[Seesspoxy]

The following is taken from:
http://www.mereislam.info/articles/T...sed-Awliya.pdf

QUESTION 2:
Is it true that Sayyidana Umar, radi Allahu `anh, chopped down the tree where he saw people praying to attain the Barakah of Nabi Muhammad, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam? It was believed that special Bay'ah-or oath of allegiance to the Prophet, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, was taken at this tree.
Mr.Gamieldien uses this to show that the Sahabah did not believe in the Barakah of Sayyidina wa Mawlana Rasul Allah, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, and were against honouring his monuments.

ANSWER:
It is well known that when Nabi Muhammad, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, was in Hudaybiyyah he gave Bay'ah to the Sahabah under a certain tree. This incident is known as Bay'at al-Ridwan. The tree became famous when Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, mentioned it in the Holy Qur'an (48:18) saying: (Laqad radiy Allahu anil muminina iz. Yubayi-oonaka tahta ash shajarah) "Verily Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, is Pleased with those Believers who gave Bay'ah to you under the Tree". In the time of Sayyidina Umar, radi Allahu `anh, people were going to this historical tree and praying there to receive the Barakah of Nabi Muhammad, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam. Upon knowing this, Sayyidina Umar went there and chopped down the tree. Faaik Gamieldien uses this Hadith, wrongly, to prove that praying under the blessed tree was Shirk. Also, to search for Tabarruk and blessings of Nabi Muhammad, sall-Allahu `alayhi
wa sallam, and pious people is Shirk and it is for this reason that Sayyidina Umar chopped down the tree. This is a great lie and some people fabricate this to suit their own ideas and nafs.

Sayyidina Umar, radi Allahu `anh, did chop down the tree, but not because he thought the people praying there were Mushriks, who, by the way, were Sahabah and Tabi'een themselves. That kind of a silly thought did not even occur to his mind. This incident as recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari (Kitab al-Maghazi) and Muslim (Kitab al- Imamah) took place because there was controversy over which tree was the one where the honourable Bay'ah was taken and reliable sources from amongst the Sahabah held that that tree in question was definitely the wrong tree and the original Tree could no longer be located and had mysteriously vanished. Ibn Umar (who was present in the Bay'ah under the Tree) said: "No one could locate the Tree after that year". (Bukhari). Thus, the tree that the Sahabah and Tabi'een were visiting at Hudaybiyyah, in the era of Sayyidina Umar was not the real one, but it was in the same valley where the real one was.

Hence, the real reason for Sayyidina Umar's chopping down of the tree was because it was wrongly believed to be the Tree under which the Holy Bay'ah was taken. In fact, the mysterious vanishing of the Real Tree by Allah, subhanaHu wa Ta`ala, shows how important it was. The honourable Sahabah actually looked for the Tree and could not find it.

Sayyidina Umar's respect for the relics and things of the Nabi , sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, can be ascertained from the following incident narrated in Kanzul Ummal (vol.7 p.66) and Ibn Qudamah (al-Mughni vol.4 p.554):

Once while going to the Mosque to lead the Jum'ah Salah, Umar passed by a canal (Mizab), which was in the way, and the dirty water from the canal messed up his clean clothes. Umar got angry and took the canal out of the way, went back home, dressed up again and went to Mosque.

In the Mosque, the Prophet's, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, uncle Sayyidina Abbas confronted him and said: "That canal was put there by the Messenger of Allah, sall- Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, as I saw with my own eyes". When Sayyidina Umar heard that, he immediately left the Mosque with Abbas and went where that canal was, bent himself like in Ruku and said to al-Abbas:

"O Uncle of the Messenger of Allah, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam, climb on my back and put the canal back where Allah's Messenger put it".

THIS WAS THE LOVE AND RESPECT OUR MASTER UMAR HAD FOR THE THINGS RELATED TO THE MASTER OF ALL BELIEVERS, SAYYIDINA MUHAMMAD, sall-Allahu `alayhi wa sallam. THOSE WITH NO LOVE IN THEIR HEARTS CAN SAY AND DO WHAT THEY WANT.

______________________________________

End of paste.

[Woziwfaq]

Salam Alaikum e-Teacher,



I have to ask, although I understand your anger and frustration for it is my own, but is it fair to generalize every salafi, and say that this is their intent?


Though I'm not a salafi, I do know a few who's mentality towards this situation is the same as ours...they deem it to be unIslamic, and flat out wrong....so it is fair?







W/s

[casinobonusnolimit]

makkah.jpg

Holy Makkah by 2010

[PRengine]

Looks like something out of Star Wars. So sad to see this happening.

[PRengine]

As the kuffar advance, they look to save their heritages whilst we Muslims are going backwards and destroying our heritage.

By the way Maulana eTeacher, I feel your anger and pain on this issue.

[Seesspoxy]

Salam Alaikum e-Teacher,



I have to ask, although I understand your anger and frustration for it is my own, but is it fair to generalize every salafi, and say that this is their intent?


Though I'm not a salafi, I do know a few who's mentality towards this situation is the same as ours...they deem it to be unIslamic, and flat out wrong....so it is fair?

Majority of the Salafees look up to and respect Saudi scholars and especially Ibn Taymiyyah. It is the view of both that all such buildings and places can be demolished and destroyed. If a few Salafees have opposing views, then they are not true Salafees according to Salafees.

When we give an opinion, we give about the majority and not about the minority.

[netamargr]

JazakumAllahu Khairan Mufti Suhail and Maulana Nazim for your informative posts. They really did clarify the whole issue MashaAllah.

Wassalam

[mymnarorump]

May Allah make them aware of their errors. Ameen.

[hechicxxrr]

There's 1 part I don't understand in all this.

Doesn't Makkah and Madina have a person/administrator called "Custodian of the Two Holy Cities"? Also known as Sharif, he would ensure the autonomy remains intact and protected from political influence of the Khalif/rulers.

Who's the Sharif now?
Is he Ahlul Bayt?
Why is he quiet in all this?

[7HlBQS8j]

the two holy cities have governers to over see the city and these governers are appointed by the king, and are princes from his family.

the custodian of the two holy sites is non other than king abdullah himself!!

[Seesspoxy]

salamu `alaykum

"It is narrated through the narrators of the Sahihayn by Ibn Abi Shayba
in his Musannaf (1:106=2:150 §7545) and Ibn Sa`d in the Tabaqat al-Kubra
(1:73), both of them from Nafi`, that news reached `Umar ibn al-Khattab
[whom Nafi` never met] that people were coming to the tree under which
the Prophet (Allah bless and greet him) had received the bay`a [in Ibn
Sa`d: "the tree of Ridwan"], whereupon he ordered that it be cut down
[in Ibn Sa`d: "he rebuked them and ordered that it be cut down"].

Supposing the above is authentic, the fact that this tree was not the
actual tree of the bay`a is illustrated by the following evidence:

- The tree of the bay`a was no longer known to the Companions as
narrated from Ibn al-Musayyab, from his father in al-Bukhari and Muslim
as well as Ibn Sa`d. Al-Musayyab was among those that gave bay`a under
the tree as stated in Ibn Hajar's Isaba after al-`Askari.

- Ibn al-Musayyib also narrated from his father: "We tried to find it
more than once and could not." Al-Hakim cited it in his Ma`rifat `Ulum
al-Hadith (p. 162, type 7) after stating that it was said the tree had
been taken away by a flood.

- Not even was its exact location known, as narrated from `Abd Allah ibn
`Umar in al-Bukhari's Sahih.

- Ibn Sa`d narrated from the centenarian superlative historian Abu
al-Hasan `Ali ibn Muh.ammad al-Mada'ini [Yahya ibn Ma`in described him
as thiqa thiqa thiqa cf. Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' (Dar al-Fikr ed.
9:127)], from Juwayriyya ibn Asma' [one of the narrators of the
Sahihayn], from Nafi`: "A group of the Companions of the Messenger of
Allah (Allah bless and greet him) went out years after that [the bay`a]
but none of them was able to pinpoint the tree and they differed over
it. Ibn `Umar said: 'It [the tree] was a mercy from Allah.'" Narrated by
Ibn Sa`d (2:81=2:105) and this is a stronger chain for Sira reports than
that of the tree-cutting even if the latter did not have a missing link
between Nafi` and our liege-lord `Umar.

- Our liege-lord Ibn `Umar even used to water a certain tree under which
the Prophet (Allah bless and greet him) had prayed so that it would not
die, as narrated by Imam al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan (5:245 §10049). If the
tree-cutting related from his father were true of the actual tree of the
bay`a, he would have desisted from such a concern.

Hence, at best, the tree `Umar ordered cut, supposing the report to this
effect is authentic, was only a tree *claimed* to be that under which
the bay`a took place, and Allah Most High knows best.

Al-Habib `Ali al-Jafri opened my eyes to this aspect of the
Companion-Sira in our first blessed face-to-face meeting in Beirut the
year 2004 when he said: "The scholars said the report that `Umar cut
down the tree of the bay`a is inauthentic." Allah bless and keep him.

gibril"

[Seesspoxy]

http://www.islamicamagazine.com/Issu...nd-Medina.html

[Seesspoxy]

To be fair here ......

The following is the evidence used by those who like to demolish and destroy Islamic Historical/Religious artifacts....


Praise be to Allaah.

Travelling to visit al-Masjid al-Nabawi is an action which is prescribed in sharee’ah as indicated by the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “No journey should be made to visit mosques except for three: this mosque of mine [in Madeenah], al-Masjid al-Haraam [in Makkah] and al-Masjid al-Aqsa [in al-Quds/Jerusalem]. (Narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim; this version narrated by Muslim). Prayer in (al-Masjid al-Nabawi) is better than a thousand prayers anywhere else, apart from al-Masjid al-Haraam.

Other places which it is prescribed to visit without travelling expressly for that purpose are the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), the graves of his two companions [Abu Bakr and ‘Umar], the graves of the people of al-Baqee’ [the cemetery of Madeenah], the graves of the martyrs of Uhud, and finally, the mosque of Quba’.

With regard to visiting those graves, this is implied in the general meaning of the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “I used to forbid you to visit graves but now visit them.”

Shaykh al-Islam [Ibn Taymiyah] (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “It is also mustahabb (recommended) to visit the graves of the people of al-Baqee’ and the martyrs of Uhud, to pray for them and ask for forgiveness for them, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to do this, but this is prescribed for all the Muslim graves.” (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 17/470)

The evidence for visiting the Mosque of Quba’ is the hadeeth narrated in al-Saheehayn from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) who said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to come to Quba’ riding and walking.” According to another report: “and he would pray two rak’ahs there.” (narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also said, “Whoever purifies himself in his house then comes to the mosque of Quba’ and prays there, he will have a reward like that for ‘Umrah.” (Narrated by Ahmad, al-Nasaa’i, Ibn Maajah and al-Haakim. Al-Haakim classed it as saheeh and al-Dhahabi agreed with him. Also classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 6154)

With regard to visiting other mosques and historical sites and claiming that they are “places which a person should visit”, there is no basis for doing this, and they should not be visited for the following reasons:

1- There is no shar’i evidence to suggest that these mosques should be singled out for visits, as there is in the case of Masjid Quba’. As is well known, acts of worship should be based on following (the Sunnah), not on innovations.

2- The Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) were the most keen of all people to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). None of them are known to have visited those mosques and historical sites. If this were a good thing they would have been the first ones to do it.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthmaan, ‘Ali and all the predecessors of the Muhaajiroon and Ansaar used to travel from Madeenah to Makkah to perform Hajj and ‘Umrah, or for other purposes, and none of them said that he was keen to pray in the places where the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had prayed. It is known that if this had been mustahabb in their view, they would have been the first ones to do it, for they had more knowledge of the Sunnah and followed it more closely than anyone else.” (Iqtidaa’ al-Siraat al-Mustaqeem, 2/748).

3- Visits to these places should be disallowed as a preventative measure. This is indicated by the actions of the righteous salaf, above all the rightly-guided khaleefah ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him). It was narrated that al-Ma’roor ibn Suwayd (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “We went out with ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab and we came across a mosque on our route. The people rushed to pray in that mosque, and ‘Umar said, ‘What is the matter with them?’ They said, ‘This is a mosque in which the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed.’ ‘Umar said: ‘O people, those who came before you were destroyed because they followed such (practices) until they made them places of worship. Whoever happens to be there at the time of prayer, let him pray there, and whoever is not there at the time of prayer, let him continue his journey.’” (Narrated by Ibn Waddah in his book al-Bida’ wa’l-Nahiy ‘anhaa; classed as saheeh by Ibn Taymiyah in al-Majmoo’, 1/281).

Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, commenting on this story, “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had not singled out that place for prayer; he prayed there only because he happened to be staying there. Hence ‘Umar thought that imitating him outwardly without having the same reason for doing so did not count as following the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Singling out that place for prayer was like the innovations of the People of the Book which had led to their doom, so he forbade the Muslims to imitate them in this manner. The one who did that was imitating the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in outward appearances, but he was imitating the Jews and Christians in his intention, which is the action of the heart. The action of the heart is what counts, because following in one’s intention is more serious than following in outward appearances.” (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 1/281)

In another example, it is narrated that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) heard that some people were visiting the tree under which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had accepted the bay’ah of people, so he commanded that it should be cut down.” (Narrated by Ibn Waddaah in his book al-Bida’ wa’l-Nahiy ‘anhaa, and by Ibn Abi Shaybah in al-Musannaf, 2/375. Its isnaad was classed as saheeh by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Baari, 7/448.Al-Albaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: the men of its isnaad are thiqaat).

Ibn Waddaah al-Qurtubi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Maalik ibn Anas and other scholars of Madeenah regarded it as makrooh to go to those mosques and historical sites connected to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), apart from Quba’ and Uhud.” (al-Bida’ wa’l-Nahiy ‘anhaa, p. 43). What is meant by Uhud is visiting the graves of the martyrs of Uhud.

Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Hence the scholars of the salaf among the people of Madeenah and elsewhere did not regard it as mustahabb to set out to visit any places in and around Madeenah after the Mosque of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), apart from the mosque of Quba’, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not specify any mosque to be visited apart from that.” (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 17/469).

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, after mentioning the places which it is prescribed to visit in Madeenah: “With regard to the seven mosques, Masjid al-Qiblatayn (the Mosque of the Two Qiblahs), and other places which some authors who wrote about the rituals of Hajj include among the places to be visited, there is no basis for doing that, and there is no evidence for doing so. What is prescribed for the believer at all times is to follow [the Sunnah], not to innovate.” (Fataawa Islamiyyah, 2/313)

The prominent scholar Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah preserve him) said: “There are no places in Madeenah to be visited apart from these: al-Masjid al-Nabawi, the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), al-Baqee’, the martyrs of Uhud, and the Mosque of Quba’. As for other sites, there is no basis for visiting them.” (Fiqh al-‘Ibaadaat, p. 405)

Some may think that as long as one does not believe that these places hold any special virtue, that justifies visiting them or other historical places. This idea is unacceptable, for the following reasons:

Firstly: the righteous salaf (may Allaah have mercy on them) forbade going to these places in absolute terms, without going into detail.

Secondly: going to these places and singling them out to visit because they are in the vicinity of Madeenah which witnessed the dawn of the Islamic call or because some battles happened there, proves that one believes in their virtue. If one did not hold such a belief, there would be no motive for visiting these places.

Thirdly: if we accept, for the sake of argument, that a person does not believe in their virtue, visiting them is still a means that may lead to that and to doing things that are not prescribed. Taking preventative measures is one of the things prescribed by sharee’ah, as is well known. Al-‘Allaamah Ibn al-Qayyim – may Allaah have mercy on him – gave ninety-nine examples illustrating this principle, and after giving the ninety-ninth example he said: “Taking preventative means is one-quarter of responsibility, for there are commands and prohibitions. The commands are of two types, one of which is the end in itself and the other is the means to that end. And prohibitions are of two types, the thing that is prohibited because it is evil in and of itself, and the means that lead to that evil. So preventing the means that lead to that which is haraam is one quarter of the religion.” (I’laam al-Muwaqqi’een, 3/143)

Fourthly: It gives wrong ideas to ignorant people; when they see many people visiting those mosques and historical sites, they will think that this is an action which is prescribed in Islam.

Fifthly: Going to extremes in that matter and calling for visits to historical sites such as Mount Uhud and Jabal al-Noor for leisure purposes is one of the means that lead to shirk. The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas issued a fatwa (No. 5303) stating that it is not allowed to climb up to the Cave of Hiraa’ for that reason. And Allaah is the One Whose help we seek.



Al-Da’wah magazine, issue #1754, p. 55

[Vipvlad]

It is sad that the quoting of hadith passes for argumentation in our intellectually bankrupt tradition. We have forgotten that an agent is involved in the interpretation, contextualization, and appropriation of the meaning and intent, masked through the agency of the transmitters, of the hadith. We cannot annex our intelligence to the empiricism of Salafi-Wahhabism. That is not religion, it is spiritual suicide.

[85IbLcwQ]

Pakistani architect flows the Ayn Zubaydah down memory lane..

Saleem Bukhari, a Pakistani architect and planner, started work in Saudi Arabia as a member of the Madinah Master Plan team almost 30 years ago. After that he worked in the Haj Research Center, a unit formed to carry out research on the issues facing pilgrims and to provide planning solutions.

He has also been part of the design and construction team for the sliding domes and umbrellas in the Prophet's Mosque in Madinah as well as that of the fireproof tents in Mina. Recently, on behalf of the governorate, he made a short documentary on Ayn Zubaydah. At present he is working on editing a book on the city of Makkah.

It is a common belief that Queen Zubaydah had laid down an artificial stream from the Tigris River near Baghdad to Makkah. The story confuses the two major works of the queen. She improved the pilgrim track from Kufah to Makkah and Madinah. On this track, which is more than 1,500 km long, water and safe camping places were provided. This track became known as Darb Zubaydah.

For the water supply to Makkah, Queen Zubaydah commissioned two aqueducts. One was from Wadi Hunayn and the other from Wadi Numan, east of Arafat. The latter, as it was close to Arafat, is sometimes known as Ayn Arafat while it is more commonly as Ayn Zubaydah. Bukhari shared his historical facts about Ayn Zubaydah with Arab News.. Read On

[Lauramalina]

New money half naken bedu with religious zeal speaks the volume. Unforutnalty people are too naieve and they use good intention of other to misslead.

A lot of agruments are rebuttled easily! only a wrapped take and a willfull missinterpreation to fit in with the wahabyte view.
People with no hisotry have no future. So is saudian.

Allahualam

Bro nomadic,

You are very funny... Most of the time i dont understand what ur trying to say

[QYD8eQ8F]

I don't want to talk about the destruction since it's a matter on which I have no knowledge, but just about the construction of building. Even if I don't like the new view Makkah and Madinah are going to have, I have two simple question to all who criticizes this act done by the Saudis Government :
How do you welcome millions of Muslim without making some improvement in the city ?
Does the number of hujjaj have stayed the same since the 1900' ?

[Efksqhyu]

I don't want to talk about the destruction since it's a matter on which I have no knowledge, but just about the construction of building. Even if I don't like the new view Makkah and Madinah are going to have, I have two simple question to all who criticizes this act done by the Saudis Government :
How do you welcome millions of Muslim without making some improvement in the city ?
Does the number of hujjaj have stayed the same since the 1900' ?

building new stuff doesn't require eradicating Muslim historical buildings, this has just been the excuse. The motivation was something quite different.

[QYD8eQ8F]

building new stuff doesn't require eradicating Muslim historical buildings, this has just been the excuse. The motivation was something quite different.

You have misunderstood my point.
There is two separates issues (even if sometimes they are related) which have been discussed here :
-destruction of historical site
-rising of tall building similar to what exist in other big cities.

My point was just about the second part of this issue not the first part, I was adressing to those who criticizes the rise of construction not to the desctruction of historical sites. The place of many buildings were not historical site and yes, some people criticize that too, I'm not agree with that attitude, so that's why I ask those questions.

[Andrew1978]

Yes just a huge coinicidence that exaggerated percieved "grave worship" is the same ideology that allows for destruction of guess what, old graves so that you can have mcdevils and starsucks instead

For 1400 years the muslims got it wrong, then the Saudis finally figured it out in the 21st Century ! Coincidentally the same reasoning behind their chief ideology, another huge coincidence.

Hajj needs to accomodate the NEW VISITORS with starsucks and mcdevils and KFc...yes, the ummah needs its double fries and shakes !!

You couldnt make this stuff up !!