago. I am not fond of hujjat and I believe you know that I discard hadith that seems illogical (I do not believe on anything as deaf and dumb, without using reason … because I would not like to be worst of creation, according to Ayah 8:22), so it does not matter when the hadith is written, as long as they are illogical and senseless, for me, they are concocted … something I believe you may not agree.

Anyhow, I do not want you to retract your conclusion, as that would be asking too much. :) … What I would do is, I would like you to walk the talk or comment and discuss on what you believe. I am quoting one hadith from old books (Sunnan abu Dawud), that obviously is at least over thousand years old (much older than 100 or 150 years) and I believe you must have no problem believing them. So, please reply my question with reference to that hadith (I can bring 100s of such hadith, so one I am quoting is not something uncommon):

Dawud :: Book 38 : Hadith 4396 Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: A thief was brought to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him). He said: Kill him. The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah! Then he said: Cut off his hand. So his (right) hand was cut off. He was brought a second time and he said: Kill him. The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah! Then he said: Cut off his foot. So his (left) foot was cut off. He was brought a third time and he said: Kill him. The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah! So he said: Cut off his hand. (So his (left) hand was cut off.) He was brought a fourth time and he said: Kill him. The people said: He has committed theft, Apostle of Allah! So he said: Cut off his foot. So his (right) foot was cut off. He was brought a fifth time and he said: Kill him. So we took him away and killed him. We then dragged him and cast him into a well and threw stones over him.

Now, please do not shy away, but do comment and answer my query (what you think about the hadith and what it mentions?):

For me, this hadith is concocted, as I fear associating such hadith to Prophet (SAW), because to me, Hadith is absurd, and I could not expect such ruling from Prophet (SAW). Obviously, for you, if hadith is more than 150 years old than it must be true … hence:

If you believe that above hadith is true, than please let us know what you think about what above hadith says? … Let me elaborate:

From above hadith: Prophet (SAW) used to give wrong verdict (judgement) when judging a crime (stoning for theft instead of cutting of hand) and people used to remind Prophet (SAW) that it is theft and that he (SAW) is giving wrong verdict, than Prophet (SAW) used to correct his verdict regarding that crime, from stoning to cutting of hand, as mentioned in hadith … Well, even feet and at last his judgment that culprit should be stoned even when his crime was theft got obeyed. Most surprising is the that thief who lost his both hands and both feet, was so adamant that he still managed to steal … shows that cutting hands and feet is no deterrent, and claim that it causes deterrent in society, that reduces such crimes, becomes invalid.

Most surprising thing is that, 4 times Prophet (SAW) gave wrong judgment and corrected himself when people reminded him that he is giving wrong judgment … and 5[SUP]th[/SUP] time when Prophet (SAW) gave wrong judgment, stoning for theft when it should have been cutting of hand (or feet, that at time did not existed), people also gave up and stoned the thief to death because thief was left with no limbs.

Further, according to Islam, if a criminal get punished for the crime, and that punishment is death, than Muslims are not supposed to mutilate his dead body, rather assume that Allah will forgive him, and thus his Namaz-e-Janaza and proper burial becomes duty of Muslim, but this unfortunate thief was thrown in well. How sad.

Now, I do not know or can say that if it is crime itself (murder) to kill someone who only did theft, or it is valid punishment for thief in Islam. But from hadith, it seems that is what happened, that a person was brutally killed (stoned to death) for theft on order of ... (if one accept the hadith).

For me, I get away by saying that this whole hadith is concocted, as it is illogical and senseless hadith, and one cannot expect Prophet (SAW) making such mistakes, giving punishment of stoning when person only stole. But, what you think?

By the way, can you clear my confusion and tell me how long Prophet (SAW) stayed in Mecca and how long in Madina?

What I learned till now is that, Prophet (SAW) stayed in Mecca 53 years of his life and 10 years in Madina. … Though after getting wahi first time and declaration of Prophet-hood ... initially Prophet (SAW) declared Prophet-hood to his close ones .... still, Quran was revealed to Prophet (SAW) for 13 years in Mecca... and 10 years in Madina.

This is the first time (from hadith) I learned that Prophet (SAW) stayed in Mecca 10 years and in Madina 10 years. … Nice hadith, isn’t it? And it is hadith from most respectable hadith book, Bukhari Shareef. Narrators are also most respected, one being Aisha (RA) and other being ibn Abbas (RA).

Bukhari :: Book 6 :: Volume 61 :: Hadith 502 Narrated 'Aisha and Ibn 'Abbas: The Prophet remained in Mecca for ten years, during which the Qur'an used to be revealed to him; and he stayed in Medina for ten years.

Well, there are many hadith that give me shiver associating them to Prophet (SAW), as to me it seems obvious lies or illogical in every respect, but then … I am not blind followers (accept like deaf and dumb, without reasoning) like some, who accept things but do not understand or think, so I accept them as concocted hadith. Here is one hadith from Bukhari:

Can you put your money where your belief is?

Would you invest in hospital (abortion centre) proposal, where according to proposal, all known black snakes would be kept, and would be shown to any women who would like to get abortion, hoping that looking at snake would cause her to abort? … No operation, no illegal abortion, no law breaking activity, as looking at snake cannot be called illegal or abortion in this way be classified as crime. Here are several hadith to back the business proposal:

Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 518 Narrated Ibn Umar: He heard the Prophet delivering a sermon on the pulpit saying, "Kill snakes and kill Dhu-at-Tufyatain (i.e. a snake with two white lines on its back) and ALBATROSS (i.e. a snake with short or mutilated tail) for they destroy the sight of one's eyes and bring about abortion." ...

Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 527 Narrated 'Aisha: Prophet said, "Kill the snake with two white lines on its back, for it blinds the on-looker and causes abortion."

Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 528 Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet ordered that a short-tailed or mutilated-tailed snake (i.e. Abtar) should be killed, for it blinds the on-looker and causes abortion." ** Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 54 :: Hadith 529** Narrated Abu Mulaika: Ibn Umar used to kill snakes, but afterwards he forbade their killing and said, "Once the Prophet pulled down a wall and saw a cast-off skin of a snake in it. He said, 'Look for the snake. 'They found it and the Prophet said, "Kill it." For this reason I used to kill snakes. Later on I met Abu Lubaba who told me the Prophet said, 'Do not kill snakes except the short-tailed or mutilated-tailed snake with two white lines on its back, for it causes abortion and makes one blind. So kill it.' "

Sahi Muslim :: Book 26 : Hadith 5545 Ibn 'Umar reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanding the killing of dogs and the killing of the striped and the short-tailed snakes, for both of them affect the eyesight adversely and cause miscarriage. …

Muslim :: Book 26 : Hadith 5550 Nafi' reported that Abu Lubaba b. 'Abd al-Mundhir al-Ansari (first) lived in Quba. He then shifted to Medina and as he was in the company of 'Abdullah b. 'Umar opening a window for him, he suddenly saw a snake in the house. They (the inmates of the house) attempted to kill that. Thereupon Abu Lubaba said: They had been forbidden to make an attempt to kill house snakes and they had been commanded to kill the snakes having small tails, small snakes and those having streaks over them, and it was said: Both of them affect the eyes and cause miscarriage to women.

Peace brother Sa1eem

The difference between you and I is ... You read a hadith and question it using your own intellect as an authority, but without trying to reconcile it first.

I always doubt, even my own understanding because I don't believe the scholars could have got it wrong. I would question more than the sense that you are questioning ... If I didn't understand the hadith I would not say "oh this must be wrong" because that would blindly believing my own inclination ...I would question:

a) The accuracy in the translation - so before ruling it out I would look to the Arabic.
b) I would consider the specific ruling versus the general ruling
c) I would consider context ... May be it would make sense given a particular setting.
d) I would seek out commentaries by scholars through time
e) I would seek out the chain of transmission

If my final conclusion was that I still can't make sense of it in my mind, but the evidence of its transmission is strong ... I would disband any understanding I have regarding it and still insist it is authentic ... Because we cannot question the very science that is used to bring us sayings of RasoolAllah (SAW), but we can say "I don't understand it" by using other ahadith it can be contextualised and that is the limit of what we are allowed to do with it.

By saying it is false we are giving a lie to all those people in the chain and by saying that we are compromising the whole hadith tradition.

[PyariCgudia]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

Again, I'm not sure why anyone is debating this.

It's obvious. Wahab, Saud, ISIS, Al Qaeda,and all these groups emanate from these areas and they're clearly evil. It's a no-brainer. These are your two horns, so to speak. And the end of times is near. Leaving this aside, many of Muhammad's SAW's predictions are now coming true to the point that it is scary. And even if you don't believe these things, just seeing the stress the middle east is under, it's also a no brainer that things will continue to spiral out of control. Things are not going to be getting better any time soon. War begets war. Iraq and Syria - now their borders no longer exist. It's complete chaos.

Inshallah, things may get better one day, but so far, the future is pretty bleak. And so for people to start taking things seriously and start praying and atoning is not a bad idea.

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

^ Peace Sister PCG

That may be the case ... But there is a subtlety here ... People are taking the "horn of the devil" to mean much fighting and killing. However, both Syria and Yemen qualify in that and in fact after the initial bloodshed in Najd it has become relatively kill free. It must mean something else. What makes Syria and Yemen different to Najd? And what does Iraq and Najd share in that both Syria and Yemen do not really share in?

The answer to these questions will enable us to work out (deduce) what is "horn of Satan" in this context.

[vroom]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

@psyah

^ Peace Sister PCG

That may be the case ... But there is a subtlety here ... People are taking the "horn of the devil" to mean much fighting and killing. However, both Syria and Yemen qualify in that and in fact after the initial bloodshed in Najd it has become relatively kill free. It must mean something else. What makes Syria and Yemen different to Najd? And what does Iraq and Najd share in that both Syria and Yemen do not really share in?

The answer to these questions will enable us to work out (deduce) what is "horn of Satan" in this context.

Salam, Just an idea for your research. You might have noticed I have referred to some people as Najdis. In order to do that, qualify my usage of the term, I would defend my usage of the term with its link to dhul khuwaysra - the najdi - who disrespected the Prophet SallAllahu Alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallam as well the other Hadiths. The Hadith on dhul khuwaysra mentions ''from his loins'' and this is just one pointer. Another point from a Hadith in the article i posted earlier was harshness and sternness. Allah is Ar Rahman Ar Raheem to the Believers, Our Prophet SallAllahu Alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallam is Rauf and Raheem for the Believers, najdis are harsh and stern!

So the difference, in my opinion, between Najd and Iraq or Sham or Yemen is Aqeedah
The Aqeedah which emanates from Najd from time to time is unique to Najdis. This time it has engulfed much of the Islamic world population, me and you both know the bidaati [innovated] nature of this aqeedah

Najdis are involved in some of the fighting and much propagation of their beliefs including within the fighting arenas. The saudi regime is najdi, and what it spends money on propagating is from a man who their own literature says is ''shaykh An-Najd'' - it emanated from Najd and it misses the essence of Islam

....

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

@vroom

Salam, Just an idea for your research. You might have noticed I have referred to some people as Najdis. In order to do that, qualify my usage of the term, I would defend my usage of the term with its link to dhul khuwaysra - the najdi - who disrespected the Prophet SallAllahu Alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallam as well the other Hadiths. The Hadith on dhul khuwaysra mentions ‘‘from his loins’’ and this is just one pointer. Another point from a Hadith in the article i posted earlier was harshness and sternness. Allah is Ar Rahman Ar Raheem to the Believers, Our Prophet SallAllahu Alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallam is Rauf and Raheem for the Believers, najdis are harsh and stern!

So the difference, in my opinion, between Najd and Iraq or Sham or Yemen is Aqeedah
The Aqeedah which emanates from Najd from time to time is unique to Najdis. This time it has engulfed much of the Islamic world population, me and you both know the bidaati [innovated] nature of this aqeedah

Najdis are involved in some of the fighting and much propagation of their beliefs including within the fighting arenas. The saudi regime is najdi, and what it spends money on propagating is from a man who their own literature says is ‘‘shaykh An-Najd’’ - it emanated from Najd and it misses the essence of Islam

…

Peace brother vroom

That is a sound enough theory but how does it connect Iraq with Najd?

My theory is that the “horn of devil” is the fitnah that comes from this discovery of Oil and Gas. Studying the reserves around the region it is clear that the majority of the Oil and Gas is literally in Iraq and Najd.

'Aqeedah could still be an important factor … I think you may be right about the belief of the Najdis … But in that case there must also be a problem with the belief in Iraq … Seeing that Iraq is considered the centre of certain Shi’a beliefs it could be that the two horns are the two sides of the coin of deviant belief.

I note many Wahabis criticise Sunnis for being like Shi’a and Shi’a criticise Sunnis for things that Wahabis do … Could it be that these two horns are such groups? In terms of numbers they are about equal too. Now it is natural for me to side with my own belief so it would be unfair for me to make such a statement. However food for thought.

---

Restored attachments:

[Das_Reich]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

^The rise of regional power politics in the various regions of the Islamic heartlands must be borne in mind when we are addressing such hadith.

One only have to look at the glorification of Jerusalem and the start of the dome of rock pilgrimage during the time of ummayyads as a alternate hajj when ibn zubair controlled hijaz.

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

^The rise of regional power politics in the various regions of the Islamic heartlands must be borne in mind when we are addressing such hadith.

One only have to look at the glorification of Jerusalem and the start of the dome of rock pilgrimage during the time of ummayyads as a alternate hajj when ibn zubair controlled hijaz.

The Sunni rulers had no influence over the ahadith tradition of the scholars. The mechanism of authentication ensured that any attempts to do so would quickly be rectified.

It is an assumption to make the connection of power politics with hadith. Yes it was present in various other cultures and in some Islamic verbal traditions and possibly in the less controlled sirat books but not in the hadith. The evidence is to the contrary - i.e. many scholars were persecuted by the ruling elite for not siding with them.

Besides the example you give is about a practice that had developed (any hadith that were fabricated?) ... In that case there was a similar practice that developed regarding Karbala. Hence a practice that forms has nothing whatsoever to do with the hadith connection between Iraq and Najd - both of which are called "place where will emerge the horn of satan"

[Das_Reich]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

[QUOTE]
The Sunni rulers had no influence over the ahadith tradition of the scholars. The mechanism of authentication ensured that any attempts to do so would quickly be rectified.

[/QUOTE]
That is a matter of debate but dogma trumps everything so its useless to do that now

[QUOTE]
It is an assumption to make the connection of power politics with hadith. Yes it was present in various other cultures and in some Islamic verbal traditions and possibly in the less controlled sirat books but not in the hadith. The evidence is to the contrary - i.e. many scholars were persecuted by the ruling elite for not siding with them
[/QUOTE]
.sirat books were less controlled yes and less dependent on perpetuating a particular sectarian agenda ( true for all sides) ...There is no doubt that CERTAIN scholars of ahle sunnah were in the forefront of leading the fight against corrupt kings and sometimes paid the ultimate price for it but that does not mean ALL scholars were incorruptible.

[QUOTE]
Besides the example you give is about a practice that had developed (any hadith that were fabricated?) ... In that case there was a similar practice that developed regarding Karbala. Hence a practice that forms has nothing whatsoever to do with the hadith connection between Iraq and Najd - both of which are called "place where will emerge the horn of satan
[/QUOTE]
Yes ofcourse if residents of Syria/Levant may have embellished or fabricated traditions favoring Shaam or Jerusalam, then it is very likely imami shias fabricated or embellished hadith regarding Karbala or regarding certain personalities.Please explain what you infer from this hadith connecting Iraq with the horns of Satan ?

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

That is a matter of debate but dogma trumps everything so its useless to do that now .sirat books were less controlled yes and less dependent on perpetuating a particular sectarian agenda ( true for all sides) ...There is no doubt that CERTAIN scholars of ahle sunnah were in the forefront of leading the fight against corrupt kings and sometimes paid the ultimate price for it but that does not mean ALL scholars were incorruptible.

Yes ofcourse if residents of Syria/Levant may have embellished or fabricated traditions favoring Shaam or Jerusalam, then it is very likely imami shias fabricated or embellished hadith regarding Karbala or regarding certain personalities.Please explain what you infer from this hadith connecting Iraq with the horns of Satan ?

Das Reich

My point is that there are too many corrective measures in place to allow personal politics enter the field of ahadith. It simply didn't happen or where it was attempted the system normalised itself and pushed out any extraneous material and ideas.
The Islamic tradition is self-corrective.

Well anyway as I said earlier that the horns of Satan cannot be simply lots of hardship and killing because that is happening in both Syria and Yemen. Both of these areas are excluded from the term "horns of Satan" - it must mean one of two things ... that both Iraq and Najd share and are generally not shared by Syria or Yemen.

These are a) Amount of Oil and Gas b) Political power ideologies that are being disseminated under the guise of being Islamic. This way the sectarian movements that use religion as a basis to support their claim of physically taking rule and the proactive use of military in order to gain power I feel are how Iraq and Najd are equivalent. The Wahhabi/Salafi/Jihadists are not the only movement that qualify - there are also Political and Aggressive Shi'a movements that are doing the same. In fact the Shi'a is on the whole a political movement and one based on power rather than faith and its birthplace is arguably Iraq, just like the Wahhabi movement is based in Najd.

If this is not what you think equates these two places then or otherwise you can always doubt the hadith in the first place. The one side argue that the Najd is not the Najd but Iraq and the other side argue Najd is Najd and Iraq is hadith manipulation. People of ahadith will take the proof of both being the places that were not included in the prayer of RasoolAllah (SAW) and the last group is on safest ground because it does not undermine any hadith.

[Das_Reich]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

[QUOTE]
My point is that there are too many corrective measures in place to allow personal politics enter the field of ahadith. It simply didn't happen or where it was attempted the system normalised itself and pushed out any extraneous material and ideas.
The Islamic tradition is self-corrective.
[/QUOTE]
I don't understand the "self correctivness" but its true sunni islam contains influences of Pro-zubayri,pro-Alid and pro-ummayyad elements so COLLECTIVELY yes the mainstream of sunni is in the middle but individual sunni traditions can be VERY partisan depending on who narrates them

[QUOTE]
Well anyway as I said earlier that the horns of Satan cannot be simply lots of hardship and killing because that is happening in both Syria and Yemen. Both of these areas are excluded from the term "horns of Satan" - it must mean one of two things ... that both Iraq and Najd share and are generally not shared by Syria or Yemen.

[QUOTE]
These are a) Amount of Oil and Gas b) Political power ideologies that are being disseminated under the guise of being Islamic
[/QUOTE]
Sir that's happening since day one and ever since the demise of pious caliphate sunni imami shia ismaili etc herediatary kinships have been promoting tyranny in the name of islam allied with the clergy and landlords.How are salafi any different from them ? or "political shia" for that matter ? if anything khariji , salafi and political shia ( khomeni esque ) are arguably more egalitarian since they don't follow the herediatory kinship pattern of earlier muslim dynasties and of present day dictatorships.Although in methods they might still practice the brutality of the monarchic regimes they claim to oppose.Yes they use religion for political power but so do the more 'traditional" muslim states like Saudis , Jordanians, Qajars and Pahlavis of Iran, Nizam of Hyderabad , nawabs of awadh etc

[QUOTE]
This way the sectarian movements that use religion as a basis to support their claim of physically taking rule and the proactive use of military in order to gain power I feel are how Iraq and Najd are equivalent. The Wahhabi/Salafi/Jihadists are not the only movement that qualify - there are also Political and Aggressive Shi'a movements that are doing the same. In fact the Shi'a is on the whole a political movement and one based on power rather than faith and its birthplace is arguably Iraq, just like the Wahhabi movement is based in Najd.
[/QUOTE]
I'm assuming you are referring to recent shia movements in Lebanon, Iraq,syria, iran etc yes they also pursue political ends , take a page out of the fascist playbook and survive by ruthlessly suppressing opposition which has been the modus operendi for all medieval societies esp in the middle east.Why single out Iraq or Najd for that matter ? wasn't the biggest shia movement of all time the Abbassid movement rise from Khurasan ? why isn't khorasaon the horn of the devil then ? And did only "shia" movements arise from Iraq and are all Iraqi uprisings disowned by traditional sunnis ? What about the uprising of Qurras of Kufa against hajjaj b Yusuf ? or Zubayri Iraq fight for survival against ummayyads ? Didn't Kufa have any importance in Sunni islam ?

[QUOTE]
If this is not what you think equates these two places then or otherwise you can always doubt the hadith in the first place. The one side argue that the Najd is not the Najd but Iraq and the other side argue Najd is Najd and Iraq is hadith manipulation. People of ahadith will take the proof of both being the places that were not included in the prayer of RasoolAllah (SAW) and the last group is on safest ground because it does not undermine any hadith
[/QUOTE]
So the "people of hadith" conclude only evil comes from najd and Iraq ? In your concern to NOT undermine one hadith will basically disown the whole contribution Iraq towards Sunni islam ?

[PyariCgudia]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

@psyah

^ Peace Sister PCG

That may be the case ... But there is a subtlety here ... People are taking the "horn of the devil" to mean much fighting and killing. However, both Syria and Yemen qualify in that and in fact after the initial bloodshed in Najd it has become relatively kill free. It must mean something else. What makes Syria and Yemen different to Najd? And what does Iraq and Najd share in that both Syria and Yemen do not really share in?

The answer to these questions will enable us to work out (deduce) what is "horn of Satan" in this context.

In Syria and Yemen the people are being victimized. By a totalitarian ruler in Syria and Yemen I'm not so sure about, but has more to do with a rebel group and a weak government.

The difference between this and the current day "najd" which I argue is more Riyadh area than Iraq is that the people of najd themselves are ***** to begin with. It's not a nice group of people caught up with a dictator they can't get rid of. People of najd themselves are bad. They think Wahhabism is actually Islam and Wahhabism is precisely the harsh tone to practicing Islam that our Prophet SAW took a disliking to.

So it's not about the location of the violence. There is no violence in Riyadh and present day areas of where Sir Wahab and Ibn Saud came from. But they are responsible in creating a network of jihadis and making Islam into some fascist tool with these police of "vice and virtue" that can attack you on the street for the most absurd of reasons. Saudi is a police state and last I recall there is no evidence in any Hadith that Muhammad SAW went patrolling in the neighborhood to make sure every woman's individual hair was tucked away or that a man and woman conversing on the street had their nikkah papers on hand. But that's what these guys have turned Islam info. It's a police state for them which is what Wahhabism is in practice. And this is what the Taliban and other such groups are trying to push with the notable example of how ISIS is running the show now in their controlled areas.

Just because there is violence somewhere doesn't make that place a candidate to be "najd". More than likely, it's a victim of najdi philosophy, and we have seen enough evidence of that in our own Pakistan.

[psyah]

Re: Al-Najd - What is it?

In Syria and Yemen the people are being victimized. By a totalitarian ruler in Syria and Yemen I'm not so sure about, but has more to do with a rebel group and a weak government.

The difference between this and the current day "najd" which I argue is more Riyadh area than Iraq is that the people of najd themselves are ***** to begin with. It's not a nice group of people caught up with a dictator they can't get rid of. People of najd themselves are bad. They think Wahhabism is actually Islam and Wahhabism is precisely the harsh tone to practicing Islam that our Prophet SAW took a disliking to.

So it's not about the location of the violence. There is no violence in Riyadh and present day areas of where Sir Wahab and Ibn Saud came from. But they are responsible in creating a network of jihadis and making Islam into some fascist tool with these police of "vice and virtue" that can attack you on the street for the most absurd of reasons. Saudi is a police state and last I recall there is no evidence in any Hadith that Muhammad SAW went patrolling in the neighborhood to make sure every woman's individual hair was tucked away or that a man and woman conversing on the street had their nikkah papers on hand. But that's what these guys have turned Islam info. It's a police state for them which is what Wahhabism is in practice. And this is what the Taliban and other such groups are trying to push with the notable example of how ISIS is running the show now in their controlled areas.

Just because there is violence somewhere doesn't make that place a candidate to be "najd". More than likely, it's a victim of najdi philosophy, and we have seen enough evidence of that in our own Pakistan.

Well said ... and I echo the points you make in what I have written too. We're on the same page.