Tag Archive | "Prophet"

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Description of the Prophet

Posted on 07 February 2012 by Tea Server



In order to understand the message of Islam, it is first necessary to acquaint ourselves with the prophet of Islam. You cannot, as the popular saying goes, separate the message from the messenger. It is therefore only natural to wish to study the life of Muhammad (pbuh), his manners and his morals, and to see how Islam manifested itself in his person as a living example for all Muslims till the end of time.

Abu Hurairah described him as follows:
“He was of medium build, closer to being tall. His skin was extremely white, his beard was black, his mouth was pleasant, his eyebrows were long, and his shoulders were wide”

Ibne Malik said:
“I never touched silk or any soft fabric equal to the softness of his palm, and I never smelled a scent more pleasing than his.”

Hind ibn Abi Hala (the son of Muhammad’s wife Kadijah) described Muhammad (pbuh) as follows:
“The Messenger of Allah was of consecutive sorrows, continuous thought, never finding rest, long in silence. He did not speak without cause. He spoke with his full mouth (was not arrogant), and spoke concisely. His speech was just, with neither excess nor deficiency. He was not pompous, nor denigrating. He exalted all blessings no matter how small and never belittled a single one. He would never praise his food nor criticize it. He was never angered by matters of this life nor that which was associated with it. However, if justice was transgressed nothing could stand up to his anger until justice was established. He never became angry for his own self nor sought retribution for himself. If he gestured, he did so with his whole palm. If he was amazed, he overturned it. If he spoke, he struck with his right palm the inside of his left thumb. If he became angry he turned away, and when he was happy he lowered his gaze. The majority of his laughter was [restricted to] smiling.”

Ali ibn abi Talib described Muhammad (pbuh) as follows:
“He was not vulgar nor did he condone vulgarity, and he was not one to shout in the market place. He did not reward evil with evil, rather, he would forgive and overlook. He never in his life struck anything with his hand except when he was fighting in the name of Allah. He never struck a servant nor a woman, and I never saw him taking revenge for an injustice dealt him, except if the prohibitions of Allah were transgressed. For if the prohibitions of Allah were transgressed he was among the strongest of them in anger. He was never given a choice between two matters but he chose the simplest of the two. If he entered into his home he was a man like any other; cleaning his own garment, milking his own goat, and serving himself.


He would guard his tongue from that which did not concern him. He would attract them (the people) and not repel them. He would ennoble the noble of the people and charge them with their affairs. He was wary of the people and guarded himself against them but without depriving them a warm smile or fitting conduct. He would inquire after his companions and would ask the people about their affairs. He would encourage that which was good and strengthen it, and he would discourage that which was evil and undermine it. He was balanced and consistent. He would never be neglectful that they would not learn neglect and grow indifferent. He had a provision for every occasion and he never fell short of justice nor exceeded it. The closest people to him were the best among them, and the best among them in his eyes were the most comprehensive in advice. The highest of them in stature with him was the best among them in looking after the people and assisting them. He would not rise nor sit down without praise [to God]. If he visited a gathering he would sit wherever the group ended (and not at their head) and he encouraged the same. He would give all those sitting with him their just due [to the extent that] they would each feel that none was more important to him than them. If someone were to sit with him or come in search of a favor he would be patient with them until they (the guest) would be the one to leave. Whoever came to him with a request was never turned away except with that which they had asked for or with a kind word. His cheerfulness and good manners encompassed them all such that he became a father to them and they all became equal in rights. His gatherings were those of knowledge, humbleness, patience, and integrity. In them there would be no raising of voices nor transgressions of prohibitions. They would not expose one-another’s errors, but would be equal, encouraging each-other in the fear of God. In them, they would respect their elders, be merciful to their children, give preference to those in need, and protect the stranger.”

He continues: “He was continually smiling, gentle in manners, soft in nature. He was not severe, harsh-hearted, loud, abusive, or miserly. He would disregard that which he disliked, and no one ever despaired of him. He never responded to disparagement or evil words. He forbade upon himself three things: Argument, arrogance, and that which did not concern him. And he relieved the people of three: He would not degrade any among them or abuse them, he would not search after their honor or private matters, and he would not speak except in matters which he hoped to be rewarded for. When he spoke his attendees would lower their heads as if birds had alighted upon them. Once he finished they would speak. They would not vie with one-another in his presence to speak, but when one would talk in his presence the rest would listen until he finished. Speech in his presence was that of the first among them. He would laugh with them, and wonder with them. He had patience with the strangers when they were gruff in speech and requests, to a degree that his companions would fetch them to him. He would say: ‘If you see someone in need, fetch him to me.’ He would not accept praise except from those who were balanced and not excessive. He would not interject into someone’s speech unless they transgressed, in which case he would either rebuke them or else leave.
He was the most generous of heart, truthful of tongue, softest in disposition, and noble in relationship. He who first set eyes upon him feared him, but he who associated with him loved him. Those who described him would say: ‘I have never seen before or after him anyone similar to him, peace be upon him’ “

*********

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) Farewell Sermon

Posted on 06 February 2012 by Tea Server



“O People, lend me an attentive ear, for I know not whether after this year, I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefore listen to what I am saying to you very carefully and TAKE THESE WORDS TO THOSE WHO COULD NOT BE PRESENT HERE TODAY.

O People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your Lord, and that He will indeed reckon your deeds.

 ALLAH has forbidden you to take usury (interest), therefore all interest obligation shall henceforth be waived. Your capital, however, is yours to keep. You will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity. Allah has Judged that there shall be no interest and that all the interest due to Abbas ibn ‘Abd’al Muttalib (Prophet’s uncle) shall henceforth be waived…

Beware of Satan, for the safety of your religion. He has lost all hope that he will ever be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things.

O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allah’s trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.


O People, listen to me in earnest, worship Allah, say your five daily prayers (Salah), fast during the month of Ramadan, and give your wealth in Zakat. Perform Hajj if you can afford to.

All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves.

Remember, one day you will appear before Allah and answer your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.

O People, no prophet or apostle will come after me and no new faith will be born. Reason well, therefore, O People, and understand words which I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the QURAN and my example, the SUNNAH and if you follow these you will never go astray.

All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me directly. Be my witness, O Allah, that I have conveyed your message to your people”.

*********

Comments (0)

Blaspehming Blasphemies

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Blaspehming Blasphemies

Posted on 07 January 2011 by Tea Server

A version of this post was originally published here.

The Blasphemous Blasphemy Law
i usually don’t do smash and grab super quick blogs, and i try and avoid politics and internet activism like the plague. however, a couple of days ago i was asked by ahsan butt of fiverupees to do a post, and since ahsan is the dawood ibrahim of paksitani blogging* i couldn’t say no.

*(if you don’t believe me, check out the untimely demises of Aslam Kana’a Senior, Chotta Bubs and Nithoo Bhola to see what i mean)

the post in question is to talk about the upcoming rally to protest the blasphemy law. in case you don’t know about it, check out the details here. (Ed: the protest has since been cancelled until further notice)

but in order to avoid this event becoming a glorified GT, we have to get our heads wrapped around what argument we are proposing to place on the agenda. as mosharraf zaidi pointed out in his excellent article, the for and against camps in the blasphemy debate are often speaking at cross currents.

for many of us, the blasphemy law is abhorrent because it is so frequently misused and abused. however, we can’t expect to present this argument, because it shifts the focus away from the legitimacy of the law to a question of how it is being enforced. which leads us into the cesspool of arguing over how to implement laws properly in pakistan.

for others, the blasphemy law needs to be repealed because it is a violation of freedom of speech. this is the exact point (you might as well mark it and take a picture with it) where the anti-blasphemy law campaign finds itself being portrayed as a bunch of ‘liberal-extremists’ licking the soles of western boots.

why does that happen?

if we are to accept freedom of speech as a valid value to cherish, then it means that we believe that we think everyone has the right to say what they feel. that’s great in theory, but in practice it boils down to two things.

first of all, it ignores the fact that in pakistan, by and large, you don’t have rights, you have power. if you have power to say what you feel like, you might pretend you are exercising your rights, but in reality you are flexing your considerable muscles. which means those without power are by and large without rights.

secondly, it implies that the only thing sacred is the right to free speech, and the sanctity of that right exists above and beyond anything else which might be held sacred. for the pro-blasphemy camp, this essentially translates into saying that people ‘should’ have the right to trash all that is sacred.

i might be wrong here, but i can sense that you are tensing up a bit. fear not – for many of the ‘progressive’ crowd, words like sacred and holy are immediately problematic and uncomfortable.

unfortunately, the problem is that until we can frame our debate in those very contexts of religion and things that are sacred, we are always opening up ourselves to be outflanked by claims that we are brainwashed from abroad and that we have no clue about what it means to be a pakistani.

so why don’t we take this debate on in a religious context?

the reason we don’t is that we seem to imagine islam like a supercomputer which we can only use once we have learnt C++ and Java and other more complex languages.

let me explain myself.

a few weeks ago, there was this thing on twitter where everyone was tweeting as their 16 year old selves. my favourite tweet of that day was by someone who wrote “one day i am going to learn arabic, interpret the Quran the right way and then all our problems would be solved.”

i know a lot of people who can relate to that feeling that there is a truth out there that we can get to if only we are learned enough.

however, we grow up and come to assume that the supremacy of islamic knowledge lies with those whose day job it is to memorize it, and thus we can’t hope to enter into a religious argument with them without resorting to non-religious points of views.

well that’s just bullshit.

because if the blasphemy debate is to be won over, and i am talking in pragmatic terms here, it has to be framed in the context of religion itself. whether we like it or not, that is the context wherein the majority of our society can converge upon. that is not to say that we are all rabid fundos or enslaved by the opium of religion, but rather the fact that it is the most widespread mode of articulating ideas in our society.

and there is no reason we can’t frame a progressive argument in religious terms. this doesn’t mean looking up ayahs and tafseers and hadith, but employing some basic logic.

the problem with the idea of blasphemy, particularly at the level of personal insults, is that it implies that the Prophet or God or the Book are some sort of virginal brides in see through chemises whose honor can be irrevocably slighted with even the smallest speck of dirt.

unleashing the law to punish business card trashing and water bringing betrays a supreme sense of insecurity about the perceived value of that which is meant to be sacred, because it implies that something as mundane as those actions would bring the whole edifice of faith and religion crashing down.

so we need to ask the pro-blasphemy camp – is the Prophet an idea, an example, a person so weak and defenseless that even the naming of a teddy bear will tarnish his image? is your faith so weak that it needs to kill an impoverished woman to save itself? is your religion so wobbly that a business card can bring it down?

even if you don’t believe in the sacred history, the more or less accepted versions of historical islam admit that the Prophet bore some hardcore persecution of his people and his self without feeling the need to avenge them. so why is it that his followers 14 centuries on feel so insecure about any criticism thrown his way?

the blasphemy law needs to be repealed because it is a blasphemy in its own self. it reduces that which is supposedly sacred into an idea so weak and powerless that only the most violent action can seem to save it. the blasphemy law is an insult to anyone who has faith, because it claims that an idea which requires blind belief can be shattered by something inconsequential.

you might not agree with me, and you might not feel that you can carry this debate with anyone armed with tafseers and hadiths. that might be true, but i honestly believe that even if this is a losing argument, it is not a futile one. because it zeroes in on the realm of religion – the very realm the pro-blasphemy camp seems to believe it owns, and can thus manipulate it for its own purposes.

at the end of the day, the reason we should wish to repeal the blasphemy law, or amend it is not because we would like to see the triumph of our own political belief and agenda. we should wish to take this stand because we don’t want to see innocent, powerless people be mercilessly persecuted and murdered.

the reason we should wish to make this argument should not be about politics, but about humanity.

Comments (0)

Register your blog:

Enter your blog address below to become a part of the TeaBreak network.

About TeaBreak:

TeaBreak.pk is a blog aggregator that syndicates pakistani blogs and categorizes them appropriately. Our mission is to give our readers a break from work and let them enjoy their blog time. And we are doing this by bringing all the popular blogs of Pakistan on one platform.