Khalifatullah Mehdi (AHS)

The Night of Power (Shab-e-Qadr)

Excerpt from Tafsir-ul-Qur'an Noor-e-Imaan by Maulana Hzt. Syed Miranji Abid Khundmiri Sahab Qibla.
Translator: Ahqar-ul-Ibaad Syed Yousuf Tajammul Khundmiri.

We revealed it in the night of power (Lailatul Qadr). All agree that it in this verse means the Holy Qur'an which Allah revealed in the night of power (Lailatul Qadr). But there are major differences as to which night is (Lailatul Qadr). Some people say it is in the month of Ramazan but others say that this night revolves during the full year, sometimes it comes in the month of Muharram, or the month of Ramazan, or ZulHaj. However it is known from the Qur'an itself that Allah revealed the Holy Qur'an in the month of Ramazan, as Allah says

Ramazan is the month in which Qur'an was revealed. By joining both verses it is understood that Allah sent the Holy Qur'an in the month of Ramazan and revealed in Lailatul Qadr. The conclusion is drawn from this that Lailatul Qadr is in Ramazan only.

Lailatul Qadr is better than thousand months. What else could be the reason for mentioning this supremacy (of Lailatul Qadr) except that people should worship in it. Imam Faqruddin Razi^RH has written under this verse: There was one person among children of Israel, who used to worship all night and used to fight (religious war) all day. He did this exercise for 1000 months. The Messenger of Allah^SLM was astonished on this. Thus Allah^SWT revealed this verse, which means O! Messenger of Allah^SLM Lailatul Qadr is better for you than that Israeli who fought (religious war) for 1000 months.

It is also noticed from this narration that since it pertained to excess in worship, Hence Allah^SWT favored Muslims owing to the Prophet^SLM and they were blessed with such a night, to worship in which is superior than (better than) worshiping a thousand months.

Now it remains to see which night is that? There are differences between commentators, Jurisprudents and even holy companions in this regard. Some say it is 19th, some others 21st, 23rd and near a few others it is the 27th.

Among the Jurisprudents, near Imam Shafaee it is the 21st night, and 23rd night as per another reference. And near Abu Hanifa it is the 27th night. In this respect, there is a difference of opinion in determination of Shab-e-Qadr. Some believe it to be some night and others differ, but nobody complains about it. 27th night is shab-e-qadr near hanafia. This is not objectionable either, although it is their own opinion. However when Mahdavia, in obedience of the practice of the Prophet^SLM, believe 27th night to be shab-e-qadr, people frown (raise their eye-brows). Hence Muawiya bin Abu Sufiyan has narrated in Abu Dawood

i.e. he heard form Mutraf, him from Muawiya, and Muawiya from Abu Sufiyan, and Abu Sufiyaan from the Messenger of Allah^SLM about Lailatul Qadr that it is the 27th night.

When it is proven with authority that Shab-e-Qadr is the 27th night of Ramazan then it should be seen as to what was the practice of the Prophet^SLM himself in this night. Therefore it is narrated by Abu Zar in Mishkwat.

Abu Zar said that we kept fast along with the Messenger of Allah^SLM. The Messenger of Allah^SLM did not lead us in the prayers at night during Ramazan until seven nights were left. Thus offered prayers with us till one third part of the night had passed. And when six nights were left, he did not pray with us. And when five nights were left he offered prayers with us till half night had passed. I said O! Messenger of Allah^SLM you offered prayers longer tonight then the Messenger of Allah^SLM said when somebody offers prayers along with the Imam until the Imam returns after the prayers, his complete night is counted as worship. When four nights were left he did not pray with us. When three nights were left i.e. the 27th night, the Messenger of Allah^SLM gathered Ahle-bait (members of the holy family), women and other people and offered prayers with us until we feared missing (Falah). (Narrator says) I asked Abu Zar what is (Falah). Said pre-dawn meals (during Ramazan).

It is noticed from this narration that only on the 27th night of Ramazan, the Messenger of Allah^SLM gathered Ahle-bait (members of the holy family), Prophet wives and other people and lead them in the prayers. That too till the last part of the night until it was feared that the pre-dawn meals would be missed.

The following points are noticed from the above discussion:

Shab-e-Qadr is in Ramazan
The Prophet^SLM gathered everyone on the 27th night and lead them in the prayers.
He did not offer prayers during the remaining nights of the month.

The minimum count of prayers is two Rakat, less than that is not considered a prayer (Salaat). Thus if Mahdavis, in obedience of the Prophet^SLM, gather their kith & kin and others, and offer two rakat prayer, how can this be called a deception? Is abiding by the Prophet^SLM i.e. following the practice of the Messenger of Allah^SLM an innovation? God forbid!

The Prophet^SLM was informed about the shab-e-qadr and was made to forget, The Prophet^SLM Himself has said this.

"I was informed about that night then made to forget".

Is it not true that besides shab-e-qadr, the Prophet^SLM did not gather ahle-bait (members of the holy family), his wives^RZ and other people for any other prayer during his entire life?

When Mahdi^AS was informed by Allah^SWT that the 27th night of Ramazan is Lailatul Qadr and then he was ordered to offer two rakat prayer as a gratitude, which became mandatory (Wajib) in the wake of the confirmed knowledge about the determination of Lailatul Qadr he received, as a great blessing.

Mahdi^AS, in compliance of this order, revived the practice of the Prophet^SLM. Gathered everyone with him and offered prayers. Thus Mahdavi also offer this prayers as obligatory (Farz) prayer in compliance of this divine order and in obedience of Imaamuna Mahdi^AS.

At this point, this objection is incorrect "how can Allah's orders come to Mahdi^AS, they come only to the Prophets (PBUT)?"

Because people intimate with Allah^SWT (Saints) do receive His orders. However they are of two types 1. As a revelation

. 2. Inspiration

For Prophets (PBUT), revelation

is must for their prophet hood. Revelation

is also of two types: One is through Gabriel^AS and the second is without an intermediary. The seal of the Prophets^SLM received both types of revelations. The noble Qur'an was revealed through Gabriel^AS, which is called "Matlu" revelation

and the other revelation is without any intermediary. As the Prophet^SLM himself said

i.e. "I was given Qur'an and a similar thing with it". But it is incorrect to say that whoever is sent a revelation must be a Prophet. Because revelation in the form of inspiration to a non-prophet is proven by Qur'an. For example, Allah^SWT's is for Joseph^AS

"Then Thee sent revelation towards Joseph^AS that (one day) you would inform them about their act". At that time Joseph^AS was not a Prophet. Furthermore, revelation being sent to Musa^AS's mother and to the honey bee are also mentioned in the holy Qur'an.

But here there isn't even a mention of the word "revelation" for Mahdi^AS. The orders from Allah^SWT to a non-prophet are called "inspirations"

. and the seniors of Ahle-Sunnat (Akabireen) agree on the possibility/truth of Allah's commands in the form of inspiration to the saints. Hence Sheikh Abdul Qader Jilani^RH claimed on the basis of knowledge from Allah^SWT

"This foot of mine is on the neck of all saints" and the saints of that time too bowed and accepted this claim. Whoever denied this claim, they were apprehended in from of Allah^SWT so much so that their sainthood was seized and (Khukbaani) was their fate.

This is about a saint. Whereas Mahdi^AS is the seal-of-the-saints, concluder of faith, caliph of Allah^SWT and free from error (innocent). He is more deserving of Allah^SWT's orders. Because who else can the caliph of Allah^SWT receive information & orders from, besides Allah^SWT?

It is completely wrong and a proof of ignorance from orders of faith to say that the faith is concluded, and to regard someone else now as capable of declaring an act obligatory, is like authorizing that particular person of which he is not deserving. This point is as follows:

The commands of Islamic law which are categorized as i.e. Obligatory, Mandatory, Sunnah (Practice of the Prophet^SLM), Lawfully Allowed, Prohibited, Undesirable and Desirable. Is there any clarification in the holy Qur'an about these seven command types with their names? And is there a complete clarification and explanation about these commands in the traditions of the Prophet^SLM?

Or is it true that some issues were mentioned and other issues were clarified by the jurisprudents? Therefore, it is found upon investigation that the jurisprudents too, after verifying the details of like the importance and emphasis of the orders and the practice of the Prophet^SLM, using their analogy and interpretation, called some acts as obligatory, some mandatory, some Sunnah (Practice of the Prophet^SLM) and some desirable. That is why we see that an act which is obligatory near one Imam jurisprudent is mandatory, Sunnah (practice of the Prophet^SLM) or desirable near the other jurisprudents.

Therefore see in the orders of jurisprudence that near Imam Malik^RH anointing (Masah) of full head and co-operation are obligatory. Imam Abu Hanifa^RH calls them Desirable (Mustahab). Recitation of Surah-Fatiha is obligatory near Imam Shafiee^RH and Imam Abu Hanifa^RH calles it mandatory (Wajib). Recitation of Surah-Fatiha by the follower in the prayer (Muqtadi) is obligatory (Farz) near Imam Shafiee^RH and prohibited near Imam Abu Hanifa^RH!

Can anyone object the jurisprudents too here saying who are they to call an act obligatory? And as such to call an act obligatory would mean that they are given such an authority which they do not deserve.

Don't the jurisprudents say about the sacrificial slaughter that it was obligatory for the Prophet^SLM and mandatory for the followers (Ummah)? Isn't it the opinion of the jurisprudents about late-night prayers (Tahajjud) that it was obligatory for the Prophet^SLM and it is Sunnah (Practice of the Prophet^SLM) for the followers (Ummah)? Who did all this segregation?

When the jurisprudents, who sometimes err and are sometimes correct, have the right to call an act obligatory, mandatory and Sunnah (practice of the Prophet^SLM) based on their analogy then can't Mahdi^AS, who is caliph of Allah^SWT and is innocent by the command of the Messenger of Allah^SLM

and is the representative of the diving/true law as per the consensus of the seniors (Akaabireen) of Ahle-Sunnat, call an act obligatory on Allah^SWT's command? An act which pre-existed. Was there any segregation of obligatory, mandatory, Sunnah, desirable, etc during the lifetime of the Prophet^SLM? Not only about the prayers but other orders of jurisprudence too. These detailed orders of jurisprudence were documented 150-200 years after the death of the Prophet^SLM. To give right to the non-innocent jurisprudents for segregation of an act as obligatory, mandatory, sunnah, etc and to deny the innocent of his right is a result of the distance from the principles of faith. Although the status of Imam Mahdi^AS is far exalted.

When according to ahle-sunnat everyone must follow the faith of any one Imam, who by consensus is non-innocent, then how can the following of Mahdi^AS be objectionable? Whose status is such that he obtains orders directly from Allah^SWT or from the soul of the Messenger of Allah^SLM. God forbid, fault-finding in jurisprudents is not our aim at all. Whatever they did, they did it for the sake of Allah^SWT. May Allah^SWT fill their graves with divine light (Noor). But the purpose is to show that the status of Mahdi^AS, in light of the traditions and according to the consensus of the seniors (Akaabireen) of Ahle-sunnat, is exalted and superior.

Now the discussion that remains is, with the performance of dugana-shab-e-qadr (two rakat farz prayer) an additional prayer is conducted. Such an assertion is also a proof of the lack of knowledge about the faith/conduct of Ahle-sunnat. People who call two-rakat prayer of shab-e-qadr the sixth prayer or an addition are not ignorant of the fact that muslims (ummat-e-Muhammadia) have been saying a sixth prayer on a daily basis, or put it this way an extra prayer then the daily five prayers, in the form of 'Vitr'. Hence the Messenger of Allah^SLM said

"Allah^SWT did an addition of a prayer for you, that prayer is 'Vitr'". Then urged

"You make 'Vitr' the last prayer of your night-prayers". There isn't any indication either about 'Vitr' in the holy Qur'an. There is no such verse in Qur'an by which we can understand the orders for performing 'Vitr' is

. Even in the tradition the order of this prayer in not mentioned, whether it is obligatory, mandatory or Sunnah and the number of rakats aren't clarified either. Inspite of this Muslims regularly perform 'Vitr' after 'Isha' prayers. Please note the differences between the jurisprudents about the orders of this prayer. It is Sunnah near Imam Shafiee, Imam Malik and Imam Ahmad bin Hambal^RH, mandatory near Imam Abu Hanifa^RH. And among the students of Imam Abu Hanifa^RH, it is obligatory near Imam Zufar.

When Imam Abu Hanifa^RH calls a prayers mandatory, for which there is no mention in the holy Qur'an and there isn't even a supporting command, and Zufar calles it obligatory. Would someone tell here too that be careful! There is room for any addition, Faith is concluded. Nobody can be given the right now to call an act obligatory or mandatory. What would happen if someone says so, Ahle-sunnat continue to act persistently according to their faith. The followers of Abu Hanifa^RH continue to believe 'Vitr' mandatory and if the 'Isha' prayer is missed, then while offering lapsed prayers they don't say just four rakats of 'Isha' prayer but also say the lapsed prayer for 'Vitr' along with it.

Those who believe it obligatory, they too perform it after the 'Isha' prayer, however they do not say a separate Iqamat. It is strange that if Imam Zufar calls a prayer obligatory, it becomes obligatory. And if Imam Mahdi^AS Caliph of Allah^SWT calls a prayer obligatory, it is an addition! Near ahle-sunnat Imam Mahdi^AS also has the right to call a prayer obligatory, similar to the jurisprudents, with the difference that the jurisprudents are non-innocent and Imam Mahdi^AS is innocent. Jurisprudents school of thought/faith is based on their analogy and interpretations, and is unreal (suspicious). And the faith of Imam Mahdi^AS is based on book of Allah (Qur'an) Allah's command and contemplation of the holy soul of the Messenger of Allah^SLM and is authoritative/conclusive.

Remember that innovation (Bid'at) is an act whose original or need did not exist Prophet^SLM's lifetime. Shab-e-Qadr, it's worship, it's prayers, and praying till the pre-dawn, gathering other people along with ahle-bait (members of the holy family) and leading them in the prayers, all this is proven by the practice of the Prophet^SLM. How can this be an innovation? Imam Mahdi^AS, by command of Allah^SWT, offered two rakat prayer as a gratitude for the blessing of determination and confirmation (of the night of Shab-e-Qadr), and revived the practice of the Prophet^SLM. When intellectually gratitude is obligatory for the blessings and favors, then lawfully (according to Islamic law) wouldn't it be obligatory? Specially When

is Allah's order "Be thankful to me and do not deny".

Now for the issue of the conclusion of faith, no doubt the faith (deen) is concluded, such that there is no place for any new (divine) book , any new law (Islamic law), any new messenger/Prophet, or a new religion. In fact there is no need for it. However it should be remembered here that in terms of revelation the faith is definitely concluded. Yet the orders would continue to be interpreted and details obtained till the world exists. Otherwise the status of congregation (Ijma) and Interpretations (Khiyaas) would seize to exist. Kalala's (childless person whose parents are also dead) orders are present but where are the details? Orders prohibiting interest are there, but where are the details? Then the conflicting orders of the jurisprudents. These are all the details of the same concluded faith. Similarly Advent of Mahdi^AS, flux of anti-christ (Dajjal), descend of Jesus^AS. Can the faith conclude without occurance of these. These facts are informed in principle. In that meaning, faith is concluded from revelation point but it does not mean that whatever happened during the lifetime of the Prophet^SLM has happened (is all), now there is no capacity for any new act. The Messenger of Allah^SLM performed Taraaveeh on three nights only. Omer^RZ ordered to perform Taraaveeh during the whole month of Ramazan and also said it an innovation (Bid'at). Yet would anyone say that how can Omar^RZ do an act which the Prophet^SLM did not do?

Amazing! That they do not call an innovation an 'innovation', yet they call Sunnah (practice of the Prophet^SLM) an 'innovation'. May Allah^SWT have mercy and guide them. (Ameen)