Fatwa Explorer

Fatwa #1440929 July 2006South Africa

Mufti Saheb’s wrong interpretation of Hazir and Nazir

Question

Mufti Saheb’s wrong interpretation of Hazir and Nazir 

 I am, what you call, a Barelwi Suni.

 After confirming with SEVERAL Ulema of the Ahle Suna Wal Jama (Barelwi order) none of them agrees’s with your interpretation of  Hazir and Nazir. You indicated that Hazir and Nazir is “omnipresent”. (refering to question “What is the ruling of praying behind barelwi's”).

Please Mufti Saheb, This is a false accusation that Barelwi Sunnis believe Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) to be omnipresent. And as a Barelwi - I agree that this is not the belief of the Ahle Sunnah Wa Jamaah, But I re-itterated that this is neither meaning of the words "Haazir" and "Naazir"

See the definition of Hazir and Nazir according to every Barelwi Order Suni as per  url link http://www.raza.co.za/Publications/Publications_Reply to Majlis%20on Meelad.htm. See the heading OMNIPRESENT

I know that there are movements out there that are trying to cause splits in the Ummah and I would appreciate if you confirm your facts before giving shaytaan joy in causing hatred among fellow brothers and sisters.

I would like a comment on the link that I have pasted in the body of the letter to Mufti Saheb.

Answer

The link trhat you provided does not seem to work. Please recheck the link and forward.

After some research, we have found that the Barelwis do hold the view that our Nabi [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] is Haazir and Naazir and he [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] directly witnesses every action of every person. It is stated in the Hadith that Allah has appointed certain angels who convey all the information of the world to Nabi [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam]. This Hadith will then be meaningless in the face of the belief that Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] witnesses every action of every person.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai

Something wrong with this record?

Report a problem

This goes to whoever maintains the archive, not to Askimam.org. For a question about the ruling itself, use the link to the original above.

Sent anonymously. No account needed, and nothing identifies you.