Dec 6, 2009

Javed Ahmed Ghamidi - a Muslim or an Agent?

Javed Ahmed Ghamidi is a self proclaimed Pakistani Muslim "scholar" who is like Saul. Paul was the 13th self appointed disciple, who joined Christianity to create Pauline-Christianity. Today, another Saul is born, however, in the ranks of Sayyidna Muhammed Sallahu alayhi wa sallam by the name of Ghamidi. His agenda is to systematically slaughter every Sunnah and replace Islam with a new belief system, like his predecessor Paul.

In an interview, posted on Youtube, Ghamidi (who shaves his beard) is asked about the subject of "Beard in Islam". Given the opportunity to explain Ghamidi neither quotes the Quran nor any hadith in this matter. Conversely, he resorts to a philosophical explanation:

"in my opinion Muslims will keep a beard, and the reason Muslims will keep a beard is because their messenger kept a beard and they (the Muslims) love their messenger. As you know when people have a strong affinity towards great personalities, and are impressed by that personality they follow and emulate that person. Muslims also have such great love for their messenger. We know that the messenger of Allah used to keep a beard. The other prophets also had a beard, and people try to express their love by adopting and emulating; thus beard falls under this category."

It is very interesting that Ghamidi does not refer to himself as a Muslim; rather he talks about Muslims as what is known in English Grammer "third person plural" tense. He says:

  • ....their messenger
  • ....they (the Muslims) love their messenger
  • for their messenger

Is he not a Muslim? Why didn't he say our messenger? Our love for the messenger dictates...? I, and We as Muslims love our messenger? He does not use the first person singular, thus clearly dissociating himself with the Muslims. He forwards his corrupt views and clearly insults the messenger of Allah by rejecting the Hadith of Beard in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. He also mocks at the hadith and plays it off as cultural norm. In fact, during his interview he refers to Muslims as "their messenger" - a number of times.

Ghamidi refers to "Muslims" and "their belief system", which clearly indicates that his belief system is not that of Sayyiduna Mustapha Muhammed Sallahu alayhi wa sallam. Otherwise, he would have kept a beard, because, in his own words the requirement of love is to emulate and follow a great personality. It is obvious that he does not consider the messenger of Allah as a great personality, nor does he feel the need to follow him. So, who is that great personality that he really follows in his heart? His words reveal a shocking conclusion, "....that which had nothing to do with 'Deen' (way of life) has been made a part of 'Deen' (Islam)...." Javed Ahmed Ghamidi abrogates the command of the messenger of Allah regarding beard, thus, advancing himself as the new "great" personality that should be 'followed'!


  1. you need to spend some time in Javed ahmed ghamidi. Not even a single word written above carries any weight.

    1. Bother, you did wonderful job to expose uncle Ghamidi who has no clue what damage he is creating for the ummah. I totally agree with below statement.
      His agenda is to systematically slaughter every Sunnah and replace Islam with a new belief system, like his predecessor Paul.


    this is what his complete stance on Sunnah AND HADITH. Yon need to discuss things in an academic manner rather than speculating on conspiracy theories

  3. Brother Anonymous,

    If you see the definition of "academics" in the dictionary you will discover that academic approach to religion was not the way of the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam). Do you think that 93% of Pakistan's population that has not made it to the literacy count understand what Academics stands for?

    1. I agree with you brother !
      Ghamdi has rejected 7 verses of Quran stating these are no longer needed these days. Can anyone help me to find what those 7 ayaats were ! Jazak Allah .

    2. Nadeem, you smack of utter ignorance, what we call as the literate Jaahil. Sorry but I do not have better words than that.

  4. A ridiculous commentary..
    He's one of those men who have few hair on the face, so the beard on his face is not very prominent.
    Beard was a norm of the Arab Society and the Muslims who keep beard because of the Prophet are praise worthy. Muslims practicing or non practicing, they all love the prophet PBUH without a doubt.
    As far as I know him he loves and respect the prophet PBUH not less than any practicing Muslim and we have no right to judge him without a solid reason. Bad gumani is forbidden by Allah, and as a Muslim We should never do it.

  5. Rubbish....This man doesnt have a clue and giving absolutely non-sensical logics to prove him wrong. I can see some of Ghamdi's teachings are different to what we have been told to believe in the past but his logical approach to variuos matters is applausable. Ghamdi saab - keep up the good work!

  6. Anonymous,
    I will be very interested to know what is the equivalent word in Arabic for "LOGIC" and how many times does it occur in the Quran? If you answer this question you will discover the holes in the holiness of those who give preference to "Logic" over "Wahy (revelation)". Where logic stops, Wahy starts. There is no logical explanation needed when the beard is a command (Hukum). If abrogating a command is "rubbish" than your logic is rubbish. The words of the messenger (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) are crystal clear and any rubbish logic to make the matter muddy means rejection of the sunnah. Only those who possess rubbish can offer rubbish via logic. Alhamdullilah the messenger of Allah did not sit around like Ghamdi giving lessons in logic and philosophy. He transformed a nation without a degree. Is that logical? Show me a man today that has transformed a nation, yet he is a farmer or goat-heardsmen with no education? A sick heart and a confused mind finds logic as the only means for justifying their hypocrisy - Ghamdi fits this profile.

  7. Quran is Almighty's word, its source of guidance and “inzar”and nothing is illogical.. its man's knowledge which is limited... Quran is an oracle and its teachings revolve around one main point and that is, we all will be answerable to what we have done here on day of judgment. I am sure you don't mean to say that there is no logic in Islam. The stance you have taken to prove that Ghamidi is wrong, Hippocratic etc unfortunately leads towards the conclusion that Islam is not a logical religion, this is not a good service towards Islam.
    So making blogs on the basis of speculations will too be questioned, lets better prepare for that day and do something constructive. The call of the day for ummah is to develop a harmony among Muslims... Personally its my dilemma... our younger generation is getting away from Islam due to the killings on the name of religion, sectarian differences and such debates all around us. The message of din is very clear... lets not make it vague.
    I know there are some points in which Ghamidi is different from the main stream Ulmas but we need to discuss them in an academic manner.

  8. Quran is indeed Almighty's word, its one of the primary textual evidences amongst the four sources of guidance. You have cited the Quran as the only source of guidance. What you fail to realize is that Quran, Sunnah, Ijma'a and Ijtihaad are the four primary sources of guidance. When the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) asked Mua'dh ibn Jabal (radhi allahu anho) - more or less - what if you can't find an answer to your problem in the Quran, or my sunnah or Ijmaa. The latter replied, "Ijtahidu bi Ra'ai" (I will use my faculty of deduction / opinon). So, this shows how the door of Logical reasoning was not only opened, but encouraged by the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam). This is was applied over the centuries thus giving rise to the Sciences of Fiqh and the rise of the four illustrious Imaam's of Fiqh. Now take for example your explanation above. You did not explain yourself completely. If for example you invited some guests during ramadaan and a few ants fall in the pot of food; will you throw away the pot, or remove the ants and serve the food? What you will find out is that analogical reasoning was applied by the four Imaams to solve this dilemma almost 1300yrs ago. The answer is not in the Quran or Hadith, literally. But Ijtihaad solves this by way of deductive reasoning - which is logic. If logic can be explained in this way, it will make more sense to people. Ghamidi likes to portray that he is "forward thinking and logical" and the Maulvi's are "backward thinking" and unable to have a dialogue. This methodology is also a way of dividing people and creating confusion. Pornography, Music and entertainment and internet has mismirized our youth more than anything. When you read what the young people are talking about in Chat rooms and various internet sites / groups; you can see that the new generation is very alert and aware of the politics of "killings" and "sectarianism". So, I beg to disasgree with your analysis on the misguidance of our youth. I don't think there is any honest and sincere Muslim that doesn't want harmony. Criticism of Ghamidi is as much necessary as he deems it necessary to criticize classical methodologies. When he criticizes it is okay; when we raise a finger it is disrupting peace? How is this acadamic and harmonious? This is what you need to understand. Imaam Ghaazaali, author of Ihyaa Uloomudeen and Imaam Fakhr Raazi in his Tafseer and Allamah Rumi in his Masnaavi and the Ulema of Kalaam (who argued against the Mutazilla and other deviant groups) were leaders in the sciences of logic and reasoning; and no Dars-e-nizami syllabus is without these foundations. For Ghamidi to position himself as a beacon of reasoning and logic and act as if "classical" scholars are "backwards" is nothing but a false propaganda. The media has continued its campaign to degrade and destroy the status of the scholars. Unfortunately the media loves apparent logical icons like Ghamidi and will never promote Classical Ulema when the war of today's media is not intent on presenting Islam from the eye of its origins.

  9. Thanks for your note, You probably didn’t read my comment properly, where did I write Quran is only source of guidance? Quran says about itself that it is furqan. So every Ijma, Qias, Ijtehad has to be seen in its light and Sunna being “amel e tawater”.
    A per my information you have misquoted Muad’ (RA) narration by adding Ijma in it. As a Muslim we should restrain to alter/add or delete in prophet’s irshadat.
    Tafarqa in Din is always condemnable whether it’s done by Ghamidi or anybody else.

    Every classical or “non classical” scholar can’t be backward, some of them may have their personal limitations as far as ability to grasp or knowledge of Arabic of Prophet’s era etc. is concerned. If Ghamidi has called them backward, I disagree with him; our region in particular has produced so many great scholars which is evident from number of Urdu Tafaseer.

    As far as media is concerned there are more channels here in Pakistan who are projecting classical scholars than the one highlighting modern Islamic speakers, there are “online istakharas” “faals” and other etc. its up to the viewers to whom they prefer. I have been associated with media for some time and found out that religious programs in their terminology are fillers, it is unfortunate and describes the mind set of media. I agree that internet has done more harm than good to younger generation but it’s not the only reason for the teenagers to think that Din is outdated etc. Things happening around us have more influence than anything else.

  10. Brother Anonymous,

    Thanks for your note as well. I agree you didn't cite Quran as the only source. The reason why I made that assumption is because you did not cite the other three sources of evidence anywhere in your comments. Today, we have a lot of "Ahle-Quran / Pervaizi" type people whose emphasis is only Quran. Then we have "Ahle-Hadith" who reject "Fiqh" (Jurisprudence). For that reason, I wanted to raise my flag of concern. Alhamdullilah, you are a very sincere and honest person and came out clarifying the matter. May Allah reward you for doing justice to the honor of this deen and in sharing your deep reflections about this ummah. Very well put comments on "Amal-e-Tawaatur".
    I have placed a disclaimer before quoting the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) and that is the phrase "more-or-less". Irrespective of the disclaimer, your reminder is highly appreciated to take utmost care in quoting the messenger of Allah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam). As a note the disclaimer "more-or-less" also happens to come from Sayyidna Ibn Masud (radhi allahu anhu) as a protection against making such mistakes. Alhamdullilah, adopting this methodology of Sahaba I feel safe and not out of the circle of citing Hadith. Now, Ijma itself is proven from the Quran as you can read in Surah Nisa verse 115. On this subject three ahaadith are popularly cited by the Ulema; Two from Sahih Bukhari and One from Imaam Tirmizi. So, the "Hujaah/Hujaat" is established beyond the shadow of doubt, especially when it is coming from the Quran and Sunnah and the sahaba demonstrated this during their life.
    "Personal Limitations" is the best description when gauging contemporary scholars. I have to say I agree 100% with you on that very valuable comment.
    I pray that your involvment in the Media positively influences the way things are projected into peoples minds. Please forgive me if I have said anything to hurt your feelings.

  11. Javed Ghamidi is one of the most prominent scholars of Muslims ummah and the above writing is beyond the limits of ethical criticism.

  12. Ghamdi explained:

  13. Javed Ghamidi is a great person, I have read his books page by page, all accusations against him are absolutely wrong.

  14. The exploitation of tasawwuf (Sufism) in today's society.

    You will see that most Muslim Modernists exploit tasawwuf to support their Modernism. The Salafis exploit tasawwuf to prove shirk in our ummah, astaghfirullah. Only the real Ahl al Sunnah wal Jama'h realise the orthodoxy of tasawwuf in Islam.

    Javed Ghamidi is truly a Modernist but a Salafi at the same time. He claim tawassuf means excessive obedience of a murshid who may be doing shirk. Ghamidi accused AL-GHAZALI (r) and SHAH WALIULLAH (r) of not being strict in their tawhid in their works. Essentially, he has declared takfir upon them. Here:

    Ghamidi champions 'philosophy' and 'logic'. Philosophy and logic both being something out of Islam. It was Al-Ghazali (r) that managed to reconcile these two disciplines with Islam (theology) through kalam (philosophy that is derived from the Qur'an and Sunnah, not outside sources). It was Al-Ghazali who made logic compulsory in the Madaaris Islamiyyah. So how can Javed Ghamidi disrespect one of the greatest thinkers of our ummah? Al-Ghazali (r) was a polymath, who had a level of ijtihad, yet didn't use it freely like today's uneducated scholars. They learn 100 ahadith and think they are a mujtahid.

    Having spoken to Ghamidi, he told me that Sufism was not there at the time of Mohammed (saaws). This of course is reminscent of Salafi methodology. In essence, Ghamidi follows the Salafi manhaj (well he only takes the first generation into account), but ends up with different, liberal, modernist conclusions.

    Notice that Ghamidi, although his conclusions are different to Maududi, still loves Maududi. Ghamidi also loves ibn Taymiyyah. How can one love an anthropomorphist more than Al-Ghazali or Shah Walliullah - two great orthodox scholars of our Sunni jam'ah.

    As for the beard, Ghamidi has some points, but he has deterred from orthodox scholarship. You are right, no ijtihad can be made here. Although, I think you are a bit obsessed by the beard (lol). You have a bit of tassub towards the Hanafi jurisprudence, but the fact is: there are differing positions. Ikhtilaf is a blessing.

    - One position is that it is haraam to shave anything that is on the cheekbone/jawbone.
    - One position says that it is haraam to shave that which is above and below the lips.
    - One position says it is a Sunnah to have a beard.

    - Sccording to Imam Nawawi in the Sharh of Sahih Muslim it is makruh to shave the beard.

    In the Hanafi fiqh, it is haram for a muazzin without a beard to pronounce adhan, whereas in the Shafi'i fiqh, it is makruh.

    At the end of the day, we are all on our own journeys. I am still trying to wear hijab. It is no one's call to keep telling me to wear because I KNOW it is fardh. We've got to be lenient with others and strict with ourselves. I am trying, we all try. Hikmah. InshAllah. The beard or hijab etc etc are nothing without inner peace (Islam).


  16. MOHAMMAD ABUBAKARJune 20, 2011 at 4:43 AM

    im very much agreed with mr.nadeem.bcz i've read an article about DR.GHAMDI in ZARB-E-MOMIN,which proved that he dont even know proper arabic,which includes grammer how can he interprete anything on his own.many other truths were disclosed in that article. to be an islamic scholar it needs ur whole life to be dedicated.secondly a real ALIM,will never criticise any of his fellowbeings.nobody has the right to alter islam according to the modern life which some scholars are really trying to just beware.and ask ALLAH SUBHAN WATALLAH for guidance.


  18. Dearest Anonymous,

    As you pointed out that Beard (Dahri), Cap (Topi), Shilwaar (pants) and Miswaak means Muslim. Let me explain:

    1. Beard is wajib
    2. Topi is mustahab
    3. Miswaak is mustahab
    4. Shilwaar (or clothing that covers the Aura is essential). Unless you are suggesting Muslims should not wear any pants? Just joking.

    Islamic Jurisprudence is well defined on these issues. These are the outward things and the consensus of 1400yrs of Islamic Scholarship stands unbroken in books and actions of the pious people.

    Unfortunately it is you who has started a new firqa; "Follow only the Quran". Now, since you study the Quran can you please show me one single ayat that says that follow ONLY the Quran and you will achieve Siratil Mustaqeem?

    I am shocked that you failed to mention surah Fatiha where the Quran mentions that if one wants siratal mustaqeem then they should follow the PATH OF THOSE WHOM ALLAH HAS FAVORED. So,here is your proof.

    1. Beautifully written. I'm touched beyond words.

  19. I believe Javed Ahmed Ghamidi has a point

  20. Javed Ahmad Ghamidi is a modern scholar, and like all modern scholars, follows the interpretative principles of Martin Luther. It was Martin Luther first who called for Sola Scriptura (Only the Scripture) as a source, thus rejecting every other source. Ghamidi has done nothing but has only tried to reject Hadith on the basis of Martin Luther's argument. Ghamidi is a very modern thinker, and is closely following the Father of Reformation. The Muslims who are objecting to Ghamidi are somewhat backward. Only Ghamidi's interpretation of Islam can rid this faith of all the ills that Islam is loaded with because of following the so called Example of the Prophet. Similarly Ghamidi has made out an excellent case for Capitalism, which is the only way of success in the modern world. The greatest contribution of Ghamidi is that he is trying to reduce the anti-American and anti-Capitalist sentiments in the Muslim world. This will bring peace to the world, and will help bring the government and culture of the US close to Pakistan. We all know that the salvation of Pakistan depends on its Americanization.

    1. Dear Anonymous, please watch the following

  21. many blame that Ghamdi sb. rejects hadith.. It is incorrect.

  22. Yar baat karnay say pahlay un ki kitabian to par main bhuat sari hadith samil hain .Javed ahmed ghamdi is tru. App Islam main farqawariat palatay hain.

  23. "Shia" nay apni taraf say deen main booth si bathay Shamil ki hui hain. un par to koi awaz nai utatha .

  24. Kisi Muslaman par Ilzam lagana bi guna hain'

  25. Wasay to aur bi botah say ulma hain jin par tanqeed hui hain,jasay kay Tahrul qadri kay baray main'vist this link

  26. Aaj kal kay door main har alam ko in firqaparsutoon nay apni tanqeed kaa nishnay banaya hain jasay kay
    D.r Zakir naik
    Harun yaya

  27. we are muslims, which means submission in front of Allah (as per Quranic teachings) and we have promised the same in Kalima to Follow Quranic orders and the same is mentione in the Quran as "Obey Allah and Obey the Prophet" --- so leaving or under mining the Prophet's orders are not allowed....

    we r Muslims and try to unite the Muslims on this basic theme----i.e Allah (Quran) and path of the Prophet (traditions or the Sunnah as Hadith)

    Pl visit (the writer followed the Quran and Sunnah) the website to learn the Computers and I.T in the context of Quranic Sciences.....

  28. Adil Mahmood Sahab,
    Assalam alaykum,

    Regarding the Shia's I have not come out and written because there is a clear demarcation between Shia's and Sunni's. So, there is nothing ambiguous about the Aqeedah of the Shia's. It is also a known fact that amongst the Shiites there are a number of "Firqas" (sects); some which are not extreme in their hate against the 3 out of 4 Khulafa Rashideen.

    Since, the Shiites consider "TAQIYYA" as part of their belief. They are well known to instigate problems in this Ummah. They lay low and join all and any sects in the Sunni Category to ensure that the Ahle-Sunnah Wal Jamaat become a target.

    This is a wide subject so let me leave it at this for now. In summary, Iran is more worried about the Shiites in Qatar but dumb silent about the killings of Sunnis in Syria. Go figure it out!

  29. you are such a stupid peoples disccussing about the matter which is not important in islam.....peoples are doing Shirk , they are worshipping graves..Non-muslims are killing the now when Tataris came in baghdad the scholors of baghdad are debating about the size of Miswak in Sunnah? What a disgusting things....Our Scholors don't understand Islam...they are not interpretting islam as Hazrat Muhammad(PBUH) gave it to Ummah.....they only know how to make peoples emtional as Tahir ul kadri do !!!they are characterless...who liese on prophet ( PBUH)...who give wrong interpretation to Quran...what a jahil mullah...
    Ghamid is the one who is giving true concept of Islam....just listen him completely...listen and read him about Asool-Deen ...then decide ...

  30. please read his works before condemning him. do not go on hearsay and keep an open mmind. then decide whether he is right or wrong.

  31. PLEASE read Ghamidi sb's work before you write such things about him. Knowing him personally, you are associating such things to a person, who is God fearing, who offers tahajud regularly and who has only one mission in his life, and that is to serve the religion of God.


  32. For his details views please visit the following website:

  33. Dearest Brother Aamir Amir,
    May Allah give you jazaul khair for the reminders. However, I would like you to watch the following video and then read my blog post. I wrote this post based on the following video:

    Please go through the video and then read my blogpost. Your comments will be much appreciated.

    1. Dear Nadeem, You seem to be a reasonable person of reason and knowledge. I really believe that one should not criticize anyone based on a single video. Do you know how many scholars have similar opinion on beard? And do you find it logical to declare a person an agent based on an opinion which is different from yours? I wonder what kind of an academic attitude is this?

    2. Dear Aamir Amin.
      Assalam alaykum.

      You carry the name "Amin" and alhamdullilah your words and expressions clearly reflect the ambience of truth. Your kind reminder weighs heavy on my heart. I want to thank you for expressing yourself. I agree that it is not "logical to declare a person an agent based on an opinion which is different" than mine. You know that Maududi Sahab wrote "Khilafat-o-mulookiat" in which he accused Usman Ibn Affan (radhi allahu anhu) of doing political favors for his family. This is an absolute lie because if that was the case, we should be questioning the integrity of the Holy Quran that was compiled by Hazrat Usman Radhi allahu anhu. So, these allegations are serious and warrant the writers and scholars to present a correction because that is what is called a proper academic attitude. What our age and time has seen is that we have great thinkers and intellectuals who possess a gifted mind. They criticize the Sahaaba, they critcize established practices of the deen, they criticize Muslims for being dumb, unintelligent, stupid, blind followers and in some case disbelievers; yet when they are reminded of their grave human errors they turn a blind eye. Maududi is a great example for this case study. I always hear people in sittings talk ill of "Maulvis, Sufees, Ulema, Hanafi,Deobandi", when no one is accusing them of anything. This is an attitude that goes to show that the people who utter these statements have a personal dislike / personal opinion. I was once invited during iftaar at someones house. We all prayed Maghrib and the gentlmen leading the Salaat turned around after finishing to a young kid and said, "Son, what is wrong with you. Always say Ameen loudly." Now, was I bothering anyone? Was I even questioning anyone saying it loud or silently? I tried very hard not to utter a word during the blessed month of Ramadan. But the gentleman keep rubbing the issue on the table in front of everyone as if he had the truth and everyone who disagreed with him (meaning the Hanafi's) were misguided. At that point I spoke up. I told him that Yasir Qazi (a madinah university trained scholar) was absolutely wrong. My interjection caused him grief. I told him that first and foremost the Ameen he was teaching the people was not like that of the Angels as described by the messenger of Allah sallahu alayhi wa sallam in Sahih Muslim. So, Yasir Qazi and whoever he followed had no right to overstep the words of the messenger of Allah.

      Aamir Sahab, the only reason I shared this story with you was to give you my reasoning for being hard on Ghamdi sahab. I personally have nothing against him. I am nothing in my knowledge compared to him.

      Take a look at Dr.Tahir-ul-Qadir. He is Hanafi and Barelwi but on the issue of beard he has some very convoluted explanations.

      Beard is not the only thing in Islam one may argue. I agree with this fact. But to sit on stage and talk about the reality of beard, like Ghamdi has done goes to show that "Beard" is an important matter. But to put it aside as a traditional camel driven cultural norm is absolutely not the correct academic approach; rather it is an attitude. Please advise me on what I should change on my blogpost and what title will be more befitting. I am open to your kind suggestions.

      Please forgive me if I have hurt your feelings.

  34. Ghamidi was the only "head" in Pakistan with a "mind" inside. Let,s clap, cheers and be happy now that Pakistan became a nation of millions "heads". I don,t know why Pakistanis hate intellect, wisdom and knowledge. Is it a genetic disorder?

  35. Dear Anonymous,
    Let us take stock of the intellectual contributions of Ghamidi and that of Ulema Deoband. Between 1283 and 1384 Hijri the following contributions have been recorded:
    526 Great Scholars of Tasawwuf
    5888 Madrasa's (Islamic Schools)
    1164 Authors & Writers on Islamic Literature
    1784 Mufti's
    1540 Debaters
    684 Sahaafi
    4388 Khateebs and Mubalighs (giving dawah)
    288 Tabeeb (Doctors in Islamic Medicine)
    27 Tafseers have been produced
    40+ Encylopedic works on Hadith
    30+ Encylopedic works on Fiqh
    15+ Major books on Aqidah & Kalaam
    21 books on Adab (manerism) and Lughat
    70 Major works on History and Seerah
    Additional counts have been left out.
    (Referenced works in Khairul-Fataawa).

    So, to insult the intellect of the Muslims and think Ghamidi has produced anything major in the fields of Islam shows the ill information you have and the hate you have for Traditional Islamic Scholars. Please, shave your beard and do as you wish!

  36. tarz e kuhn pe arna aain e nau se darna..........

    so iqabal is also kakir coz he ischallenging old traditions according to mr nadeem

  37. Assalam alaykum,
    Islam has always challenged traditions that have been contrary to the Quran and Sunnah. What is really sad and painful is that you read my blogpost and post comments that are not correctly explained. Please exlplain yourself so that I can understand and reply. Please write in Urdu or email me and I will be more than happy to respond.

  38. is forum mein ek sey barh ek ghamidi ko follow karney waley mardood mojood hein.

    Allah hum sab ko hidayat day aur seedhi rah dikhaye, Ameen. Aur Ghamidi key fitnay sey mehfooz rakhey. Ameen.

  39. Let us now see the actions of “Mercy” of the Prophet in the books of Ahadeeth.

    Narrated by Anas: Some people from 'Uraina tribe came to Medina and its climate did not suit them, so Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) allowed them to go to the herd of camels (given as Zakat) and they drank their milk and urine (as medicine) but they killed the shepherd and drove away all the camels. So Allah's Apostle sent (men) in their pursuit to catch them, and they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut, and their eyes were branded with heated pieces of iron and they were left in the Harra (a stony place at Medina) biting the stones. (Bukhari: Volume 2, Book 24, Number 577)
    This Hadeeth is repeated 14 times in Bukhari. Here are the other references: vol 1, No.234; vol 4 No.261; vol 5, No.505; vol 5, No.506; vol 7, No.589; vol 7, No. 590; vol 7, No. 623; vol 8, No. 794, vol 8, No. 795, vol 8, No. 796, vol 8, No. 797; vol 9, No. 37.
    And here is a version from Muslim:
    Anas reported: Eight men of the tribe of 'Ukl came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and swore allegiance to him on Islam, but found the climate of that land uncogenial to their health and thus they became sick, and they made complaint of that to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: Why don't you go to (the fold) of our camels along with our shepherd, and make use of their milk and urine. They said: Yes. They set out and drank their (camels') milk and urine and regained their health. They killed the shepherd and drove away the camels. This (news) reached Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and he sent them on their track and they were caught and brought to him (the Holy Prophet). He commanded about them, and (thus) their hands and feet were cut off and their eyes were gouged and then they were thrown in the sun, until they died. (Muslim: Book 16, No. 4131)

  40. Dear Mr.Anonymous,

    Before I start publishing all your comments and giving you answers. I want one thing very clear from you.

    What is your name? What is your religion? Do you believe in God / Allah? Are you an aethist? Are you a Christian? Are you a Hindu? Are you a Jew? Are you a free thinker? And what do you believe in? What system of believe do you hold? Or do you believe in nothing?

    If you can give me those answers, I will respond. If you can not give me straight answers then all you are doing is playing games from the shadows and I will not continue.

    Now, to respond to your text message above. Can you please confirm if the incident above took place before or after the verse "Rahmatullil A'alameen" was revealed?

    Apparently, the Command of Apostasy was already given. Secondly, the verse "ashidaa-u a'laal kuffar" was already revealed.

    The subject of drinking Urine is explained very clearly by the Sahaaba. In the stages of Islam's infancy there were many traditions amongst the Kuffar. When it came to Ruqiyya - treating with traditional medicine and amulets...the messenger of Allah sallahu alayhi wa sallam made one rule very clear and that was to follow any tradition as long as there no element of Shirk involved. Simple and short.

    These people had a health problem and they got cured. So, next time if you or your loved one gets Cancer and a doctor in Houston Texas gives you Cancer Medicine that contains urine, bacteria from pork stomach lining and blood+puss from a dead cadaver I would like to know if you will take that medicine? That is why it is important to know your belief system.

    Let us assume for the sake of argument the the verse of Mercy was revealed. Now, you have cancer, you get the treatment and your health comes back to normal but you turn around and kill staff of the hospital that was helping you to recovery. That is a crime. Murder in the 1st Degree in the United States. What was the capital punishment of the day in the traditional ways. Obviously, beheading a criminal was not revealed yet. It is obvious that the Sheperd was killed brutally and an eye-to-eye principle was applied. You are making assumptions as if all the revelation was complete and Islam was complete. That is your problem.

  41. It seems that you are afraid to have an open debate with me regarding this issue, which is why you haven't posted my previous comments and have also not posted my reply to your last post. I think the real fear should be that of Allah - to join books with His Book and to include things in His Deen that He never authorized in His Complete and Fully Detailed Book.

  42. We now have a baseline. You reject all Hadith and believe only in the Quran. You reject Hadith, Qiyas, ijtihaad

  43. You have shown that you are not interested in truth. You are only interested in opinions that confirm your own opinion. Other opinions that you have no answer to, you dismiss them by labelling them and by using faulty logic of "generalization" and "black and white thinking".
    Where did I say I "reject" all Hadeeth? And could you please explain what it means to "accept" hadeeth or "reject" hadeeth? Can you answer this question: When you say you "accept" hadeeth, what do you accept:

    1. that ahadeeth are revelations from Allah?
    2. that the authors of ahadeeth were messengers from Allah?

    If this is your meaning of "accepting" hadeeth, then yes I reject that view. However, if you do not mean the above, then what does it mean to "accept" or "reject" hadeeth?

    I understand that it is easy to jump up and down and classify people in pre-determined boxes/categories and avoid a decent intellectual discussion with the view of finding the truth. It is much harder to have an open mind and not to view oneself as a "god" who now "knows all truth and has no possibility of mistake".

    Your attitude shows that you view yourself as "perfect" who has now "discovered all truth" and is certain that "there is no possibility of any mistake in your view". You have preferred to not publish my comments that show my view in detail with evidence; rather, you have selectively published some of my comments and have preferred to label me rather than discuss the arguments I have written. That is your choice.

    The Qur'an says that those who have true belief, they have NOTHING to fear. Apparently you are afraid to publish my arguments and have a decent discussion with me about them. Perhaps it is time you should examine your belief system - otherwise, my arguments would not create fear in you.

    best regards

  44. Please read this informative book to clear your misconceptions:

  45. Dear Mr.Tabrez,

    I would like you to write to Sheikh Mutfi Taqi Usmani a rebuttal to his book and publish it for the sake of humanity.

  46. Fitna Ghamdiat ka ilmi muhasiba

    InshaALLAH this book will show you the real face of Mr. Ghamidi.

  47. This blog post defaming respected Dr ghamidi is an absolute Rubbish the writers carries a personal prejudice and is on an out right character assasination campaign which in it self a sin in our religion .The Author has a pretty weak understanding of Islam i Wish and pray for the guidance of brother

  48. Jazakallah Khair for your comments. Defaming the respected Sunnah of Beard can not be a means for entering Paradise with the speed of lightning. But to respect Ghamidi and disrepect the sunnah of the messenger of Allah sallahu alayhi wa sallam is not a personal prejudice. The man is prejudiced.

    If any Muslim is prejudiced or has a sickness in their hearts against the sunnah of the messenger of Allah (salallahu alayhi wa sallam), then they have a serious problem with their belief as a Muslim.

    Islam is "akmaltu lakum...." completed in front of 125,000 Sahaaba who DID NOT defame or water down the sunnah of the messenger of Allah salallahu alayhi wa sallam like Ghamidi. The Sahaaba knew better what to keep and what to abandon. The Sahaaba opposed any practice that was from the era of the Jahiliyya. Sahaaba practices Ruqyaa and when they explained it in front of the Messenge of Allah salallahu alayhi wa sallam he told them to use any Ruqyah as long as there was no SHIRK. The sahaaba who learnt about shaving hair did not raise a single blade to remove facial hair. If the Sahaaba new that beard was not important you would have heard it from them. They did not HIDE anything. So, Ghamidi needs to check with the Sahaaba to cross the intellectual bridge of Islam.

    Being a "Dr" like "Dr.Naik" allows Ghamidi to to win new followers.

  49. This guy is crazy, came up with illogical stuff, childish
    So if someone says our , your or mine you can simply jump to a conclusion. And keeping beard means you love the prophet (p.b.u.h) and if not then you dont love him. I think Mr nadeem is gonna kill all those who dont love our Prophet p.b.u.h) (beardless muslims) what a joke. And i think all those terrorists are gonna enter heaven because they fulfill Mr nadeens criteria

    1. Please get your facts together. I am not sure why you are so against the beard? How is it that having a beard is the same as killing someone? Beard and terrorism have nothing in common. I think you want to act like Joker. If you don't know much about the Authority of the Sunnah, then ask. Paradise / Killing / Terrorism has nothing to do with the subject of beard. You are watching too much news and the Media has managed to brain wash you and think like them. Welcome to mind control. Get to know the people of Allah and know the value of the Sunnah. Otherwise, you are wasting your life watching TV and following people who continue deceive.