||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: 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 RaziRH 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 AllahSLM was astonished on this. Thus AllahSWT revealed this verse,
which means O! Messenger of AllahSLM 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 AllahSWT
favored Muslims owing to the ProphetSLM 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 ProphetSLM, believe 27th night
to be shab-e-qadr, people frown (raise their eye-brows). Hence Muawiya bin Abu Sufiyan has narrated in
i.e. he heard form Mutraf, him from Muawiya, and Muawiya from Abu Sufiyan, and Abu Sufiyaan from the
Messenger of AllahSLM 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 ProphetSLM himself in this night. Therefore it is narrated by Abu Zar
Abu Zar said that we kept fast along with the Messenger of AllahSLM. The Messenger of AllahSLM 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 AllahSLM you offered prayers longer tonight then the Messenger of AllahSLM 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 AllahSLM 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 AllahSLM
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
The following points are noticed from the above discussion:
The minimum count of prayers is two Rakat, less than that is not considered a prayer (Salaat). Thus if
Mahdavis, in obedience of the ProphetSLM, gather their kith & kin and others, and offer two rakat
prayer, how can this be called a deception? Is abiding by the ProphetSLM i.e. following the practice of
the Messenger of AllahSLM an innovation? God forbid!
- Shab-e-Qadr is in Ramazan
- The ProphetSLM 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 ProphetSLM was informed about the shab-e-qadr and was made to forget, The ProphetSLM Himself has
said this. "I was informed about that night then made to forget".
Is it not true that besides shab-e-qadr, the ProphetSLM did not gather ahle-bait (members of the holy
family), his wivesRZ and other people for any other prayer during his entire life?
When MahdiAS was informed by AllahSWT 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.
MahdiAS, in compliance of this order, revived the practice of the ProphetSLM. 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 MahdiAS.
At this point, this objection is incorrect "how can Allah's orders come to MahdiAS, they come only to
the Prophets (PBUT)?"
Because people intimate with AllahSWT (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 GabrielAS
and the second is without an intermediary. The seal of the ProphetsSLM received both types of
revelations. The noble Qur'an was revealed through GabrielAS, which is called "Matlu" revelation
and the other revelation is without any intermediary.
As the ProphetSLM 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, AllahSWT's is for JosephAS "Then Thee sent
revelation towards JosephAS that (one day) you would inform them about their act". At that time
JosephAS was not a Prophet. Furthermore, revelation being sent to MusaAS'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 MahdiAS. The orders from AllahSWT 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 JilaniRH claimed on the basis of knowledge from AllahSWT
"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 AllahSWT so much so that their sainthood was seized and (Khukbaani) was their fate.
This is about a saint. Whereas MahdiAS is the seal-of-the-saints, concluder of faith, caliph of
AllahSWT and free from error (innocent). He is more deserving of AllahSWT's orders. Because who
else can the caliph of AllahSWT receive information & orders from, besides AllahSWT?
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 ProphetSLM), 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 ProphetSLM?
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 ProphetSLM, using their
analogy and interpretation, called some acts as obligatory, some mandatory, some Sunnah (Practice of
the ProphetSLM) and some desirable. That is why we see that an act which is obligatory near one Imam
jurisprudent is mandatory, Sunnah (practice of the ProphetSLM) or desirable near the other
Therefore see in the orders of jurisprudence that near Imam MalikRH anointing (Masah) of full head and
co-operation are obligatory. Imam Abu HanifaRH calls them Desirable (Mustahab). Recitation of
Surah-Fatiha is obligatory near Imam ShafieeRH and Imam Abu HanifaRH calles it mandatory (Wajib).
Recitation of Surah-Fatiha by the follower in the prayer (Muqtadi) is obligatory (Farz) near Imam
ShafieeRH and prohibited near Imam Abu HanifaRH!
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 ProphetSLM
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 ProphetSLM and it is Sunnah (Practice of the
ProphetSLM) 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 ProphetSLM) based on their analogy then can't
MahdiAS, who is caliph of AllahSWT and is innocent by the command of the Messenger of AllahSLM
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 AllahSWT's
command? An act which pre-existed. Was there any segregation of obligatory, mandatory, Sunnah,
desirable, etc during the lifetime of the ProphetSLM? 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 ProphetSLM. 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 MahdiAS 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 MahdiAS be objectionable? Whose status is such that he
obtains orders directly from AllahSWT or from the soul of the Messenger of AllahSLM. God forbid,
fault-finding in jurisprudents is not our aim at all. Whatever they did, they did it for the sake of
AllahSWT. May AllahSWT fill their graves with divine light (Noor). But the purpose is to show that
the status of MahdiAS, 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 AllahSLM said "AllahSWT
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 HambalRH, mandatory near Imam Abu HanifaRH. And among the
students of Imam Abu HanifaRH, it is obligatory near Imam Zufar.
When Imam Abu HanifaRH 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 HanifaRH 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 MahdiAS Caliph of AllahSWT calls a prayer obligatory, it is an addition! Near ahle-sunnat
Imam MahdiAS also has the right to call a prayer obligatory, similar to the jurisprudents, with the
difference that the jurisprudents are non-innocent and Imam MahdiAS is innocent. Jurisprudents school
of thought/faith is based on their analogy and interpretations, and is unreal (suspicious). And the
faith of Imam MahdiAS is based on book of Allah (Qur'an) Allah's command and contemplation of the
holy soul of the Messenger of AllahSLM and is authoritative/conclusive.
Remember that innovation (Bid'at) is an act whose original or need did not exist ProphetSLM'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 ProphetSLM. How can this be an innovation? Imam MahdiAS, by command
of AllahSWT, 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 ProphetSLM. 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 MahdiAS, flux of anti-christ (Dajjal), descend of JesusAS. 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
ProphetSLM has happened (is all), now there is no capacity for any new act. The Messenger of
AllahSLM performed Taraaveeh on three nights only. OmerRZ 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
OmarRZ do an act which the ProphetSLM did not do?
Amazing! That they do not call an innovation an 'innovation', yet they call Sunnah (practice of the
ProphetSLM) an 'innovation'. May AllahSWT have mercy and guide them. (Ameen)