Al-Ummi

 _________________________________________________________________________________

Source Note: This is a direct English rendering of an article Al-Ummi, by Mr. Rizwanullah (Scholar, Al Mawrid, Lahore. The content has been translated faithfully into English with grammatical refinement, without interpretive additions.

_________________________________________________________________________________

It is commonly claimed—may Allah be pleased with him—that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was 

unlettered and did not know how to read or write at all. To support this, evidence is presented from the Qur’an and Hadith. For example, the following verse (29:48) is cited:

 وَمَا كُنتَ تَتْلُوا۟ مِن قَبْلِهِۦ مِن كِتَـٰبٍۢ وَلَا تَخُطُّهُۥ بِيَمِينِكَ ۖ إِذًۭا لَّٱرْتَابَ ٱلْمُبْطِلُونَ ٤٨

“Before this, you neither read any book nor wrote it with your hand. Had this been the case, these rejecters could have, however, been inflicted with doubt.”[1]

 However, upon careful reflection, it becomes clear that this verse has no direct connection with the matter under discussion. This is because, in this verse, the continuous past tense is used, which merely negates the habitual practice of the Prophet (pbuh)—namely, that he used to read books or write them down. From this alone, it is evident that no definitive argument can be made regarding whether a person is literate or illiterate. There are many individuals who, due to their intense engagements, never adopt such activities, yet despite this, we observe that they still possess some ability to read and write.

 Thus, the verse does not negate literacy; rather, it only states that the Prophet (pbuh)did not read any book nor write it. The remaining question, then, is: what exactly is meant here by “any book”? One possible answer is that, since the word kitāb (book) appears with a ‘tanwin’ (Nunation: the addition of an ‘n’ sound at the end of a noun) and is preceded by the particle min, it may imply generality—i.e., every kind of book. However, when examined in light of linguistic principles, the indefiniteness (tankeer) of kitāb and the generality (ta’amim) it suggests do not necessarily require that this meaning be taken in an absolute sense. We know that, in certain contexts, such general expressions can still be subject to specification (takhsees) based on contextual clues. To understand this in Urdu terms, it is similar to a situation where two teachers of the same subject, sitting in an educational institution, say to each other: “Today, no student came.” Despite the apparent generality of “no student,” we understand from the context that it may refer only to the students of that particular subject.

In the context of the mentioned verse, two groups are under discussion: one consists of those who already possess a divine Book, and the other of those who have believed in the Qur’an and are now دعوت (inviting others) toward it. From among the first group, those who have refused to accept this دعوت do not regard the Qur’an as the word of God; rather, they consider it to be a personal composition of the Prophet (pbuh). Behind this claim lies a particular doubt, the basis of which is addressed in this verse. That doubt is not that the Prophet (pbuh) knew how to read and write and therefore authored a book like the Qur’an, for there is not even the slightest correlation between a person being literate and producing something like the Qur’an. Rather, their actual suspicion is that the teachings presented in the Qur’an have been borrowed from earlier revealed scriptures and are now being presented under the name of the Qur’an. It is, in fact, this very doubt that the verse seeks to remove. Thus, within this context, despite the presence of indefiniteness (tanwīn) and the particle min, a form of specification (takhsees) is introduced into the word kitāb. Its meaning, therefore, can only be that the Prophet (pbuh) had never read ‘any book’—that is, any such revealed scripture—before this.

 Such specification (takhsees) after generality (ta’ameem) can also be observed in other places in the Qur’an. For example, in another verse, the word ‘ilm (knowledge) appears with tanwīn (indefiniteness) and the particle min, yet it is clear that it does not refer to knowledge in an absolute sense, but rather to a specific نوع (type) of knowledge. In Surah al-An‘ām (6:148) it is said:

 قُلْ هَلْ عِندَكُم مِّنْ عِلْمٍۢ فَتُخْرِجُوهُ لَنَآ ۖ إِن

“Ask them: Do you have any knowledge which you can present before us?”

 If the meaning we have explained for “mā kunta taqrā’u min qablihi min kitāb” وَمَا كُنتَ تَتْلُوا۟ مِن قَبْلِهِۦ is accepted, then the correct placement and implication of “wa lā takhuttuhu biyamīnik” وَلَا تَخُطُّهُۥ بِيَمِينِكَ ۖ  also becomes clear. The purpose of mentioning it here is likewise fully clarified: namely, that there is no basis to claim that the Qur’an is derived from other books and, in that sense, a composition of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh). This is because he neither used to read such books nor write them down and preserve them, such that one could suspect—God forbid—that he compiled the Qur’an with their help.

 Another verse presented in support of the claim that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was unlettered is from Surah al-A‘rāf (7:158):

 فَـَٔامِنُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ ٱلنَّبِىِّ ٱلْأُمِّىِّ ٱلَّذِى يُؤْمِنُ بِٱللَّهِ وَكَلِمَـٰتِهِۦ وَٱتَّبِعُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُونَ ١٥٨

“So, profess faith in God and in His unlettered prophet, His messenger who himself believes in God and His words ^[534] and follows Him that you may be guided. [Some people from among the Israelites shall definitely believe in him.]”

 This is the second verse that is presented as evidence for the Prophet (pbuh) being unlettered; however, we explain in detail that it is not possible, in any way, to derive this meaning from it. However, we explain in detail that deriving this meaning (absolute illiteracy) from this verse is not possible.

 The word “ummī” is derived from “umm” (mother), with the added yā’ indicating relation. In the Arabic language, when used in its purely lexical sense, it refers to a person who cannot read and write. This purely lexical meaning does appear once in the Qur’an as well, but with a clarification—that by such “unlettered” people are actually meant those who have not studied the Book of God. In Surah al-Baqarah, it is stated (2:78):

 وَمِنْهُمْ أُمِّيُّونَ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ ٱلْكِتَـٰبَ إِلَّآ أَمَانِىَّ

“And [these people are ones that] there are also among them the illiterate commoners who consider the Book of God to be only a collection of [their] fancies.”

 Beyond its literal meaning, the Qur’an also uses this word as a designation for the مشرکین عرب (Arab polytheists). The reason for applying it to them is their lack of guidance-based knowledge and, in contrast to the People of the Book, their being without a revealed scripture.[2] If examined carefully, both these aspects can be seen in sequence in the following two verses. In Surah al-Jumu‘ah (2:62):

 هُوَ ٱلَّذِى بَعَثَ فِى ٱلْأُمِّيِّـۧنَ رَسُولًۭا مِّنْهُمْ يَتْلُوا۟ عَلَيْهِمْ ءَايَـٰتِهِۦ وَيُزَكِّيهِمْ وَيُعَلِّمُهُمُ ٱلْكِتَـٰبَ وَٱلْحِكْمَةَ وَإِن كَانُوا۟ مِن قَبْلُ لَفِى ضَلَـٰلٍۢ مُّبِينٍۢ ٢

“It is He who brought forth among the unlettered a Messenger from among them, who recites to them His revelations and purifies them and for this instructs them in the Law and in Wisdom. In reality, these people were in manifest error before this”

 And in Surah Āl ‘Imrān (3:20):

 وَقُل لِّلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْكِتَـٰبَ وَٱلْأُمِّيِّـۧنَ ءَأَسْلَمْتُمْ ۚ

“And ask the People of the Book and these unlettered ^[785] [among the Ishmaelites]: Do you also similarly submit to God?”

 Since the people of Banī Ismā‘īl (the descendants of Ishmael) are part of that same group of Arab polytheists, the application of this term (ummī) to them follows naturally. From here, it also becomes clear that the use of this word for the Prophet (pbuh)is, in reality, due to his being an individual from Banī Ismā‘īl. Accordingly, in the verse under discussion, the word ummī has been used for him with consideration of this very aspect.

 The context of the verse also supports this understanding, because here his دعوت (call/message) is being presented, in his own language, to the people—and especially to the Banī Isrā’īl (Children of Israel). Obviously, in such a context, there would be no wisdom in informing them whether he was literate or illiterate. Rather, the situation demands that their misunderstanding be corrected by clarifying that he has been sent not only for Banī Ismā‘īl but also for Banī Isrā’īl. Furthermore, in connection with his being ummī—that is, an Ismā‘īlite—they are being reminded of a covenant mentioned in their own scripture, in which the words “from among their brethren” are specifically used:

 “I will raise for them a prophet like you from among their brethren, and I will put My words in his mouth.”[3]

 In summary, this verse, too, has no connection with the question of whether the Prophet (pbuh)was literate or not; rather, it simply highlights his belonging to Banī Ismā‘īl. As for the matter of being distant from formal or scriptural learning, it should be remembered that this was not unique to the polytheists or to Banī Ismā‘īl. Rather, according to the general norms of that region and era, even the Jews living there were, more or less, in a similar situation.

 Thirdly, a hadith is also presented in this discussion: when, in the Cave of Ḥirā’, the angel Jibrīl (Gabriel) brought revelation, he said to the Prophet ﷺ: “Iqra’” (Read/Recite). In response, the Prophet (pbuh)said: “Mā ana bi-qāri’” (I cannot read). This statement is often translated as: “I cannot read,” and it is taken as a declaration of illiteracy.

 In Arabic, however, the word qirā’ah (reading) can carry different meanings. At times, it refers to reading by looking at a written text—as is also intended in certain Qur’anic usages, such as in Surah Banī Isrā’īl (17:71) , where people are described as reading their record of deeds:

 يَوْمَ نَدْعُوا۟ كُلَّ أُنَاسٍۭ بِإِمَـٰمِهِمْ ۖ فَمَنْ أُوتِىَ كِتَـٰبَهُۥ بِيَمِينِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ يَقْرَءُونَ كِتَـٰبَهُمْ

“[Even then, they show ingratitude.] They should remember the day when We shall call all the people, including their leaders. Then those who are given their account in their right hands, they will [happily] read it.”

 At times, this verb (qara’a) is also used for reciting purely from memory, without looking at any written text. For example, in the context of the tahajjud prayer, we observe that the same verb is used for reciting the Qur’an. As stated in Surah al-Muzzammil (73:20:

 فَٱقْرَءُوا۟ مَا تَيَسَّرَ مِنَ ٱلْقُرْءَانِ ۚ

“Thus, recite now from this Qur’ān in this prayer as much as you are able to.”

 In the Arabic language, when a verb is accompanied by a preposition (ṣilah), it affects and shapes its meaning. Likewise, when the verb qara’a is used with the preposition ‘alā, its meaning is no longer confined to simply “reading,” but extends to “reciting to others,” i.e., conveying something to an audience. For instance, in Surah ash-Shu‘arā’ (26:198-199):

 وَلَوْ نَزَّلْنَـٰهُ عَلَىٰ بَعْضِ ٱلْأَعْجَمِينَ ١٩٨ فَقَرَأَهُۥ عَلَيْهِم مَّا كَانُوا۟ بِهِۦ مُؤْمِنِينَ ١٩٩

“[They are still not believing] and had We revealed it to a non-Arab, then he would have read it out to them, even then they would not have accepted faith.”

 Now, if we reflect on the aforementioned narration (of the first revelation), we see that after the verb qara’a, there is no mention of any book, nor is there any contextual indicator suggesting such a meaning. Therefore, “reading from a written text” cannot be intended here. Similarly, given that this incident pertains to the very first revelation, there was no prior memorized material either; thus, reciting from memory cannot be meant in this case. Hence, from every angle, it becomes clear that “Iqra’” here actually means “to proclaim” or “to convey the message to others.” The entire narrative described in the report—such as the trembling that overcame the Prophet (pbuh) after bearing this responsibility, his expression of fear for his life, and the reassurance given by Khadījah (رضی اللہ عنہا) that he possessed noble character—all point toward the fact that “Iqra’” here signifies the act of delivering the message to the people.

 One should not raise the objection that, in this narration, the verb qara’a is not explicitly accompanied by the preposition ‘alā. This is because such a preposition can be omitted when contextual clues sufficiently indicate its presence, and this omission is linguistically valid. An example of this can also be seen in the following verse, where the preposition is omitted, yet it is clear to every student of the language that the verb carries the meaning of “reciting to others.” In Surah al-A‘rāf (7:204):

 وَإِذَا قُرِئَ ٱلْقُرْءَانُ فَٱسْتَمِعُوا۟ لَهُۥ وَأَنصِتُوا۟ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ ٢٠٤

“[Therefore,] when this Qur’ān is recited to you, listen attentively to it and remain silent so that you may be shown mercy.”

 In summary, the narration under discussion describes the Prophet’s (pbuh)منصبِ دعوت     (mission of conveying the message), and even in it there is no evidence to support the claim of his illiteracy.

 Fourthly, another narration is also cited in this regard, in which the Prophet (pbuh) described his people as ummī. In that context, it is entirely clear that the word is used in its purely lexical sense. The hadith states:

 “We are an unlettered people; we neither write nor calculate.”[4]

 There is no doubt that here the term is used in its literal sense. However, it should be understood that, in language, a word is sometimes applied to a group without intending every single individual within it; rather, what is meant is a general characterization of the group as a whole. For example, in the following verse, it is said about the Arab polytheists that they were in clear misguidance. Every student can understand that this is a collective comment about the قوم (community), because we know that among them there were also monotheists and followers of the pure monotheistic religion (Din e Hanif) in considerable numbers. As stated in Surah al-Jumu‘ah (62:2):

 وَإِن كَانُوا۟ مِن قَبْلُ لَفِى ضَلَـٰلٍۢ مُّبِينٍۢ ٢

“In reality, these people were in manifest error before this”.

 Similarly, in the cited narration, the general condition of the Arab people is being described.[5] In fact, there is clear evidence that people among them did possess the ability to read and write.[6] Moreover, the Qur’an itself was written down during that period, and instructions were given to record financial transactions. As mentioned in Surah al-Qalam (68:1):

 نٓ وَ الۡقَلَمِ وَ مَا یَسۡطُرُوۡنَ ۙ﴿۱﴾

“This is Sūrah Nūn. The pen bears witness and whatever [the scribes] are writing [from it] 

 And in Surah al-Baqarah (2:282):

 یٰۤاَیُّہَا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡۤا اِذَا تَدَایَنۡتُمۡ بِدَیۡنٍ اِلٰۤی اَجَلٍ مُّسَمًّی فَاکۡتُبُوۡہُ ؕ

“Believers! [Matters of lending and borrowing will, however, continue; so,] when you acquire a loan for a fixed period, record it in writing.”

 The point being made is that, like the other arguments, this narration also does not prove that the Prophet (pbuh) was illiterate. This is because it is a general comment about his قوم (people), and it cannot, under any circumstances, be used as evidence to establish illiteracy for a specific individual.

 Having clarified the correct status of these negative arguments, we now turn to some affirmative considerations:

 First, we know that in Arabia, there were no formal institutional systems of education. However, some individuals did acquire learning on a personal basis. Yet, concerning the Prophet (pbuh), there is not even the slightest historical evidence to suggest that he ever sat before a teacher (zānū-yi talammudh) and formally learned to read and write.[7] At the same time, it is also a reality that some people, even without the help of a teacher, come to acquire basic reading and writing skills. This is often due to natural inclination or practical necessity. If we consider the temperament and disposition of the Prophet (pbuh), along with his daily activities—especially his engagement in trade and the journeys undertaken for livelihood—then reason suggests that he would necessarily have possessed at least some degree of ability in reading and writing.

 Second, the verse “wa mā kunta tatlū min qablihi min kitāb wa lā takhuttuhu biyamīnik” has already been discussed in detail above. If its meaning is that the Prophet (pbuh)did not read any religious book nor write it with his own hand, then it still, in a sense, contains an implicit indication that the capacity to read and write existed. This is similar to how, in Urdu, we might say about a student: “This boy has never been seen reading a book of Islāmiyyāt.” Since the negation here applies to a specific type of book, the more plausible implication is that he can read, but does not read that particular kind of book.

 Third, the previous arguments regarding the Prophet (pbuh)were based on inference and probability. Now, we state explicitly that he did, in fact, know how to read and write. On the occasion of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, when a written agreement was drafted between the Quraysh and the Muslims, the wording included: “This is the agreement concluded by Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah.” The Quraysh objected, saying that if they had accepted him as the Messenger of Allah, there would have been no dispute; rather, he should be written simply as Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh. The Prophet (pbuh) responded: “I am Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh, and I am also the Messenger of Allah.” He then instructed Ali ibn Abi Talib to erase the words “Messenger of Allah” from the document. ‘Ali said: “By God, I will never erase it.” Thereupon, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) took the document into his own hands. The narrator reports that “he did not write well” (wa laysa yuḥsin al-kitābah), which in itself indicates the presence of at least a basic level of writing ability. Furthermore, the narration clearly states that the Prophet (pbuh) then wrote: “This is the agreement concluded by Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh with the Quraysh.”[8]

 After establishing from this report that the Prophet (pbuh) possessed the ability to read and write, one final important point should be understood. The miraculous nature of presenting a discourse like the Qur’an does not lie in the claim that he could not read or write and yet produced such a text. Rather, the true miracle is that he did not study under any teacher, nor did he ever engage in the study of previous religious scriptures, and yet he presented such profound, weighty, and elevated discourse. This, evidently, is clear proof that it is not a product of his own composition, but necessarily the word of God.

________________________________________________________________________________

Arranged by:
Aamir I. Yazdani
MPhil Islamic Thought & Civilization (PAKISTAN)
MSc Irrigation Engineering (UK)

---

[1] English Translation of the Qur’an Verses from Al-Bayan

[2] This acknowledgment of the term indicates that it is not used exclusively for the Arab polytheists, but has also been applied to the Magians of Persia, as mentioned by Al-Tabari.

[3] Book of Deuteronomy (18:18)

[4] Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith no. 1814

[5] This is comparable to how, in Urdu, one might describe an African country as “illiterate” and a European country as “educated,” even though we know that many individuals in both societies are literate

[6] For instance, the agreements of Shi‘b Abī Ṭālib and Ṣulḥ al-Ḥudaybiyah were formally written down. Likewise, among the prisoners of Badr, education itself was accepted as a form of ransom.

[7] For this reason, some scholars have translated al-ummī as “unschooled” rather than strictly “illiterate,” such as Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi in Kanz al-Īmān.

[8] Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith no. 4251

 

The Moment of Reckoning – II (Q/A Session) by Mr. Rizwanullah (Translated in English)

Epigraph: “And seek, through what Allah has given you, the Home of the Hereafter.” — Qur’an 28:77

 Source Note: This is a direct English rendering of a recorded discussion between Mr. Rizwanullah (Scholar, Al Mawrid, Lahore) and young participants. The content has been translated faithfully into English with grammatical refinement, without interpretive additions.

 Question 1: When the Qur’an is studied carefully, one notices that while it repeatedly draws attention toward the final destination — the ultimate stage for which one must prepare — Allah specifically mentions one important reality:

“Your wealth and your children are but a trial (fitnah)…”

The question often arises: if wealth and children are described as a fitnah (trial or test), then why does Islam also describe righteous children and beneficial wealth as sources of ongoing reward (sadaqah jariyah)?

Reply: The likely explanation given is this: wealth and children, by themselves, are not automatically a means of success in the Hereafter. Rather, they are tests that can either draw a person toward Allah or distract him away from Allah. Yet at the same time, we also see that Islam teaches: If your children are righteous, they continue praying for you and become a source of reward for you even after your death. If you spend your wealth in good causes, it continues benefiting you after you leave this world.

 So the real issue is not wealth or children themselves. The issue is how they are used, nurtured, and directed. If a person becomes so absorbed in wealth and family that they distract him from his responsibility toward Allah and the Hereafter, then they become a fitnah in the negative sense — a trial that causes failure.

 But if wealth is earned lawfully, spent righteously, and children are given proper moral and spiritual upbringing, then the very same things become among the greatest assets for the Hereafter.

 So these are not contradictory statements. Rather, they describe two possible outcomes of the same blessings. The Qur’an calls them a test because every test can lead either to success or failure depending on how a person responds to it. So is it really about how these things are used and how children are raised that transforms them into something beneficial, or are these two contradictory ideas?

 When the Qur’an uses the word fitnah regarding these things, fitnah here means a test or trial. Wealth, children, family — all these become a form of examination for human beings. In what sense are they an examination?

 Well, an examination means that a question has been placed before you. You may answer it correctly or incorrectly, but once the question appears, you have undeniably entered the test. Exactly on this principle, your children, your family, and your possessions become a continuous test for you. Now it depends on you how you pass through this examination.

 Both possibilities exist.

 Sometimes these very blessings gradually become a burden and a cause of ruin. How? When a person himself never turns toward faith, never thinks seriously about the Hereafter or preparation for accountability before Allah, and likewise never places those concerns into the minds of his children. Instead, he teaches them only the formulas of worldly success: how to become important, powerful, successful, wealthy, and socially accomplished. Their upbringing revolves entirely around worldly achievement.

 Now the very things that were granted to you as a test become, because of your response to them, not a means of salvation for the Hereafter but a source of loss.

 But now look at the other side. These same blessings can also become provisions for your eternal journey.

 There is a verse in the Qur’an that beautifully expresses this idea. Usually, people place verses like “Hādhā min faḍli Rabbī” (“This is from the فضل of my Lord”) or “Wallāhu khayrur-rāziqīn” (“Allah is the Best of providers”) in their homes. But the verse I have placed in my own home is this: “And seek, through what Allah has given you, the Home of the Hereafter.” — Qur’an 28:77

 Meaning: whatever Allah has granted you here — your family, your children, your home, your resources, your blessings — do not limit their use merely to worldly enjoyment and temporary comfort. Their real purpose is much greater: Use them to build your Hereafter. Take these blessings forward with you into the next life. Purchase the eternal world through them. Allah says: “Seek the Home of the Hereafter through what Allah has given you.” One way is simply to eat, drink, enjoy, and remain absorbed in worldly pleasures. The other way is to use these blessings to construct your eternal life.

 If you look at your family and children with this perspective, then you not only help shape their Hereafter, but after your death, they continue helping shape yours as well. Through righteous upbringing, they pray for you, become a source of ongoing charity (sadaqah jariyah), and continue benefiting you even after you leave this world.

 So yes — that understanding is absolutely correct. ________________________________________________________________________________

Question 2: Some people plan their lives in such a way that during the earlier part of their lives, they commit every kind of wrongdoing. In their businesses, they engage in adulteration or do not work honestly. But their plan is that toward the last part of their lives, they will perform Hajj, all their sins will be forgiven, and after that, they will spend a few years in the remembrance of Allah.

 In this way, according to them, both their Hereafter and their worldly life will be secured. So is this attitude correct?

 Reply: Wrongdoing that happens suddenly — the Qur’an says that some people fall into sin because they are swept away by emotions. If that is the situation, then a return is also possible. A person repents, turns back, and God, too, comes forward and embraces him in His mercy. In fact, if I use the Qur’an’s own words, Allah says that for such a person who returns, it becomes binding upon Him that He will certainly accept his repentance: “Indeed, repentance accepted by Allah is for those who commit wrongdoing out of ignorance…” (Surah An-Nisa 4:17)

 So this is one type of case. A believer generally makes mistakes in this manner. A person who has God in his heart, who has fear of God and concern for the Hereafter, is not free from mistakes altogether. Whenever he becomes involved in sin, it is this kind of lapse: it happens, but then he returns as well.

 But the second case — and I am again referring to the verse from Surah An-Nisa — is of those people who keep on committing wrong after wrong. Notice that the Qur’an used the singular form earlier: “those who commit a wrong” (ya‘malūna as-sū’a) — meaning someone who slips into a sin emotionally. But the second expression is: “they keep committing evil deeds” (ya‘malūna as-sayyi’āt) — mistake upon mistake, sin upon sin, continuously.

 First of all, this attitude itself cannot belong to a true believer. Then it takes on an even uglier form when planning becomes part of it — when a person decides: “I have fallen into continuous wrongdoing, and I will keep doing this. And how long will I continue? Until I become sixty or sixty-five years old.”

 If you reflect carefully, rebellion is now included in his sin. Earlier, he was merely a sinner committing wrongdoing plainly, but now a kind of arrogance has entered into it. What does this attitude really mean in simple words? It means: “I will not return. I will not repent until I reach sixty or sixty-five.” This attitude is actually an act of arrogance and defiance (istikbār).

 About such a person, Allah says: “I will not spare him.” At another place, Allah used a very powerful expression: “Yes indeed, whoever earns evil and his sins surround him completely…”

 Meaning: at first, a person merely commits a sin — that was still manageable. But then his sins begin to encompass him entirely. His mornings and evenings become immersed in wrongdoing. Then a third thing is added: he mentally plans that he has no intention of returning until he has spent a certain age in sin. About such a person, Allah says that he will become deserving of eternal Hell. The Qur’an (2:81).

 And this matter should also be looked at from another angle: where did this person get the certainty that, after spending all those years in sin, he will even get the chance to repent? How did he become so sure? Even rationally, this is a false assumption. There is no logical basis for someone to plan that, “At old age I will repent.” Does anyone know the appointed time of death? One may suddenly be seized.

 The Qur’an gives a very striking picture: “Say: the angel of death who has been appointed over you shall take your soul…” (Surah As-Sajdah 32:11). Notice the imagery. Allah says an angel has been assigned over you. What does “assigned” mean? For example, imagine a government appointing an intelligence officer over someone and instructing him: “Keep observing him. Do not let him out of your sight. The moment we command you, seize him.”

 That is what “appointed” conveys here. Allah says an angel has been assigned, as though he is constantly watching — observing one’s movements, one’s comings and goings — merely waiting for the command from God as to when he should take him away.

 When this is the reality, then how can someone make plans that “I will reform myself in old age”? It is impossible. The call may come at any moment. ___________________________________________________________________________________

 Question 3: When Allah is ultimately going to deal with me individually, and Allah has already declared that in the Hereafter, wealth, children, relatives — none of them will be of any benefit to me — then why should I spend my life with them? Why should I not instead live only for myself?

 Reply: The examination is indeed yours — but the question is: an examination in what?

 It is precisely through these relationships that you are being tested. You are given children, parents, brothers and sisters, a neighborhood, relatives, and loved ones. Then you are placed among them and told: this is how you are supposed to live with them — this is your test.

 If you start thinking, “What concern do I have with these people?” then, in another sense, it means you have walked out of the examination hall altogether. Your test no longer even exists.

 You will notice that in certain mystical or ascetic traditions, this very mindset operates. They say, “If we remain in society, there will always be chances of becoming involved in sin. So let us renounce the world, retreat into forests, sit in caves, keep chanting God’s name, and then neither will we face worldly distractions nor become sinners.”

 But this strategy is actually a strategy of running away from the test. It is just as if someone were told, “You must cross this river, and we will test your swimming ability by seeing whether you can cross it or not.” And he replies: “Well, if I enter the river, there is a possibility that I may drown, so I simply will not enter it at all.”

 That is exactly the situation here. Wherever God sends us in life, it is as though He has already prepared a testing environment and placed us into it. Now your task is not to run away. Your task is to remain within these very circumstances and adopt the correct attitude and conduct. That is your examination: Steadfast and balanced conduct. ___________________________________________________________________________________ 

Question 4: Now we often say that we should prepare for the Hereafter. And you just mentioned that the time of death is unknown. So a common question arises: if a person keeps all his focus only on the fact that “I will die one day and I will be held accountable before God,” then should he concentrate only on worship and righteous deeds?

 What about all the inventions, discoveries, and worldly advancements we see around us? This question comes up very frequently in such discussions.

 So, how much attention should we give to worldly matters, and how should we manage our worldly life in such a way that our journey toward the Hereafter also remains sound while our worldly life too becomes productive and successful?

 Reply: Things have to be managed step by step, side by side. For example, I was just coming from Faisalabad by bus. Now, among the fifty passengers on the bus, not everyone can have the same mindset. Some may be religiously inclined, while others may have no religious inclination at all and may be purely worldly people. But notice something carefully: both of them traveled. In the same way, neither that person’s worldliness nor this person’s religiosity affected the actual journey.

 Exactly on the same principle, when you live in this world, you also have to study worldly sciences and progress in them. These are unavoidable requirements of living in the world. Human needs will exist, and therefore inventions will also exist.

 Now, within this process of living in the world and studying these disciplines and advancing in them, both a religious person and a non-religious person can participate. Both can make the journey, and both are capable of making inventions. There is no issue in that regard.

 In fact, if you need a practical example, then study the earlier Muslim era. The Muslims among us were themselves producing these things and creating this body of knowledge. People from outside the Muslim world were not the ones doing it. So this itself is proof that our method of seeking knowledge makes it possible to do all these things while remaining within religion. None of this is hindered by faith.

 However, I would like to make an overall comment here: despite all this, there still remains a difference. And that difference is this: when you are a religious person, your faith influences your decisions.

 For example, take the case of travel again. Two people may both be traveling, but one person may have one purpose behind the journey, while the other has a completely different purpose. One may be traveling somewhere to serve the religion, while another may leave home in order to go somewhere and commit wrongdoing. The journey is the same, but the moral value changes.

 Likewise, whether you study worldly sciences as a religious person or as a purely worldly person, the rules and mechanics of the sciences themselves will not create any obstacle. What changes is the moral and spiritual value attached to your actions.

 But even here, the important point that should remain before us is this: if at some point you begin to feel that these sciences and disciplines are entangling you to such an extent that your next life — the Hereafter — is disappearing from your sight, then you should not pursue them in that way.

 This is not only the demand of religion; it is also the demand of reason.

 If the price of worldly inventions becomes your Hereafter, then what would religion demand from you? Think about it rationally: between a temporary life of a few days and an eternal life, which one would you prefer? Obviously, the eternal life.

 Religiously as well, the matter is the same. If a situation ever arises where you are forced to choose only one of the two paths and there is no third option available, then as a believer, you should understand that if you personally do not make an invention, the world’s progress will not stop. Many people are already engaged in these fields and are doing excellent work. It is not necessary that I myself must accomplish it.

 But if my Hereafter is being ruined because of it, then I should give greater attention to my Hereafter instead.  _________________________________________________________________________________

Question 5: Please shed some light on this situation: suppose there is a doctor who is also a Muslim, and whose goal is also the Hereafter. Among his fundamental responsibilities here is that he has to take care of a patient, and he has even taken an oath that he will not compromise on the patient’s health.

 Now, if during an operation the time for prayer arrives, and he skips the prayer to continue with the operation, then how should this attitude be viewed?

 Reply: So this is actually his commitment, isn’t it? You are looking at it from one angle as a worldly commitment — that he must care for the patient and look after him. But if you look at it from another perspective, it is actually a demand of his religion as well. It is a religious obligation because of the agreement he has entered into, and even if there were no formal agreement, the patient still has rights over him. The patient is in a vulnerable state, perhaps even dying — how can the doctor become indifferent to him? He has to save him, regardless of whether he formally took an oath or not. And when he performs this duty, he is in fact acting upon his religion.

 Now let us come to the second matter: prayer. Did God make prayer obligatory upon you in such a way that under no circumstances would you ever be given any concession regarding its timing? Or is the matter actually the opposite — that concessions have indeed been given in timing?

 You know that in our religion, prayers can even be combined.

 Now imagine a doctor standing in an operating theater. He has already made an incision in the patient. Obviously, after making the incision, he cannot simply say, “Let me go and offer the prayer right now.” We are talking about situations where major surgeries sometimes continue for four or five hours, and during that time, the doctors cannot even move away from their positions.

 In fact, some time ago, a doctor asked me this very question, and I told him, “First, take care of your patient. God has not imposed such a restriction upon you that even in this circumstance, you must pray exactly at that moment.” Allah has granted concession for such situations. Once you are free, you may combine the prayers and offer them together.

 And this kind of situation is not unprecedented. During the time of the Prophet ﷺ, on the occasion of the Battle of the Trench (Ghazwah al-Khandaq), the Muslims were stationed at the defensive lines and did not even get the opportunity to offer the prayers on time, so they later made them up as missed prayers.

 So the point is this: when you are living in the world and acting according to moral principles, then in reality you are already acting upon religion itself. These responsibilities should not be viewed as something standing in opposition to religion. Rather, they themselves should be understood as commands and demands of religion. _________________________________________________________________________________

“And seek, through what Allah has given you, the Home of the Hereafter.” — Qur’an 28:77

 Source: Mr. Rizwanullah, Scholar Al Mawrid, Lahore 

_________________________________________________________________________________ 

Arranged by:
Aamir I. Yazdani
MPhil Islamic Thought & Civilization (PAKISTAN)
MSc Irrigation Engineering (UK)

The Moment of Reckoning - I by Mr. Rizwanullah (Translated in English)

Epigraph: “And seek, through what Allah has given you, the Home of the Hereafter.” Qur’an 28:77 

 Source Note: This is a direct English rendering of a recorded discussion between Mr. Rizwanullah (Scholar, Al Mawrid, Lahore) and young participants. The content has been translated faithfully into English with grammatical refinement, without interpretive additions.

 The Analogy of Travelling
Upon reflection, travel offers many valuable lessons. One kind of journey is where you simply depart, remain completely unconcerned about what is happening around you, fall asleep, and arrive at your destination. However, if you travel with full awareness and attentiveness, you gain ever-new observations, and your experience increases significantly. 

When a journey begins, and you take your seat, initially, there is a feeling of reassurance and comfort. Your attention is focused on somehow settling into your place and adjusting yourself. The most important thing at that moment seems to be securing a seat. Once you get your place, you attain a little peace and comfort. But as you continue moving forward, and as different stations and destinations pass by, changes also begin to occur in your temperament and state of mind.

 Let me give you a simple example. When we were children and used to travel, at the beginning, there would simply be the usual struggle of settling down in the train and making space for ourselves. Five or ten minutes would pass in that. After that came the stage where we would sit by the window and observe the outside scenery: the trees seeming to move backward, rivers appearing, canals flowing, and flowers passing by. Then, as we neared our destination, before our station arrived, our mother would especially tell us: “Get up and prepare yourselves — the station is about to come.”

 In the light of this, if you reflect carefully, life too is very much like a journey. It also has its stages and stopping points along the way, and then there is a final destination to which everyone must inevitably go, whether they wish to or not. The first stage is childhood and adolescence. Then youth turns into adulthood. After that begins the phase of middle age, then old age, and finally death.

 Childhood
If you observe a child, you will notice that the child lives a completely carefree and contented life. There is neither concern nor thought about the unseen future. The child simply lives in his own world, making decisions according to his own understanding. Whatever is directly before his eyes becomes his focus and center of attention.

 Youth
Then comes the next stage in the journey of life: youth. In youth, passion is stronger, enthusiasm is greater, activity and movement are more intense, and a person becomes involved in countless engagements and pursuits. It is as though he is constantly running forward with excitement overpowering him. In that stage too, true awareness is often absent.

 Middle Age
But when one enters middle age, it feels as though that earlier intensity and passion begin to soften. Emotions become more balanced. The passions and ambitions that once burned strongly begin to settle, while maturity and awareness increase. The Qur’an too refers to this stage of intellectual and emotional maturity: “Until he reaches full maturity and reaches forty years of age…”

Onset of Old Age
Around forty years is generally the stage where, if you imagine life as climbing a mountain, you have reached the peak in many respects. After that, the downward slope begins. Then the signs of old age start appearing. Your hair begins turning white. Your joints begin wearing down. Your eyesight weakens. Earlier, you could see clearly from afar, but now doctors tell you that you need glasses. These changes begin appearing one after another.

 Tell-Tale Signs
What are all these things actually telling you? They are telling you that your final station is approaching. So what should one do? As I mentioned earlier, our mother would say, “Gather your bags and belongings together — the station is near.” In the same way, at this stage of life, your task should no longer be scattering and expanding endlessly into worldly pursuits; rather, it should be gathering yourself together and preparing.

 Yet even at this age, some people remain entirely occupied with plans related only to this world. You may have seen people who, even with one foot almost in the grave, continue making worldly plans — striving for further success, advancement, and accumulation. Whereas what should really happen is that the direction toward which you are inevitably heading should now become your focus, and preparation for that destination should begin.

 You may dye your white hair and hide its color. One meaning of doing so could simply be appearance and grooming. But another possibility is this: Allah had shown you a sign — as though warning bells had begun ringing that your station is approaching — yet instead of taking heed, you try to hide the reminder itself. It is as though a person says, “I still do not want to think of myself as old. I do not want to feel any such concern. I still wish to remain absorbed in the pleasures and distractions of this world.”

 What I am saying is that in the journey of life, when the signs of old age begin, it is as though the signs of death have also begun. At that point, a person should begin preparing. Preparing for what? For the station where he must eventually disembark — inevitably and without escape. As the Qur’an says: “Indeed, you are laboring steadily toward your Lord, and you will surely meet Him.” — Qur’an 84:6

 Whether willingly or unwillingly, you are moving toward that meeting. No matter how much a person struggles, he cannot refuse to arrive at that destination.

 Moment of Reflection
Now, the reality I have placed before you is something people often fail to keep in mind. There are several reasons for this, some of which are mentioned in the Qur’an and also discussed in the sayings of Muhammad.

 For example, especially in youth, a person feels that life ahead is still very long. Youth carries its own excitement, ambitions, and romantic idealism. A young person thinks: “I am still young. Old age and death are far away. There is still plenty of time before I need to prepare.” But this is actually a deception. Ordinarily, yes, people move through all these stages one after another. But it is not Allah’s fixed rule that every individual must necessarily reach old age before death.

 A person who assumes in youth that “my destination is still far away, so preparation can wait,” should remember that sudden death also exists. Many people are healthy, young, and apparently fine in every way — yet they suddenly depart from this world.

 Some people think differently. They say, “Even if we die, Judgment Day will not come immediately. You yourself tell us that there is the عالمِ برزخ (the intermediate realm). That period may last thousands of years. Then the Day of Judgment will occur, then a new world will be created, and only after that will we stand before Allah’s court.”

 But here too, a person is falling into another form of deception. He becomes spiritually lazy, thinking that there is still a very long time ahead. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ explained this beautifully in a Hadith. He said: “Whoever dies, his Qiyamah has already begun.” Meaning: even if thousands of years remain before the Final Day arrives, for the person who has died, his opportunity is already over.

 It is like a student sitting in an examination hall with three hours allotted for the exam. But after only one hour, his answer sheet is taken away. Even if two more hours remain officially, what benefit are they to him now? He can no longer write anything. In this sense, the Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever dies, his Judgment has already commenced.”

 Conclusion
We were discussing how, as these earthly stages of life keep passing by, sometimes the awareness slips out of a person’s mind that the moment of accountability is drawing near. Therefore, God repeatedly reminds us of this in the Qur’an, keeps bringing it before us again and again. Like that famous verse: “The people’s time of reckoning has drawn very near, yet they remain in heedlessness, turning away.”

 Now, what does heedlessness (ghaflah) mean here? Keep the earlier example in your mind — suppose you are traveling and you fall asleep. What does sleeping mean in that situation? It means that before reaching your stop, the preparations you were supposed to make are now left undone because you fell asleep. So the Qur’an explains that one of the greatest obstacles, one of the greatest barriers that prevents a person from keeping God’s accountability before him, is this heedlessness. We fall asleep spiritually.

 If a person remains awake to the fact that the moment of accountability is approaching, then naturally he will prepare for it. These two things are inseparable — understand this carefully. For example, when educational institutions announce, “The examinations are near,” what does that actually mean? Does it mean: “Go to sleep”? No. The very purpose of announcing that examinations are near is to say: “Wake up, become alert, prepare yourselves, come out of negligence — very little time remains.”

 The Qur’anic expression is: “Iqtaraba linnāsi hisābuhum” : “The people’s reckoning has come very close.”

 So in the end, we simply pray to Allah that He creates within us this awareness and consciousness: that while we continue living our worldly lives, we never forget that in the Hereafter we will have to give an account of our affairs, and that moment is not very far away at all. It is as though it is right upon our heads.

________________________________________________________________________________

“And seek, through what Allah has given you, the Home of the Hereafter.” — Qur’an 28:77

 Source: Mr. Rizwanullah, Scholar Al Mawrid, Lahore

________________________________________________________________________________

 Arranged by:

Aamir I. Yazdani
MPhil Islamic Thought & Civilization (PAKISTAN)
MSc Irrigation Engineering (UK)

Is the Opinion of the Majority (Jumhur) a Binding Proof? - By Dr. Muhammad Akram Nadwi

 Is the Opinion of the Majority (Jumhur) a Binding Proof?

By Dr. Muhammad Akram Nadwi

[Source Note: This is a direct English rendering of the article by Dr. Muhammad Akram Nadwi. The content has been translated faithfully into English with grammatical refinement, without interpretive additions.]
 

Some matters are so baseless that no serious and occupied person wishes to waste time discussing them. One such notion, however, has been circulating on social media for several years: “The opinion of the majority is a binding proof,” “Opposing the majority is misguidance,” “Truth depends upon the opinion of the majority,” “Whoever departs from the way of the majority risks losing his faith,” and similar statements.

I continued ignoring such claims, considering them unworthy of attention, assuming they were merely another wave of nonsense common on social media. Coincidentally, today, a similar post was shared in a WhatsApp group. As usual, I ignored it. Suddenly, a respected scholar directed the discussion toward me. These days, life is so busy that one naturally avoids such futile matters. Yet I thought that if scholars themselves have begun treating such falsehoods as worthy of consideration, then a remedy has become necessary; otherwise, a new innovation may take root in religion.

In both Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, there is a narration from Aisha bint Abi Bakr in which the Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever introduces into this matter of ours something that does not belong to it, it is rejected.”

Out of fear that this irrational idea may become part of God’s pure religion, I have decided to put these thoughts into writing. May Allah grant us all the ability to follow the truth.

The question posed in the title of this article can be fully answered by dividing the discussion into three sections:

1. The obligatory/practical response
2. The cause of the confusion
3. The scholarly/research-based response

---

1. The Practical Response

Those who repeatedly raise this issue are generally followers of one of the four schools of jurisprudence — Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, or Hanbali. Since the majority in the Indian subcontinent are Hanafis, examples will be drawn from the Hanafi school.

The first question to such people is: if the opinion of the majority is truly a binding proof, then what justification remains for following the Hanafi school? In every issue, you should act upon the opinion held by the majority.

According to Abu Hanifa, the time of Zuhr prayer ends when the shadow becomes twice the object’s length, whereas the majority of jurists and hadith scholars hold that it ends at the first shadow length. If the majority’s opinion is truly binding, then fairness demands abandoning Imam Abu Hanifa’s opinion and following the majority.

Similarly:

• Imam Abu Hanifa considered Witr obligatory, while the majority regard it as Sunnah.
• Hanafi books mention four non-emphasized Sunnah rak‘ahs before ‘Isha, whereas no such practice is authentically reported from the Companions, the Successors, or the four Imams.
• Imam Abu Hanifa held that the opening Takbir is valid with any phrase glorifying God, while the majority disagree.
• According to Imam Abu Hanifa, intention is not a condition for the validity of ablution, while the majority say that ablution without intention is invalid.
• Imam Abu Hanifa considered purification during Tawaf obligatory, whereas the majority considered it a condition.
• Imam Abu Hanifa allowed a woman’s marriage without a guardian, while the majority require a guardian.

Every school contains hundreds of such issues where the majority opinion was not followed. If the majority’s opinion were obligatory, why would these schools insist upon their own views?

---

2. The Cause of the Confusion

The confusion arises because these people fail to distinguish between narration and opinion.

If a hadith is transmitted through a connected chain of trustworthy narrators, and another hadith with a sound chain exists in opposition to it, then which narration receives preference?

The agreed position of scholars is that the narration whose transmitters possess stronger precision and reliability is preferred. If both chains are equal in precision, then preference is determined by supporting chains and multiplicity of transmission. The stronger narration is called محفوظ (preserved), and the weaker one شاذ (anomalous).

Thus, in matters of narration, the number of transmitters can sometimes become a factor of preference.

But opinions are different.

In matters of opinion, preference depends upon the strength of evidence. The opinion supported by stronger evidence is stronger; the one supported by weaker evidence remains weak. Even if the entire world votes in favor of the weaker opinion, it still remains weak and anomalous.

---

3. The Scholarly Response

The claim that “the opinion of the majority is a binding proof” contradicts:

• the Qur’an,
• the Sunnah,
• the consensus of the Muslim Ummah,
• reason itself,
• and the continuous scholarly practice of Muslim jurists across generations.

The Qur’an repeatedly makes obedience to Allah and His Messenger obligatory. For example: “O you who believe! Obey Allah, obey the Messenger, and those in authority among you.” — Qur’an 4:59

Based upon such verses, the Ummah unanimously agreed that:

1. The first proof is the Book of Allah.
2. The second proof is the Sunnah of the Messenger.

Obedience to those in authority exists under obedience to Allah and His Messenger.

Then Allah says: “If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and the Messenger.”

Meaning: when scholars or authorities differ, the matter must be referred back to the Qur’an and Sunnah. The view most consistent with them is the stronger view.

The Qur’an commands decisions based upon evidence — not numbers. In fact, the Qur’an strongly indicates that if the majority’s opinion lacks evidence, rejecting it becomes obligatory, and blindly following the majority without proof becomes misguidance.

The Prophet ﷺ also emphasized this principle. In Sahih Muslim, Jabir ibn Abd Allah narrates:

“I leave among you that which, if you hold firmly to it, you will never go astray after me: the Book of Allah.”

A narration in Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn also mentions the Sunnah alongside it.

The famous hadith of Muadh ibn Jabal likewise directs people first to the Book of Allah, then to the Sunnah of the Messenger, and thereafter to analogy (Qiyas).

Some narrations also command adherence to the Sunnah of the rightly guided caliphs. Yet no hadith states that, in cases of disagreement, the majority opinion becomes automatically authoritative.

---

From the era of the Companions onward, all jurists, hadith scholars, and scholars generally agreed that the proofs are the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Most jurists — except the Zahiris — also accepted consensus (Ijma‘) and analogy (Qiyas) as legal proofs. But no jurist ever declared the opinion of the majority itself to be an independent proof.

The books of Usul al-Fiqh from the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali schools exist in abundance. They count consensus as proof, but none considers the majority opinion itself a proof.

Reason also dictates that the correct view is the one supported by evidence. A claim without evidence remains weak, even if the entire world supports it.

This is why democracy itself is not considered proof of truth.

Many beliefs once universally accepted by nations were later disproven by scientific inquiry.

Even members of Tablighi Jamaat repeatedly emphasize this point. During their consultations, it is specifically stated that the Amir is not bound to decide according to majority opinion.

---

The historical practice of jurists clearly proves that the majority’s opinion is not binding proof.

If you study the books of all schools and the commentaries on hadith, you will repeatedly find statements such as “this is the opinion of the majority,” yet no jurist treats majority agreement itself as evidence. Rather, those opposing the majority present proofs for their position.

This clearly demonstrates that evidence is what matters — not numbers.

Otherwise, anyone opposing the majority would have been obligated to abandon his view merely because he stood in the minority. Yet no scholar ever abandoned his position solely because the majority disagreed.

If the Hanafis began blindly following the majority, the Hanafi school itself would disappear.

---

Conclusion

Calling people to follow the majority is an unacademic and irrational call. The invitation should always be toward following evidence.

In this religion, the universally agreed proofs are the Qur’an and Sunnah. Other disputed proofs also exist, foremost among them consensus and analogy.

Whenever a person presents an opinion, he is obligated to support it with evidence from these sources.

Merely chanting “majority, majority” in place of evidence is manifest misguidance. It effectively declares the Companions, the Successors, the four Imams, and all jurists and hadith scholars to have been mistaken.

Arranged by:
Aamir I. Yazdani
MPhil Islamic Thought & Civilization (PAKISTAN)
MSc Irrigation Engineering (UK)