The correct meaning of “Min Doon Allah”

The Correct Meaning of ‘Without Allah’

”مِن دُونِ الله“ is a prescribed phrase. This phrase appears in several verses of the Holy Quran and many Hadiths. Similarly, in some verses, after mentioning Allah, the words ” مِنْ دُونِه“ also appear. For example, consider the following verses:
① وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ لَا يَخْلُقُونَ شَيْئًا وَهُمْ يُخْلَقُونَ ‎ ﴿٢٠﴾ ‏ أَمْوَاتٌ غَيْرُ أَحْيَاءٍ ۖ وَمَا يَشْعُرُونَ أَيَّانَ يُبْعَثُونَ ‎ ﴿٢١﴾ ‏

“And those whom they invoke besides Allah create nothing, and they themselves are created. They are dead, not alive, and they do not know when they will be resurrected.”
② يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ضُرِبَ مَثَلٌ فَاسْتَمِعُوا لَهُ ۚ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ لَن يَخْلُقُوا ذُبَابًا وَلَوِ اجْتَمَعُوا لَهُ ۖ وَإِن يَسْلُبْهُمُ الذُّبَابُ شَيْئًا لَّا يَسْتَنقِذُوهُ مِنْهُ ۚ ضَعُفَ الطَّالِبُ وَالْمَطْلُوبُ ‎ ﴿٧٣﴾

“O people! An example is presented, so listen to it carefully: Indeed, those whom you invoke besides Allah can never create even a fly, even if they all gathered together for that purpose. And if the fly should take away something from them, they could not recover it from the fly. Weak are the pursuer and pursued.”
③ لَهُ دَعْوَةُ الْحَقِّ ۖ وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ لَا يَسْتَجِيبُونَ لَهُم بِشَيْءٍ إِلَّا كَبَاسِطِ كَفَّيْهِ إِلَى الْمَاءِ لِيَبْلُغَ فَاهُ وَمَا هُوَ بِبَالِغِهِ ۚ وَمَا دُعَاءُ الْكَافِرِينَ إِلَّا فِي ضَلَالٍ ‎ ﴿١٤﴾

“To Him alone is the true call, and those whom they call besides Him cannot respond to them. Their call is like one who stretches his hands toward water to reach his mouth, but the water does not reach it. And the call of the disbelievers is nothing but error.”
④ وَلَا تَدْعُ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ مَا لَا يَنفَعُكَ وَلَا يَضُرُّكَ ۖ فَإِن فَعَلْتَ فَإِنَّكَ إِذًا مِّنَ الظَّالِمِينَ ‎ ﴿١٠٦﴾ ‏

“Do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you. But if you do, then indeed you will be among the wrongdoers.”
⑤ قُلْ أَرَأَيْتُمْ شُرَكَاءَكُمُ الَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ أَرُونِي مَاذَا خَلَقُوا مِنَ الْأَرْضِ أَمْ لَهُمْ شِرْكٌ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ أَمْ آتَيْنَاهُمْ كِتَابًا فَهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَيِّنَتٍ مِّنْهُ ۚ بَلْ إِن يَعِدُ الظَّالِمُونَ بَعْضُهُم بَعْضًا إِلَّا غُرُورًا ‎ ﴿٤٠﴾

“Say, ‘Have you considered those whom you invoke besides Allah? Show me what they have created from the earth, or have they partnership in the heavens? Or have We given them a scripture so they are [standing] on evidence from it?'”
⑥ وَمَنْ أَضَلُّ مِمَّن يَدْعُو مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ مَن لَّا يَسْتَجِيبُ لَهُ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ وَهُمْ عَن دُعَائِهِمْ غَافِلُونَ ‎ ﴿٥﴾ ‏

“And who is more astray than one who calls upon those who cannot respond to him until the Day of Resurrection, and they, of their invocation, are unaware.”
⑦ قُلِ ادْعُوا الَّذِينَ زَعَمْتُم مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ ۖ لَا يَمْلِكُونَ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَلَا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَمَا لَهُمْ فِيهِمَا مِن شِرْكٍ وَمَا لَهُ مِنْهُم مِّن ظَهِيرٍ ‎ ﴿٢٢﴾ ‏

“Say, ‘Call upon those whom you claim [as gods] besides Him; they do not possess the [ability for] removal of adversity from you, nor can they change [it].'”
⑧ ذَٰلِكُمُ اللَّهُ رَبُّكُمْ لَهُ الْمُلْكُ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ مَا يَمْلِكُونَ مِن قِطْمِيرٍ ‎ ﴿١٣﴾ ‏ إِن تَدْعُوهُمْ لَا يَسْمَعُوا دُعَاءَكُمْ وَلَوْ سَمِعُوا مَا اسْتَجَابُوا لَكُمْ ۖ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَكْفُرُونَ بِشِرْكِكُمْ ۚ وَلَا يُنَبِّئُكَ مِثْلُ خَبِيرٍ ‎ ﴿١٤﴾

“He is Allah, your Lord; there is no deity except Him, the Creator of all things, so worship Him. And He is Disposer of all things. And those whom you invoke besides Him do not possess [as much as] the membrane of a date seed.”
“If you call them to guidance, they do not hear; and you see them looking at you while they do not see.”
The meaning of ” مِنْ دُونِ الله“ or ” مِنْ دُونِهِ“ in the above and other similar verses is: “Besides Allah” or “Other than Allah.” Most translators of various schools of thought have rendered it approximately in this way. According to this phrase in the Quranic verses, every being or personality, no matter how great and exalted they may be in the sight of Allah and the believers, and no matter how high their rank, every being or personality to whom the term of majesty “Allah” cannot be applied, and who cannot be called “Allah,” is ” مِنْ دُونِ الله“. Every claimant of Islam openly believes that “Allah is One.” This is what we have been taught, as stated:

قُلْ هُوَ اللهُ اَحَدٌ

“Say, He is Allah, [who is] One.”
No individual who claims Islam can dare to deny or dispute this, and it is also an undeniable fact that in Islam, after Allah, the greatest love that is obligatory is for Allah’s beloved final Messenger Muhammad, peace be upon him.
But despite this honor, grandeur, and high status, no believer can dare to say that Muhammad, peace be upon him, is Allah (may Allah protect us). Despite such virtue, he, peace be upon him, is a great being besides Allah. Then if Muhammad, peace be upon him, is not Allah, how can anyone else be? And the meaning and implication of ” مِنْ دُونِ الله“ is so clear that there is no need for any debate on it. But unfortunately, due to the misunderstanding of some people, even this matter has become a subject of dispute. When such people saw that the attributed verses of the Holy Quran contradict many of their beliefs and actions, instead of correcting their wrong beliefs and submitting humbly before the Quranic verses, they began to debate who is the true referent of ” مِنْ دُونِ الله “ and who is not??!!

Proof of the Barelvi Doctrine

1: Hakim and Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Sahib of the Barelvi community wrote in response to a verse with the same meaning:

Answer:

Here, the negation is not of the Wali Allah (Friend of Allah), but of the Wali min doon Allah (Friend other than Allah), whom the disbelievers had made their helper and supporter, meaning idols and devils. Wali Allah is the one whom the Lord has made the helper of His servants, like the Prophets and Saints.

Dear readers! The words in the verse are ” مِنْ دُونِ الله“, not ” ولي من دون الله“, but the Barelvis’ Hakeem-ul-Ummat and Mufti Sahib insisted that “Prophets and Saints” are not meant. Then they arbitrarily said that Allah has made them helpers. Anyway, someone should ask them what is the benefit of such stubbornness? ” ولي من دون الله“ also means “a wali other than Allah.” This too negates everyone except Allah.
2: Among their own “Kaseer al-Alqab, Allama” Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib wrote: The reference of ﴿وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللهِ﴾ is idols and statues, not Prophets and Saints.

Among their own “Allama” Ghulam Naseeruddin Sialvi Sahib, in his book Tanbeeh al-Ghafil fi Nida al-Rasool ﷺ, Nida Ya Rasool Allah ﷺ, gave a headline and a fine discussion on the meaning of ” مِن دُونِ الله“

. In this alleged fine discussion, he repeatedly wrote: “It has been proven that Prophets and Saints are not included in min doon Allah.”

The answer to this so-called “fine discussion” of these “ghafil” will come in its place, which will expose their negligence as clear as daylight.
Some self-made Sheikh-ul-Islam, politically, religiously, and morally one of Pakistan’s most controversial personalities, Tahir-ul-Qadri Sahib, also took part in this discussion and in his book Al-Tawheed established the correct meaning of مِن دُونِ الله in the context of Tawheed. He wrote:
The true meaning of مِنْ دُون الله in the Holy Quran wherever the words ﷺ or similar expressions are mentioned, is the rejection of the false beliefs and ideologies of the disbelievers and polytheists and the denigration of false deities. Fundamentally, these words intend to express the following matters.”

Then Qadri Sahib established several headings such as:
(1) False beliefs and ideologies
(2) False deities
He explained each in a few lines. Similarly, he wrote:
“The negation of divinity from everyone except Allah through these words expresses the absolute disassociation of false deities from the truth and the negation of divinity from everyone except Allah.”

Here he wrote that the negation of divinity from everyone except Allah is done through من دون الله, but leaving aside the marks of his controversy, he further wrote:
The addressees of مِن دُونِ الله in the Divine speech are not the believers but the disbelievers, polytheists, and those false gods whom they worshipped. Neither the chosen Prophets and Messengers of Allah nor the righteous and saints are meant by مِنْ دُونِ الله.

Similarly, he wrote: “As far as Prophets and Messengers, Saints and Mystics, perfect believers, and Allah’s accepted and chosen servants are concerned, they are considered close and beloved in the Divine court; the command of مِن دُونِ الله cannot be applied to them. Allah’s statement is:

انه من عبادنا المومنين

‘Indeed, they are among Our (perfect) believing servants.'”

Qadri Sahib quoted the verse as if it is proof of his statement, whereas the verse does not say that Prophets or Saints are not من دون الله.
He further wrote: “The Saints of Allah (Allah’s friends and beloved servants) cannot be other than Allah also because they themselves are manifestations of Allah’s attributes walking on earth.”

If the Saints of Allah are not ” غیر اللہ “, then Tahir Qadri Sahib should explain how many gods they have? And why is the worship of these Saints not rightful? In short! These statements clearly reveal what their belief is.
في الوقت ان اقتباسات only intends that their belief be presented before the readers in their own words so that no one may consider it an accusation or allegation.
The meaning of مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ and شَهِدَ شَاهِدٌ مِّنْ أَهْلِهَا
From the Barelvi translations of Quranic verses, it becomes absolutely clear what the meaning of ” من دون الله“ is. But due to some people’s stubbornness and perversity, a lexical explanation is felt necessary. For this, we do not need to undertake any laborious or lengthy discussion ourselves because there is testimony from the Barelvi household on the meaning of ” شَهِدَ شَاهِدٌ مِنْ أَهْلِهَا“.
Pir Mehr Ali Shah Golrawi Sahib’s family includes a renowned and famous individual, Pir Syed Naseeruddin Naseer Shah Golrawi Sahib (on whose grave Barelvis are seen expressing their particular devotion). When he saw the perversity and stubbornness of his people, he refuted them and gave a detailed discussion on the lexical meaning of من دون الله. Naseer Sahib wrote: “Rather, the meaning of the word دُونَ itself demands that when its annexed word is Allah, then all creation can come under من دون الله. In the famous and authentic lexicon Lisan al-Arab, the explanation of دُونَ is as follows:
دون نقيض فوق : is the opposite and antonym of fawq (above). When fawq means above, then necessarily doon means below. Therefore, everything that is below Allah in rank and status is دُون الله, and the other meanings of دُون are الحقير و الخسيس. Obviously, there is no one equal to this King of both worlds. Therefore, the scope of دون الله is very broad. The author of Lisan al-Arab further clarifies:
وقال بعض النحوين لدون تسعة معان: that doon has nine (9) meanings. تكون means before, and means امام, and means behind, and means فوق, etc. We chose the meaning of below because there is none above that Being; if anything else is accepted above Him, it would be outright disbelief. Therefore, the example of below in Lisan al-Arab is: بمعنى تحت كقولك دُونَ قدمِكَ خد عدوك أى تحت قدمك۔ “that your enemy’s cheek is under your foot.” Hence, the meaning will be that in terms of rank, honor, and dignity, everything in the universe is دون الله (below Allah). Therefore, including the chosen personalities, idols, false deities, and polytheists, everything is من دون الله.
Here, a Hadith Sharif is also presented as an example. Consider that the Prophet ﷺ said:

إن آدم و من دونه تحت لواء ى يوم القيامة . إلخ

Translation:

Indeed, Adam and all other humanity will be under My banner on the Day of Resurrection. Here, from the word وَ مَنْ دُونَهُ, two meanings emerge:

Number 1. Dūna:

Meaning besides, that is, Hazrat Adam (peace be upon him) and besides him, all other humans will be under my banner. It has become clear that دُونَ can be applied and there is no aspect of disrespect in it. However, such a difference in ranks must be kept in mind that the beloved of God never consented to shirk, nor did they command anyone to do so; therefore, their status with Allah is certain.

The meaning of مِنْ دُونِ الله is from one of the descendants of Pir Mehr Ali Shah, then for the Barelvis of Pir Nasiruddin Golra, it is sufficient for acceptance that after his death they (contrary to hadiths) built his shrine in Golra, where a crowd of people stays. The writer himself has seen with his own eyes how many people stand humbly before Nasir Sahib’s grave, some circumambulate the grave, others prostrate. In short, whatever people do at the graves known by the name of a high, adorned, and saintly grave, the same continues at Nasir Sahib’s grave.
So this is certainly testimony from their own household that every creation, no matter how chosen the personalities may be, مِن دُونِ الله are besides Allah. There are arguments for this in the Quran, Hadith, and lexicons. Also, there is no aspect of disrespect in this. Nasir Sahib wrote in the same book at one place:
“Those gentlemen whose viewpoint is that the verses addressing idols should be applied to Prophets and saints, this is not only ignorance but also distortion of the Quran. They should also keep in mind our research that wherever the words ‘other than Allah,’ ‘besides Allah,’ ‘partners,’ and ‘rivals’ appear in the Quran, they mean everything other than Allah Almighty that becomes an obstacle in reaching Allah. If idols are the obstacle, then these words mean idols, and if humans are the obstacle, then humans are meant. We have presented many examples from the Holy Quran as proof and can present more.”

It is astonishing that those who do not honor the grave of their own elder, whom they consider their helper and fulfiller of needs, do not seem willing to accept the Quran presented by their tongue and pen. In any case, Pir Sahib’s statement is clear and needs no explanation as per the saying “clear path needs no explanation” that for them also مِن دُونِ الله غیر اللہ and rivals are names of the same things.
The meaning of غیر اللہ was written by Ahmad Raza Khan Sahib to the Barelvis’ Aala Hazrat, the greatly blessed, greatly ranked, renewer of the Ummah, Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Sahib in his treatise ” بــركــات الامداد لاهل الاستمداد “ in his distinctive style of speech:
If the noble verse “Iyyaka Nasta’een” (You alone we ask for help) means absolute seeking of help is intended to be restricted to the Divine Being, then would seeking help only from the Prophets (peace be upon them) be shirk? Are they the only non-God? And are all persons and things considered God by the Wahhabis? Or does the verse specifically name them that shirk is permissible from them and not others? No, no, when exclusivity of oneness and shirk from others is established, then any kind of seeking help from any other than God will always be shirk, whether human or inanimate, living or dead, entities or attributes, actions or conditions, all fall under being other than God. Now what is the answer to the noble verse?

First of all, it should be stated that ” من دون اللہ“ means besides Allah and this is the meaning of غیر اللہ as well. The Barelvi Imam Khan Sahib also admitted that whether human or inanimate, living or dead, “all fall under being other than God, and that is the intended meaning!”
Now regarding the issue of the noble verse اياك نعبد و اياك نسعتين, it should be said that the meaning and interpretation of the verse is quite clear in the light of other verses and hadiths, so there is no need to respond to the verse itself. However, the objections of the Barelvi Mujaddid based on confusion of topics require a response. For now, it is sufficient to say that mutual assistance and seeking help through causes and means is established from the texts of the Quran and Hadith, and that help is not at all contrary to this verse, otherwise there would be contradiction and inconsistency in the Quran which is impossible. However, asking for help or seeking relief from the dead or non-existent persons beyond causes and means, as these people do, is not proven by any text. So the difference between the above verse and their practice is clearly evident. وللعاقل تكفيه الإشارة

Other than Allah and the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the Saints

Before mentioning the fallacies of the second party in this regard, consider the arguments that clearly show that the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the saints and righteous are also included in من دون الله. This view is not at all contrary to their dignity and greatness but is exactly in accordance with their teachings. The reason for presenting the translation and interpretation of the admonishing verses from the pens of renowned scholars of Brelviya is only to dispel their suspicion that the translations are incorrect, and the interpretation and explanation are wrong. As they commonly propagate that Wahhabis mislead by incorrect interpretation. The aim is to remove this suspicion through their own translations and interpretations.

First Argument:

Allah Almighty said:

مَا كَانَ لِبَشَرٍ أَن يُؤْتِيَهُ اللَّهُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحُكْمَ وَالنُّبُوَّةَ ثُمَّ يَقُولَ لِلنَّاسِ كُونُوا عِبَادًا لِّي مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلَٰكِن كُونُوا رَبَّانِيِّينَ بِمَا كُنتُمْ تُعَلِّمُونَ الْكِتَابَ وَبِمَا كُنتُمْ تَدْرُسُونَ ‎ ﴿٧٩﴾ ‏

“No man has the right that Allah should give him the Scripture and authority and prophethood, and then he says to the people, ‘Be my servants instead of Allah’s.’ Rather, he will say, ‘Be Allah’s helpers,’ because you teach the Book and because you study it.”

1: As a commentary, in the margin of the translation, Naeemuddin Muradabadi Sahib wrote:
This is impossible for the Prophets and attributing such a thing to them is a slander. The occasion of revelation is that the Christians of Najran said, “Jesus (peace be upon him) commanded us to worship him as our Lord.” In this verse, Allah Almighty denied their statement and explained that it is impossible for the Prophets to say such a thing. Another narration of the occasion of revelation is that Abu Rafi, a Jew, and a Christian leader said to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), “O Muhammad, do you want us to worship you and consider you our Lord?” The Prophet replied, “I seek refuge in Allah from commanding worship of anyone other than Allah, nor has Allah commanded me or sent me for that.”

2: Their Hakim al-Ummah Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Sahib also quoted the same point in the commentary of this verse.

3: Their Allama Abul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri Sahib also wrote the same regarding the occasion of revelation of this verse.

4: Their Allama Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib quoted the same in the commentary of this verse as follows: “Imam Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari

narrates with chain of transmission from Ikrimah: ‘Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) states that Abu Rafi Qarzi said, “O Muhammad (peace be upon him), do you want us to worship you as the Christians worship Jesus son of Mary?” The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said, ‘We seek refuge in Allah from worshipping anyone other than Allah.’ etc.”

5: Their Pir of Bhera, Karam Shah Az Hari Sahib wrote in the commentary of this verse:
“That is, the one who is honored with blessings will not invite anyone to worship him, rather he will advise everyone to become servants of Allah. Here the Christians are being told that Jesus (peace be upon him) was a Prophet. How could he call himself God or the son of God?”

6: Pir Syed Nasiruddin Gulravi Sahib wrote:
Regarding the application of مِنْ دُونِ الله, another Quranic proof was mentioned a few lines earlier where we stated a rule and general principle that wherever in the Book of Allah there is negation of polytheism and affirmation of monotheism, the words غیر اللہ or من دُونِ الله include every entity and every personality that is worshipped, is being worshipped, or there is a possibility of being worshipped, whether they are idols or chosen servants. We presented a verse from Surah Maidah as evidence. Now below another verse with translation and occasion of revelation is given.

After this, Gulravi Sahib quoted the above verse

and narrated the objection of Abu Rafi the Jew and the response, which Muradabadi, Naeemi, Saeedi, etc. have also explained.

Dear readers! The blessed verse and the explanations of half a dozen eminent scholars of the opposing party are before you. It is absolutely clear in this verse that every one of the Prophets whom Allah Almighty honored with prophethood invited people to be servants of Allah; none invited to be servants of himself. It is evident that all Prophets (peace be upon them) are من دون الله. In this verse, Allah, Glorified and Exalted, called every Prophet من دون الله. If saying this were disrespectful or an insult to the Prophets (may Allah protect us), Allah Almighty would never say so, because Allah commands belief in the Prophets and respect for them. How could He say something that necessarily involves disrespect to the Prophets? Absolutely not.

The second point is that according to these commentaries, when the Jews accused that the Prophet (peace be upon him) wanted them to worship him (seeking refuge in Allah), the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) denied it and said: “I seek refuge in Allah from commanding worship of غير الله.” Nasiruddin Gulravi Sahib, under the title “Nuqta Naqeeqa” (subtle point), wrote in detail:
“Here you have used the word غير الله for yourself, and from the references of many commentaries it is proven that in the above-mentioned verse ما كان لبشر refers to Hazrat Isa (peace be upon him) and Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa (peace be upon him).”

In short, those who narrated and explained this occasion of revelation, all Barelvis, have accepted this fact and admitted that the best of creation, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), is also من دون الله, meaning “included among those other than Allah.” Gulravi Sahib was not a denier of this anyway.

Dear readers! You can see that Naeemi Sahib did not consider the Awliya (saints) included in ”من دون الله“ in “Jaa al-Haqq,” but in his commentary he accepted that the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) is among those other than Allah. Similarly, Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib accepted the Prophet (peace be upon him) being other than Allah in the commentary of the verse under discussion, but later on

it is not known what came to his mind that he wrote: وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ refers to idols and statues, not Prophets and Awliya! After all, what is the difference in meaning and concept between من دون الله and غير الله? This is why Saeedi Sahib felt the need to deny it. In any case, after detailed discussion, the Pir of Gulra, Nasiruddin Sahib wrote: “Now tell me, those who insist on restricting the words من دون الله and غير الله only to idols and applying the verse rejecting polytheism only to the disbelievers and polytheists of the early period, how far are they realistic?”

It is submitted that expecting realism from them is almost futile.

Second Argument:

Allah Almighty said:

﴿وَإِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَٰهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ﴾

“And when Allah will say, O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as two gods besides Allah’?”

1: Their Hakim al-Ummah Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Gujarati Sahib wrote in the exegesis of this verse:
دون comes in many meanings: far, separate, opposite, except, not, other. Here it means “besides” because no Christian says that Allah Almighty is not God, only Jesus and Mary are gods. Therefore, the verse is very clear. That is, O Jesus, son of Mary, did you tell those Christian people to take me and my mother as gods besides Allah?

2: Abu al-Hasanat Qadri Sahib wrote in the exegesis of the same verse:
“Allah Almighty’s question is a rhetorical question, meaning you did not say this, intended to shame the Christians. Otherwise, Allah Almighty knows. That is, O Jesus, son of Mary, did you tell those Christian people to take me and my mother as gods besides Allah?”

3: Peer Naseeruddin Gulravi Sahib wrote under the same verse:
On the Day of Judgment, Allah Almighty will ask Hazrat Jesus (peace be upon him), did you tell the people to worship me (Jesus) and my mother Mary besides Allah? Here Allah Almighty uses the word من دون الله for Hazrat Jesus and Mary (peace be upon them),

Allah, Glorified and Exalted, has called His noble Messenger Sayyiduna Jesus and his honorable mother Mary (peace be upon them), whose righteousness, piety, and goodness are testified in the Holy Quran, as ” من دون الله“ in this blessed verse. Scholars of the opposing party have also acknowledged this in their writings. So how can it be correct to say that the Prophets (peace be upon them) and great saints are not included in من دون الله? If they are not included in من دون الله (may Allah protect us), then their worship would also be invalid? Then what is the meaning of condemning those who worship them! According to their own fabricated ideas, they are also worshipping Allah; they are not worshipping من دون الله!

Third Argument:

Allah Almighty said:

﴿اتَّخَذُوا أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ﴾

“They have taken their priests and monks as gods besides Allah, and also the Messiah, son of Mary.”

Ahmad Saeed Kazmi Multani Sahib translated it in these words:
“They have made their religious leaders and worshippers their lords besides Allah, and also the Messiah, son of Mary.”

1: In the exegesis of this verse, Pir Muhammad Karam Shah from Hari Bherwi Sahib wrote:
“‘Ahbaar’ is the plural of ‘Jabr’, meaning a distinguished scholar who can speak with great excellence and tact. ‘Ruhban’ is the plural of ‘Rahib’, derived from ‘Habta’ meaning fear. That is, those people who dedicate their entire life to worship out of fear of Allah.”

2: Their Hakim-ul-Ummah Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Sahib wrote in the exegesis of this verse:
The Christians consider Hazrat Masih (Jesus) as the likeness of God, i.e., the son of God, and obviously the son of the Lord would also be the Lord, so this accusation against them is correct. Understand that those people practically considered their popes and priests as lords, treating them as if they were lords, and in belief, they considered Jesus (peace be upon him) as their Lord. ﴿وَمَا أُمِرُوا إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُوا إِلَٰهًا وَاحِدًا﴾ This exalted statement expresses rebuke upon these two nations, meaning in the Torah, Gospel, and all heavenly books, these people were commanded to worship only one Allah. They considered others besides Allah as owners who could make lawful and unlawful, prostrated to them, sought forgiveness of sins from them, and worshipped them, i.e., heartfelt and belief-based worship. Therefore, they opposed all heavenly books. ﴿لَّا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ﴾ This exalted statement mentions the reality that no one is worthy of worship except Allah; all kinds of worship are due to Him, whether belief-based, physical, or financial. ﴿سُبْحَانَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ﴾ This exalted statement explicitly calls Jews and Christians polytheists and declares their mentioned beliefs as shirk (associating partners with Allah).

Mufti Sahib perhaps unknowingly also admitted here that Jews and Christians worshipped their scholars by prostrating to the Ahbaar and Ruhban, so why do those today who beautify high graves with their prostrations not worship those high graves’ occupants? ”عباد القبور “
It is also written:
“Doone has many meanings: distant, separate, opposite, cut off except here it is either opposite or except.” (Also)
Mufti Naeemi Sahib’s admission that in this verse ”دون “ means except is an acknowledgment that in this verse, Sayyiduna Isa (peace be upon him), religious leaders, and worshippers are considered من دون الله i.e., besides Allah, and along with Jews, Christians’ treatment of Sayyiduna Isa (peace be upon him) and their righteous people is declared shirk. If they were not من دون الله, then why would this treatment be shirk?

Fourth Argument:

Allah Almighty says:

﴿قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ تَعَالَوْا إِلَىٰ كَلِمَةٍ سَوَاءٍ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ أَلَّا نَعْبُدَ إِلَّا اللَّهَ وَلَا نُشْرِكَ بِهِ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضًا أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ ۚ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا فَقُولُوا اشْهَدُوا بِأَنَّا مُسْلِمُونَ﴾

“Say, O People of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us and you—that we worship none but Allah and associate no partner with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lord besides Allah. But if they turn away, then say, ‘Bear witness that we are Muslims.'”

1: Naeemuddin Muradabadi Sahib wrote in the explanation of “associate no partner with Him” and “none shall take others as Lord” that:
“Neither Hazrat Isa (Jesus) nor Hazrat Uzair (Ezra) nor anyone else, as the Jews and Christians made their priests and monks, worshipping and prostrating to them.”

2: Their Hakim al-Ummah Gujarati Sahib wrote in the tafsir of this verse:
“In summary, we should worship none but Allah, consider all Prophets and Awliya as servants of Allah, not make any of them a deity, nor consider anyone as a partner of Allah—not idols, nor the moon, nor the sun, nor the cross, nor anyone else. Also, no one should make anyone other than Allah their Lord and owner of commands. Consider all scholars and saints as followers of religion.”

3: Their Allama Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib wrote in the tafsir of this verse:
“Imam Waahidi

wrote that none among us should make others as Lord besides Allah. In its explanation, Hazrat Ibn Abbas (RA) said that just as the Christians made Hazrat Isa their Lord and the Banu Israel made Uzair their Lord.”

Similarly, Saeedi Sahib wrote:
“(3) Do not consider anyone as Lord besides Allah, yet they made their scholars and monks as Lords, meaning they treated them as Lords because they obeyed them in declaring things lawful and unlawful. Also, they prostrated to their monks and said that the monk who struggles more has the effect of divinity descending upon him and he becomes capable of reviving the dead and enabling the congenitally blind to see.”

Dear readers! See, Naeemi Gujarati Sahib himself at this point accepted all Prophets (peace be upon them) and Awliya as other than Lord. This is what the Quran calls “من دون الله” meaning “besides Allah.” But on the other hand, they do not seem to accept this reality. Similarly, Saeedi Sahib also included by name Sayyidna Isa and Sayyidna Uzair (peace be upon them) in من دون الله and also scholars and monks, but on the other hand, they also deny it. In short, from the Barelvi tafsirs of this verse, it is also proven that all creation, no matter how exalted personalities like the Prophets (peace be upon them) are, are من دون الله, meaning other than Allah.

Fifth Argument:

Allah Almighty said:

﴿أَفَحَسِبَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَن يَتَّخِذُوا عِبَادِي مِن دُونِي أَوْلِيَاءَ ۚ إِنَّا أَعْتَدْنَا جَهَنَّمَ لِلْكَافِرِينَ نُزُلًا ‎﴾

“Do the disbelievers think that they can take My servants as protectors besides Me? Indeed, We have prepared Hell as a hospitality for the disbelievers.”

1: ”عبادي “ In the interpretation of “My servants,” Abadi Sahib wrote:
“Like Hazrat Isa, Hazrat Uzair, and the angels.”
And in the interpretation of “take as protectors besides Me,” he wrote:
“And that they will benefit from this is a false assumption; rather, those servants are averse to them, and indeed We will punish them for this shirk.”

Making servants as intercessors is shirk

Alhamdulillah! Muradabadi Sahib had to admit even to such a staunch Barelvi that making servants (of Allah) as intercessors is shirk, no matter how pious those servants may be.
2: Abu al-Hasanat Qadri Sahib wrote in the commentary of this verse:
“That is, as a rhetorical question, He said: Do these disbelievers think that leaving Me and making My servants their guardians, intercessors, and fulfillers of needs is sufficient for them? Whereas even making supplication for the fulfillment of needs through My servants can only be beneficial if it is with My consent; otherwise, they cannot even pray. In fact, if one looks closely, they themselves are in need of My grace. Their being close and chosen is only as beneficial to you as their being answered in prayers, like Jesus, Moses, and other noble Prophets (peace be upon them) and great saints. But to consider them as permanent intercessors by themselves without the consent of Allah is pure ignorance. For such people, we have Hell prepared.”

From Qadri Sahib’s commentary, it seems he only wanted to establish permission for “making supplication through” them, since he himself spoke of making supplication through pious people rather than seeking fulfillment of needs or intercession directly from them.
As for the issue of being permanent intercessors by themselves or by Allah’s grant, we have, Alhamdulillah, provided proof in our book “Ummah and the Danger of Shirk” that even the ancient polytheists claimed “granting” power and authority. See

. Then Qadri Sahib wrote that their being chosen is as beneficial to you as their being answered in prayers, like Jesus, Moses, and other noble Prophets (peace be upon them) and great saints, meaning their prayers are accepted. The word “only” is noteworthy. Nevertheless, if these saints are considered as fulfillers of needs, intercessors, problem solvers, and responders to supplications, then this would be a clear deviation from his own explanation and commentary. In short, there is no evidence to consider them as intercessors or protectors by themselves or by Allah’s grant.
3: Their Allama Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib wrote in the commentary of these verses:
“My servants refer to angels, Hazrat Isa (Jesus), and Hazrat Uzair (Ezra), and the meaning of this verse is: Do they think that by leaving Me, they will make My servants their intercessors and worship them instead of Me, and I will not punish them, or that this act will benefit them? We have prepared Hell for the hospitality of the disbelievers.”

The above three senior Barelvi scholars agree that “‘ibadi” meaning “My servants” refers to Sayyiduna Isa, Sayyiduna Uzair, and the angels. In the Quranic verse under discussion, Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala used the words ”من دوني“, meaning “other than Me” or “besides Me.” Those who considered the Prophets (peace be upon them) as their intercessors or helpers, Allah warned them with punishment. And making them “protectors or intercessors” was also, apparently unknowingly, declared “shirk” by Naeemuddin Sahib Muradabadi, thus refuting such beliefs of his own.
Just think! Those who considered the Prophets (peace be upon them), such sacred, close, and chosen personalities, as “intercessors” and helpers were warned with punishment by Allah. So, if those who consider Baba Farid, Baba Ali Hajveri, Baba Moinuddin Chishti, and others among our saints as “intercessors” and helpers, is there no warning for them? There is a warning for those who make the Prophets (peace be upon them) intercessors, but none for the righteous among the Ummah? And from the Quranic text, the Prophets (peace be upon them) are proven to be “besides Allah,” but not the owners of shrines? What kind of religiosity and what kind of justice is this? And what kind of thinking is this? May Allah alone grant understanding!

Sixth Argument :

Allah Almighty said:
‎إِنَّكُمْ وَمَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ حَصَبُ جَهَنَّمَ أَنتُمْ لَهَا وَارِدُونَ ‎ ﴿٩٨﴾ ‏ لَوْ كَانَ هَٰؤُلَاءِ آلِهَةً مَّا وَرَدُوهَا ۖ وَكُلٌّ فِيهَا خَالِدُونَ ‎ ﴿٩٩﴾ ‏ لَهُمْ فِيهَا زَفِيرٌ وَهُمْ فِيهَا لَا يَسْمَعُونَ ‎ ﴿١٠٠﴾ ‏ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ سَبَقَتْ لَهُم مِّنَّا الْحُسْنَىٰ أُولَٰئِكَ عَنْهَا مُبْعَدُونَ ﴿١٠١﴾ ‏

“Indeed, you and whatever you worship besides Allah are the fuel of Hell. You will enter it. If they were gods, they would not enter it, and all of them will abide therein forever. They will therein neither be relieved nor will they hear. Indeed, those for whom the good promise from Us has come into effect will be kept away from the Hellfire.”

In the exegesis of these verses, Karam Shah Bihrawi Sahib wrote:
“Here the address is to the polytheists of Makkah that you and your stone-made gods will be made the fuel of Hell. The word ‘ma’ is for those without intellect, therefore angels, Uzair, and Jesus are not included in it. When this verse was revealed, Abdullah bin Al-Zubair objected that then only they worship them. Upon hearing this, the Prophet said: نعم كل من احب ان يعبد من دون الله فهو مع من عبده Yes, every person who desires that besides Allah, he should also be worshiped, he will also be thrown into Hell along with his worshipers.”

Yes, certainly, but those who did not invite to worship themselves but worshiped Allah Almighty and invited people to worship Allah alone, like the Prophets (peace be upon them), Imams, and Awliya (saints), they are not included in this. Allah Almighty has a good promise for them; according to these verses, they will certainly be kept away from Hell. Like some other Barelvi commentators, Saeedi Sahib also quoted Ibn Al-Zubair’s objection and wrote:
“When Quraysh made this baseless objection, Allah Almighty revealed this verse ﴿اِنَّ الَّذِينَ سَبَقَتْ …﴾ Indeed, those for whom a good reward has already been decreed from Us will be kept away from the Hellfire.”

Also, Saeedi Sahib wrote:
“Their objection was baseless because in the Arabic language ‘ma’ is used for those without intellect, and Hazrat Isa and Uzair (peace be upon them) are beings with intellect. So this verse does not apply to them.”

Undoubtedly, they are not the subject of this verse, but it is not correct that the word ”ما“ is used only for those without intellect. In fact, it is used for both those with intellect and those without intellect. The second group denies its use for those with intellect, so consider some examples:
1: Allah Almighty commanded the Prophet (peace be upon him) to say:

‎ ﴿وَلَا أَنتُمْ عَابِدُونَ مَا أَعْبُدُ﴾ ‏

Saeedi Sahib himself translated it as:
“You do not worship what I worship.”

The Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) worshiped only Allah Almighty. In this verse, the word ما is used for Allah, Glorified and Exalted be He.
2: Allah Almighty said:

﴿قَالَ يَا إِبْلِيسُ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَن تَسْجُدَ لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ﴾

He said, “O Iblis! What prevented you from prostrating to the one whom I created with My own hands?”

And in its exegesis it is written: “Regarding Hazrat Adam (peace be upon him), He said: I created him with My own hands.”

Hazrat Adam (peace be upon him) is certainly among those with intellect, but Allah Almighty used لِمَا خَلَقْتُ, not لِمَن خَلَقْتُ. It is proven that ‘ma’ is also used for those with intellect, as it was used for Hazrat Adam (peace be upon him).
3: Allah Almighty said:

﴿فَانكِحُوا مَا طَابَ لَكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ﴾

Saeedi translated: “Marry the women you like.”

The word ما was used for women who are beings with intellect. مَنْ طَابَ لَكُم was not used.
4: Allah Almighty said:

﴿وَلَا تَنكِحُوا مَا نَكَحَ آبَاؤُكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ﴾

Saeedi Sahib translated: “And do not marry those women whom your forefathers married.”

In this verse also, the word ”ما“ was used for women who are beings with intellect; here too مَنْ نَكَحَ was not used. Certainly, one does not marry lifeless stone idols.
5, 6, 7: The Quran repeatedly says:

﴿مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ﴾

Saeedi Sahib translated: “Or your owned slave girls.”

Elsewhere translated as: “Those women whom you own.”

Here also the word ”ما“ was used for owned women, although they are beings with intellect; the word ”من ملكت ايمانكم“ did not appear for them.
8: Allah Almighty said:

‎وَوَالِدٍ وَمَا وَلَدَ ﴿۳﴾ ‏

Saeedi translated: “By the father and his offspring.”

In the exegesis it is written: The father refers to Hazrat Adam (peace be upon him) and his offspring refers to his progeny.

Thus, here the word ‘ma’ is used for the entire human race. Is the entire humanity without intellect? (God forbid) More examples can be given that the word ما is also used for those with intellect. If this usage were so incorrect and far from linguistic rules, many examples would not appear in the Quran. If it were as impossible as Murad Abadi, Gujarati, Saeedi, Bihrawi, and other non-Barelvi scholars have understood, then (provided proof) any objection like this would have been refuted by the most eloquent of people, Muhammad Mustafa (peace be upon him), or one of his servants would have said, “Fools, what has happened to you that you are so ignorant of your own language that you do not even know that ما is also used for those with intellect, Jesus (peace be upon him), Uzair, and angels (peace be upon them) are beings with intellect, so how wrong and baseless is your objection!”
To my knowledge, there is no such statement or response with an authentic chain, although some commentators have written such things without chains. In short, from these verses of Surah Al-Anbiya, the meaning of من دون الله becomes very clear that it includes the Prophets (peace be upon them), angels, and righteous servants; otherwise, such clarification would not have been necessary. For further clarification, see the exegesis of these verses of Surah Al-Anbiya in Tafsir Al-Qurtubi.

Fallacies of the Second Party

After the positive arguments, now see what fallacies the second party presents against the definitive explicit texts and what the responses to these fallacies are. If Naeemi Gujarati Sahib has made any detailed discussion on this issue, it is not known to us; however, Ghulam Naseeruddin Sialvi Sahib of Jhelum has, in his book, given a few arguments according to his own understanding. Similarly, Tahir al-Qadri Sahib has also made considerable efforts to complicate this matter. In this article, we are reviewing the so-called arguments of Sialvi Sahib; God willing, at another opportunity, the fallacies of Qadri will also be illuminated. Observe their responses:

First Sialvi Fallacy:

Giving his first argument, the mentioned Sialvi wrote:
Regarding (من دون الله), Allah the Exalted says:

‏ ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْحَقُّ وَأَنَّ مَا يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ هُوَ الْبَاطِلُ وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْعَلِيُّ الْكَبِيرُ ‎ ﴿٦٢﴾ ‏

“Allah alone is the Truth, and whatever they call upon besides Him is falsehood.” It is noteworthy that if prophets and saints are also included in (من دون الله ), then it would necessarily mean that they are false, whereas calling prophets and saints false is an insult to them.

Answer:

Before understanding the reality of this argument, see what Sialvi Sahib has written as the translation of من دون الله in his so-called scholarly research?
1 :

“Whom you call besides Allah.”

2 :

“You have no helper besides Allah.”

3 :

“Whom you call besides Allah.”

In the above three verses, the phrase من دون الله appears. You can see that Sialvi himself has translated it in all three places as: “besides Allah.” Can Sialvi clearly say that the Prophets, peace be upon them, are other than Allah? In any case, we have already explained at the beginning what the meaning of “besides Allah” or “other than Allah” is.
The second point is that the interpretation which Sialvi Sahib called derogatory after quoting the verse is undoubtedly an insult to the Prophets, peace be upon them, and certainly false. But this is not the meaning of the verse at all. In fact, this verse does not declare the deities themselves false but rather the worship of them as false. First, consider the correct translation of this verse by some renowned Barelvi scholars:
1 : Ahmad Saeed Kazmi Multani Sahib translated:
“This is because Allah alone is the truth, and (these polytheists) worship besides Allah that which is false.”

2: Abu Al-Hasanat Qadri translated:
“This is because Allah is the truth, and besides Him whom they worship is false.”
3 : Saeedi Sahib translated:

“Allah alone is the truth, and these (polytheists) worship besides Him that which is false.”

Then in its explanation it is written:
“Because Allah alone is the truth. Worshiping Him is the truth, and worshiping others besides Him is false.”

From these translations and explanations, it is clear that the verses do not call من دون الله false themselves but rather the prayer to them is false. The root of يدعون is “prayer,” and the pronoun in the verse refers to this singular prayer. The polytheists called many besides Allah. If further clarification is needed, consider this verse from the Holy Quran, where Allah says:

﴿لَهُ دَعْوَةُ الْحَقِّ ۖ وَالَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ لَا يَسْتَجِيبُونَ لَهُم بِشَيْءٍ﴾

“Calling upon Him alone is the truth, and those whom they call besides Allah cannot respond to their call.”
Reflecting on both verses makes it clear that calling upon Allah alone is the truth, and calling upon others besides Allah, i.e., asking them for prayer, is false. This does not at all imply any insult to the Prophets, peace be upon them. Sialvi’s fallacy is thus exposed.

Second Sialvi Fallacy:

Sialvi Sahib, in his presumed second argument, wrote: The command of Allah Almighty is:

﴿وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا مِن دُونِهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ﴾

“Do not follow anyone besides Him.”
Here, Allah Almighty has forbidden following ”من دونه“; if the Prophets and Awliya also fall under (من دون الله ), then following them would also be forbidden.
Whereas the command of Allah Almighty is:

﴿قُلْ إِن كُنتُمْ تُحِبُّونَ اللَّهَ فَاتَّبِعُونِي يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللَّهُ﴾

Allah Almighty instructs the believers to follow the Holy Prophet ﷺ, so how can the Holy Prophet ﷺ fall under (من دون الله )?”

Answer:

It is unclear whether Sialvi Sahib is truly so ignorant or if he deliberately feigns ignorance to impose his point, resorting to sophistry and compiling these mistakes under the attractive title of “Refined Discussion.”
Dear readers! To understand his deception, first observe the complete verse.

اتَّبِعُوا مَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا مِن دُونِهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ ۗ قَلِيلًا مَّا تَذَكَّرُونَ ‎ ﴿٣﴾ ‏

“O people, follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord and do not follow other than Him as guardians. Little is it that you remember.”

In simple words, the translation of this verse is:
“Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord and do not follow the guardians besides it; you seldom accept admonition.”
In this verse, first, ” منزل من الله “ means the command to follow “what has been revealed from Allah,” and then ” من دونه “ forbids following anything besides this revelation. Here, ” من دونه“ does not mean “besides Allah” at all, but it means that even a low-level student cannot remain unaware that in ”دونه“, the pronoun ” ه“ refers to ”منزل من الله “, not Allah. This is also clear from Khan Sahib’s translation. Perhaps no one other than Sialvi Sahib has made such a grossly ignorant interpretation. If Sialvi Sahib is not such an ignorant schoolboy, then this is outright deception.
What is منزل من الله? Now let us also clarify what منزل من الله is. Like Ahl-e-Haq, Barelvis also agree that the Quran and Hadith are منزل من الله. Consider the statements of some Barelvi scholars:
1: Peer Karam Shah Bihrawi Sahib, while interpreting this verse, wrote:
“It is being said that we should not deviate from the Shariah and commands revealed to them through our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and should not abandon them to follow any other legal system. The pious scholars have clarified that just as the Quranic commands are منزل من الله, similarly, the commands expressed by the tongue of the Messenger are not his personal opinions but divine revelation, i.e., الكتاب والسنة (الــقــرطبي) و يعم القرآن و السنة لقوله تعالى وما ينطق عن الهوى ان هو الا وحى يوحى (بیضاوی). Allama Baydawi states that this refers to both the Book and the Sunnah because the Prophetic Sunnah is also منزل من الله. The Divine command is that my beloved does not speak from his own desire; whatever he is commanded through revelation comes to his tongue.”

2: Their Saeed-ul-Millat, Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib wrote: This verse commands the Ummah to follow what has been revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and to act upon it. This verse is evidence for the authority of the blessed Hadith because just as the Quran was revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him), similarly, the blessed Hadith were also revealed to him. Besides this verse, there are many other verses that prove the authority of the blessed Hadith.”

In short, this verse commands following the Quran and Hadith and forbids following other guardians. Only a disbeliever can deny following the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), but were they من دون الله? God forbid, they were not. And the verse forbids following من دون الله, not ” من دون الله أنزل الله “. Even this verse does not fulfill Sialvi’s wishful thinking.

The Third Sialvi Fallacy:

It is written: The command of Allah Almighty is:

﴿وَالَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ مَا يَمْلِكُونَ مِن قِطْمِيرٍ﴾

“The ones whom you call besides Allah do not even possess the thin membrane on a date seed.” This verse is also a clear proof that the Prophets, peace be upon them, and the noble saints, may Allah be pleased with them, are not included in من دون الله.”

Answer:

As usual, at this point, Sialvi Sahib has spoken without thinking, otherwise the solution to his objection is already present in his own translation. He has clearly written in the translation: “except Allah.” Sialvi Sahib cannot say at all that it means “except the Prophets, peace be upon them,” rather it means only Allah (may Allah protect us). If he does not say this and hopefully will not say it, then consider how he wrote that the Prophets, peace be upon them, are not included in (من دون الله). The clear meaning of this statement is that the Prophets, peace be upon them, and the noble saints are not except Allah, because the translation of من دون الله itself has been done by him as “except Allah.”

For further clarification, also observe the verse which is in the same sequence, then look at the tafsirs of some Barelvi scholars, the falsehood of Sialvi’s argument will become even clearer. Allah Almighty has said:

وَالَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ مَا يَمْلِكُونَ مِن قِطْمِيرٍ ‎﴿١٣﴾‏ إِن تَدْعُوهُمْ لَا يَسْمَعُوا دُعَاءَكُمْ وَلَوْ سَمِعُوا مَا اسْتَجَابُوا لَكُمْ ۖ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَكْفُرُونَ بِشِرْكِكُمْ ۚ وَلَا يُنَبِّئُكَ مِثْلُ خَبِيرٍ ‎﴿١٤﴾‏

“And those (false deities) whom you worship besides Allah do not possess even the husk of a date seed. If you call them, they do not hear your call, and if they do hear, they cannot respond to your plea, and on the Day of Resurrection, they will deny your association (of partners with Allah). And none will inform you like the One who is well-informed.”

Warning:

Like many other places, Kazmi Sahib has translated تدعون here as “worship,” whereas the context clearly indicates that the correct translation is “call,” as Siyalvi Sahib has translated it as “call.” This is because the following verse mentions hearing or not hearing the “prayer” or “supplication,” and worship is not something that can be heard unless “worship” is taken to include prayer and calling out. In any case, translating it as worship is a dire necessity for those who seek prayers from beings other than Allah; otherwise, it becomes difficult to defend their words and actions.

Now, observe the interpretation of these verses by some Barelvi commentators, from which it becomes absolutely clear that the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the pious saints are also included in من دون الله.

1: And their revered Pir, Shah Sahib Bihrawi, wrote:
“Allama Alusi writes that idols do not respond because they are lifeless; they cannot hear or speak. But those wretches who call upon angels or those close to Allah will not receive a response because these misguided people considered them as gods, whereas they were completely far from being gods. So why would they respond to the cries of such people who were making such a grave accusation?”

Warning:

We have already discussed this verse and its interpretation in some detail in our article “Other than Allah” from Du’a and Some Quranic Questions.
2: Qazi Sanaullah Panipati Naqshbandi Sahib wrote:

أى الذين تعبدونها من الاصنام وغيرها كائنة من دونه تعالى ما يملكون من قطمير

“Besides Allah, the idols or jinn you worship do not even own the husk of a date seed.”

Warning:

Qazi Panipati Sahib Barelviya is a trusted commentator.
3: Saeedi Sahib wrote in the commentary of the verse following this verse:
“On the Day of Resurrection, they will deny your shirk (associating partners with Allah), meaning they will deny that you worshipped them and will express disassociation from you. Allah Almighty will resurrect these idols, and they will declare that they were not worthy of being worshipped. It is also possible that here the idols refer to those deities who are rational beings, such as Hazrat Isa and Hazrat Uzair and the angels, and on the Day of Resurrection, they will disassociate themselves from the worship of the polytheists. It is in the Holy Quran: When Allah says: O Isa son of Maryam! Did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as gods besides Allah?’ Isa will say: Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what is not true.”

We have not found explicit texts about the resurrection of false idols, but the Quran mentions the disassociation of those true close servants who were worshipped. And remember that the discussion on the verse quoted by Sialvi Sahib does not end here; rather, it is completed in the next verse. According to the commentaries of Behrawi and Saeedi, this statement also applies to Sayyidna Isa and Uzair (peace be upon them). Similarly, Allah Almighty says:

قُلِ ادْعُوا الَّذِينَ زَعَمْتُم مِّن دُونِهِ فَلَا يَمْلِكُونَ كَشْفَ الضُّرِّ عَنكُمْ وَلَا تَحْوِيلًا ‎ ﴿٥٦﴾ ‏ أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ يَبْتَغُونَ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهِمُ الْوَسِيلَةَ أَيُّهُمْ أَقْرَبُ وَيَرْجُونَ رَحْمَتَهُ وَيَخَافُونَ عَذَابَهُ ۚ إِنَّ عَذَابَ رَبِّكَ كَانَ مَحْذُورًا ‎ ﴿٥٧﴾ ‏

“Say, ‘Call upon those whom you claim besides Allah; they do not possess the power to remove any harm from you nor to change it.’ Those whom they call upon seek a means to their Lord, among them are those who are nearer to Him in hope of His mercy and fear of His punishment. Indeed, your Lord’s punishment is something to be feared.”
Now, in the commentary of these verses, the Barelvi commentator Saeedi Sahib wrote:
“The meaning of this verse is the rejection of the polytheists, who said that they themselves are not worthy of worshipping Allah, but the worthy ones are the close ones, meaning the angels of Allah. Then they made imaginary idols of angels and worshipped these idols with this interpretation. Some commentators said that they worshipped Hazrat Isa and Hazrat Uzair, and this verse was revealed in rejection of their worship, stating that those whom you worship cannot remove any harm from you nor can they bring you any benefit.”

From Saeedi Sahib’s commentary, it is also clear that Sayyidna Isa, Sayyidna Uzair, and the angels (peace be upon them) neither have the power to remove any harm nor to bring any benefit. The words of the Holy Quran are:

﴿فَلَا يَمْلِكُونَ كَشْفَ الضُّرِّ عَنكُمْ وَلَا تَحْوِيلًا﴾

“That neither do they have the power to remove any harm from you nor to turn it away.”
Then from the next verse, it is clear that this statement is said about the close and righteous ones. Sialvi Sahib denies believing in the prophets (peace be upon them) and the righteous as من دون الله, but along with the texts of the Holy Quran, even their own co-religionists accept them as included.

Fourth Sialvi Fallacy:

Sialvi has written:
The grandeur of من دون الله is such that they are not even the owners of the thin membrane on the date seed, and regarding the Prophets, Allah Almighty says:

﴿فَقَدْ آتَيْنَا آلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَآتَيْنَاهُم مُّلْكًا عَظِيمًا﴾

“So We gave the family of Abraham the Scripture and wisdom, and We gave them a great kingdom.”
From this noble verse, it is proven that من دون الله is not the owner of anything, and the Prophets, peace be upon them, are the owners of a great kingdom.

Answer:

As usual, here too, without reflecting on the verse, Sialvi Sahib has made this speech. His “Mujaddid” Sahib has translated the verse as follows:
“So We gave the children of Abraham the Book and wisdom, and We gave them a great kingdom.”

In the margin, while explaining this, their “Sadr al-Afazil” Naeemuddin Muradabadi Sahib wrote: “As was given to Prophet Yusuf, Prophet Dawud, and Prophet Sulaiman, peace be upon them.”

Saidi Sahib wrote in the exegesis of this verse:
“In the family of Prophet Abraham, prophets and messengers were sent who were given these books and wisdom. A great kingdom was also given, just as Prophet Yusuf, Prophet Dawud, and Prophet Sulaiman were given kingdoms.”

“Sialvi Sahib’s presented verse, or indeed any verse or hadith, does not prove that all the Prophets, peace be upon them, were given a kingdom, i.e., kingship. Sayyidna Dawud, peace be upon him, became king after Talut.”

“Similarly, during the presence of Sayyidna Dawud, peace be upon him, Sayyidna Sulaiman was not king; he became king after him.”

“Likewise, when other texts are considered, it becomes clear that in Surah Fatir, the powers referred to are those beyond the usual causes. Similarly, the statement that they do not hear your prayers, and even if they do, they cannot accept your prayers, indicates that the deceased and distant people are meant. Otherwise, asking prayers from living and near or somewhat distant persons is among ordinary and natural matters. But this absolutely does not mean that prayers should be asked from near and living people, since prayer is an act of worship which is the exclusive right of Allah.”

Fifth Sialvi Fallacy:

Sialvi has written: Allah Almighty says about Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him):

﴿وَ كَذٰلِكَ مَكَنَّا لِيُوسُفَ فِي الْأَرْضِ يَتَبَوَّءُ مِنْهَا حَيْثُ يَشَاءُ﴾

“Thus We established Yusuf (peace be upon him) firmly in the land, where We willed.”
“In its interpretation, Maulvi Shabbir Ahmad Usmani writes that Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him) descended wherever he wished and exercised authority wherever he wished.”
From this verse, it is also proven that من دون الله does not include Prophets and Saints.

Answer:

Undoubtedly, Allah Almighty has indeed commanded thus, but the point to consider is that this “authority” refers to all powers, even those beyond the means? Seeing Syed Sahib’s argument, it seems that he has not carefully read the Holy Quran, let alone Surah Yusuf, because in the same Surah, a little later it is also stated:

﴿كَذَٰلِكَ كِدْنَا لِيُوسُفَ ۖ مَا كَانَ لِيَأْخُذَ أَخَاهُ فِي دِينِ الْمَلِكِ إِلَّا أَن يَشَاءَ اللَّهُ﴾

Refer to the translation and Tafsir by Barelvi Pir Bhairavi Sahib, who wrote:
“Thus, we could not have planned for Yusuf to keep his brother according to the law of the King of Egypt except that Allah Almighty willed.”

Then, while explaining, he wrote:
“If Allah’s support had not been obtained, it would not have been possible for Hazrat Yusuf to keep his brother according to the law of his country.”

So, Syed Sahib, this is the Tafsir of one of your own Pir Sahibs. From this verse of the Holy Quran and this Tafsir, it becomes as clear as daylight that although Sayyiduna Yusuf (peace be upon him) was granted authority in the land of Egypt by Allah Almighty, he did not possess all powers there; so how could he have all powers over the entire earth and even after death? This verse certainly does not prove that the Prophets من دون الله mean other than Allah. Moreover, there is no mention of the Awliya (saints) at all in this verse. It is unclear on what basis Syed Sahib keeps mentioning the Awliya everywhere alongside?!!

The Sixth Sialvi Fallacy:

Sialvi has written:
The command of Allah Almighty is:

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَن ذِي الْقَرْنَيْنِ ۖ قُلْ سَأَتْلُو عَلَيْكُم مِّنْهُ ذِكْرًا ‎ ﴿٨٣﴾ ‏ إِنَّا مَكَّنَّا لَهُ فِي الْأَرْضِ

And when they ask you about Dhul-Qarnayn, say: I will recite to you something of his story. We established him firmly in the land, and We gave him means to achieve all things.

Answer:

Undoubtedly, Dhul-Qarnayn was a righteous and just king. Allah Almighty granted him a great kingdom, but the Holy Quran does not mention the granting of extraordinary supernatural things. In the interpretation of this verse, Allama Ghulam Rasool Saeedi of the Barelvi school wrote:
“The dominion and authority of Dhul-Qarnayn. The meaning of this verse is that We gave him a great kingdom, and whatever a king needs to establish his sovereignty, We granted him those things. We gave him the power to control all directions of the kingdom, and We provided him with all kinds of weapons, means, and resources by which he became the ruler of all the east and west, and all countries became subject to him, and all kings of Arabs and non-Arabs became obedient to him.”

From this interpretation, it also becomes clear that all his control was outward and related to matters of the state. He was provided with every necessary means. Therefore, this verse does not at all prove that he had power over supernatural matters or the ability to hear people’s prayers. Nor does it prove that he was من دون الله, meaning other than Allah or besides Allah.

Seventh Sialvi Fallacy:

Sialvi Sahib has written:

وَلَقَدْ كَتَبْنَا فِي الزَّبُورِ مِن بَعْدِ الذِّكْرِ أَنَّ الْأَرْضَ يَرِثُهَا عِبَادِيَ الصَّالِحُونَ ‎ ﴿١٠٥﴾ ‏

“And We have written in the Zabur after the reminder that My righteous servants shall inherit the earth (Translation by Mahmood Al-Hasan).” From this noble verse, it is proven that Prophets (peace be upon them) and Awliya (may Allah be pleased with them) are not included in “min doonillah” (other than Allah), because the status of “min doonillah” is such that they are not even owners of the membrane on a date seed, whereas here Allah Almighty says that My righteous servants will become inheritors of the earth.”

Eighth Sialvi Fallacy:

It is written: The command of the Almighty is:

﴿إِنَّ الْأَرْضَ لِلَّهِ يُورِثُهَا مَن يَشَاءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ﴾

“The earth belongs only to Allah; Allah makes whomever He wills among His servants the inheritor.” From this noble verse, it is also proven that Prophets (peace be upon them) and Awliya (may Allah be pleased with them) are not included in “min doonillah” because those “other than Allah” do not possess even an atom of ownership, and the Prophets (peace be upon them) are inheritors of the entire earth by His grant.”

Answer:

What is meant by making the earth an heir is clear in itself, but it is not known why Sialvi Sahib is making such a great claim by presenting these verses that the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the pious saints ”من دون الله“ are not included. First, observe the explanation of these verses from the commentary of the second party’s commentator, Saeedi Sahib, who has written:
Some commentators have said that this refers to the earth of the world, and Allah Almighty has promised to grant governance and authority to the righteous Muslims. The evidence for this is the verse:

﴿وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ﴾

“Allah has promised those among you who believe and do righteous deeds that He will surely grant them succession [to authority] upon the earth just as He granted it to those before them and that He will surely establish for them [therein] their religion which He has preferred for them and that He will surely substitute for them, after their fear, security. They worship Me, not associating anything with Me. But whoever disbelieves after that – then those are the defiantly disobedient.”
Similarly, Prophet Musa (Moses) (peace be upon him) said to his people:

﴿قَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِقَوْمِهِ اسْتَعِينُوا بِاللَّهِ وَاصْبِرُوا ۖ إِنَّ الْأَرْضَ لِلَّهِ يُورِثُهَا مَن يَشَاءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ﴾ ‏

“Musa said to his people, ‘Seek help through Allah and be patient. Indeed, the earth belongs to Allah. He causes to inherit it whom He wills of His servants.’”
The meaning of these verses is that when righteous Muslims strive and struggle to establish the system of Allah’s religion, Allah will help them and by His grace will grant them authority over the earth.

These verses and the explanation from the Barelvi commentator are before you. The matter of granting authority to the people of faith means granting governance and rule over this earth. And this authority is not among the matters beyond causes. Then how has it been proven from these verses that the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the pious saints من دون الله mean no one except Allah?
If Sialvi Sahib thinks on this basis that here Allah has spoken of granting governance on earth to His servants, meaning the believing righteous servants, whereas according to Maulvi Sahib’s opinion من دون الله do not have even an atom’s worth of authority, therefore the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the pious saints are not included in من دون الله, then Sialvi Sahib should also say that none of the believing righteous servants من دون الله are included. (May Allah protect us) Rather, he should even say that disbelievers are not included in من دون الله, while these disbelievers possess great kingdoms, whether Allah has granted them these kingdoms for any purpose or not. But they certainly exist. Rather, Sialvi Sahib should even say that no human being in the world is included in من دون الله, since every person in the world is the owner of something or other, and the basis of Sialvi Sahib’s argument is this very point that من دون الله do not own even the husk of a date seed or an atom, while they are people of faith. So it is incumbent upon them, according to their thinking, not to consider every owner of every date and atom as included among those besides Allah. At least not every believer, even if they are sinful. If they do not think so, then they must present a proof for the specification of the saints.

هاتو برهانكم ان كنتم صدقين!

The New Sialvi Fallacy:

Sialvi has written: Allah’s command is:

﴿يَا دَاوُودُ إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاكَ خَلِيفَةً فِي الْأَرْضِ﴾

“O Dawood! We have made you a vicegerent on the earth.”
This noble verse is clear evidence that prophets, peace be upon them, are not deputies besides Allah because they do not have even the slightest authority. And Allah Almighty gave Dawood, peace be upon him, a new vicegerency on earth; whoever is a deputy of a king is the owner of the affairs of that land, both black and white. So how can the deputy of Allah, God forbid, be a deputy of a stone who has no authority?

Answer:

When the Caliphate was granted on earth, and a Caliph was appointed, it meant that the one who establishes the system revealed by Allah on that earth was appointed. Accordingly, alongside the portion quoted by Sialvi Sahib, the command of Allah Almighty is also present:

﴿فَاحْكُم بَيْنَ النَّاسِ بِالْحَقِّ وَلَا تَتَّبِعِ الْهَوَىٰ فَيُضِلَّكَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ ۚ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَضِلُّونَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ﴾

“So judge between the people with justice and do not follow desire, lest it mislead you from the way of Allah.”

And here, the Caliphate on earth does not mean the Caliphate of the entire earth; it is established from the verses and hadiths that the prophethood of all prophets except Muhammad Mustafa ﷺ was for a specific time and region. Observe this fact in the words of my commentator Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib, who wrote:
“Before the mission of Sayyiduna Muhammad ﷺ, the prophets and messengers who were sent were messengers for a specific area, specific time, and specific nation, and the commands revealed for their worship and affairs were also for a specific period.”

If Sialvi Sahib wants to prove from this granting of Caliphate that the prophets, peace be upon them, are not included in من دون الله, then why does he not say, citing

, that all the Caliphs from the rightly guided Caliphate to the Ottoman Caliphate, especially the just Caliphs like the Rightly Guided Caliphs, may Allah be pleased with them, are not included in من دون الله that Allah alone granted the Caliphate to the believers and appointed a Caliph? Similarly, among the disbelievers, those whom Allah granted kingship by His will, may Allah protect us, are they also not included in ”من دون الله“? With the kind of arguments Sialvi Sahib is presenting in opposition, by such arguments, all the people of the world would be proven excluded from من دون الله. (May Allah protect us)

Sialvi Sahib and General Principles

“From Sialvi Sahib’s writing, it seems that he is somewhat familiar with certain general principles of logic, even if applying them causes him some trouble. In any case, presenting some such words, he wrote: Although this verse only proves the caliphate of Dawud (peace be upon him), whereas the claim of Ahl al-Sunnah is that all the Prophets (peace be upon them) have authority, we have presented this argument because the Wahhabi gentlemen claim the absolute negation that no Prophet or Wali has any authority over anything. So from here, the authority of Dawud (peace be upon him) on earth is proven, thus their claim of absolute negation is proven false because the negation of absolute is partial negation.”

Answer:

First of all, it is a great slander on Ahl-e-Haq that they do not accept any authority for the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the pious saints. Undoubtedly, Allah Almighty has given authority to whomever He willed and as much as He willed. From this perspective, their general negative claim is pure slander.

The reality is that Barelvis claim to have many authorities beyond means and causes; even after the death of these close servants of Allah, they believe these authorities can fulfill needs, remove difficulties, grant wealth, status, honor, and disgrace—in short, they claim authority to bestow every blessing with which Allah Almighty blesses His common servants. This belief is not proven by any evidence. People who try to provide proof for such beliefs present some so-called arguments, but these do not establish the belief at all.

As for the issue of generalities, Sialvi Sahib has claimed that “all Prophets are endowed with authority.” His claim, in terms of generalities, is a “positive general” (موجبہ کلیہ), which can also have a “partial negative” (سالبہ جزئیہ). In previous pages, we have cited Quranic verses and their interpretations along with Barelvi explanations and objections. As in the Quran, it is stated that those besides Allah to whom prayers are made can neither remove harm nor delay it. In its interpretation, like many other commentators, Saeedi Sahib wrote:

“Some commentators have said that they used to worship Jesus and Uzair, and in response to their worship, this verse was revealed that those whom you worship can neither remove any harm from you nor bring you any benefit.”

Although the Quranic verses negate everyone except Allah, even the Barelvi interpretation negates such authority, power, and control for Sayyiduna Isa and Sayyiduna Uzair (peace be upon them). According to their own principles, this is at least a “partial negative.” And a “partial negative” is sufficient to refute a positive general. Their claim is thus proven false because they are general claimants while some negations are admitted even by themselves. Therefore, relying on generalities is also not beneficial for them.

Tenth Sialvi Fallacy:

After this, Sialvi Sahib mentioned the prayer of Sayyiduna Sulaiman (peace be upon him) to Allah Almighty and the acceptance of this prayer by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and the kingdom granted as a result, writing: It is also evident from this noble verse and the Tafsir of Shabbir Ahmad Usmani that the Prophets (peace be upon them) do not enter من دون الله.

Answer:

mentions the prayer of Sayyiduna Sulaiman (peace be upon him) and the gift from the Lord. Who can deny this? Undoubtedly, Allah Almighty accepted his prayer and granted him such a kingdom that was not given to any other individual. But there is nothing in this verse that the Prophets (peace be upon them) are not included in من دون الله! As usual, Sialvi Sahib has argued from the concept of possession, and we have already responded that every human being has some degree of possession. The eleventh Sialvi fallacy is written as follows:
The command of the Almighty is:

﴿قُلِ اللَّهُمَّ مَالِكَ الْمُلْكِ تُؤْتِي الْمُلْكَ مَن تَشَاءُ﴾

“O beloved! You say that O Allah, You are the owner of the entire kingdom, and You grant the entire kingdom to whomsoever You will.”
“From this noble verse, it is established that Allah Almighty can grant the entire kingdom to whomever He wills, so it becomes clear that the Prophets (peace be upon them) are not included in ‘min doon Allah’ (besides Allah), because those (besides Allah) are not owners of even a particle. And these honorable ones are owners of the entire universe by the grace of Allah Almighty, just as Maulvi Mahmood al-Hasan has written in his book Adillah Kamila.”

Answer:

Allah Almighty can “grant the entire kingdom” to whomever He wills, and there is a significant difference between “can grant” and “has granted.” It is not proven from any verse or hadith that Allah Almighty has made the Prophets, peace be upon them, the owners of the entire universe. Yes, this is indeed the claim of Maulvi Sialvi Sahib and those of his sect, but a mere claim is not evidence. Furthermore, as we have stated in previous pages, except for Sayyiduna Muhammad Mustafa, peace be upon him, the prophethood of all other Prophets, peace be upon them, was limited to a specific nation, specific regions, and specific times. And what could be superior to prophethood among creation? When their prophethood was for the people of the entire earth, then how could those Prophets, upon whom Allah Almighty bestowed kingship on earth, be kings of the entire universe?

Then Maulvi Sialvi Sahib has quoted in his book

, from which it is proven that the kingship Allah granted to Sayyiduna Sulaiman, peace be upon him, was a kingship like no other was granted to anyone. If all the Prophets, peace be upon them, were owners of the entire universe, then what was the special nature of Sayyiduna Sulaiman’s kingship? (May Allah protect us) Whereas the Holy Quran itself describes the special nature of his kingship. Even if, hypothetically, the ownership of the universe for all were proven, it still would not prove that the Prophets, peace be upon them, are من دون الله, meaning none besides Allah, while it is proven from numerous verses that من دون الله also includes the Prophets.

Twelfth Sialvi Fallacy:

It is written:
Regarding من دون الله, Allah the Exalted says

﴿وَمَا لَكُم مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ مِن وَلِيٍّ وَلَا نَصِيرٍ ‎﴾ ‏

“There is no helper or friend for you besides Allah.”
From this, it is proven that those who are من دون الله are not capable of helping anyone,

Answer:

How baseless is the statement written by Sialvi Sahib! From his writing, it seems that in his view among the creation there is a specific type of من دون الله about whom Allah the Exalted has spoken. Certainly, this is not the case. Moreover, in this verse the words من دون الله are present, but not for any particular creation; rather, according to Sialvi Sahib’s own translation, they are for “besides Allah,” and Sialvi Sahib cannot deny that all creation is besides Allah. There is not a single individual among the creation who can be called Allah.
The rest of the answer will be presented in response to the next fallacy, InshaAllah.

Thirteenth Sialvi Fallacy:

It is written:
Regarding the Prophets, peace be upon them, Allah the Exalted says:

﴿وَإِذْ أَخَذَ اللَّهُ مِيثَاقَ النَّبِيِّينَ لَمَا آتَيْتُكُم مِّن كِتَابٍ وَحِكْمَةٍ ثُمَّ جَاءَكُمْ رَسُولٌ مُّصَدِّقٌ لِّمَا مَعَكُمْ لَتُؤْمِنُنَّ بِهِ وَلَتَنصُرُنَّهُ﴾

“Remember the time when Allah took a covenant from all the Prophets that when I give you the Book and Wisdom, then a Messenger will come to you confirming what is with you. You must believe in him and support him.”
From this noble verse, it is proven that من دون الله does not include the Prophets, peace be upon them. If the Prophets, peace be upon them, were included in those besides Allah, then they would not have the power to provide help.

Answer:

Undoubtedly, this verse indicates that the prophets, peace be upon them, were given the covenant that they would both affirm and assist. However, this does not prove that they are من دون الله, meaning other than Allah (may Allah protect us). If Syed Sahib’s argument is based on the power to assist, as it is, since it is written: “If the prophets, peace be upon them, were included among those besides Allah, then they would not have the power to assist,” then the Maulvi Sahib should hold the belief regarding the entire Ummah of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, and indeed all the believers of all the prophets, peace be upon them, that they are not included among those besides Allah (may Allah protect us). Why? Because Allah Almighty said:

﴿فَلَمَّا اَحَسَّ عيسى مِنْهُمُ الْكُفْرَ قَالَ مَنْ اَنْصَارِى إِلَى اللهِ قَالَ الْحَوارِيُّونَ نَحْنُ اَنْصَارُ اللَّهِ اٰمَنَّا بِاللهِ وَ اشْهَدُ بِانَّا مُسْلِمُونَ﴾

“Then when Jesus sensed disbelief from them, he said, ‘Who will be my helpers to [the cause of] Allah?’ The disciples said, ‘We are helpers of Allah. We have believed in Allah, and you bear witness that we are Muslims.'”

The Barelvi scholar and exegete Saeedi Sahib wrote in the commentary of this verse:

The companions of Hazrat Isa, peace be upon him, are called Hawariyyun (disciples).

“This verse proves that all the companions of Sayyiduna Isa, peace be upon him, became his disciples and helpers.”

Also, Allah Almighty said:

﴿فَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِهِ وَ عَزَّرُوهُ وَ نَصَرُوهُ وَ اتَّبَعُوا النَّوْرَ الَّذِي أُنْزِلَ مَعَه أُولئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ﴾

“So those who have believed in him, honored him, helped him, and followed the light which was sent down with him – it is those who will be the successful.”

This verse gives glad tidings of success and prosperity to those who believe in the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, honor him, and assist him. According to this verse, the command to assist him is for all the believers, and it is one of the rights of the Prophet, peace be upon him, over his Ummah.

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said:

ما من نبي بعثه الله فى أمة قبلي إلا كان له من أمته حواريون و أصحاب يأخذون بسنته ويقتدون بأمره

“Before me, every prophet whom Allah sent to any nation had disciples and companions who adopted their Sunnah and obeyed their commands.”

This hadith clearly proves that any prophet, peace be upon him, who had a nation, had disciples who were sincere helpers. Some hadith mention that prophets who had no followers are exceptions. In any case, every prophet, peace be upon him, who had followers, had helpers among them.

Now, the unique arguments of Syed Sahib require him to say that all the people of all nations who, to some degree, became helpers of their prophet, peace be upon him, are not included among all the believers of the Ummah of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and are not ”من دون الله“, meaning other than Allah. May Allah protect us.

But the matter does not end here. Disbelievers also help one another; the allies of the devils also assist each other. According to Maulvi Syed Sahib’s argument, disbelievers would also not be included in من دون الله, may Allah protect us, and the term من دون الله, meaning “other than Allah,” would not apply to them either, since they too have the power to assist (I seek Allah’s forgiveness).

If Syed Sahib rises above sectarian bias and considers this with justice, then by reflecting on various Quranic texts, it will become clear to him that

the negation of help mentioned there is help that is above the causes, not the negation of help that is subordinate to causes.

Because throughout the entire Quran, there is no proof of help from other than Allah that is above the causes, but there is proof of help subordinate to causes. In short, Syed Sahib’s argument does not prove his claim.

Fourteenth Sialvi Fallacy:

It is written: The command of Allah Almighty is:

﴿إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ لَن يَخْلُقُوا ذُبَابًا وَلَوِ اجْتَمَعُوا لَهُ ۖ وَإِن يَسْلُبْهُمُ الذُّبَابُ شَيْئًا لَّا يَسْتَنقِذُوهُ مِنْهُ﴾

“The ones whom you call besides Allah can never create anything, and if a fly snatches something from them, they cannot retrieve it from it.”
Whereas the Quran describes the status of Allah’s wali (friend) as:

﴿قَالَ الَّذِي عِندَهُ عِلْمٌ مِّنَ الْكِتَابِ أَنَا آتِيكَ بِهِ قَبْلَ أَن يَرْتَدَّ إِلَيْكَ طَرْفُكَ﴾

“He said to the man who had knowledge of the Book, ‘I will bring it to you before your glance returns.'”
“It is understood that the position of those besides Allah is that they can never snatch anything, and the position of Allah’s friends is that they can bring a throne located fifteen hundred miles away within the blink of an eye.”

Answer:

In

, who are included, it becomes clear from Maulana Sialvi Sahib’s written translation that he has translated من دون الله as “other than Allah.” For anyone who knows and understands Urdu, it is not difficult to understand that any being, no matter how exalted and virtuous, if we cannot call them Allah, then they are “other than Allah.” And anyone with even a trace of faith will never dare or be so disrespectful as to call any greater creation Allah. And Maulana Sialvi Sahib’s purpose is that Prophets (peace be upon them) and Awliya (saints) are not included in من دون الله; so do they have the courage to say clearly that Prophets and Awliya are not other than Allah but are Allah? (May Allah protect us) If not, and certainly not, then they should reconsider their reasoning because this is the conclusion that follows.

Secondly, in the tafsir of the verse, their “Allama Saeedi Sahib” wrote:
“The forms which they used to venerate and worship, i.e., stars, planets, angels, Prophets, and the righteous, among these stars and planets absolutely cannot create anything, and if something is taken from them, they cannot return it. As for angels, Prophets, and the righteous, they cannot create anything by their own power nor can they intervene in anything without Allah’s permission. Although Hazrat Isa (Jesus) created some birds and revived some dead, it was by the power and permission given by Allah. Similarly, angels, Prophets, and the righteous intervene in the universe but by Allah’s power and permission, and without His grant and permission, they cannot make idols nor intervene in anything. The beings whose forms these idols were made of also cannot create anything or intervene in anything without His grant and permission.”

The purpose of presenting this is that if Prophets (peace be upon them) and Awliya are not included in من دون الله, then why did Saeedi Sahib write in the tafsir of this verse that “angels, Prophets, and the righteous cannot create anything by their own power nor intervene in anything without Allah’s permission”?

From Saeedi Sahib’s tafsir, it becomes clear that this verse is also a refutation of all those who worship Allah’s righteous servants besides Allah, such as the Christians worshiping Sayyiduna Isa (Jesus) and the Jews worshiping Sayyiduna Uzair (Ezra), and similarly both worship their own righteous individuals. Likewise, the polytheists of Makkah worshiped idols made in the forms of Sayyiduna Ibrahim, Sayyiduna Ismail (peace be upon them), and some other righteous people. These facts are known even to their Maulvis, so may Allah protect us, is Allah Almighty unaware of these matters? No, absolutely not. Then why did Allah not specify an exception for the righteous in this and similar verses? If these clear verses (may Allah protect us) were insulting to the righteous and the close ones to Allah, then an exception would certainly have been mentioned, as we have quoted earlier

, where Allah Almighty did specify an exception for the righteous and the close ones.

Thirdly, if Maulana Sialvi Sahib or anyone of his sect and thought believes that Awliya possess the attribute of creation by Allah’s given power and are creators of many things, then they should openly admit this and also consider these verses.

Allah Almighty said:
1: اللَّهُ خَالِقُ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ ۖ وَهُوَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَكِيلٌ ‎ ﴿٦٢﴾

“Allah is the Creator of all things, and He is the Guardian over all things.”

When Allah Almighty alone is the Creator of everything, then Maulana Sialvi Sahib should explain: what are the Awliya creators of? What have they created?

After mentioning the creation of the earth and the heavens, Allah said:
2: هَٰذَا خَلْقُ اللَّهِ فَأَرُونِي مَاذَا خَلَقَ الَّذِينَ مِن دُونِهِ ۚ بَلِ الظَّالِمُونَ فِي ضَلَالٍ مُّبِينٍ ‎ ﴿١١﴾ ‏

“This is the creation of Allah (O polytheists)! Now show Me what others besides Him have created? (Nothing) But they are in clear error.”

In the tafsir of this verse, Bihrawi Sahib wrote something that is a great advice and lesson for Maulana Sialvi Sahib and others like him. Bihrawi Sahib wrote:
“This vast and lofty dome of the sky, which has no pillars or supports visible to hold it, this spacious earth and the lofty mountains embedded in it, the various animals, the timely rainfall, the colorful crops, vegetables, trees growing, bearing fruit, blooming, and everything else you see, Allah has created all this with His perfect power and supreme wisdom. And you do not have the courage to deny this. Now tell Me, what perfection of power and wisdom have those false gods you worship day and night shown that you have started to consider them gods? How powerful and clear is this argument against polytheism.”

Look, Maulana Sialvi Sahib! Everything you see has been created by Allah Almighty, so how can Awliya be creators? Then the term “false gods” does not mean that the righteous and the lower servants who claim divinity, may Allah protect us, are false; absolutely not. They are just children, but to make them Allah, to declare them gods, and to claim their divinity is the falsehood of the polytheists. So those who committed worship and veneration of Sayyiduna Isa, Sayyiduna Uzair, Sayyiduna Ibrahim, Sayyiduna Ismail (peace be upon them) and the righteous were also questioned:

﴿فَأَرُونِى مَاذَا خَلَقَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ دُونِه؟﴾

“Now show Me what they besides Allah have created?”

If Maulana Sahib considers Prophets (peace be upon them) as creators on their own, then can’t Christians say that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the creator of many things and his worship is rightful? Maulana Sialvi Sahib does not consider “righteous” included in ”من دون الله“; tell us what their answer will be? Also, what will be the answer to this objection that if Allah’s righteous servants are also “creators,” then why does this verse say: “Tell Me what these people have created?”

3: After mentioning some of His blessings, Allah Almighty said:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ اذْكُرُوا نِعْمَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ ۚ هَلْ مِنْ خَالِقٍ غَيْرُ اللَّهِ يَرْزُقُكُم مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۚ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۖ فَأَنَّىٰ تُؤْفَكُونَ ‎ ﴿٣﴾ ‏

“O people! Remember the favor of Allah upon you. Is there any creator besides Allah who provides for you from the heavens and the earth? There is no deity except Him, so how are you deluded?”

Can Maulana Sialvi Sahib and his followers say that yes! Awliya are the creators who provide sustenance? If your answer is yes, then listen to Saeedi Sahib who wrote the benefit of this verse:
“The benefit of this verse is that when a person becomes fully certain that there is no provider except Allah, then his heart will not turn to anyone other than Allah to ask for anything, nor will he bow before anyone.”

Many other verses can be presented proving that “being a creator” is an attribute of Allah Almighty, and no one shares this attribute with Him. It is a fact that those besides Allah who are worshiped and called for help cannot create anything, and it is the right of the Creator alone that prayers be made to Him. Allah Almighty says:
4: قُلْ أَرَأَيْتُمْ شُرَكَاءَكُمُ الَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ أَرُونِي مَاذَا خَلَقُوا مِنَ الْأَرْضِ أَمْ لَهُمْ شِرْكٌ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ أَمْ آتَيْنَاهُمْ كِتَابًا فَهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَيِّنَتٍ مِّنْهُ ۚ بَلْ إِن يَعِدُ الظَّالِمُونَ بَعْضُهُم بَعْضًا إِلَّا غُرُورًا ‎ ﴿٤٠﴾

“Say, have you seen those whom you invoke besides Allah? Show Me what they have created of the earth, or do they have any partnership in the heavens? Or have We given them a book so that they are guided by clear proofs? (Nothing) Rather, the wrongdoers promise one another falsehood.”

It is proven from the Quran itself that the unjust polytheists had made Allah’s beloved and righteous servants partners with Allah, yet Allah Almighty’s command without any specification or exception to show which part of the earth or heavens they created proves that there is no creator besides Allah. In short, Maulana Sialvi Sahib’s claim that من دون الله does not include the righteous is baseless and false.

Now let’s come to Maulana Sialvi Sahib’s claim that “the Quran describes the status of the Wali (saint).” Is

about the status of a “Wali”? Remember that in our culture, “Wali” refers to a righteous, pious non-prophet person who said to Sayyiduna Sulaiman (peace be upon him) that he would bring the throne of the Queen of Sheba before he could blink his eye. The verse is:

﴿قَالَ الَّذِي عِندَهُ عِلْمٌ مِّنَ الْكِتاب﴾

“He said, ‘I have knowledge of the Book.'”
Who is meant by الذي “He” in the verse? Is it a human? Their Allama Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Sahib wrote in the tafsir of this verse:
Who was the person who had knowledge of the Book? Allama Syed Mahmood Alusi

writes: Ibn Abbas, Yazid bin Rumani, Hasan Basri, and the majority agree that this person was Asif bin Barkhiya from Bani Israel. (Ruh al-Ma’ani) Other opinions about this person are: Allama Ali bin Muhammad Mawardi

writes:
(1) He was the angel by whose means Allah gave power to Prophet Sulaiman’s kingdom.
(2) He was a member of Sulaiman’s army consisting of jinn and humans.
(3) He was Sulaiman himself who commanded an Ifrit from the jinn to bring the throne before he blinked. (Imam Razi preferred this opinion.)
(4) He was another human besides Sulaiman, and there are five opinions about him:
① Qatadah said his name was Malykha.
② Mujahid said his name was Astum.
③ Ibn Ruman said he was Sulaiman’s friend, Asif bin Barkhiya.
④ Zubair said his name was Dhul-Nur and he was Egyptian.
⑤ Ibn Lahia said he was Khidr.

The Quran does not explicitly state whose statement this is. As for the mufassirun (exegetes), there are various opinions in tafsir books; some say one thing, others another. Saeedi Sahib also quoted four opinions. So on what basis does Maulana Sialvi Sahib claim that he was a “Wali”? Saeedi Sahib himself later wrote that he was Asif bin Barkhiya and also wrote:
“Imam Ibn Abi Hatim

narrates with chain of transmission that Saeed bin Jubair narrated from Ibn Abbas that that person was Asif bin Barkhiya, who was the secretary of Prophet Sulaiman (peace be upon him).”

But Saeedi Sahib did not like to mention that Imam A’mash is a mudallis (one who conceals defects in the chain) and this narration is from ”عن“. Barelvi debater Abbas Rizvi criticized this narration saying:
“In this narration, one narrator is Imam A’mash who, although a great Imam, is a mudallis, and when a mudallis narrates from ‘an’ (direct hearing), his narration is unanimously rejected.”

He wrote in another book:
“According to the principles of hadith scholars, the ‘an’anah’ (continuous chain) of a mudallis is not acceptable.”

Similarly, their “Ala Hazrat” Ahmad Raza Khan Sahib wrote:
“The ‘an’anah’ of a mudallis is accepted as authentic by the majority of hadith scholars.”

In short, when the Quran does not explicitly state that the one who brought the throne was from among humans, and the hadith or companion’s statement is not proven from them either, as for the tafsir of the Tabi’in, their Hakim al-Ummat quoted from his Allama Golravi:
“As for the tafsir of the Quran by the Tabi’in or Tabi’ al-Tabi’in, if it is from narration, it is either authentic or not.”

Then what is the use of Maulana Sialvi or Saeedi Sahib measuring distances and saying 1500 miles? Then their Sadr al-Fazil, Naeemuddin Muradabadi Sahib wrote in the tafsir of this verse:
“Asif said, ‘You are a Prophet, son of a Prophet, and the rank you have in the presence of Allah, who else has it here? You pray, and it will be with you.’ He said, ‘You speak the truth.’ And at that moment, the throne moved underground and appeared near Prophet Sulaiman’s chair.”

From this tafsir, it is understood that the throne was brought by Allah Almighty because the One who accepts prayers is Allah alone. Therefore, Maulana Sialvi Sahib presenting this verse and saying that the status of the Wali is that he can bring a throne 1500 miles away in the blink of an eye is a wrong argument. Then to deduce from this that Awliya are من دون الله, i.e., not other than Allah, is even more false.

Fifteenth Sialvi Fallacy:

It is written:
And the glory of من دون الله is that they can never create. And Jesus, peace be upon him, says:

﴿أَخْلُقُ لَكُم مِّنَ الطِّينِ كَهَيْئَةِ الطَّيْرِ فَأَنفُخُ فِيهِ فَيَكُونُ طَيْرًا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ﴾

“That I make a figure from clay in the form of a bird, then I breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by the permission of Allah.”
“It is proven that Prophets, peace be upon them, and the noble saints are not included in من دون الله.”

Answer:

If Sialvi Sahib had mentioned the initial part of this verse, his misconception would have been immediately resolved. Anyway, listen, Allah Almighty said:

﴿‏ وَرَسُولًا إِلَىٰ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ أَنِّي قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِآيَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ ۖ أَنِّي أَخْلُقُ لَكُم مِّنَ الطِّينِ كَهَيْئَةِ الطَّيْرِ فَأَنفُخُ فِيهِ فَيَكُونُ طَيْرًا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ ۖ وَأُبْرِئُ الْأَكْمَهَ وَالْأَبْرَصَ وَأُحْيِي الْمَوْتَىٰ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ﴾

“And (He will send him) as a messenger to the Children of Israel (he will say to them), ‘I have come to you with a sign from your Lord (the sign is that) I make for you out of clay the likeness of a bird, then I breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah’s permission.'”

Bihrawi Sahib wrote in the commentary of this verse:
“Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) was sent to a people who were a clear proof in themselves, therefore, such clear miracles were granted to him that no wise person could deny after seeing them. The Holy Quran explains these miracles very clearly and refers to them as ‘Ayah’ and says العلامة الظاهرة which means a clear sign by which someone is recognized, leaving no room for doubt or suspicion. These miracles consist of five types:
(1) Making the likeness of a bird out of clay and breathing into it, bringing it to life.
(2) Making a congenital blind person see.
(3) Healing a leper.
(4) Bringing the dead back to life.
These four types were practical miracles, and the fifth type was a scientific miracle, that is, giving news of the unseen.”

Warning:

There is no denial of the news conveyed through the revelation that Allah Almighty has sent down.
Naeemuddin Muradabadi Sahib wrote:
“When Hazrat Isa (Jesus) عليه السلام claimed prophethood and showed miracles, people requested him to create a bat. He formed the shape of a bat from clay and then breathed into it, and it began to fly.”

❀ Saeed Sahib wrote at one place in the commentary of the same verse:
“The aforementioned five things are the strongest and most powerful miracles that prove the truthfulness of my claim to prophethood, and whoever accepts something based on evidence, these are proofs for him.”

From the interpretations of the Barelvi scholars, it appears that like all the believers, they also accept these matters as the “miracles” of Sayyiduna Isa عليه السلام, and regarding miracles, Allah Almighty has said:
1: وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلًا مِّن قَبْلِكَ وَجَعَلْنَا لَهُمْ أَزْوَاجًا وَذُرِّيَّةً ۚ وَمَا كَانَ لِرَسُولٍ أَن يَأْتِيَ بِآيَةٍ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ ۗ لِكُلِّ أَجَلٍ كِتَابٌ ‎ ﴿٣٨﴾

“And indeed We sent before you many messengers and made for them wives and descendants. And it is not for any messenger to bring a sign except by Allah’s permission. For every term is a decree.”

If a miracle were the act of the Prophet, then why would it not be possible for them to present a miracle, and why would it be said that it is dependent on Allah Almighty’s command?
2: Allah Almighty says:

﴿قُلْ إِنَّمَا الْآيَاتُ عِندَ اللَّهِ ۖ وَمَا يُشْعِرُكُمْ أَنَّهَا إِذَا جَاءَتْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ﴾

“Say, ‘Signs are only with Allah,’ and what do you know? Perhaps when the sign comes, they will not believe.”

Who is the Creator of Miracles?

In the verse under discussion, it is also mentioned that Syedna Isa (Jesus) عليه السلام used to make a bird and breathe into it, and it would become a bird by the permission of Allah Almighty, as Syedna Sialvi himself translated the verse as follows:
“Then it would become a bird by the permission of Allah.”

“Sialvi Sahib and all his like-minded followers who derive a wrong meaning from this verse and mislead the common people should carefully consider the words of the verse, which clearly show that Syedna Masih عليه السلام only shaped the clay into the form/shape of a bird and breathed into it. That clay figure became a bird only by the command of Allah, since this matter was manifested through the hands of Syedna Isa عليه السلام, it was his miracle. Similarly, he عليه السلام did not attribute the creation of the bird to himself but attributed only the creation of the bird’s form to himself. The words of كَهَيْئَة الطَّيْرِ bear witness to this. Also, the words of فَيَكُونُ طَيْرًا بِاِذْن indicate that the clay figure became a bird by the permission of Allah. Thus, there is no metaphorical attribution of the creation of the bird. The believers have always considered Allah Almighty as the Creator of these miracles, which Allah, Glorified and Exalted be He, manifests through His Prophet عليه السلام to support and confirm them, so that those who do not believe have no excuse left, because the Holy Quran states: The signs (miracles) are only with Allah.”

However, in this matter, the method and belief of the disbelievers were somewhat different. Accordingly, Saeedi Sahib wrote in the Tafsir of

:
Christians used to say that the miracles manifested by the hands of Hazrat Isa عليه السلام and Hazrat Maryam are created by Hazrat Isa and Hazrat Maryam themselves. In this regard, it is correct to narrate from them: “Did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as gods besides Allah’?”

3: Hakim al-Ummat Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Sahib of the Barelviya wrote in the Tafsir of the same verse:
“Christians consider Hazrat Isa عليه السلام as the creator of these miracles and Hazrat Maryam as the creator of her miracles, and it is evident that the Creator is only Allah; for these reasons, it is indeed stated here.”

If, like the Christians, Sialvi Sahib and his group also consider Syedna Isa عليه السلام as the creator of the miracle of making the bird, then they themselves should say whether they have walked shoulder to shoulder with the Christians or not! And according to Naeemi and Saeedi, the Barelvis, since the Christians considered Syedna Isa عليه السلام as the creator of these miracles, Allah Glorified and Exalted be He declared them to be gods besides Allah. If the Barelvis also adopt such a belief, it will necessarily mean that they consider Syedna Isa عليه السلام as a “god,” and this is explicit shirk (polytheism) even according to their own standards. اعاذنا الله منه

In short! In Sialvi Sahib’s misconception, the proof is missing that the Prophets and the Awliya (saints) من دون اللہ are none but Allah. Along with this, Sialvi Sahib’s so-called “refined discussion” has ended. The discussion he started afterward is outside the scope of this topic. Alhamdulillah, in the face of clear evidence, the reality of Sialvi Sahib’s misconceptions and intellectual evasions has become fully apparent.

Ahmad Saeed Kazmi and Those Without Allah

Respected readers, Ahmad Khan Naeemi and Ghulam Naseeruddin Sialvi have categorically claimed that the Prophets (peace be upon them) and the noble saints are not included in من دون الله. However, the Barelvi Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah, Ghazali Zaman and Razi Duran, Ahmad Saeed Kazmi Multani Sahib, have presented a somewhat different view contrary to their stance. Observe what he has written:

Regarding من دون الله, it is also necessary to express that all the verses of the Holy Quran which negate the divinity of anyone other than Allah and prohibit and condemn worship besides Allah are certainly conclusive proofs of the negation of divinity and condemnation and prohibition of worship of all the Prophets and saints (peace be upon them). Indeed, the belief in the Oneness of Allah is the essence of religion.

What Multani Sahib wrote after “but” we will also quote, God willing. But first, it should be noted that in the above excerpt, he has clearly and explicitly acknowledged the fact that من دون الله or غير الله or ماسوي الله, that is, all the verses based on the prohibition and condemnation of worship besides Allah, are certainly conclusive proofs of the condemnation and prohibition of divinity and worship of all the Prophets (peace be upon them) and noble saints.

The question to Sialvi Sahib is that according to him, the Prophets (peace be upon them) and noble saints are included in من دون الله. Then why did Kazmi Sahib say otherwise? In short, Kazmi Sahib’s statement clarifies that it is absolutely and certainly wrong to consider the Prophets (peace be upon them) and noble saints as other than Allah. Now listen further to Kazmi Multani Sahib, he wrote:

But to include them in the meaning of ” من دون الله “ and ”من دونه “ in the sense that they are absolutely not capable of any action or command, even if that action or command is by the permission of Allah, is against the Quranic texts. Indeed, it is not correct to include any individual other than Allah in the meaning of these verses in this sense.

Kazmi Sahib could not deny that the noble Prophets (peace be upon them) and saints are not included in من دون الله or that they are not other than Allah, and no rational and just person can deny this. Now, it is obligatory and necessary to accept to the extent that the Quran or the texts of the Sunnah affirm. Similarly, it is obligatory and necessary to hold the belief in the negation of all that is negated in the Quran and the blessed Hadiths regarding من دون الله. It is strange that when it comes to the negation of divinity and worship, all individuals of من دون الله, even the Prophets (peace be upon them), are considered included, but when it comes to accepting prayers, hearing supplications, relieving difficulties, and fulfilling needs, the noble saints besides the Prophets (peace be upon them) are not considered included in من دون الله. What is the reason and proof for this difference?

The evidences revealed by Allah, the Lord of the Worlds (whether in the form of the Quran or Hadiths), prove that those who engaged in the worship and veneration of others besides Allah and sought relief from difficulties through them apart from the causes, were not merely worshipping imaginary idols, but they began worshipping in opposition to the will and teachings of the close servants of Allah. However, Allah Almighty, instead of making an exception for the righteous in this matter, negated all besides Allah with general terms like مِنْ دُونِ اللهِ من دونه or غير الله. For example, Allah’s command:

قُلِ ادْعُوا الَّذِينَ زَعَمْتُم مِّن دُونِهِ فَلَا يَمْلِكُونَ كَشْفَ الضُّرِّ عَنكُمْ وَلَا تَحْوِيلًا ‎ ﴿٥٦﴾ ‏ أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ يَبْتَغُونَ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهِمُ الْوَسِيلَةَ أَيُّهُمْ أَقْرَبُ وَيَرْجُونَ رَحْمَتَهُ وَيَخَافُونَ عَذَابَهُ ۚ إِنَّ عَذَابَ رَبِّكَ كَانَ مَحْذُورًا ‎ ﴿٥٧﴾ ‏

Observe the translation of these verses by Kazmi Multani Sahib, he wrote: Say to them,
“Call upon those whom you consider as gods besides Allah; they do not possess the power to remove your distress nor to change it. Those (righteous servants) whom they worship themselves seek a means to their Lord, to see who is nearer and more hopeful of His mercy and who fears His punishment. Indeed, the punishment of your Lord is something to be feared.”

In refutation of the third Sialvi fallacy, we have quoted these verses and the commentary of the Barelvi commentator Saeedi Sahib. Now observe the commentary of Peer of Bhera, Muhammad Karam Shah Az Hari Sahib, who wrote:

The meaning is that the polytheists whom they have made gods and whom they call upon in their hardships and troubles are not gods; rather, those are always engaged in seeking the pleasure of their Generous Lord. If they were truly gods as the polytheists imagine, then why would they need worship and seeking pleasure from anyone?

Now consider these verses; they do not mention the worship of idols, stars, planets, or devils, nor do they describe them as relievers of difficulties or hearers of supplications. Rather, they mention calling upon the righteous and pious people whom the polytheists mistakenly considered as relievers of difficulties, fulfillers of needs, troublemakers, and saviors. Undoubtedly, they were beloved and dear servants of Allah, as testified by the Quran. Yet Allah Almighty said that those whom you call besides Allah, whom you consider as your helpers and relievers of difficulties, do not have the power to remove your distress; far from removing it, they cannot even turn it away. Then He further mentioned their good deeds, piety, worship, and fear and reverence as praiseworthy acts.

When the matter is that Allah Almighty has negated the authority and power of the righteous people and condemned calling upon them, and negated all besides Him, then how and why should Kazmi Multani adopt a self-made interpretation ignoring the Quranic teachings?

﴿فَلَا يَمْلِكُونَ كَشْفَ الضُّرِّ عَنكُمْ﴾

Summary:

Kazmi Sahib’s statement regarding authority and control that in this respect including any individual other than Allah in the meaning of these verses is incorrect and against the Holy Quran. Kazmi Sahib, presenting what he considered evidence, wrote:
In all such verses, من دون الله to بغير اذن الله are meant. For example, in verse ﴿وَلَا يَتَخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضًا أَرْبَابًا مِنْ دُونِ الله﴾, under من دون الله, Tafseer Mazhari states: “أى بغير اذن من الله meaning without permission from Allah

, that is, considering someone capable of personal control or personal command and enforcing his command without divine permission is like making him your Lord.

Even this interpretation does not resolve the difficulty for Barelvis, because nowhere in the Holy Quran and authentic Hadith is there a command or permission to ask for supplication from anyone other than Allah; rather, the command is to ask supplication only from Allah. If the matter is about personal or granted power, then we can say that verses or hadiths should be presented which prove that the Prophets (peace be upon them) and righteous people can accept supplications and pleas in a granted manner, and therefore supplications should be asked from them and they should be called upon. If no verse or hadith is found, and certainly none is found, then there is no proof of permission from Allah.
Quoting another example, Kazmi Sahib wrote:
And if any command or control is by Allah’s permission, then it is not included in the meaning of من دون الله. As the statement of Hazrat Isa (Jesus) (peace be upon him) appears in the Holy Quran:

﴿أَنِّي أَخْلُقُ لَكُم مِّنَ الطِّينِ كَهَيْئَةِ الطَّيْرِ فَأَنفُخُ فِيهِ فَيَكُونُ طَيْرًا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ﴾

“That I create for you from clay the likeness of a bird, then I breathe into it, and it becomes a flying bird by Allah’s permission, that is, by Allah’s command; and I heal the born blind and the leper, and I bring the dead to life by Allah’s permission, that is, by Allah’s command.”
“It is understood that no one is capable of acting on their own or issuing personal commands, rather not even a straw can move without Allah’s permission, and باذن الله by the actions of Allah’s beloved ones, life can enter into an inanimate body, and by divine permission, they can also bring the dead to life.”

It is surprising where their ”غزالي زمان“ and ” امام اهلسنت“ come from and where they connect! The verse presented mentions the miracles of Sayyiduna Isa (peace be upon him), as is clear from the beginning of the verse. But like Sialvi Sahib, Kazmi Sahib also did not consider it appropriate to present that part of the verse which would make the matter somewhat difficult. In any case, in this “statement” of Isa (peace be upon him), first of all, it is clearly stated that ﴿أَنِّي قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِآيَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ﴾ “I have come to you with a sign from your Lord.” And we have already stated that “sign” means miracle, which is an act of Allah and manifested through a Prophet (peace be upon him). To call it the control of that Prophet is an indication of the Christian mindset that Isa (peace be upon him) was the creator of miracles (may Allah protect us). Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the verse specifically mentions the miracles of Sayyiduna Isa (peace be upon him), but the Barelvis, Razis Durani and Imam Ahle Sunnat, by stretching their logic, generalize it and write that it is understood that by the actions of Allah’s beloved ones, life can enter into an inanimate body. Surely this theory is a necessity for them, because this is their belief, so to prove it, they cite the miracle verse of Sayyiduna Isa (peace be upon him) and use it as evidence for the beloved ones, so that they can prove their belief that the saints can also cure diseases, restore sight to the blind, bring the dead to life by Allah’s permission, solve difficulties and fulfill needs. However, there is no proof of this in the Quran and Hadith. For further details, see Sialvi Sahib’s fallacy and its answer.
Kazmi Sahib further wrote:
“That is, من دون الله no one can do anything, and باذن الله the servant can do everything that is related to Allah’s permission.”

Thus, Allah Almighty has negated all powers except من دون الله, that is, except Allah. Kazmi Sahib, by his logic, has affirmed all those powers. If his interpretation is not false, then why has Allah negated them in the Holy Quran while من دون الله means the negation of all besides Allah.
Then Kazmi Sahib also said that باذن الله the servant can do everything that is related to Allah’s permission. Let us see what those whom these people call ”ولي“ can do?
Dear readers, you must have heard many such stories; narrating them would be quite lengthy. One of their “Allama and Mufti,” Muhammad Akmal Atta Qadri Attari Sahib, has written a book titled “How is it to ask for help from non-Allah?” which was published by “Maktaba Aala Hazrat, Sarai Mughal Janazah Gah Mazang Lahore.” On its

, there is a heading about incidents of saints granting help, then various titles were established, and under each title, a story of help is narrated. From the titles alone, it is evident that they believe in some control for their saints. Consider some titles:
(1) “Got the lost camel returned?”

(2) “Granted desired blessings”

(3) “Stopped the river from rising”

(4) “Granted healing”

(5) “Fixed the eye”

(6) “Cured the paralyzed”

(7) “Granted a son”

(8) “Postponed death by Allah’s command”

(9) “Turned a stick into a human”

(10) “Healed the sick”

Followers of Kazmi Sahib should explain what is the proof that these actions of the saints happen by Allah’s permission, which text of Quran and Hadith proves that saints have باذن الله or granted power from Allah to perform all these actions? The summary of the discussion is that wherever in the Quranic verses or similarly in Hadiths the words من دون الله appear or after mentioning Allah the words من دونه come, those words refer to every entity other than Allah. It is not correct to exclude saints and beloved ones of Allah from this. For now, we suffice with this. God willing, if life permits, we will review the arguments of Tahir-ul-Qadri Sahib on another occasion. And with Allah is success.