Question: A woman left Islam and became a Christian. Some of her relatives say that in dreams they see about her, she looks well and happy. If we see good dreams about such people, what is the meaning?
Answer: Never be beguiled by dreams. Dreams can be good and bad. Dreams can be from Allah Ta’ala, from the Malaaikah and also from Iblees. Dreams can also be from our nafs and the accord with the corruption of our souls.
Sometimes a bad dream has a good meaning. But only an expert in this intuitive knowledge can present a correct interpretation. As far as we are concerned, if a dream is in conflict with the Shariah, then set it aside and do not follow the dream no matter how good it appears. Our criterion is always the Shariah. For the one who had left Islam, just make dua that Allah Ta’ala grants her good hidaayat to return to the fold of Islam.
If in a dream someone sees the murtaddhah sitting on the Arsh of Allah Ta’ala, then too do not be fooled. If you see in a dream she is walking happily in Jannat, then too do not become confused. The barometer is always the Shariah. The kaafir is doomed for everlasting perdition in Jahannam as far as the Law of the Shariah (the Qur’aan and Hadith) states. What exactly Allah Ta’ala will do in the Aakhirah, is His Prerogative. If He so wishes, He will send to Jannat any kaafir. No one can question the Divine Authority. Stating this fact, the Qur’aan Majeed says that if Allah Ta’ala wants to forgive the munaafiqeen, He can and will do so. There is no one to question this and no one can do anything about the Divine Prerogative.
But, we are commanded by Allah Azza Wa Jal to submit and follow only His Shariah, hence we say that kuffaar are doomed for everlasting perdition and ruin in Jahannam – forever and forever.
TAKEN FROM THE MAJLIS VOLUME 26 NUMBER 02
Scraping the very dregs of the barrel of ignorance and stupidity, the Munaafiqeen (Hypocrites), in their desperation for displaying some semblance of ‘islamic’ evidence to bolster their nifaaqi desire and demand for the closure of the Musaajid, clutched at a ridiculous straw. These Munaafiq donkeys now proffer a character, Ibn Sina, who appeared on the platform of history a thousand years after Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
With a hideously stupid argument they seek to justify the closure of the Houses of Allah Azza Wa Jal with a medical opinion/measure of the Zindeeq, Ibn Sina to whom the quarantine measure is attributed. It is ludicrous to present the medical opinion of a Zindeeq who came 1000 years after Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), to support the kufr of closing the Musaajid, an act of heinous kufr which has no precedent in the annals of Islam an no support whatsoever in the Shariah.
Besides Ibn Sina being a Zindeeq peanut in a pile of other copro-worms, he is not counted even among the deviate scholars. Ibn Sina was a poodle of the kuffaar Greek philosophers. He latched on to the kufr ideology of the Greek Philosophers who, despite their claim to be intellectual and rational creatures, were another brand of Greek mythologists.
The beliefs of Ibn Sina which he acquired from his kuffaar Greek masters as today’s munaafiqeen and zanaadaqah lap up the vomit of their university atheist professors, are an obnoxious conglomeration of epistasis and insoforia of the worst kind of kufr. The following beliefs of kufr will be shocking to the people of Imaan who have been misled regarding Ibn Sina.
Ibn Sina’s Beliefs
1) The world is not of temporal origin. That is: the world is uncreated and co-eternal with Allah Azza Wa Jal.
2) Allah Azza Wa Jal is devoid of attributes. He is merely a creative energy from which ensues creation without Him having any will or power over the creations emanating from Him. He is like the sun from which flow rays of light and heat over which the sun has no control.
3) He denies the existence of Jannat and Jahannam.
4) He denies the resurrection in Qiyaamah and of Qiyaamah itself.
5) He believed that the Ambiyaa (Alayhimus salaam) were reformers for the ignorant masses, not for donkey intellectuals as himself and the donkeys which abound in our current era, parading as the ‘intelligentsia’ when in reality they are ignorantsia.
6) Thus, the entire Islam, its beliefs and practices, was a ruse for educating the ignorant masses.
While Ibn Sina is generally known as a Muslim due to masquerading as one just as the Munaafiqeen of today are portraying themselves as Muslims, he was a copro-Zindeeq.
Ibn Sina’s ‘quarantine’ view has no relationship with the kufr of closing the Musaajid even on the assumption that there is medical sense in his medical knowledge. Undoubtedly, he was a hakeem par excellence, but bereft of the slightest vestige of Imaan. After his death, someone saw him in a dream. In the dream, Ibn Sina, pointing to the Auliya and Sufiya said:
Haa ulaa ee falaasah haqqan (“They, i.e. the Sufiya, are the true philosophers.”)
The attempt to eke out capital from Ibn Sina has added to the stupidity of the Munaafiqeen.
13 Sha’baan 1441 – 7 April 2020
THE PLAGUE — ABSTAIN FROM BID’AH
Bid’ah is abhorrent to Allah Ta’ala. The innovation of acts resembling Ibaadat is Bid’ah. Innovating such Bid’ah during plagues does not please Allah Ta’ala. The innovated wazaaif and supplications only add to the problems and misery of the plague. The plague is not ameliorated nor eliminated by Bid’ah. On the contrary, the devastation is intensified.
Haafiz Ibn Hajar Asqalaani (Rahmatullah alayh) states in his voluminous kitaab, Bathlul Ma’oon fi Fadhlit Taa’oon regarding baseless innovations during one devastating plague:
“In the month of Rabiul Awwal (during the plague), the people gathered (in Damascus) to make khatam of Bukhaari Shareef. By the Mihraab of the Sahaabah, they recited Surah Nooh 3363 times according (an instruction) which someone saw in a dream. Then the people made fervent dua for the elimination of the plague. But the plague became more severe.”
The plague continued with increased and unabated fury and devastation. Do not lose sight of the fact that the plague is either Shahaadat or Athaab. The Athaab of Allah Azza Wa Jal will run its prescribed course decreed by Allah Ta’ala. Nothing will stop or thwart it. Regardless of the desperate measures instituted in the panic-stricken communities, the plague will fulfil its divinely-decreed mandate.
In one plague Muslims introduced the Bid’ah of going to the outskirts of the city to perform Salaat and make dua as is the practice for Salaatul Istisqaa’ (Dua for rain). They even fasted three days. But the plague continued unabated.
In our time today, wazeefahs based on the dreams of some buzrugs are being circulated. Innovating such practices is Bid’ah and in conflict with the Sunnah.
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah who had suffered in the Plague of Amwaas, did not innovate any specific practices or wazeefahs.
The solution is not Bid’ah nor only Dua and Wazaaif. The remedy for the plague is Inaabat ilallaah. The fundamentals of Inaabat are:
Sincere Taubah (Repentance)
Reciting Istighfaar with sincerity in abundance
Renewal of the Mithaaq (Pledge). This is of absolute importance.
It is vital to pledge to Allah Ta’ala that the sins in which we had indulged will not be repeated. Submission to the Shariah and adoption of the Sunnah are incumbent factors of Inaabat ilallaah. Minus the Mithaaq, the wazeefas and duas will be of no avail.
Istighfaar, Tahleel, Tasbeeh, Tilaawat, Durood and Dua in abundance are also necessary. But minus Inaabat, these acts are not accepted.
There should be no organized khatams of anything. Everyone should perform Ibaadat in the privacy of the home and silently shed tears, imploring the Rahmat of Allah Ta’ala.
Grotesque, dark and bizarre fitnah is in the making. Worse appears on the horizon. The Ummah has been trapped in satanic luxuries and haraam pleasures. The consequences are now beginning to surface. Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed:
“We shall most assuredly give them to taste of the lesser punishment, not the greater punishment. Perhaps they will return to Rectitude.
When we fail to derive lesson from the lesser punishment, the greater punishment will be unleashed with obliterating severity and consequences. The entire community will be uprooted, devastated and eliminated. May Allah Ta’ala have mercy on us. May Allah Ta’ala grant all Muslims the taufeeq for Inaabat. May Allah Ta’ala save us all from the dark shaitaani plots of the Munaafiqeen in our midst.
12 Sha’baan 1441 – 6 April 2020
Q. If a person sees Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) in a dream wearing such clothes which were not worn during his time, will the dream be authentic? Did he in fact see Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam)?
A. The Akaabir Ulama/Auliya have different views on this issue. There are three views regarding seeing Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) in a dream.
First view: Shah Abdul Azeez (Rahmatullah alayh) said that if one’s heart testifies that the one seen is Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), then he has seen Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) regardless in whatever form the vision is. There should be no doubt in the heart.
Second view: Shah Rafeeuddeen (Rahmatullah alayh) said that if there is even the slightest difference with Rasulullah’s actual form and appearance, then the one seen is not Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). For example, if Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had 20 white hairs, and if the dreamer sees 21, then the one he sees is not Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The slightest difference in any form negates the authenticity of the dream.
In substantiation of his view, Shah Rafeeuddeen (Rahmatullah alayh) would say that during the age of the Sahaabah if anyone claimed to have seen Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) in a dream, they would ask the person to describe the vision he saw. If the description differed even slightly from Rasulullah’s actual form and appearance they would reject it and say that it was not Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
Third view: Shah Ishaaq (Rahmatullah alayh) said that if one sees in a dream that Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is dressed in the garments of the Atqiya (the men of piety/Auliya) of the age, then he did see Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). If he sees Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) dressed in some other type of garb, then it is not Nabi-e-Kareem (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
From these differences it is clear that there is no absolute certitude on this issue. The criterion is always the Shariah. If anything in the dream is done or instructed that is in conflict with the Shariah, then it should be compulsorily set aside.
It will be haraam to give practical expression and to implement anything seen in a dream if it contravenes the Shariah regardless of whether the vision in the dream is that of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
Dreams do not override the Shariah which Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had delivered to the Ummah from Allah Ta’ala.