THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COMPETENT AND AN INCOMPETENT MURSHID

Sultaanul Fuqara, Hazrat Faqir Nur Muhammed Sarwari Qaadri (radi Allahu anhu), defines a perfect Shaikh as one who discards the Nafs (carnal desires), purifies the soul and cleanses the mind of his Mureed for the sole purpose of guiding his disciple on the correct path and delivering him to Allah. A perfect Murshid does not attain worldly gain.

A false Sheikh takes Mureeds so that his worldly status is boosted. The Mureed gives his hard-earned income to his Murshid who lives a luxurious lifestyle, which cannot even be afforded by the affluent people. These “heavensmarketers” have furnished their homes with the trappings of Hell and have they become the Fuel of Hell.

A disciple must first evaluate the Murshid in the context of worldly transactions. As soon as he is convinced of a selfish or worldly motive he should immediately disassociate himself from such a Murshid. The Murshid should not claim his status because of lineage, rather, he should have been under training of a perfect Sheikh and practiced upon the spiritual exercises, travelled the inner paths and be well versed with all the stages of  spiritual progress. Acquiring oneself with books of Tasawwuf or attaining superficial knowledge of Jurisprudence or logic or being born in the household of a pious person or claiming Khilafat (permission to take Bai’ah) from a false Murshid does not qualify one as a Murshid. One cannot hope for any guidance (Hidayah) or grace (Faiz) from such a false Murshid. Unfortunately, these pretentious Murshids roam our streets in abundance causing mayhem and chaos. May Allah Ta’ala grant Hidayah to these customary Sheikhs (Peers) and bless the Mureeds with better judgement. (Irfaan, pg. 326)

ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY

It means that such a person must believe in the essential requirements of the Islamic faith, and he should not do anything against the spirit of the faith. In the same book we come across this statement:

“That is to say, it is an agreed view of the Islamic scholars that a person who violates the essential requirements of Islam is a disbeliever, though he may be a follower of the Qiblah and he may spend his entire life in performing the acts of obedience, as has been stated in Sharah-E- Tahreer by Imam Ibnul Hammam.”

The books of Islamic belief, law and principles are full of clear directives and details on this point.

(Tamheed Ul Iman by Ala Hazrat radi allahu anhu)

DISRESPECT TO ALLAH AND HIS PROPHET صلى اله عليه وسلم IS WORSE THAN IDOL WORSHIP

Fourthly, this subject has its own plain logic. Can a person, who offers prayers five times a day with his face towards the Qiblah and worships Maha Dev once a day, be regarded by any sensible person to be a Muslim? The action of worshipday Maha Dev and the action of calling Allah a liar or insulting the Prophet are equally the acts of disbelief but the acts of disrespecting Allah and His Prophet are definitely more serious than worshipping Maha Dev. ‘Some acts of disbelief are worse than others’. The reason is that worshipping an idol is a symbolic denial of Allah, but this symbolic denial, is not equal to the actual denial. Moreover, prostration (sadja) before an idol can be possibly given a rational explanation that it may have been just an act of respect and not an act of worship. Any act of respect done in the form of prostration (sadja), is not an act of disbelief in itself. For example, if a person comes before a scholar or a spiritual leader and prostrates before him as a mark of respect, he win be judged as a sinner but not a disbeliever. The Islamic law has condemned idoIatory by the non-Muslims as disbelief because it falls into a pattern of disbelief in their life-style. On the contrary, talking ill of Prophet Muhammad صلى اله عليه وسلم is in itself a disbelief, which leaves no chance of Islamic belief left in this case. I am not relying here basically on the difference that the Islamic community can by its unanimous decision forgive a worshipper of an idol but even one thousand Imams cannot and would not forgive a person, who talks ill of the Prophet of  Islam صلى اله عليه وسلم .

Our Hanafi scholars of distinction like Imam Bazazi, Imam Ibnul Hammam, Allama Maula Khasrau author of Dar Radd-E-Gharoor, Allama Zain bin Najeem auttKJr of Bahrar Raaiq and Ishbah Wan-N-Nazaair, Allama Umar bin Najeem auttKJr of Naharul Faaiq, Allama Abu, Abdullah Muhammad bin Abdullah Ghazi author of Tanveer-ul-Absaar, Allama Khairuddin Ramli author of Fataawa Khairiyya, Allama Shaikh-Zada author of Majma-ul-Anher, Allama Mudaqaq Muhammad Ali Haskafi author of Durr-E- Mukhtar and many other prominent scholars have held this view. (For further details and discussion on this point see my book “Fataawa-E-Rizwiyah”).
It should be understood that the inability to forgive is limited to the court of an Islamic ruler, because he has to pronounce death sentence even after hearing the plea of forgiveness. On the other hand, if somebody seeks forgiveness sincerely and heartily it is acceptable in the court of Allah. There is a danger that these insolent people may put up an excuse that there is no point is seeking forgiveness because it cannot be granted. The correct positon is that the disbelief will be obliterated; you will become a Muslim and get rid of the eternal confinement to Hell. To this extent there is unanimity amongst the Islamic scholars (see Rudd-ul Mukhtar and other books).

(Tamheed Ul Iman by Ala Hazrat radi allahu anhu)

%d bloggers like this: