Invasion of Bani Al-Mustaliq (Muraisi“) (Sha’ban, 6 Al-Hijra)

News reached the Prophetﷺ on the 2nd of Sha’ban to the effect that the chief of Bani Al-Mustaliq, Al-Harith bin Dirar had mobilized his men, along with some Arabs, to attack Madinah. Buraidah bin AL Haseeb Al-Aslami was immediately dispatched to verify the reports. He had some words with Abi Dirar, who confirmed his intention of war. He later sent a spy to explore the positions of the Muslims but he was captured and killed. The Prophetﷺ summoned his men and ordered them to prepare for war. Before leaving, Zaid bin Harith Radiallahu anhoo was put in charge of the affairs of Madinah. On hearing the advent of the Muslims, the disbelievers became frightened and the Arabs accompanying them defected and ran for their lives. Abu Bakr Radiallahu anhoo was entrusted with the banner of the Emigrants, and that of the Helpers went to Sa’d bin ‘Ubadah The two armies were stationed at a well called Muraisi’. Exchange of arrow fire continued for an hour, and then the Muslims rushed and engaged the enemy in a battle that ended in a complete victory for the Muslims. Some men were killed, women and children of the disbelievers taken as captives, and a wealth of booty fell to the lot of the Muslims. Only one Muslim was killed by mistake by a Helper. Among the captives was Juwairiyah, daughter of Al-Harith, chief of the disbelievers. The Prophet ﷺmarried her, due to which the Muslims freed a hundred of the other enemy prisoners who embraced Islam, and were then called the Prophet’sﷺ in-laws.”

Zadul-Ma’ad 2/112, 113, Ibn Hisham 2/289, 290, 294, 295.

The Treacherous Role of the Hypocrites prior to the Invasion of Bani Al-Mustaliq

‘Abdullah bin Ubai, a terrible hypocrite was full of enmity against Islam and the Muslims because he believed that the Prophet ﷺ had taken his leadership over Al-Aws and Al-Khazraj, two clans already agreed on the Prophethood Nabi Pakﷺ men and his masterhood over them. ‘Abdullah’s enmity appeared before he entered Islam. Following the battle of Badr, he made pretensions of being a Muslim, but deep at heart, he remained that terrible enemy of Allâh, His Messenger ﷺ and all the believers, in general. His sole target had always been to sow the seeds of dissension in the Muslim community, and undermine the cause of the new heavenly religion it has. His treacherous behavior could be witnessed everywhere but was strikingly evident in his wicked attempts at creating a state of confusion and disorder amongst the Muslims at the battle of Uhud. His hypocrisy and deceit assumed serious and ugly dimensions when he used to stand up among the Muslims shortly before the Prophet’sﷺ Friday speech, and mockingly say to them: “This is the Messenger of Allâh, who has honored you with Allâh, so you have got to support, obey and listen to him,” and then he would sit down.

He did the same following the battle of Uhud on Friday. He was so rude and arrogant that his words expressed clearly the deeplyrooted enmity, so some of the Muslims took him by his cloak and silenced him. He immediately left, uttering rude and mocking words. A Helper met him at the Mosque gate and ordered him to return and beg the Messenger for Allâh’sﷺ forgiveness, but he replied that he did not want his forgiveness.” He, previously held secret contacts with Bani Nadeer, encouraging them to make an alliance with him and promising support for them; all of this in his ceaseless efforts in a long process of conspiracy and intrigue hatched against the Muslims. Allâh’s Words as regards his treacherous acts and attempts during the Trench Battle came to testify quite clearly his hypocrisy

“And when the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease (of doubts) said: ‘Allâh and His Messengerﷺ promised us nothing but delusions!” (33:12]

All enemies of Islam from the Jews, hypocrites and polytheists did acknowledge that Islam had the upper hand not because of material superiority, multitudes of troops or equipment; but it was rather due to the noble values, refined ethics and high attributes of the Muslim community and deep love to Nabi Pakﷺ . The enemies of Islam were already aware of that flood of light derived wholly from the person of the Prophetﷺ who always stood as an excellent example for men to imitate and follow. The enemies of Islam, after going through the course of fruitless warfare against the new religion for five years, came to realize fully that eliminating Islam would not be possible on a battlefield, so they adopted other tactics. They, being reputed gossipmongers. decided to launch a widespread propaganda campaign alming at slandering the person of the Prophet ﷺin a most sensitive area of Arabian life, namely ethics and traditions. Following the battle of the Confederates, the Prophet ﷺmarried Zainab bint Jahsh after her marriage with Zaid bin Harithah , his adopted son, had

broken up. They seized this opportunity and began to circulate idle talk against the Prophetﷺ in Arabia depending on a tradition among the desert Arabs that prohibits contracting a marriage with an adopted son’s divorcee. They alleged that his marriage would be considered a terrible sin. These rumors had a negative impact on the morale of some weakhearted Muslims until the decisive Verses were revealed acquitting the Prophet and invalidating all those ill designs and hateful schemes.

The Wicked Role of Hypocrites during the Invasion of Bani Al-Mustaliq

During this Ghazwah, the hypocrites almost managed to create chaos among the Muslims themselves, coupled with serious and ugly slander against the Prophet ﷺAllâh said about them::

“Had they marched out with you, they would have added to you nothing except disorder, and they would have hurried about in your midst (spreading corruption) and sowing sedition among you…” [9:47]

The following are the details of the events:

1. The Hypocrites said. “If we return to Madinah then the more honorable will expel therefrom the meaner.”

After the battle was finished, Allâh’s Messengerﷺ was staying at Al-Muraisi’, and the people were getting water from a well. There was a man named Jahjah Al-Ghifari helping ‘Umar bin AlKhattab. He and Sinan bin Wabr Al-Juhani were crowding each other for the water and began to quarrel. So Al-Juhani yelled, “O Helpers!” Jahjah yelled, “O Emigrants!” So Allâh’s Messenger ﷺshe said:

“Do you use the slogans of pre-Islamic ignorance while I am yet among you? Leave it, for indeed it is detestable.”

This was conveyed to ‘Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul while he was with some of his people and he became angry. Among the people was Zaid bin Arqam cities while a boy, and he narrated that ‘Abdullah bin ‘Ubai said, “Have they done that? We are the greater number in our city…if we return to Madinah then the more honorable will expel therefrom the meaner.” Then he turned to those present and said, “This is your own doing! You put them up in your city, divided your wealth with them and by Allâh! if you were to withhold your hand from them then they would go to a land other than yours.” Zaid bin Arqam is told his uncle about that, who in turn told Allâh’s Messenger ﷺwhile ‘Umar was present. ‘Umar Radiallahu anhoo said, “Order ‘Abbad bin Bishr to kill him.” So he wrote the said:

“Why O ‘Umar! The people will say that Muhammad ﷺ kills his followers?”

So he ordered them to move out. But that was at an hour when people normally would not move. So they began moving out. Usaid bin Hudair caught up with him and said, “You move at such a bad time?” He even replied “Has what your companion said not reached you?” He was referring to ‘Abdullah bin Ubai. So he said, “What did he say?” He replied, “He claims that if he returns to Madinah then the more honorable will expel the meaner from it.” So he said, “But you can expel him from it if you wish O Messenger of Alláhﷺ ! He is, by Allâh, the humiliated while you are the mighty one.” Then he said that he would gain the upper hand

once the people saw the real side of ‘Abdullah bin Ubai. Then he marched with the people that day until the evening and that night until the morning and the sun appeared. Then they halted and slept which distracted them from what had happened. As for Ibn Ubai, when he was informed that Zaid bin Arqam

had conveyed to Allâh’s Messenger ﷺ, what he said, he went to the Prophetﷺ and swore by Allâh that he had not said what he had, and that he had not spoken about it at all. Some who were there among the Helpers suggested that maybe the boy was mistaken in what he narrated and he had actually not remembered what the man said. So he agreed. Zaid the said: “I became more upset than ever I had been. [Later) I just sat in my house.” Then Allah revealed:

“When the hypocrites come to you…” (63:1) up to His Saying:…they are the ones who say: ‘Spend not on those who are

with Allâh’s Messenger, until they desert him…” and:

“Indeed the more honorable will expel therefrom the

meaner.” [63:8) So Allâh’s Messenger ﷺ sent for me, recited it to me, and said:

“Allâh has confirmed your statement.” Meanwhile the son of this hypocrite, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdullah bin Ubai, was a righteous man among the Companions. He was innocent of his father’s behavior. So he waited at the gates of Madinah with his sword unsheathed. When Ibn Ubai came he told him, “By Allâh! You may not enter here until the Messengerﷺ of Allâh gives you permission, for he is the mighty one and you are the humiliated one.” When the Prophet ﷺ came, he permitted him so he moved out of the way. ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdullah had told him, “O Messenger of Allâh! ﷺOrder me if you want to kill him, by Allâh, I will bring you his head.”

The Slander Incident

This extremely painful incident took place on the Prophet’s ﷺreturn from the expedition against Bani Mustaliq. The Muslim army had to halt for a night at a place, a short distance from Madinah. In this expedition, the Prophet ﷺ was accompanied by his noble wife, ‘Aishah Radiallahu anhoo. As it so happened, ‘Aishah then went out some distance from the camp to attend to the call of nature. When she returned, she discovered that she had dropped her necklace somewhere. The necklace itself was of no great value, but as it had been loaned to her, ‘Aishah Radiallahu anhoo went out again to search for it. On her return, to her great grief and sorrow, the army had already marched away with the camel she was riding, her attendants thinking that she was in the howdah (litter) as she was then thin, very young and light in weight. In her helplessness, she sat down and cried till sleep overpowered her. Safwan bin Mu’attal , an Emigrant, who was coming in the rear recognized her as he had seen her before the Verse enjoining the veil was revealed, and brought her on his camel to Madinah, himself walking behind the animal. The hypocrites of Madinah, led by ‘Abdullah bin ‘Ubai

sought to make an incident out of this and spread a wicked scandal against ‘Aishah Radiallahu anhoo and unfortunately some of the Muslims also became involved in it. On arrival in Madinah, the Prophetﷺ held counsel with his Companions, who pronounced different opinions ranging from divorce to retention. The incident almost roused a fight between two rival factions, Al-Aws and Al-Khazraj, but the Prophet’sﷺ intervention silenced both parties on the spot. ‘Aishah Radiallahu anhoo unaware of the rumors being circulated, fell ill and was confined

to bed for a month. On recovering, she heard of the slander and took permission to go and see her parents seeking authentic news. She then burst into tears and stayed for two days and one sleepless night ceaselessly weeping to such an extent that she felt her liver was about to rip open. The Prophetﷺ visited her in that situation, and after testifying to the Oneness of Allâh, he told her, “If you are innocent. Allâh will acquit you, otherwise, you have to beg for His forgiveness and pardon.” She stopped weeping and asked her parents to speak for her, but they had nothing to say. so she herself took the initiative and said “Should I tell you I am innocent, and Allâh knows that I am surely innocent, you will not believe me; and if I were to admit something of which, Allâh knows, I am innocent, you will believe me: so there is nothing for me and you except the words of the father of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph):

‘So (for me) patience is most fitting. And it is Allâh (Alone) Whose Help can be sought against that which you assert.” She then turned away and lay down for some rest. At that decisive moment the Revelation came acquitting ‘Aishah of all the slanderous talk fabricated in this concern. ‘Aishah Radiallahu anhoo, of course. was wholeheartedly joyful and praised Allâh thankfully. Allâh’s Words in this regard went as follows:

“Verily! Those who brought forth the slander (against ‘Aishah – the wife of the Prophet are a group among

you.” (24:11) The principal elements involved in the slander affair, Mistah bin Athathah, Hassan bin Thabit and Hamnah bint Jahsh. were flogged with eighty stripes As for the man who took the principal part. ‘Abdullah bin Ubai, he was not flogged, either because the physical punishment in this

world substitutes the chastisement in store for him in the Hereafter – and he did not deserve this merit; or for the same public interest for which he was not killed previously. He, moreover, became the object of criticism and humiliation after his real intentions had been exposed to all the public.”

Almost a month later, Allâh’s Messengerﷺ and Umar bin AlKhattabh Radiallahu anhoo were engaged in the following talk: “Don’t you see ‘Umar if I had him (Abdullah bin Ubai) killed, a large number of nobles would have furiously hastened to fight for him. Now, on the contrary, if I ask them to kill him, they will do so out of their own free will.” “Umar Radiallahu anhoo replied: “I swear by Allâh that the Prophet’sﷺ judgment is much more sound than mine.’

Quotes by Imam Ali AlaihisSalam

HAZRAT IMAM ALI ALAIHIS SALAM says, “Every listener other than Allah is deaf to light voices while loud voices make him deaf and distant voices also get away from him. Every onlooker other than Allah (God) is blind to hidden colors and delicate bodies.” 
Nahjulbalagha: sermon.63, page 140.

Hadith Ali Allah ki Raste mein bahut sakhat hain

Sayyidinā ʻAlī Karrama Allāhu Waj·hahu Al-karīm Kā Ẕikre Jamīl

سیدنا علی کرم اﷲ وجھہ الکریم کا ذکرِ جمیل

٣٢۔ عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيْدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ رَضِيَ اﷲ عَنْهُ قَالَ: اشْتَکٰی عَلِيًّا النَّاسُ. قَالَ: فَقَامَ رَسُوْلُ اﷲِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِيْنَا خَطِيْبًا، فَسَمِعْتُه يَقُوْلُ: أَيُهَا النَّاسُ، لَا تَشْکُوْا عَلِيًّا، فَوَاﷲِ، إِنَّه لَأَخْشَنُ فِي ذَاتِ اﷲِ، أَوْ فِي سَبِيْلِ اﷲِ. رَوَاهُ أَحْمَدُ وَأَبُوْ نُعَيْمٍ وَالْحَاکِمُ، وَقَالَ: هٰذَا حَدِيْثٌ صَحِيْحُ الإِسْنَادِ.

’’حضرت ابو سعید خدری رضی اللہ عنہ بیان کرتے ہیں کہ لوگوں نے (حضور نبی اکرم صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم کی بارگاہ میں) حضرت علی رضی اللہ عنہ کے بارے میں کوئی شکایت کی۔ تو حضور نبی اکرم صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم ہمارے درمیان کھڑے ہوئے اور خطبہ ارشاد فرمایا۔ سو میں نے آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم کویہ فرماتے ہوئے سنا: اے لوگو! علی کی شکایت نہ کرو، اللہ کی قسم وہ اللہ کی ذات میں یا اللہ کے راستہ میں بہت سخت ہے۔‘‘

اس حدیث کو امام احمد، ابو نعیم اور حاکم نے روایت کیا ہے۔ اور فرمایا: اس حدیث کی سند صحیح ہے۔

  • “Ḥaz̤rat Abū Saʻīd Ḳhudrī raḍiya Allāhu ‘anhu bayān karte haiṅ ki logoṅ ne (Ḥuz̤ūr Nabīye Akram ṣallá Allāhu ‘alayhi wa-Ālihi wa-sallam kī bārgāh meṅ) Ḥaz̤rat ʻAlī raḍiya Allāhu ‘anhu ke bāre meṅ ko’ī shikāyat kī. To Ḥuz̤ūr Nabīye Akram ṣallá Allāhu ‘alayhi wa-Ālihi wa-sallam hamāre darmiyān khar̥e hū’e aur ḳhuṭbā irshād farmāyā. So maiṅ ne āp ṣallá Allāhu ‘alayhi wa-Ālihi wa-sallam ko yeh farmāte hū’e sunā: ae logoṅ! ʻAli kī shikāyat na karo, Allāh kī qasam woh Allāh kī ẕāt meṅ yā Allāh ke rāstā meṅ bohat saḳht hai.” Is ḥadīs̲ ko imām Aḥmad, Abū Nuʻaym aur Ḥākim ne riwāyat kiyā hai. Aur farmāyā: yeh ḥadīs̲ kī sanad ṣaḥīḥ hai.
    [Aḳhrajah Aḥmad bin Ḥanbal fī al-Musnad, 03/86, al-raqm: 11835,

Aḥmad bin Ḥanbal fī Faḍā’il al-ṣaḥābah, 02/679, al-raqm: 1161,

al-Ḥākim fī al-Mustadrak, 03/144, al-raqm: 4654,

Abū Nuʻaym fī Ḥilyaṫ al-awliya’, 01/68,

Ibn ʻAbd al-Barr fī al-istīʻāb, 04/1857,

Ṭāhir al-Qādrī fī Ḥusnu al-maʻāb fī Ḏh̲ikri Abī Turāb karrama Allāhu waj·hahu al-Karīm,/43_44, al-raqm: 32.]

Kya saaz gana bajana Haram hai Islam mein ??Ruling on music in Islam

The debate among Muslims is not about the permissibility of audio art, but about what kind of audio arts are permissible. The Qur’an, the first source of legal authority for Muslims, contains no direct references to music. Legal scholars use the hadith (saying and actions of Prophet Muhammad) as another source of authority, and have found conflicting evidence in it. The consensus that has emerged is that the audio arts fall into three broad categories: legitimate, controversial, and illegitimate. Qira’at, the call to prayer, religious chants and the like are all considered legitimate. Controversial audio arts include almost all other types of music. Illegitimate audio arts are considered to be those that take people away from the commandments of the faith. Music that leads to drinking or licentious behavior is considered illegitimate. Depending on the community of interpretation, one can find devotional music legitimate, controversial, or illegitimate.

Sufis, a broad category for a group of Muslims who generally take on a more personal and esoteric approach to the faith, argue that devotional audio arts must be bound by three things to be considered legitimate: time, place, and companions. Al-Ghazali, the famed 11th/12th century Sunni Muslim, argues that a good time is one that allows you to complete religious and societal obligations and no diversion should take time away from performing obligations. The place for the performance of audio art should be an appropriate setting– no concerts in masjids, and no performances in bars. Finally, the companions, the people surrounding the listener, should encourage the best in the listener.

The 10th century philosophical group, the Ikhwan as-Safa, argue that the truest audio art is the Voice of God, which the Prophet Moses heard at Sinai. When Moses heard the Voice, he moved beyond the need for earthly music. Based on this moment, the Ikhwan as-Safa believe that human audio arts are necessary echoes to remind us of the true music. The 15th century Persian mystical poet Jami says that in the Qur’an, when God says He is blowing life into the form of man (38:72) it should be understood that human beings are the first musical instrument. The famous Sufi poet Rumi (13th century) also plays with the idea of human beings as musical instruments. He opens his work the Mathnawi, perhaps one of his most famous poems, with the lines, “Listen to the reed as it tells a tale/ a tale of separation,” a statement on the human condition of removal from the Divine. It is also argued that the Prophet David (who authored the Psalms according to Muslims) and the Prophet Solomon both had beautiful voices and sang freely.

Drawing from these traditions, Muslims have an understanding of the permissible audio arts. For the legally minded, the traditional consensus is that nothing can be forbidden that is not explicitly forbidden by the Qur’an or the Prophet.

This issue is very old and was resolved long time ago. Imam al-Ghazzali, one of the most famous Muslim scholars, writing almost a thousand years ago, reported several Ahadith and came to the following conclusion: “All these Ahadith are reported by al-Bukhari and singing and playing are not haram.” Al-Ghazzali also convincingly answered many critics who had raised such objections in his book, “Ihya Ulum al-Deen.”

Those who are opposed to music, quote this Hadith:

“Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 69, Number 494v: Narrated Abu ‘Amir or Abu Malik Al-Ash’ari: that he heard the Prophet saying, “From among my followers there will be some people who will consider illegal sexual intercourse, the wearing of silk, the drinking of alcoholic drinks and the use of musical instruments, as lawful. And there will be some people who will stay near the side of a mountain and in the evening their shepherd will come to them with their sheep and ask them for something, but they will say to him, ‘Return to us tomorrow.’ Allah will destroy them during the night and will let the mountain fall on them, and He will transform the rest of them into monkeys and pigs and they will remain so till the Day of Resurrection.”

It is dangerous to form an opinion on the basis of one or two Hadiths, and Hadith literature should be considered as raw data. Each Hadith should be evaluated and compared with other Ahadith as well as with other historical sources. The problem is that we usually don’t know the context of each Hadith, and it is difficult to know under what circumstances the Prophet (s.a.w) made certain statements.

The above Hadith most likely refers to musical instruments used in drinking parties during the period of “jahiliyaa” (pre-Islamic era) in which even men wore silk clothes and orgies included illegal sexual intercourse. Taken by itself, the Hadith should also ban silk, but that is not the case and silk is permitted for women. That is why it is important to look at all Ahadith and not come to a hasty conclusion. There are other Ahadiths which clearly show that musical instruments are permitted: For example this Hadith:

“Volume 6, Book 61, Number 568: Narrated Abu Musa:

That the Prophet said to him’ ‘O Abu Musa! You have been given one of the musical wind-instruments of the family of David .’”

Critics also argue that music instruments are ONLY allowed during festivities. They quote this Hadith:

Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 15, Number 72: Narrated Aisha: Abu Bakr came to my house while two small Ansari girls were singing beside me the stories of the Ansar concerning the Day of Buath. And they were not singers. Abu Bakr said protestingly, “Musical instruments of Satan in the house of Allah’s Apostle !” It happened on the ‘Id day and Allah’s Apostle said, “O Abu Bakr! There is an ‘Id for every nation and this is our ‘Id.”

That Hadith again has to be studied in proper context because the Prophet (pbuh) not only permitted singing on other occasions, he recommended it. “Aishah narrated that when her relative was married to an Ansari man, the Prophet (s.a.w) said: ‘Aishah, did they have any entertainment? The Ansar are fond of Entertainment.” He didn’t say they were fond of entertainment only on festivities or that it was wrong but allowed on some occasions.

In another Hadith, “Ibn Abbas said, ‘Aishah gave a girl relative of hers in marriage to a man of the Ansar. The Prophet (s.a.w) came and asked, ‘Did you send a singer along with her?’ ‘No,’ she said. The Messenger of Allah then said: ‘The Ansar are a people who love poetry. You should have sent along someone who would sing, ‘here we come, to you we come, greet us as we greet you.’”

Music-haters also reference this Hadith:

“Anas ibn Malik related from the Prophet (saws) that, “two cursed sounds are that of the musical instrument(mizmaar) played on the occasion of joy and grace, and the woeful wailing upon the occasion of adversity.”

It is not difficult to find contradictory Ahadith. However, almost all scholars of Islam are of the view that singing is not only permitted, it is recommended on the occasions of Eid, weddings, births, aqiqahs, and on the return of a traveler. {See Yusuf al-Qardawi’s “The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam.”] Qardawi in the same book also states the following: “It is reported that many Companions of the Prophet (may Allah be pleased with them) as well as second generation Muslim scholars used to listen to singing and did not see anything wrong with it. As for the Ahadith which have been reported against singing, they all are weak and have been shown by researchers to be unsound. The jurist Abu Bakr al-Arabi says, ‘No sound Hadith is available concerning the prohibition of singing,’ while Ibn Hazm says, ‘ All that is reported on this subject is false and fabricated…he who listens to singing intending neither obedience nor disobedience in doing something neutral and harmless, which is similar to going to the park and walking around, standing by a window and looking at the sky, wearing blue or green clothes, and so on.’”

The best answer was given by Ibn Hazm who quoted another verse: “And what is beyond the truth except error?” (Quran 10:32). In other words, those who are prohibiting something which God has not forbidden, for no apparent reason, are simply falling into error.

Then there are some Muslims who argue that only drums are allowed. That too is false. Note the Hadith that I have quoted above:

“Narrated Abu Musa: “That the Prophet said to him ‘O Abu Musa! You have been given one of the musical wind-instruments of the family of David.’”

That makes it obvious that Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) was not opposed to wind instruments. So there goes your “drums are OK” theory. Secondly, what is permitted on Eid day is also permitted on other days. There is not a single Hadith which says that what is permitted for Eid is not acceptable on other days. Muslims have been enjoying Music since the beginning of Islam with no guilt whatsoeve

Quran and Modern Science :WE ARE CREATED OUT OF NOTHING

117- Creator of the heavens and the earth from nothingness, He has only to say when He wills a thing, “Be,” and it is.( 2- Al-Baqarah The Cow, 117)

The Arabic word “beda’a” means creation of something out of nothing. This word also connotes the fact that something is created not on
a pattern previously designed of something but as a completely new
entity having no precedence. The greatest marvel of the creation is the
creation of all concepts out of nothing. Think of the spectrum of colors. None of us can visualize a color that we have not already seen, nor
can we produce that color. We are familiar with colors that already
exist, but we cannot possibly create a new color. Allah, on the other
hand, created all colors at a time when the concept of color did not
exist, just as the universe did not exist before. To create a concept and
its range of contents out of nothing is beyond human imagination and

1) Monotheism: There is but one Allah, He that created this
magnificent physical universe and everything in it, living or
2) Atheistic materialism: Matter has been in existence since
eternity. Everything is made of matter from a chain of fortuitous events.
3) Agnosticism: We cannot know which of these two viewpoints
is correct. Both may be justified in their postulates.


The agnostic’s assertion may be expressed by the sentence, “We cannot know whether there is a Allah or not, and we cannot know whether
the universe has been in existence since eternity or not.” He believes
that nothing is or can be known. If the hypothesis “Matter had a
beginning” is confirmed, the assertion that “Matter had no beginning” would be refuted and the contention “We cannot know
whether it had a beginning or not” will be proved wrong. Thus,
demonstration of the fact that matter had a beginning is a blow not
only to atheism but also to agnosticism and skepticism. Once the
hypothesis of the beginning and creation of matter has been confirmed, the atheists should abandon their disbelief and the agnostics
their skepticism. If you remember the words in the sura The Prophets,
verse 30, “Will they not believe even then?” this statement in the
verse that described the Big Bang is a sign according to which the
unbelievers will stick to their own convictions, or lack of conviction.
It has become clear that an agnostic is no different than a man who
worships the cow and the denial of the atheist is tantamount to the
adoration of fire; these people base their philosophies on absolute lack
of evidence, sheer delusion, total lack of logic and scientific reasoning.
The claims of rationality and the so-called scientific approach of the
atheists and agnostics have been debunked. In the coming pages we
shall see that both in the creation of the universe, in things created
within the universe and in the creation of living beings, an intelligently designed process is going on, and we shall demonstrate that the
objections of agnostics and skeptics to this assertion are merely delusions.


It was understood that time existed in relation to the movements of
matter. As matter and its movements did not exist prior to the Big
Bang, time did not exist before the Big Bang. Matter and time came
into being after the Big Bang. Their existence depends on each other.
Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking conclusively proved in mathematical terms that the universe had had a beginning. The Big Bang
theory confirmed the hypothetical alternative suggested by atheists
that the universe had to have a beginning if it had been created. In
brief, the claims of atheists have been proven wrong in scientific terms
and in terms of logic and reason; and yet the atheistic attitude is still
prevalent today due to reasons like stubbornness, delusion and arbitrariness.
If there are two theses that negate each other, the substantiation of
either of them disproves the other’s argument. The contention of
atheists that matter existed from eternity having thus been falsified,
the fact that it was created becomes the incontestable truth, discrediting the conviction of unbelievers. Insistence of denial of this proven
fact is a gross mistake and an example of inexcusable dogmatism.

49- To the contrary, these are clear signs in the hearts of
those who are granted knowledge. None deny Our messages except the unjust.
(29- The Spider, 49)


The Big Bang theory confirmed that the universe and time had a
beginning and that matter did not exist from eternity but was created. The assertion that the universe existed from eternity was thus
The Big Bang not only demonstrated that the universe was created by the Creator, but at the same time the false beliefs like the distribution of sovereignties among divinities, each having under his
command the earth, the sun, the moon and the mountains respectively, were proved wrong. It became clear that whoever He was Who
had devised the initial composition of the universe, having recourse to the Big Bang, was the Creator of everything. Thus the universe was
under the exclusive control of One Single Power and this power was
not shared. The universe evolved from a single point; the Author of
that point was also the Originator of men, rivers, stars, butterflies,
supernovas, colors, suffering and happiness, music and aesthetics.
Since everything came into being emerging from the oneness, He
must be the Author of that “oneness.”
The Big Bang showed that the matter idolized by atheists, and the
matter that makes up the entire universe is but an insignificant speck
of dust, so to say. Those who witnessed that from that insignificant
speck there have emerged men, beasts, plants, and the universe in its
glowing colors understand that the genius was not inherent in the
matter itself but in something exterior to it, i.e., in the Creator. Close
your eyes and try to imagine the void and open them to behold the
trees, the seas, the heavens, your own image reflected in the mirror,
the food put at your disposal for your consumption and the works of
art. . . . How could all these glorious things have emerged all by themselves from the dark and from one single point in the void? For intelligent minds, the creation unfolds itself not only in artistic aesthetics
but also in mathematical terms. The velocity of expansion of the universe is of such a critical point that, according to the expression of a
scientist, had the velocity been different at the primeval explosion less
than 1/1018, the universe would have collapsed, sinking unto itself
and never coming into being as it is. Likewise had the quantity of matter been less than it actually was, the universe would have scattered
around, rendering the formation of the celestial bodies impossible.
The force applied in the disintegration of the initial composition at
the moment of creation is not only incommensurably great, but the
design behind it is infinitely ingenious. Thus everything was designed
by our Creator to make possible the existence of the universe. All
these events are meant to show the blindfolded the infinite power of
our Creator and the fact that He designed everything to the most
infinitesimal detail perfectly. We are witnessing another fact through
these phenomena: impossibility does not exist in the vocabulary of the
Creator; it suffices Him to wish that something come about, and there
it is.