Chapter 1

Introduction

Although we initially felt no need to address the unanimous belief of Bada, the misunderstandings being created by the insightful Nawasib against the Shi’a of Ahlulbayt [as] deemed it important to address the matter once for all.

The word Bada has the following two meanings in general Arabic language:

The first meaning is “Appearance after hiding.”

The second meaning is the “origination of a new idea.”

The Shi’a believes that Allah [swt] is the Creator of this universe and every single living or nonliving thing present in the universe is due to the will of Allah [swt]. Every incident occurring until the Day of Judgment is within the absolute / eternal knowledge of Allah [swt]. If Allah [swt] grants a kingdom to an individual, that is then taken back because he transgressed into major sins and grants it to somebody else, then according to Shia belief Bada’ has been utilized by Allah [swt]. This example does not mean that Allah [swt] was initially unaware of what was going to happen in the future, on the contrary He [swt] has absolute knowledge of every single movement that is going to happen. These narrow-minded Nawasib who prefer to adhere to man made dictionaries will abruptly interpret the incident according to the above two meanings of Bada’ by Allah [swt], rather than enhancing their belief towards the unimaginable capabilities of the Creator. Sadly these narrow-minded Nawasib that depict the Islamic belief of Bada as controversial ignorantly object to the notion that there can be a ‘change’ in Allah [swt]’s will.

In this article we shall seek to prove the existence of the belief of Bada directly from:

1. Allah (swt)’s final Divine Book

2. the statements of esteemed scholars of Ahle Sunnah and Shia

3. the authentic Sunni books of hadeeth

We shall also prove that historically it was only the narrow minded Jews who were opposed to the concept of a ‘change’ in God’s will. It should not come as much of a surprise to see their Nawasib brothers have also sharing this stance.

Since supplication is one of those acts that can change one’s destiny, we humbly supplicate that Allah [swt] adopt Bada and replace their dim whetted minds with the ability to ponder so that recognize the blessings that Allah [swt] has showered on Muslims in the shape of Bada (Ameen).

Chapter 2

The concept of Bada’ in Quran

It is unfortunate that some Nawasib tasked with sowing Fitnah amongst Muslims by their Jewish and other anti-Islamic paymasters have portrayed the Shia belief of Bada’ as something new and alien to the Islamic faith. That is what we read on Ansar.org and in various others booklets of our opponents:

Ansar.org states:

The theory of Al-Imamah lead to the invention of Al-Bida. The Shia invented Al-bida to save their theory in Al-Imamah from collapsing.

Whilst this approach reveals that the Nawasib are materially rewarded for sowing controversies amongst Muslims it also highlights their failure to assess the truth before attacking the Shia, since the concept of Bada’ can be evidenced from our Holy Book.

First Incident: The incident of Musa [as] wherein Allah [swt] made changes in the covenant He [swt] had made with Musa [as]

Allah [swt] made a covenant with Musa [as] that if he comes to the mount of Tur and fasts for thirty days, he would be granted the Torah. Accordingly, Musa [as] went to the mount of Tur and fasted for thirty days. When on the thirtieth day he went on the mount after doing miswaak (tooth brush), he couldn’t could not understand that one of the conditions of the covenant was to do miswaak (tooth brush). He was according told that Allah [swt], deemed the smell of the one who fasts as better than the fragrance of musk. He was then asked to fast for ten more days and to come to the mount without doing miswaak (tooth brush), it was only then he would be issued with the Torah. Musa [as] accordingly fasted for a further ten more days and on the fortieth day, he was given Torah. Now let us see the episode from the Holy Quran:

[Shakir 7: 142]

"And We Appointed with Musa a time of thirty nights and completed  them with ten (more) so the Appointed time of his Lord was complete forty nights"

It can be read very clearly that Allah [swt] had initially made the covenant for thirty days/nights but later on 10 more nights were added to the covenant. This does not constitute a change in the knowledge of Allah [swt] rather there was a change in the knowledge of Musa [as]. Allah [swt] already knew that Musa [as] was to be issued the Torah after forty days. The very fact has been stated in Holy Quran in the following manner:

"so the appointed time of his Lord was complete forty nights"

That is the reason that in another verse, Allah [swt] stated:

[ Y u s u f ali 2 : 5 1 ]

And Remember We appointed forty nights for Moises, and in his absence ye took the calf (for worship) and ye did grevious wrong

This verse revealed the reason why this was initially kept from Musa [as] the ten day delay in returning to his people was a test of their faith, those amongst them with weak beliefs came under the influence of Samri and started to worship the calf and in this way, and hence failed the test.

The Quran quotes this incident in the following words:

[ S h akir 2 0 : 8 2 - 8 9 ]

And most surely I am most forgiving to him who repent s and believes and does good, the continous to follow the right direction

And what caused you to hasten from your people, O Musa?

He said: They are here on my track I hastened on to Thee, my Lord, that Thou mightest be pleased

He said surely We have tried your people after you, and the Samiri has led them astray.

So Musa returned to his people, wrathful, sorrowing. Said he, O my people! did not your Lord promise you a goodly promise: did then the time seem long to you, or did you wish that displeasure from your Lord should be due to you, so that you broke (your) promise to me?

They said: We did not break (our) promise to you of our own accord, but we were made to bear the burdens of the ornaments of the people, then we made a casting of them, and thus did the Samiri suggest.

So he brought forth for them a calf, a (mere) body, which had a mooing sound, so they said: This is your God and the God of Musa but he forgot.

What! Could not they see that it did not return to them a reply, and (that) it did not control any harm or benefit for them?

Had it was disclosed to Musa [as] that he would receive the Torah on the thirtieth or fortieth day, or on the thirtieth day provided he conducted miswaak, or fasted for forty days without doing miswaak etc, then how would his adherents have been tested? The test was only possible when the thirty days were mentioned initially and the condition on the fulfillment of which Torah was to be given, this was kept secret. Musa [as] and his nation did not envisage a further ten days. This brief delay period, was sufficient for Samri to misguide the nation saying that the God of Musa [as] was a calf and Musa [as] has mistakenly gone on the mount of Tur and he could not locate the Torah there (naudobillah).

Second Incident: The incident of Yunus [as] wherein Allah [swt] revoked the due wrath on the nation of Yunus [as]

The second belief of Bada’ also comes from the Holy Book that Nawasib have failed to understand due to vision being clouded by Shi’a hatred. The Quran tells us that Prophet Yunus [as] kept preaching to his nation for a number of years and only two people brought faith. In the end, Prophet Yunus [as] became disappointed with his nation and thus asked Allah [swt] to send His (swt) wrath upon them. We read in the Holy Quran:

[Shakir 21:87]

And Yunus, when he went away in wrath, so He thought that We would not straighten him, so he called out among afflictions: There is no God but thou, glory be to thee; surely I am of those who make themselves to suffer loss.

Under the commentary of this verse, almost all the Sunni commentators have stated that there was a change in Allah [swt]’s decision for sending his wrath on the people of Yunus [as]. For example:

1. Imam Suyuti in Tafseer Dur Al Manthoor, Volume 4, page 333

2. Ibn Kathir in Tafseer Ibn Kathir, volume 6, page 232

3. Qadhi Thanaullah in Tafseer Mazhari, volume 2 page 191

Ibn Kathir records:

This story is mentioned here, and in Surat As-Saffat and Surah Nun. Yunus bin Matta, upon him be peace, was sent by Allah to the people of Nineveh, which was a town in the area of Mawsil [in northern Iraq]. He called them to Allah, but they rejected him and persisted in their disbelief. So he left them in anger, threatening them with punishment after three [days]. When they realized that he was telling the truth and that a Prophet never lies, they went out to the desert with their children and cattle and flocks. They separated the mothers from their children, then they beseeched Allah and pleaded to Him, with the camels and their young groaning, the cows and their calves mooing, and the sheep and their lambs bleating, so Allah spared them from the punishment. Allah says: (Was there any town that believed (after seeing the punishment), and its faith saved it Except the people of Yunus; when they believed, We removed from them the torment of disgrace in the life of the world, and permitted them to enjoy for a while) [10:98].

Obviously Yunus [as] being the prophet of Allah [swt] threatened his nation and predicted the wrath precisely after three days upon the instructions of Allah [swt] i.e. Allah [swt] had decided to send wrath upon them after three days but we see that Allah [swt] abandoned his decision and spared them due to their humble plea that they subsequently made.

Similar to the incident of Musa [as] mentioned above, the reasoning behind keeping the actual condition a secret is clear. Had it been conveyed to Yunus [as] right at the beginning that the wrath was going to be cancelled due to a change in heart amongst the people, there would have been no grounds for him to threaten the wrath on his indifferent nation, since they would have eventually come to their senses. Allah [swt] issued the news of wrath with a (hidden) opportunity for a reprieve if they abandoned their disbelief and came to the path of truth. The nation took advantage of the opportunity, and they became believers.

Third incident: The incident of the sacrifice of Ismaeel [as] by Ibrahim [as]

Another incident concerns the sacrifice of Prophet Ibrahim [as] in which Allah [swt] had instructed Prophet Ibrahim [as] in his dream to sacrifice Ismaeel [as] and he accordingly sought to implement this instruction. Allah [swt] saved Ismaeel [as] when his father was about to slash the knife across his neck and replaced him (as) with a ram. If Ibrahim [as] had been told right at the beginning that his son would be substituted with a ram, how would Ibrahim [as]’s firm heart could be tested? Thus, the actual order was revealed to them while the end result was kept from them so that the examination of their submission and obedience could be assessed. That’s why we read in the Quran:

[Shakir 37:105]

You have indeed shown the truth of the vision; surely thus do We reward the doers of good.

Like the previous incidents of Prophet Musa [as] and Prophet Yunus [as], here we also see that instructions were issued whilst the end result was kept hidden. That is why the nation of Musa [as] thought that he [as] should have returned after thirty days. Prophet Yunus [as] thought that the wrath on his disobedient people was inevitable. Ibrahim [as] thought that Ismaeel [as] was indeed going to be sacrificed. And when the result turned out to be against the expectations of those prophets, then they came to know that the instruction was actually dependent on a condition(s). What is clear that at no place do these incidents suggest that Allah [swt] was ignorant of anything at any place (naudobillah) only narrow-minded people like Nawasib can come to such an absurd conclusion. He [swt] is the knower of the unseen. He [swt] is well aware of the extremes of the universe before their creation. People cannot comprehend His logic which is why they expect something specific from their Lord when it turns out to be against their expectations, it is means that Bada’ has occurred, the reasoning has been divulged for a result that had not initially been expected.

Bada’ demonstrates that a man cannot reach the depths of knowledge and logic held by Allah [swt]

Bada’ implies that Allah [swt] is absolutely Omnipotent and has full control over all things.

Bada’ reveals the connotation that not even a single leaf could move without Allah’s permission in the created world.

If it is suggested that whatever Allah [swt] has to do, has already been decided by him, and He does not possess any authority to alter or change matters, then this would negate the concept of the Islamic Shari’ah that abrogated all previous ones, that is non sense. If it is believed that Allah (swt) has created whatever He [swt] has to do, then the need and wish to worship and keeping aloof from sins will be of no avail because deeds become irrelevant, we are destined for Heaven or Hell, no matter what we do / don’t do. Moreover, such a belief would contradict the Quranic injunctions of making abundant supplications and pleas such as this:

"Pray unto Me and I will hear your prayer " (Quran 40:60)

then surely I am very near; I answer the prayer of the suppliant when he calls on Me ( Quran 2:186)

"Show us the straight way" (Quran 1:6)

'And there are some among them who say: Our Lord! grant us good in this world and good in the hereafter' (Quran 2: 201)

Such verses would in effect just be an act, according to such pathetic logic our supplications are not going to make any difference since Allah [swt] will do what He [swt] has decided. But if the change in the previous Shari’ahs is correct, as are concepts such as entering Paradise on account of worship and going to Hell due to abandoning worship is true, and making supplications to alter covenant of Allah [swt] is not false, charity and generous deeds brings Barkah then we will have to accept that Allah [swt] has put many Takwini affairs according to the way we implement the aforesaid acts, although, the fact remains that Allah [swt] knows the end result of all matters. It is a different matter that those close to Allah [swt] expect something due to their previous knowledge but things turned out to be against their expectations, the very appearance of unexpected decisions is referred to as Bada’. When it is proved that the acceptance of Allah’s divinity and authority is impossible without Bada’ and the completeness of the Sharyah of Muhammad [s], the abrogation of religions, the descending of prophets and achieving Hell or Heaven on the basis of sins and rewards, all of these things are dependent on Bada’ and when from the incidents of three prophets cited above we deduce the easiness the belief of Bada’ has provided to us Muslims then why Nawasib are still found yapping at the statement of Imam Jaffar Sadiq [as]:

"The greatness of Allah is in nothing except Bada."

or

"If people come to know how much reward Bada' contain they will not seize o talk about it"

Incident Four: Change of Qibla, an example of Bada’

When on the right path, you will find in abundance to prove the truth. Alas! Falsehood wouldn’t hide a place to hide. Salat, the most important act of worship, Muslims and even the old nations kept expressing their submission to Allah Almighty in this manner. An obligation stressed in the Quran approximately 98 times, can Allah Almighty (God forbid) make a mockery of this act by changing his decision (as per Nasibi belief)? If Nasibis think that changing a decision by Allah Almighty is such a void act, then why did this happen in case of prayers? (Nauzbillah) Didn’t Allah Almighty know beforehand that He will change the qibla later on? Sure, He did know that. Then if the qibla was changed, and Nasibis accept that, then how can they say that the belief of Bada is wrong?

A vivid example of Bada (that is so widely yapped about by the Nasibis) is the change of Qibla. The Muslims, for 17 months after Hijrah, faced Baytal Muqaddas while offering prayers, but later on Allah Almighty ordered the Holy Prophet [saww] to turn his face towards the Holy Ka’aba and proceed with that as the Qibla for prayers.Beloved scholar of Nasibies Ibn Kathir says:

"When Holy Prophet [saww] migrated to Medina, it was ordered that al Muqaddas should be made the qibla"

Once it is proven that Allah (swt) initially instructed that Baytal Muqaddas be faced as qibla, then it evident that He changed this decision. Let us cite the incident here. The change of qibla took place in 2 Hijri.

Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir says:

"Holy Prophet [saww] offered prayers facing Baytal Muqqadas for 16 or 17 months. He wanted it to be changed to the Holy Ka'aba after receiving orders from Allah (swt), he faced the Ka'aba and offered 'Asr prayer'

Qadi Thanaullah Panipati Uthmani affirms:

“The change of Qibla according to the most probable narrations, took place on the 15th of Rajab, two months before the Battle of Badr, before the time of sunset. The majority of the Ulema have termed this (date of change) to be correct.”

This incident is narrated in detail in the Holy Quran. However, this incident has been dealt with in three parts in the Quran:

1. Foretelling by Allah [swt] about the mocking at the change

2. The change of the Qibla

3. Reverting of people from Islam

Since Allah (swt) knew that not only the Jews, but their agents within the fold of Islam wouldn’t spare any room for misguiding Muslims and creating doubts (refer to treaty to Hudaibiyah), he foretold the Muslims about the change of Qibla.

[ Y u s u f ali 2 : 1 4 2 ]

The fools among the people will says: "What hath turned them from the Qibla to which they were used?"  Say:  To Allah belong both east and West. He guideth whom He will to a Way that is straight.

Interesting revered Sunni Scholar, Qadhi Thanaullah Panipatti in ‘Tafseer al-Mazhari’. He says:

“When Allah Almighty ordered Prophet Muhammad [s] to change the qibla, the pagans of Mecca mocked, saying that Muhammad has started doubting in his own religion and reverting to our religion, that is why he has replaced his qibla with ours too.”

In light of this reference, we can proclaim that we are the real followers of the Holy Prophet [saww], not caring about the mocking of Nawasib, who have to carry ahead the mission of their forefathers, to mock those on the right path, following Allah (swt) in all beliefs and deeds.

Allamah Thanaullah Panipati not sparing his ‘Sunni’ brothers in any way further states:

“Jews and the pagans of Mecca criticized and mocked at the change of qibla from Baytul Muqaddas, this is when the verse was revealed.”

Another beloved scholar of our opponents Ibn Kathir in this connection says:

“The fools in the above mentioned verse refers to the scholars of Jews, and it is also said that the munafiqeen (hypocrites) have been referred to as fools.”

This is what has been the argument of the Shia all along, besides all the historical evidences, the attitude, hypocrisy and even the beliefs of Nawasib are also derivations from Jews. With the task assigned to them by the Jews for disuniting the Muslims and harming the mainstream Mu’mineen (Shia), they have inherited all their traits from the Jews too, mocking the Shia for exactly the same issue. Jews mocked Holy Prophet [saww] for the change in decision by Allah Almighty, and same attitude is adopted by Nawasib in dealing with the Islamic belief of Bada’. In their bliss of ignorance, they forget that Allah the eternal, with just a single change in decision, unveiled many faces.

Allah Almighty himself discloses the logic for his change in decision:

[Yusufali 2:143]

and We appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels (From the Faith). Indeed it was (a Change) momentous,except to those guided by Allah. And never would Allah Make your faith of no effect.

Ibn Kathir under this verse comments:

“Those who were weak in faith started to doubt and said what is this, sometimes he calls this as qibla and sometimes he calls that as Qibla.”

Ibn Kathir testifying the belief of Bada’ in connection to the change of qibla states:

“The change in qibla was done to find out that who the real believers were. Who is it that would face anywhere you would want him and who suddenly reverts and turns murtad (apostate). This was an important issue, that those real followers who know that whatever Holy Prophet [saww] says is true. Who have the belief that Allah does whatever He wants, He may order his creatures as He likes, He may eradicate what he wants and keep unchanged what he wants. Every step of His is logical. It is not difficult for the real followers to follow all the orders of Allah. But those with the sick hearts, whenever confronted with a new order, are afflicted with a new pain.”

The above quoted reference from Tafseer Ibn Kathir is self descriptive and detailed, anyone with a tinge of honesty and intellect would easily understand it and should accept it. This reference should be read and understood, before barking on Shia belief of Bada’. But the poor Nasibis are helpless too, because if they are not going to do all this against Shia, they aren’t going to get the bundles of dollars that they are paid from their Zionist masters. Alas! In this craze, the Nasibis have forgotten Allah Almighty, and submitted to their new God, the Almighty Dollar.

This incident, while proving the belief of Bada’ as Islamic, having solid evidence in Quran, also drags the Nawasib in line with their masters, the Jews, terming them as fools, in the Quran dialect. Here, none, not the Shias at least, believe that Allah Almighty didn’t know beforehand that He [swt] would change the qibla later, but none can raise objections here that why did Allah make the Muslims pray for 17 months as Baytal Muqaddas as their qibla and then change it to provide the Jews with a chance to mock at them. Shias believe that Allah is All-knowing, All-wise. No act of Allah is without logic and reasoning, however, the human minds and souls may not be developed and excelled enough to understand that. He knows the logic behind what he does, and needs not to prove it to others. The absolutism of Allah that Shias believe in is unprecedented and they also don’t dare to question his knowledge and power. The Nawasib coward in the battlefields like their masters who would flee from wars, have inherited the ability of questioning God and His absolutism from their same satanic masters too.

Here is a verse of the Holy Quran, revealed for the Jews and hypocrites at the time of the change in qibla when they mocked at that. It perfectly describes the situation of the Nasibis, not only in the issue of Bada’, but all such belief which are made to appear ‘conflicting’. Indeed Allah is All-wise, All-knowing.

[Yusufali 2:145]

Even if thou wert to bring to the people of the Book all the Signs (together), they would not follow Thy Qibla; nor art thou going to follow their Qibla; nor indeed will they follow each other's Qibla.

A slap to Nawasib pertaining to the change in qibla

If the Nasibies like that of Sipah-e-Sahabah (kr-hcy.com) abhor the belief of Bada’ so much like Jews, then they should denounce the change of qibla and persist with facing Baytal Muqaddas even now. The basic human ethics call for it that the Nasibis, not believing in Bada’ shouldn’t offer prayers in direction of Ka'aba like the other Muslims who do believe that Allah [swt] can make any change He likes, anywhere and anytime (i.e. Bada’).

Chapter 3

The unanimity among the Shia and Sunni Ulema in the belief of Bada’

Some idiotic Nawasib have misused the Islamic concept of Allah [swt] changing his decisions which the Shia call Bada’ while different terminologies for the same concept are held by the Ahle Sunnah. Such ignorant people argue that this belief was developed by the Shi’a to address the shortcomings in the doctrine of Imamate. In order to refute such Nasibi conjecture, we shall address the writings of Maulana Azam Tariq (la), the diseased leader of anti-Shia movement ‘Sipah e Sahabah’ who had not only advanced common Nasibi objections to topic but took further steps to the road of ignorance in order to prove his opponents wrong.

The notorious Nasibi author fed on the haram milk of Jews and Saudi Arabia in the form of dollars has written under two titles i.e. ‘The literal meaning of Bada’ and the Shia notion’ and ‘The reason for the fabrication of the belief of Bada’ that:

Azam Tariq stated:

All the books on language unanimously show that the meaning of Bada ’is that whatever thing which was unknown, knowing such thing is called Bada’…. The belief of Bada’ is tantamount to outright blasphemy against Allah [swt] and to deem knowledgeable God as ignorant is a matter that will certainly disturb your mind and will lead you to ask ‘what was the basis for the Shia to fabricate and then attribute such an incorrect and impudent belief to Allah?’, thus O respected people, this is my claim that all Usool and Furu of Shia madhab is the fabrication of a few clever minds…. In order to erase the mistake of the Imam, to avoid this embarrassment they refer to the fact that Allah [swt] got Bada’ in such and such matter…

Then the Nasibi mullah has cited the following tradition from Usool al-Kafi, page 233 (Lucknow):

Azam Tariq stated: Ali ibn Muhammad and Muhammad ibn al-Hassan have narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad and Muhammad ibn Yahya from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Isa all from al-Hassan ibn Mahbub from abu Hamza al-Thumali who has said the following. "I heard abu Ja'far (a.s.) say, "O Thabit, Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, had set up a time limit for it in the year seventy but when al-Husayn (a.s.) was murdered Allah’s anger became more intense on the people on earth. He delayed it until one hundred forty. When then spoke to you about it and you publicized this hadith and disclosed the secret. Allah thereafter has not set up a time limit for it available with us. Allah deletes whatever He wants and establishes whatever He wants, with Him is the original book…The second incident of

Bada’which is quote tough and is a away ahead than the first incident. This incident is about Ismaeel the son of Imam Jafar Sadiq. Allah had designated Ismaeel the elder son of Imam Jafar Sadiq as Imam after him…. But Alas! Ismaeel died during the life of his father and God’s decision turned out to be wrong, God appointed Musa Kazim as Imam. (Had God already knew that Ismaeel would die piror to his father then why would He [swt] felt embarrassed by appointing him Imam) [Khutbaat e Jail, page 46-52]

Ansr.org states:

The theory of Al-Imamah lead to the invention of Al-Bida. The Shia invented Al-bida to save their theory in Al-Imamah from collapsing.

The likeness of Azam Tariq and other filthy Nawasib is the likeness of the people of the Torah mentioned in the Quran:

[Shakir 62:5]

The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, is as the likeness of the ass… "

They cannot ponder and think due to their lack of brain cells. They are the puppets whose strings are in the hands of the Jews whom Allah [swt] has equalized with donkeys in Holy Quran. These Nawasib are in fact worse than them because they have become pawns of the Jews being used by them to implement their filthy machinations. By creating differences amongst Muslims, they are dragging them towards the path of Hell. However, even the joint ploys of Jews and their sub-cast, the Nawasib will not be able to harm the Army of Allah, and they will always be defeated, just as Hizbollah (Army of Allah) recently proved. Allah himself says that His army will always be triumphant.

Reply one: Belief of Bada’ is mentioned in Quran

As we have discussed in the previous chapter, the belief of Bada’ originates from the Holy Book which these Nawasib claim to follow but it seems that they never read it without the spectacles of Shia abhorrence.

Reply Two: Both Shia & Sunni believe in the concept of Bada’ but with different terminologies

The topic of Bada’ has been used as a means to attack the Shia Athna Asharis while in reality there is no disagreement about this belief between Shias and common Sunnis, the difference is only with regards to the names / terms used for this concept. A belief that the Shi’a called Bada’ is known as Qaza Mau'laq [dependent or conditional Taqdeer] amongst the Ulema of Ahle Sunnah.

It is as clear as the Sun that that Bada’ and Qaza Ma’ulaq whilst having different terms contain exactly the same meanings. Whilsy discussing this same topic Shah Ismaeel Shaheed Dehlawi commented:

“The term Qadr refers to whatever is said about an object in Aalam-ul-Ghaib, and term Qaza refers to the presence of an object according to the same hidden exigency. What is said about Qaza-wa-Qadr is how the meaning is derived from the term. There are two levels for it, Mubram (inevitable) and Mu’alaq (contingent/dependent). Mubram (inevitable) means there is no room for change, no alteration can take place, what is wanted in the Ghaib (unseen) would be fulfilled. In Mu’alaq (contingent) destiny too something is wished but it is possible that what happens is different to what was wished, or when present what was wanted could be different to how it was perceived.”

Ubqaat Ubqa 12, page 153, published by Idara-e-Majlis- e-Ilmi, Karachi

If mindless and ignorant Nawasib particularly Nasibi mullahs are desperate enough to blame Shias then they should first attack their pioneer scholars or at least shut their mouths.

In this regard we present some more excerpts from the books of our opponents so that they can draw comparisons between the two schools. Abdul Aziz Farharvi writes in the Sharah of ‘Sharah Aqaid Nafsi’:

“Allah eliminates what He wills or confirms, and with Him is the Mother of the Books. Some Mufasareen have stated that Allah [swt] has two books from where He eliminates and confirms as well, but as for Ummul Kitab [Mother of Books], no change takes place in that”

Al Nabras Sharah, Sharah al- Aqaid, page 297 (Published in Meerut)

On its column, Maulana Barkhurdar Multani states:

“His statement that ‘Some Mufasareen have stated’, Akramah has narrated from Ibn Abbas that al-Kitab are two books. One book is the one from which Allah [swt] eliminates what He wills or confirms what He wills and with Him is the Mother of the Books. That’s what Tafsir Ibn Kathir contains”

Ibid page 297 Column 2

Ibn Kathir has recorded many hadiths and statements under the commentary of this verse.

“Every book descended from the skies contains things that are destined, and there is a fixed time, from amongst those, Allah abrogates what he wishes and keeps what he wishes.

When the Holy Quran was revealed on the Holy Prophet [SAWW], the previous books were cancelled. Allah may eradicate what he wants and keep what he wants. He sets out the happenings of an entire year, but it is not beyond His power, He still changes what He wishes and keeps similar what He wants.”

He then quotes Mansoor having asked from Hazrat Mujahid:

“How is it to pray that O Allah! If my name is amongst the pious, keep it the way, but if it is amongst the evils, eradicate it, and add it to the list of pious. Mujahid replied: It is a good prayer.”

Mansoor then said that he met Mujahid after one year, he recited two verses from Surah alQadr and said:“

The food, pains of the whole year are fixed on Lailatul Qadr, but Allah can delay what he wants and hasten what he wants, however the book of Sa’adat and Shaqawat isn’t changed.”

Shaqeeq bin Salmah would supplicate:

“O Allah! If you have written our names amongst the ill-fated, change that and count us amongst the pious, and if we are already amongst the pious, then keep it that way.”

Umar bin Khattab while doing Tawaf of Holy Ka’aba, used to say:

“O Allah! If you have written any sins or evils for me, change them. You can change what you wish and keep what you wish, you possess the mother of the books.”

Ibne Kathir further says:

“It is written in Masnad Ahmed that due to certain sins, men are deprived of their food. Nothing can change fate, except prayers. It is written Nisai and Ibne Majah that Silah-e-Rehmi (doing good to one’s kin) increases life.”

Ibne Kathir quotes Ibne Abbas saying:

“Allah Almighty holds the Loh-e-Mehfooz that is at a journey of 500 years, it’s a white pearl, between two sheets of ruby, Allah looks at it 63 times then changes what he wants and keeps what he wants. He holds the mother of the books”

Ibne Kathir quotes Holy Prophet [saww] saying:

“When three hours of the night is left, Allah opens the Dhikr, He looks at it in the first hour, none can see it except Him. Hence he changes what he wants, and keeps what he wants.”

All above mentioned references are from, Tafsir Ibne Kathir, volume 3, chapter 13, page 51, commentary of verse 39 of Surah al-Ra’ad, published by Farid Book Depot, Delhi, India.

We don’t think there is any need to further elaborate the above mentioned hadiths and statements. They are quite self explanatory. The clear cut and simple meaning is that there is a kind of Taqdeer which is Mubram (inevitable) and another one which is changeable and all this is according to the absolute knowledge of Almighty Allah. There is no element whatsoever of the ignorance or weakness of Allah [swt] about a certain matter (God forbid) rather it is all about the sign of His perfect authority and hidden wisdom. If there is any involvement of ignorance in this topic, that is credited to Nawasib, and their ignorance.

Shah Waliullah Dehlawi has also referred to the same Holy verse for the issue of change in Qaza and has written:

“The Sunnah has made it quite clear that Allah [swt] creates incidents in a certain manner before their occurrence on earth. Then they are revealed to this world. They appear in this world in the same manner that they had initially been created by Allah [swt]. This is Allah’s Sunnah. Sometimes Allah [swt] eliminates this ‘already established’ while sometimes He establishes the annihilated [Mu’dum] according to its entity. He [swt] has stated: ‘Allah eliminates what He wills or confirms it, and with Him is the Mother of the Book’. An example of this is that He [swt] creates a calamity and then sends it towards the man who is entitled to confront it. A supplication ascends from him which makes that calamity return. Sometimes Allah [swt] creates death but good deeds ascend which revoke death”

Hujutallah al Balaghah, Volume  1 page 66 (Published by Muneeriyah, Egypt)

Allamah Shabeer Ahmed Uthmani too both from his own words and as well as from the words of his master Shah Abdul Qadir Dehlawi’s ‘Tafseer Mozal Quran’ has made the very fact crystal clear under the commentary of same verse. He writes:

“Means according to His wisdom, He may eliminate a commandment or establish one that He wills. He may destroy a nation He wants and may replace them with the one He wills. He may changs or keep unchanged the effect of any event. He may reveal a promise whose conditions are met and may delay the ones with conditions that are unfulfilled. This means all kinds of changes and alterations, defacements and affirmations, abrogation and instructions are in His hands. All the offices of Qaza and Qadar are in His possession and the root of all offices and information, the Ummul Kitab is with Him. The eternal knowledge that is beyond and above all alterations is the source of Loh-e-Mehfooz.

Hazrat Shah Sahib sates: ‘Everything in the world is due to causes, some causes are visible while some are hidden. The effect of all causes have certain physical speculations, whenever Allah [swt] wishes, He can increase or decrease that effect from that speculated range and He may keep it unchanged if He Wills. A man sometimes gets killed by a pebble or sometimes escapes a bullet and a certain range of every act is in Allah's [swt] knowledge which never changes. Taqdeer is the range of man's choice, so there are two types of Taqdeer, one which changes and the one which doesn’t. The one which changes it called Mau’laq [contingent][Bada’] and the one which doesn’t change is called Mubram [established/inevitable]”.

*Bracket is from our side so that the notion be understood more easily.

Qadi Thanaullah Pani Patti Uthmani in his famed ‘Tafseer Mazhari’ records the following commentary for the cited verse:

“Ibn Abbas [ra] stated that He [swt] establishes or effaces whatever He [swt] wants from Loh al Mahfooz. He [swt] effaces the inscription which is to be effaced known as Taqdeer Mu’alaq (conditional destiny) and He creates another thing in its place no matter whether in Loh al Mahfooz this Qaza was recorded as Mu’alaq (conditional) or not, and this is hidden in the knowledge of Allah [swt] only. And He [swt] does not efface the inscription that is not entitled to be effaced which is known as Taqdeer Mubram (inevitable), Qaza Mubram (inevitable) is never rejected.”

Since the Imams of Ahlulbayt [as] are the true inheritors of the knowledge of Quran the Tafseer (commentary) of this verse has come from them in a very clear and simple words. Unlike the common Muslims and their scholars, they do not make the facts more abstruse and perplexed. Thus, there are number of traditions recorded in books in this regard.

If these Nasibi Mullahs had taken out some time out of their homosexual activities in their seminaries and read some books besides sodomizing poor students, they could easily know this easy concept. Now this either shows the ignorance of Nasibi Mullahs or their deceit. Either these Nasibi mullahs and their filthy adherents do not read their books or if they read them that means they deceitfully hide them so that naïve Muslims remain unaware of the truth and get out of their noxious trap to choose the path of truth. We now present some of the traditions in this regard so that the similarities between the meanings of the statements and ahadeeth narrated by Ulema of Ahle Sunah and by the Imams of Ahlulbayt [as] or even at some places the similarities in words may also become clear. In Usool al-Kafi, Kitab al-Tawheed, Chapter of Bada’ we read the following tradition:

It is narrated from Ali ibn Ibrahim from his father from ibn abu ‘Umayr from Hisham ibn Salim and Hafs ibn al-Bakhtari and others from Abu ‘Abdallah (as) who has said the following about the words of Allah.

"God establishes or effaces whatever He wants ...(13:39) The Imam (as) said,

"Can anything be effaced without being established? Can anything be established unless it is out of nothing?"

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #3

Is there not any similarity between the words of Shah Waliullah Dehlawi "Wa bath al Ma’dum" cited earlier and the tafseer by our Imam [as]? Please ponder over this fact.

The remainder traditions in al-Kafi are about the increment and subtraction, like we have mentioned from the scholars of Ahle Sunah. We read in Al-Kafi:

Narrated from Hamran from Abu Jafar (as) who said the following.

"I asked the Imam about the words of Allah, " It is who has created you from clay to live from a life-time and the span of your life is only known-to Him… "  (6:2)

The Imam said, "There are two appointed times. One is a definite time [Ajal Mahtum] and the other is the conditional one [Ajal Moquf]."

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #4

Allamah Shabeer Ahmed Uthmani and Shah Abdul Haq Dehlawi have stated the very "Ajal Mehtum" as “Qaza Mubram” and “Ajal Moquf” as “Qaza Mua’laq”. According to them the later is dependent on the fulfillment of certain conditions while Mahtum or Mubram are not conditional rather they are definite/confirmed which cannot be changed.

Al-fudayl ibn Yasar said the following:

"I heard Abu Jafar (as) saying, "There are two kinds of knowledge. The first kind is hidden with Allah only and noone of his creatures has any information of that. The other kind of knowledge is the knowledge of His angels and His messengers. Whatever knowledge He has given to His angels and messengers it will come to pass. He will not speak a lie not will He let His angels or messengers to do so. From the kind of knowledge that is hidden with Him, He brings forward whatever He wills and takes back whatever He wills and establishes whatever He wills."

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #6

Intelligence and honesty demands that we peruse the principle books of a school and then ponder into it in order to understand their beliefs with correct interpretation but why would ignorant and deceitful people involve in such decent activities? We further read in Usool al-Kafi:

Fazeel narrated that he heard Abu Jafar [as] saying: ‘There are some affairs which Allah [swt] alone has the knowledge of. Among them He [swt] makes Muqadam [confirms] or makes it Mukhar [delays], whatever He wills.

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #7

Narrated Abu Basir from Abu ‘Abdallah (as) who has said the following. "Allah has two kinds of knowledge. There is the hidden, treasured knowledge of which one has any information except Allah. From this knowledge comes al-Bada’. There is the knowledge that Allah has given to His angels, His messengers and His prophets and we know this knowledge."

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #8

We now come to know that Bada’ is the part of the eternal and absolute knowledge of Almighty Allah and it is not like that in the case of Bada’ something new comes into His [swt] knowledge later on, as filthy Nasibies blames the people of truth, rather He [swt] is the knower of each and every single thing. This is Taqdeer Mu'alaq, Moquf or dependent, conditional. Allah [swt] does not grant this type of knowledge to any of his angels, messengers and Imams. As for the Nasibi blame that (God forbid) when Allah [swt] doesn’t have the knowledge of something but on getting to know it he makes Bada’, the filthy and Kufr assertion of Nawasib is addressed in the following tradition:

“Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] said: ‘There is nothing in which Bada’ take place with Allah [swt], unless He [swt] already knew about that before its appearance”

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #9

Even the Nasibi friends of Sipah-e-Sahabah (kr-hcy.com) from ansar.org affirmed the Shia view:

Ansar.org:

Shia’s books do not say that Allah knew something He did not know before.

The next hadith in Al-Kafi is also an epitome of the topic.

Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] said: "Bada’ never takes place with Allah [swt] due to lack of knowledge [ignorance]"

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #10

The Nawasib are constantly blaming us for something that is accepted by the Ahle Sunnah, the belief of Bada’ is referred by them as Qaza Mua'laq. Since Nawasib have made themselves hide within the rows of Ahle Sunnah they should accept the belief of Ahle Sunnah which is similar to that of the Shi’a. We will conclude by citing the Shia concept of Bada’ with this last tradition which can also be said as an epitome of the topic.

“Mansur bin Hazam narrated: ‘I asked Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] whether is it possible that an incident takes place today which was not in the knowledge of Allah [swt] till yesterday?’. Imam [as] replied: ‘No! May Allah [swt] disgrace the one who says so’. I asked: ‘Has whatever taken place and whatever will take place till Qayamah is in the knowledge of Allah[swt]?’. He [as] said: ‘Yes indeed! He [swt] knows everything before he would create the creation”

Usool-Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed, Baab-al-Bada' Hadith #11

Now allow us to present the words of an esteemed Shia scholar Shaykh al Mufid (ra) so that readers can decide what is the actual Shia belief of Bada’ rather than the portrayal of these filthy Nawasib. He (ra) writes in one of his esteemed books ‘Awail al Maqalat’:

“Regarding the meaning of Bada’ , I say the same which all Muslims say about abrogation and other such things like it. For example to impoverish after giving wealth, or to make sick after keeping healthy, or death after life or (according to the belief of some people) reduction and increase in age and livelihood. As for the reason of application of Bada’, its reason is that the personalities who were the envoys (i.e. Holy Prophet and the Imams) between Allah and His creation were heard saying this word. And if this word had not been used in such traditions, whose authenticity is absolute, I would never have considered its use permissible. If the verses and traditions regarding this were not found that God gets angry, He gets pleased, He loves and is amazed then words such as ‘anger’, ‘pleasure’, ‘love’ and ‘amazement’ for not be used for Him. Since they are found in narrations, we have begun to use them. However, we take such a meaning from them, which no intellect can deny The fact is that there is no difference of opinion in the chapter of Bada’ between me and other Muslims. And those who oppose Shias in this matter are against the word of Bada’ and not against the meaning of ‘Bada’. I have exposed the wrong use of this word in such a way that there is no scope of further discussion in this matter and my religion is the religion of all the Imamiya.”

Awail al Maqalaat, page 53 (Published in Tabriz)

Allamah Syed Dildar Ali Nasirabadi popularly known as Ghufran Ma'ab was a Shia scholar from India who originated from a family of scholars from the village of Nasirabad (Uttar Pradesh, India). The title "Ghufran Ma'ab" was given to him by scholars in Najaf due to his scholarly attributes which means "the one who lives in heaven". He writes in ‘Imdaad ul Islam’ chapter of ‘Al-Tawheed’ page 112:

“This shows that confession in Bada’ is the belief in the command of God that He has full control over His actions. Many laws of Shariah are dependent on it. For example, abrogation of laws, manipulation of jurisprudence, sending of messengers, inducements of worship, prohibition of unlawful acts, encouragement for supplication, charity and maintaining good relations with relatives, all these beliefs are based on this very a article of belief. All these matters are among the necessities of religion. If a person doest not believe in Bada’ within these specific meanings, he would have to deny all those matters also. When a person denies all these things he would become a greater denier than the disbelievers and transgressors. Allah give us refuge from this! Had the ‘Aama (Ahle Sunnah) not believed in the real sense of Bada’ , we would have labelled them as disbelievers because they would have denied a necessity of religion”

But since unlike Jews, the Ahle Sunnah do not reject that Allah [swt] does possess absolute power and knowledge and like Shias they also believe in the meaning of Bada’, we cannot call them disbelievers.

The above discussion makes it crystal clear that the term Bada’ is one which is used by the Imams of Ahlulbayt [as] to refer to the change in the Qaza Mau`laq, Moqoof or conditional. The scholars of Ahle Sunnah have referred to the very belief merely in simple words like ‘change in Taqdeer’ (change in destiny). Thus, only due to their stupidity and opposition of Islam, Nawasib have opened the door of accusations by giving incorrect meanings to the belief of Bada’. Knowledge and contemplation is neither the destiny of Nawasib nor do they strive to come near to it and it seems that they are just on the hope that May Allah [swt] get Bada’ and show these filthy creatures the path of truth. May Allah [swt] do so.

It is clear that for the belief of Bada’, Qaza Mau`laq, Moqoof or dependent or conditional, the Imams of Ahlulbayt [as] and the scholars of Ahle Sunnah have referred to verse 39 of Surah Ra`ad. Allamah Shabeer Ahmad Uthmani in a few words mentioned the very point as did the Imams of Ahlulbayt [as] in the traditions of Usool al-kafi to the extent that he said:

"… He may show whichever promise He wills, for conditions being met and which ever promise He may delay on conditions being not fulfilled… "

This is Qaza Mua'laq (conditional destiny) in which the changes take place from the absolute and definite knowledge of Allah [swt] and the very change is known as Bada’. The promise being not fulfilled due to non availability of conditions of promise is called Bada’. These are the conditions of promise which are within the exclusive, definite and absolute knowledge of Allah [swt] and most of His chosen ones are also kept from such knowledge. Thus, the promises are not fulfilled due to non-availability of their respective conditions, and in first chapter we have cited such evidence from the Holy Quran.

We will shed further light on the fact that Sunni Ulema have always asserted that Allah [swt] changes Taqdeer due to some reasons that He [swt] knows. Imam Fakhruddin Razi states under the commentary of 13:39:

“There are two statements about this verse. First one is the one which is common about every affair, like what is clear from the words, and Allah defaces the provision or increases it. Similarly, about death, piety, belief and disbelief, these people deem that Allah establishes them as well as defaces them. This is the mazhab of Umro bin Masud and Jabir bin Abdullah Ansar has also narrated about it from Holy Prophet… .The second statement is that defacement and establishment take place in specific things. Now there are various ways in determining those specific things. First one is the abrogation of the instruction before the occurrence of defacement or establishment and bringing a new instruction replacing previous one…. Eighth one is that it refers to the defacement or the establishment of provision, effort and hardship means Allah writes them in the book but then deletes them due to charity and supplication made and in this way the human being is made to concentrate towards Allah… Tenth one is that Allah defaces whichever of his decisions He likes and nobody is aware of that, only He is the owner of his decision alone, He gives the decision the way He likes. He is the sole authority to create, to destruct, to give life, to give death, to make rich or to make poor. In this, no creation can be aware of His unseen.”

Tafseer, Kabeer, Volume 6, Page 51

One can easily compare the above mentioned esteemed Sunni source with the Shia belief mentioned by one of the pioneer and admired Shia scholars, Shaykh al Mufid:

“Regarding the meaning of Bada’ - I say the same which all Muslims say about abrogation and other such things like it. For example to impoverish after giving wealth, or to make sick after keeping healthy, or death after life or (according to the belief of some people) reduction and increase in age and livelihood”

Awail al Maqalaat, page 53 (Published in Tabriz)

Similarly Allamah Zamakhshari under the commentary of the verse "… and no one whose life is lengthened has his life lengethened, nor is aught diminished of one's life, but is all in a book… (35-11)" states:

This means that we neither increase the age of any individual nor decrease it but that is written in a book, this is in the manner that for example it is written in Loh that if such and such person performs Hajj or Jihad, his age will be forty years and if he performs both Hajj and Jihad then his age will be sixty years. So if he performs both acts and hence attains the age of sixty, that would mean that he attained complete age, whereas if he performs only one of those acts and hence could not exceed forty, that would means that his age decreased from his ultimate age limit of sixty years. And Holy Prophet has made a hint towards this affair in his statement that charity and generous deeds abide the cities and increase the age.” It has been narrated from Ka’ab that when Umar got injured, Ka’ab stated: ‘Had Umar supplicated, his death would have been ineffective”. To which someone enquired Ka’ab: ‘Hasn’t Allah said so ‘when their term comes, they shall not then remain behind for an hour, nor can they go before (their time)’[10:49]?’. Ka’ab replied: ‘Allah has also said: ‘and no one whose life is lengthened has his life lengthened, nor is aught diminished of one's life’’. And the popularity runs on the tongue: ‘May Allah increase your age’ or ‘May Allah increase your life’. And such sort of sentences.

Tafseer, Kashaf, Volume 3, page 604

Similarly Qadhi Baydawi in his esteemed Tafseer states under the commentary of the above cited verses:

“And it has been stated that the increment or reduction in the age of an individual takes place due to various reasons which has been written in the book by Allah. For example that if Umar performs Hajj, his age will be forty years otherwise it will be sixty years”

Tafseer Baydawi, Volume 3, page 269

All of the statements from the scholars of Ahle Sunnah make it crystal clear they believed that Allah [swt] defaces or establishes what He wills in the affairs of creation and He keeps sending new instructions for logical reasons that are from His absolute wisdom. This very view is referred to as Bada’.

Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani was able to make change in Qaza Mubram (established)

It is strange that these ignorant Nasibies look at the Islamic concept of Bada’ i.e. change in Taqdeer by Allah [swt] with the intention of rejection altogether while one of the revered figures of their school Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani had the ability to alter the Qaza Mubram (an inevitable/established destiny) that as we have read no one can amend. The Ahle Sunnah deduced that even Qaza Muabrram may be of two kinds. Qadi Thanaullah Pani Patti records the following incident in his authority work ‘Tafseer Mazhari’:

“I say that similar to the narration of Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Ibne Masud, an incident has been reported in Maqamat-e-Mujadidiyah. There was a person named Mullah Tahir Lahori, he was the teacher of Hazrat Mohammad Saeed and Hazrat Mohammad Masoom, the two sons of Hazrat Mujaddid Sahab. Once Hazrat Mujaddid via special vision saw “Mullah Tahir Lahori is Shaqqi (wicked)” written on the forehead of his sons’ teacher. He mentioned this to his sons, who were students of Mullah Tahir, they requested that he pray to Allah that may Allah change “Shaqawat (wickedness)” with “Sa’adat (blessing)”. At this Hazrat said that he had seen it in Loh-e-Mehfooz that this is Qaza-e-Mubram (inevitable) (established destiny) which cannot be changed. On the insistence of his sons, he said that he recalled that Hazrat Ghausul Thaqalayn Sheikh Mohiuddin Abdul Qadir Jilani said that even Qazae-Mubram (inevitable) is changed through his prayers.  So I plead: “O Allah! Your bounties are limitless, your blessings do not end on anyone. I hope and seek it through your limitless blessings that accept my prayers and erase the statement of ‘shaqawat’ from the forehead of Mullah Tahir and replace it with “sa’adat” just as you had accepted the prayers of my lord, Hazrat Ghaus-e-Azam.” Hazrat Mujaddid says that after this prayer the scene came before my eyes just as if the word shaqqi was erased from Mullah Tahir’s forehead and it was replaced by the word ‘Saeed’ right in front of me. And it isn’t difficult for Allah.”

Hazrat-e-Mufassir says that after this a doubt raised in my head that if Qaza-eMubram (inevitable) could be changed then prayers that it isn’t Mubram (inevitable) at all and it is wrong to call it Mubram (inevitable). Allah Almighty resolved this doubt in my heart like this that there are two types of Qaza-e-Mu’alaq (changeable). One whose being Mu’alaq (changeable) has been written in Loh-e-Mehfooz and the other whose being Mubram (inevitable) hasn’t been written in Loh-e-Mehfooz. Its being Mu’alaq (changeable) or Mubram (inevitable) is only known by Allah Almighty. Since its being Mu’alaq (changeable) isn’t scribed in Loh-e-Mehfooz, therefore according to the inscription there, it is known as Qaza-e-Mubram (inevitable). Qaza-e-Mubram (inevitable) that Hazrat Ghausul Azam says that is changed through his prayers is the same Qaza that is Mubram (inevitable) (Ghair Mu’alaq (changeable)) in Loh-e-Mehfooz and Mu’alaq (changeable) (Ghair-eMubram (inevitable)) in Ilm-e-Ilahi in Allah’s knowledge. The forsakenness of Mullah Tahir was also of the same type, that is, Mubram (inevitable) (Ghair Mu’alaq (changeable)) in Loh-e-Mehfooz and Mu’alaq (changeable) (Ghair-e-Mubram (inevitable)) in Ilm-e-Ilahi.”

Tafseer-e-Mashari, Volume 6, pages 181-182 (published by Darul Isha'at Karachi)

Reply Three: The word “Bada” along with its relevant meaning also exists in Sunni texts

Having proven that Allah [swt] can change destiny through what Shi’a terms as Bada’ and what the Sunni Ulema also believe but with different terminologies, it is interesting to note that the word Bada also exists in Sunni texts from the blessed lips of the Holy Prophet [s] with their ulema also providing relevant commentaries to such traditions. Here we present some of those references:

Hadeeth One:

There is a lengthy tradition in Sahih Bukhari which not only contains a detail incident about Bada applied by Allah [swt] but also contains the word Bada that destroys Nawasib efforts cast doubts over a belief unanimously held by Muslims. We will present the complete tradition in another chapter, but allow us to present the initial words of the tradition which contains the word Bada along with its relevant meanings. The hadith begins this way:

Narrated Abu Huraira: that he heard Allah's Apostle saying, "Bada by Allah to test three Israelis who were a Leper, a blind man and a bald-headed man…”

In the English version of Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 56, Number 670 the translator has translated the word Bada in this manner:

"Allah willed to test three Israelis who were a Leper…”

The Salafi translator can do what he likes, the fact is the Prophet of Islam [s] said that Bada takes place by Allah [swt] and this serves as a harsh slap to the Nasibi world. Not only this, but we see that Imams of Ahle Sunnah providing a relevant commentary to the word Bada used in the tradition.

“Bada’ Allah means that Allah [swt] already knew, and now He [swt] was revealing what he already knew. It is not that something was hidden from Allah [swt] and was now being revealed to Him [swt] because to attribute such a thing to Allah [swt] is impossible.”

This has been recorded by:

1. Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Fathul Bari, Volume 6, page 364

2. Allamah Badruddin al-Aini in Umadatul Qari, Volume 16, page 48

3. Allamah Qastalani in Irshad al-Sari, Volume 6 page 216 (Egypt)

Moreover Ibn Atheer in his authority work ‘Al-Nehaya fi Gharib al-Hadith’ Volume 1 page 109 records:

“The hadith of the bald-headed man, a leper and a blind man (Bada’ by Allah to test them) means (Allah) already destined it, this is the meaning of Bada’ here, because destiny has already been decided (by Allah).

Bada’ such as correcting something which is known after it wasn’t known, is not accepted as an attribute of Allah”

Al-Nehaya fi Gharib al-Hadith' Volume 1, page 109

Just compare the understanding of the word Bada advanced by the prominent Sunni Imams with these Shia statements, they concur with one another. What do the Nawasib have to say regarding Holy Prophet [s] who testified to this term and Imam Bukhari who recorded this testimony in his ‘Sahih’ that Bada’ takes place by Allah [swt]? Since attributing the word Bada for Allah [swt] is considered blasphemy in the eyes of Nawasib, are they willing to issue takfeer against the Prophet of Islam [s], Imam Bukhari and those prominent Sunni scholars who advanced a relevant commentary for the word Bada?

Ansar.org states:

However, what Ahl Al-Sunnah disagree with the Shia is that the Shia use a phrase “bida” that means nothing in Arabic but attributing ignorance to Allah.

Perhaps the Ansar.org and all those anti-Shia fanatics object to the word Bada do not consider Imam Bukhari among Ahle Sunnah nor those esteemed Sunni scholars who provided the relevant commentary to the word Bada used in the tradition! In order to increase their problems, let us bring some more revered Sunni names to the list who narrated and authenticated narrations containing the word “Bada”.

.Hadeeth Two:

Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal records the following episode pertaining to the Bada of Allah [swt] that may take place on the Day of Judgment on account of which proud Muslims will get salvation:

The Messenger of Allah said: Allah (swt) will gather the nations in the filed on the Day of Judgment, and if there is Bada’ by Allah to declare among His creation as to what every nation had been worshiping then (the angels) following them will make them enter hell.

Then Allah will come to us while we are on a high place, and say:

‘Who are you ?’

We will reply: ‘We are Muslims’.

Then he (Allah) will say: ‘What are you waiting for ?’

We will reply: ‘We are waiting for Allah.’

Then He will say: ‘would you recognize Allah if you saw him?’

We would reply: ‘Yes.’

Then He will say: ‘How will you recognize him when you have never seen him?’

We will reply: ‘Indeed there is none like Him’.

He will then appear to us, whilst laughing, He (swt) will say: ‘Oh Muslims, rejoice with glad tidings, there is no one amongst you that I didn’t replace with a Jew or Christian in hell”

1. Kanz-al-Ummal, Volume 14 Hadith 39218

2. Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Volume 4 Hadith 18824

3. Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Volume 4 Topic : Hadith of Abi Musa Ashari

4. Tarikh Damisqh, by ibn Asakir, volume 43 page 332

5. Muntakhab Musnad Abd bin Hamid, page 191

Shaykh Shu'aib al-Arnaoot in his Sharah of Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal termed the Hadith as 'Sahih'.

Hadeeth Three:

Imam Jalauddin Suyuti records the following tradition in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur from various esteemed works:

Narrated ibn Abi Shaiba, Ahmad, Muslim, Abed bin Hamid, Abu Dawoud, ibn Majah, ibn al-Munder, ibn Mardweh and al-Bayhaqi from Abdullah bin Umar that he said: ‘I memorized from the messenger of Allah (pbuh) that the first signs that will appear shall be the sun rising from the west and the appearance of the creature, whichever (sign) appears first the other will follow suit immediately after it.

Then Abdullah said after reading books: ‘I guess the first (sign) that shall appear is the sun rising from west. Whenever (the sun) rises it goes under the thrown and prostrate and asks for permission to return. It will be permitted to return, unless there is Bada’ by Allah to make (the sun) rise from west, the (sun) will keep doing as it is doing now (by rising from east) and shall go under the thrown, prostrate and seek permission to return, that will be refused, it will ask (again) for permission to return, but will not be permitted to do so, until the night passes, as much as Allah wants it to be, until it (the sun) knows that even if leave is granted, it will be unable to reach the east.

The (sun) will say: ‘Oh Lord, how far is the east, who will care for the people?’ When the sky will be like arches, (the sun) request permission to return. The sun will be answered: ‘Rise from your place.’ So it will rise from the west.

Then Abdullah recited: 'its faith shall not profit a soul which did not believe before, or earn good through its faith. Say: Wait; we too are waiting.'

1. Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Vol. 3 page 390, Surah Anaam, Ayah 158

2. Majma Zawaid, Volume 8 Hadith 12579

3. Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, Volume 2 page 201 Hadith 6881

4. Tafseer Tabari, Volume 5 page 404

At another Salafi website the very hadith from Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal is recorded at Hadith No. 6586

Sheikh Shu'aib al-Arnaoot said about the hadith in Musnad Ahmad:

“The chain of narration is sahih according to the conditions of the two Sheikhs (Bukhari & Muslim)”

Similarly Allamah Ahmad Shakir in his version of Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal stated:

"The chain is Sahih"

Also Hafiz al-Haythami said after citing the hadith in his authority work Majma al-Zawaid:

“The narrators are narrators of the sahih”

.Hadeeth Four:

Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti and Qadhi Showkani in their respective commentaries of Holy Quran records:

Narrated ibn al-Munder and ibn Abi Hatim from ibn Abbas about the verse:

‘Allah takes the souls’. (Ibn Abbas) said: “There are sun rays between Nafs (self) and Roh (soul). Allah takes the self during the time of sleep and keeps the soul in the body and keeps his (human’s) abdomen working, if there is Bada by Allah to bring him (the human) back, He will take the soul and hence he will die, or delay his prescribed time by sending the self back to its place in the body”

1. Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Vol.7, page 230, surah Zumur, Ayah 42

2. Tafseer Fathul Qadeer, Volume 4 page 662

.Hadeeth Five:

Al-Hafid Abi Bakar al-Haythami records:

Amir bin Abdulrahman bin Nestas reported about Khaybar and said: ‘The Messenger (s) of Allah (swt)’s conquest (Khaybar) and every thing in it like palm trees and farms became his (s) possession, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and His companions didn’t work for it, He (pbuh) entered into an agreement with the Jews, that the Jews work on the farms and share with the Muslims the crop as much as there is Bada by Allah and by His Messenger (pbuh).

That was when the Messenger of Allah sent ibn Rawaha for dividing the crop amongst them, and when he gave them the choice, they (Jews) chose the dates. Khaybar remained a residency of the Jews according to their agreement with the Holy Prophet (pbuh) until the reign of Umar, when he (Umar) expelled them (the Jews).

The Jews said: ‘Didn’t the prophet (pbuh) make an agreement with us on such and such?’ (Umar) said: ‘Yes, but on what was Bada by Allah and his Messenger but now its Bada to me to relegate you.’ Then Umar expelled them and divided the land amongst those Muslims who participated in the conquest. Then he (Umar) said: ‘Now the people here are Muslims, Jews will no longer reside here. Verily the agreement of the Messenger of Allah was about cropping to count the "zakat" before the crop was eaten’.

Majma al Zawaid, Volume 4 Hadith 6604

After citing this hadith, Al-Haythmani (d.807 H) wrote that all the narrators are narrators of the Sahih books, while he was unable to find a biography of one narrator namely Amir bin Abdulrahman, which is no surprise since he copied the name incorrectly, it is actually Amir bin Abdullah, as Imam Abdur Razak al-Sanani (d. 211 H) recorded the same hadith in his authority work ‘Al Musnaf’ with Amir bin Abdullah in the chain:

Musnaf Abdul Razak, Volume 8 pages 102-203

Ibn Shabah Nameri (d.262 H) in his famed work ‘Tareekh al-Madinah Munawarah’ Volume 1 page 178 also recorded this tradition with Amir bin Abdullah in the chain:

And this Amir bin Abdullah has been cited by Imam Ibn Habban as an authentic narrator:

Al-Thuqat by Ibn Habban, Volume 7, page 249

Imam Bukhari in ‘Tareekh Kabeer’ Volume 6 page 449 and Imam Fakhruddin Razi in ‘Jarah wa al-Tadeel’ Volume 6 page 326 also mentioned Amir bin Abdullah:

Tareekh Kabeer,Volume 6 page 449

Jarah wa al-Tadeel, Volume 6 page 326

Hadeeth Six:

Naeem bin Hamad al-Marozi (d. 229 H) records the following athar in his work ‘Kitab al-Fetan’ Volume 1 page 64:

Abi al-Zahrya reported: “If sedition (fitna) was sent to a group of people, and a Prophet existed amongst them they (the people) would be afflicted by sedition and those with minds, opinions and knowledge would lose them respectively, save that which Allah wants, if there comes Bada’ by Allah, He shall restore their minds, opinions and knowledge, so they could grieve over what they had missed. Baqya reported: ‘They would grieve over their actions’.

Kitab al-Fetan, Volume 1 page 64

End Comments:

If, according to the pathetic logic of the Nawasib, the Shi’a are infidel for ascribing to the doctrine of Bada’ they should survey their own house first and should issue takfeer against the above cited scholars of their school from Imam Bukhari through to Marozi. The truth is both Ahle Sunnah and Shia believe in Bada’ in the same manner, and we have cited authentic Sunni texts using the word Bada’. Sadly scholars that came later became contaminated with the Nasibi virus and hence did not deem it appropriate to use the same terminology as the Shi’a. Whilst terminologies might have changed the Sunni Ulema never retreated from the concept of Bada’.

Chapter 4

The Belief of Bada’ and its relation to Imamate

The filthy accusation of Azam Tariq al-Nasibi on the Imams of Ahlulbayt [as]

This Nasibi Azam Tariq [la] evidenced the filth of his lineage in the form of following words:

Azam Tariq states:

… In order to erase the mistake of the Imam and to avoid the embarrassment for getting back to initial statement they had to say that Allah [swt] got Bada’ in such and such matter…

Had this stupid and ignorant Mullah bothered to ponder over the Holy Quran, he would have come to know that Allah [swt] had promised Musa [as] for thirty days but later on He [swt] changed it to forty days and his nation went astray during that delay. Why didn’t Allah [swt] tell him about forty days in the first instance? Does Allah [swt] lie (God forbid)? Only filthiest Nawasib of the highest order would come up with such a conclusion from the verses that contain the incident of Musa [as] whereas the people of truth who use their brains will never fall into such depths blasphemy and narrow-mindedness.

The tradition stating the change in time for the establishment of a true Islamic government

Then the Nasibi mullah cited the following tradition from Usool al-Kafi, Kitab al Hujjah, Chapter 82 page 233 (Lucknow):

Azam Tariq states:

Ali ibn Muhammad and Muhammad ibn al-Hassan have narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad and Muhammad ibn Yahya from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Isa all from al-Hassan ibn Mahbub from abu Hamza al-Thumali who has said the following. "I heard abu Ja'far (a.s.) say, "O Thabit, Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, had set up a time limit for the affair in the year seventy but when al-Husayn (a.s.) was murdered Allah’s anger became more intense on the people on earth. He delayed it until one hundred forty. When then spoke to you about it and you publicized this hadith and disclosed the secret. Allah thereafter has not set up a time limit for it available with us. Allah deletes whatever He wants and establishes whatever He wants, with Him is the original book.… [Khutbaat e Jail, page 46-52]

Reply

First of all let us cite the meaning of the word 'Amr' (affair) used in this tradition put forward by Allamah Baqar Majlesi:

“It means the revelation of truth and its triumph over falsehood by one of the Imams, it doesn’t mean the appearance of the twelfth Imam”

We cited this because many the ignorant Nasibi mullahs use this tradition to prove that according to this Shia tradition, Allah [swt] kept changing the time of the appearance of Imam Mahdi [aj].

Secondly it is possible to assume that the promise for the establishment of the real Islamic state would have been conditional during the 70 AH but Allah [swt] is not bound to reveal those conditions to anyone. There is no confusion whatsoever if promises are not fulfilled for its conditions not being met and for that matter one can just check the words of Allamah Shabeer Ahmed Uthmani cited before or Nawasib can issue the edicts of Kufr against him as well. The conditions must have been that if Muslims aided Imam Hussain [as] and attained success against the Kafir and Munafiq rulers, the actual Islamic government would certainly be established otherwise it would not. But we saw that most so called Muslims preferred to aid the tyrannical / hypocritical rulers others just kept away from the truth. Consequently, Allah [swt] didn’t fulfill his promise. All such things are within the eternal knowledge of Allah [swt] but He does not disclose such details to his people even to his chosen ones. Only Allah [swt] knows the reasoning of such concepts. Allah [swt] had made a conditional covenant with Bani Israel to give them governance but those stupid people just like their beloved Nasibi adherents thought that the promise was unconditional and they would have permanent eternal leadership, whatever happened. Today’s Jews are still waiting for the fulfillment of that promise in fact they are using every method to attain domination over the world. Allah [swt] addressed Bani Israel in the Quran:

[Shakir 2:40]

O children of Israel! call to mind My favor which I bestowed on you and be faithful to (your) covenant with Me, I will fulfill (My) covenant with you; and of Me, Me alone, should you be afraid.

This means that if Bani Israel fulfilled their covenant, Allah [swt] would likewise fulfill His covenant with them, failure to do so would lead to Him (swt) entering into a covenant With Bani Ismaeel

Deciding the time for the reappearance of Imam Mahdi [as]

The author states:

Azam Tariq states:

When Imam Baqir [as] didn’t find any reply for the time and again change in God’s decisions therefore he just said that those who mentioned the time of the reappearance of Mahdi were liars. It is mentioned in Usool al-Kafi page 223 that: ‘Narrator says that he asked Imam Baqir [as] whether there is any particular time for the appearance of Mahdi to which he replied that those who mentioned the time were liars, were liars, were liars.

Reply

First of all it should be noted that Shaykh Baqir Majlisi termed the cited tradition as 'weak' in his famed work 'Miraqt al-Uqul' Volume 4 page 175.

Secondly, the Nasibi author and his ilk should know that there isn’t any contradiction between ‘Kazab al Waqtun’ (those who mention the time are liars) and the Imams mentioning the time in front of their people. Some impatient people of their own would accord suggest the time of the appearance of Mahdi [as]. The Imam had nothing to do with such unfounded speculation. This was because the Muslims and in particular the Shia of Ahlulbayt [as] were subject to untold oppression from tyrannical leaders that they hated with a vehemence. In light of such persecution they yearned for the quick establishment of a real and actual Islamic government. The desire for salvation, led to some speculating over the time of al-Mahdi [as]. It was the speculations of such people that Imam Baqir [as] rejected. It is also crucial to note that the reports relating to the establishment of Islamic government in 70 H were not popular around the era of 70 H and Imam Baqir [as] addressed such comments during His own period of Imamate. This was hence the conditional Taqdeer of Allah [swt] which were not fulfilled because conditions on the ground were not met.

The disloyalty in citing the incident accompanied with ignorance

The author unveils the intensity of his grudge and extremism in this manner:

Azam Tariq states:

Allah had designated Ismaeel, the elder son of Imam Jafar as Imam after him and it is obvious that the twelve envelopes which were revealed to Holy Prophet having the name of each Imam must have contained an envelope with Ismaeel’s name as well and Ismaeel must have born from the thigh of her mother and must have possessed the all the signs of Imamate….The words of another tradition which has been recorded by Shaykh Saduq in Risala Eitiqa`ad are: ‘Allah never had Bada’ in anything like he had in the case of my son Ismaeel.

[Khutbaat e Jail, pages 51-52]

Reply

Its is quite strange that this stupid mullah has made self made assumptions, like Ismaeel was the Imam to succeed Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] hence he ‘must have’ born from thigh and a envelope of his name ‘must have’ revealed! We want to ask these Nawasib that when you are using tense of ‘an unconfirmed past event’ one after another is it just for propaganda purposes and apportion blame on your opponents? Making mere assumptions of one’s own and then attributing the same to others can only be the work of Nawasib and no Muslim can do such an impudent act. The revelation of name by name envelopes isn’t any unsound thing. Didn’t Allah [swt] bestow a tablet to prophet Musa [as]? Where is the evidence that an envelope of Ismaeel’s name was revealed? Blaming others on the basis of mere assumptions using the words ‘must have’ is nothing but sheer dishonesty.

This act is known as “Musadira alal Matloob” in debating terminology, it means that you make an assumption and then make that assumption a criterion; you judge things according to that assumption, without even confirming whether the assumption is right or wrong.

This is similar to the doctrine of Khilafat, we say that no one can be Khalifa, unless Allah appoints him. But idiot Nasibis, reject this by arguing that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and others became khalifas even though Allah (swt) did not appoint them, the Shi’a doctrine is therefore false! Isn’t this ridiculous, making a wrong assumption, and then citing that as the criteria for debates? Those who are unaware of the basic rules of religious debates have become the self proclaimed champions of it. This is again an assumption!

Azam Tariq and other Nasibi mullahs have adopted treachery and sheer deceitfulness as their routine clothing. One of the examples of their deceit is the paragraph of Shaykh Saduq cited by Azam Tariq al-Nasibi wherein he deliberately removed the context and stole its middle part while the original sentences are:

“Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] stated that Bada’ took place in my son’s case, thus He [as] said that such thing never appeared in any case from Allah [swt] like the one took place in the case of my son Ismaeel because Allah [swt] removed him from the earth before me so that it would known that he was not the Imam after me.”

Eiteq'adat by Shaykh Saduq, page 29, published in Delhi

Since the deceiving of people by Shaytan could have caused people go astray Allah [swt] blocked the path of this deceit and thus took the life of Ismaeel during the lifetime of his father Imam Jafar [as] thus making it crystal clear that Ismaeel was not an appointed Imam as opposition could have taken place in that case. Despite this, opposition appeared and a sect namely Ismaili came into existence which still exists. The words clearly show that whatever happened was from the absolute knowledge of Allah [swt] not some fresh knowledge that appeared to Him [as] at that time (God forbid).

The author has used assumptions one after the other and has been very deceitful whereas Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] as recorded by Shaykh Saduq clearly stated that the death of Ismaeel took place during His [as] life to make it clear that he was not designated for Imamate neither in his [as] life nor afterwards. In order to uproot some kind of confusion, Allah [swt] from his wisdom matched it with the death of Ismaeel. Allah [swt] has already stated: “ Surely Allah does not love  the trescherous” . ( 8 : 5 8 )

It should be quite clear that it isn’t sufficient to be an elder son in order to become an Imam rather there are many other qualities required. Allah [swt] has already named all the twelve Imams and it is sufficient for us that those names are present in Shia Athna Ashari books in fact in Sunni books as well and to assume that ‘an envelope with his name must have revealed as well’ is nothing but foolhardiness. The shortage in brain cells caused the stupid author to concoct assumptions and blame others, we see that similar attitudes were present amongst the people of previous eras. Ibn Abdul Barr records a very interesting incident bears relevancy to this discussion:

It was said to Hadrath Ali: ‘O Ameer al Momineen! There are some people who say that Allah [swt] has no knowledge of future events until it takes place’. Ali said: ‘ May their mothers weep for them. On what basis do they say this?’. He was told that they cite the words of Allah: 'And Verily We shall try you till We know those of you who strive hard (for the cause of Allah) and the steadfast, and till We test your record' Ali said:'one who didn't attain knowledge, is dead… '

Jam'e Bayan al-Ilm wa Fazla, Volume 1, page 138 (Beirut)

So we once again saw that those who stay away from the original people of knowledge i.e. the door of the city of knowledge, concoct stupid assumptions and draw absurd analogies. Just like their Nawasib ancestors the modern day proto-type read and interpreted the Quran on their own, they also went astray by falling into the quagmire of assumptions and analogies against the Shia of Ali [as] and then set out to lead naive Sunni Muslims astray.

Nasibi Objection to the stance of Imam Jafar [as]

The illiterate author makes another senseless objection, which we are presenting here in concise form:

Azam Tariq states:

“Why Imam Jafar [as] did not make his dead son alive or why any other Imam didn’t do so while according to Shia belief Imams possessed such an ability”.

“Ismaeel was designated Imam after Imam Jafar Sadiq but since he died during the life of his father therefore the decision of Allah [swt] went wrong thus He made Musa Kazim as next Imam. Had Allah [as] knew that Ismaeel had such a short life then such embarrassment would never have taken place”.

These are some of the most impudent questions and objections. Allah [swt] may grant the knowledge of Taqdeer to his chosen ones but has not allowed for them to disclose it. Sometimes the permission to disclose is there and sometimes Allah [swt] doesn’t give the knowledge of conditional Taqdeer to anyone.

When it has been made clear that Ismaeel hadn’t even been named as Imam, then why the need to resurrect him? Moreover, had Ismaeel [as] been appointed an Imam even for a day, the number of the Imams of Shia Athna Ashari would been 13, not 12, so such a claim by anyone is baseless.

The foolish Mullahs will not abandon his ignorance but in order to save naive people from their filthy and lethal trap, allow us to mention that Allah [swt] made Harun [as] caliph and Wasi of Prophet Musa [as] but Harun [as] died during the life of Musa [as] then Yusha bin Nun was appointed as Musa’s [as] caliph and Wasi. Didn’t Allah [swt] know that the life of Harun [as] was shorter than Musa [as] and He [swt] initially appointed Harun [as] as Caliph but later on He [swt] felt something due to which He [swt] took the life of Harun [as] before Musa [as]? (God forbid). Wasn’t Allah [swt] capable enough to increase the life of Harun [as]? The questions which Nasibi mullahs so as to portray the doctrine of Imamate as fake and imperfect, we will respond by citing the Imamate and Caliphate of Harun [as] to evidence his stupidity. One of the revered Sunni clergymen Allamah Abdul Kareem Shahrastani states about the caliphate of Harun [as]:

“The Jews are of the view that Musa [as] handed over the signs of Torah and Alwah [tablets] to his Wasi (successor), his servant and one who was supposed to lead on affairs after Him [as] i.e. Joshua bin Nun so that he could transfer these signs to the children of Harun [as], because Amr was similar between Musa [as] and Harun [as] due to the fact that when Allah [swt] sent the first revelation to Musa [as], He [as] narrated the supplication of Musa [as]: ‘And make him share my task [Amr]’ [20:32]. Thus, Harun [as] was the Wasi of Musa [as]. When Harun [as] died during the life of Musa [as] the Wasiyat (successor ship) then temporarily transferred to Joshua bin Nun so that he could transfer it to the two sons of Harun [as] Shabeer and Shabar on a permanent basis. This is because Wasiyat and Imamate can be granted on a permanent basis or can be given temporarily to someone.”

1. Al Malal wal Nahal, Volume 1, page 211 (Published in Egypt)

2. Eqd al Jaman fi Tarikh Ahl Zaman, by Badruddin Aini, page 17 (Makthaba, Ghazzali, Syria)

This reference also confirms the fact that just like this nation, the chain of succession and Imamat was also present in previous nations. Just like Musa [as] designated his successor during his life similarly Holy Prophet [s] also designated his successor during his life and this time the successorship was not given on temporarily rather the permanent chain of Imamate and Wilayah started from Ali [as]. The meaning of Hadith Manzilah becomes further clear in the light of above mentioned fatcs. The ignorant Nawasib who abruptly raise questions on the issue of Imam Jafar [as]’s son Ismaeel, would no doubt raise similar questions in the case of Musa [as] and Harun [as]. Only idiots raise such questions, a pious believer would never have the audacity to interfere on the affairs and wisdom of Allah [swt].

Bada that place for the Imamate of Imam Hassan Askari [as]

After citing the very incident of Bada taken place in respect of Ismaeel, Ansar.org states:

Ansar.org states:

The same thing happened with Al-Hadi (the tenth Imam for the twelver Shias). Al-Hadi had announced that his son, Muhamed, was to be the next Imam. Nevertheless, Muhamed died before his father did. Hence, Al-Hadi gave the next leadership to his other son Al-Hasan Al-Askari and said, “O’ son, thank Allah, for He made a new decision about you.” [Al-Kafi, vol.1, p.326-327. Basa’er Al-Darajat by Al-Saffar, p.473. Al-Irshad by Al-Mufeed p.337. Al-Ghaybah by Al-Tusi, p.122]

Reply

First of all we should point out that the translation that Ansar.org has provided namely “He made a new decision about you” should have been “He has granted you a new task” i.e. (Imamate).

Secondly, there is nothing objectionable from the incident of Bada being applied by Allah [swt] in the case of the Imamate of Hassan Askari [as] exactly it was just like the previous episode of Ismaeel. Whilst we see abstruse issue here, the following tradition will make the matter crystal clear:

Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Ishaq ibn Muhammad from abu Hashim alJafari who has said the following. "I was in the presence of abu al-Hassan (a.s.) after the death of his son, abu Jafar. I felt like wanting to say, "The two; abu Jafar and abu Muhammad at this time are like abu al-Hassan Musa and Ismaeel, the sons of Jafar ibn Muhammad (a.s.)." At that point abu al-Hassan turned to me before I spoke and said, "Yes, O abu Hashim, Allah applied Bada’ in the case of abu Muhammad after abu Jafar, a fact that was not known for him. Similarly He (swt) applied Bada’ in the case of Musa after the death of Ismaeel as an issue through which his condition came to light. That is what you thought to yourself. Even though people of falsehood may dislike it, abu Muhammad, my son will be the succeeding Imam after me. With him is the knowledge that he will need and with him is the means of Imamat (Leadership with Divine Authority).

Al-Kafi, Volume 1, Kitab al Hujjah Chapter 75 Hadith 10

As stated by Ansar.org Sheikh al-Tusi also recorded same event in his authority work ‘AlGhayba’ page 201 in the following words:

Abu Hashim Dawoud bin al-Qasim al-Jaffari said: ‘I was with Abi al-Hassan (as) at the time of his son Abu Jaffar’s death and he was directed and guided to him. Then I was thinking and saying to myself that this is the similar case like that of Abi ibrahim and Ismail. Then Abu al-Hassan came close and said: ‘Yes Aba Hashim, Bad'a by Allah about Abu Jaffar and he replaced him with Aba Muhammad, as it was Bad'a by Allah with regards to Ismaeel.’

So we come to know whatever had happened (Bada) in the case of Ismaeel and Imam Musa Kazim [as] exactly same later on happened in the case of Muhammad and Imam Hasan alAskari [as], and that is what Ansar.org has too accepted i.e. “The same thing happened with Al-Hadi”. And since we already have fruitfully discussed the incident of Ismaeel thus there shalll not be anything to object or mock at whether about that incident or this one since both are similar kinds of situations.

But in order decide the matter of Bada once for all, let us now once again recall as to what had happened in case of Ismaeel and Imam Musa Kazim [as] that Shias believe and compare it with what had happened with the three people of Israel that Ahle Sunnah believe and for that purpose, one doesn’t need to learn rocket science, just compare these two terms used in the two respective books: Shaykh al-Tusi records:

Bada by Allah to Ismaeel

Bada by Allah to test them (Leper, Blind and Bald-headed men)

Since there is no difference between what has been recorded by Bukhari with regards to the story of three Israeli men and what has been recorded by Shia scholars with regards to the incident of Ismaeel and the difference is only that in Shia sources it was Ismaeel or Muhammad where as in Sunni sources there were three Israeli men, so what the heck is there for Nawasib to make the issue against Shias?

The incident of Prophet Lut [as] and the concept of Bada’

The Nasibi author under the title ‘Prophet Lut [as] casted doubts on the appearance of Bada’ from Allah [swt]’ states:

Azam Tariq states:

In Usool al Kafi, Kitaab al Nikah under Baab allawatat there is tradition of which I am mentioning a small part. When angels brought the news of wrath [Azaab] to Lut [as], He [as]said: ‘O messengers of my Lord, what instructions do you have from my Lord?’ They said: ‘We have instructions to catch this nation in morning’. Lut [as] said: ‘I have something to say to you’. They ask: ‘What is it?’ Lut [as] said: ‘You should catch this nation right now because I am afraid that my Lord may get Bada’ about these people’. La hol Wala Quwah Ilah Billah… Will there remain any reliability on any statement of Allah [swt] after this belief? Then it is also quite possible that Allah [swt] may get involved with Bada’in the statements of establishing Qayamah, distributing hell and heaven, weighing the deeds on the day of judgement etc… (astaghfurallah) [Khutbaat e Jail, page 57]

Reply

The author would have not exhibited such stupidity had he glanced over the incident of prophet Yunus [as] before raising an objection about al-Kafi that Lut [as] feared the appearance of Bada’ from Allah [swt] but since like other filthy Nawasib of Sipah-e-Sahabah, the author is permanently overcome by Shaytan that means they stay aloof from the truth.

These idiots when talking about Shias adopt only one eye to examine the facts (no doubt they are the followers of the one eyed Dajjal), which why they formulate complete lies, or half truths tailored as lies.

As for the notion that ‘with the presence of the belief of Bada’ there remains no reliability on the statements of Allah [swt] for establishing day of Qayamah, distribution of hell and heaven etc’ there would not have appeared such doubts in the vulgar and cheap brain of the author had this ignorant mullah understood the tradition of Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] mentioned previously. The Imam [as] said that there are two kinds of affairs, firstly established affairs and secondly dependent affairs. There is no Bada’ in established affairs but that may happen in dependent/contingent ones. The establishment of Qayamah, the distribution of hell and heaven and the weighing of deeds etc are established affairs and they are not related with any conditions, where as most of the our routine affairs are conditional and dependent. The nature of such conditions, whether they are being fulfilled or not (etc) EVERYTHING is in the eternal and absolute knowledge of Allah [swt]. Knowledge of Allah [swt] surrounds each and everything. Since the Nawasib are themselves at the peak of ignorance their filthy minds quickly generate the views about Allah [swt] being ignorant of something because of Bada’ (nauzobillah) which in other words means that in the mirror of Bada’ the Nawasib watch the reflection of their ugly faces.

Moreover, about the status of the cited tradition, Shaykh Baqir Majlisi stated that it is a 'weak' tradition, see Miraq al-Uqul, Volume 20 page 390.

After quoting the above Shia tradition, the Nasibi author has also used statements of Imam [as] about the rewards of believing in Bada. So ,as for the tradition that having faith in Bada’ is the most exalted worship (ibada’h), then who can make the ignorant mullahs understand that it is a confirmed fact that Bada’ means the eternal and absolute knowledge of Allah [swt] which can also be compared with the complete details of the happenings in the entire universe a concept that affirms the highest and absolute degree of Allah [swt]’s authority that not only brings faith in Him [as] but is the actual faith on which all kinds of worship are based. One who gets involved in doubts neither understands the authority and unlimited Qudrah of Allah [swt] nor has he has accepted it. Sadly we see that the mindless mullahs are busy in making sound things unsound with their minds on account of their worship of Satan.

Chapter 5

Some incidents of Bada’ recorded in Sunni books

We have made it clear that both Shia and Sunni adhere to the doctrine of Bada’. It is only the Nawasib who (due to Jewish financers) are unable to accept this Quranic belief. In chapter 3 we cited some traditions from Sunni sources that contains the word Bada and shall now cite further episodes from Sunni books that might not contain the word Bada depicts the same concept.

Incident One: Allah [swt] had “Bada” in case of three Israelis

We will start with the hadith from Sahih al Bukhari that contains the word Bada we had previously cited some of its lines in chapter 3 and promised to cite the complete tradition here. The Hadith has the word in exactly the same manner that the Shi’a understand it:

We now present the whole tradition from the English version of Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 56, Number 670:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

that he heard Allah's Apostle saying, "Allah willed to test three Israelis who were a Leper, a blind man and a bald-headed man. So, he sent them an angel who came to the leper and said, 'What thing do you like most?' He replied, "Good color and good skin, for the people have a strong aversion to me.' The angel touched him and his illness was cured, and he was given a good color and beautiful skin. The angel asked him, 'What kind of property do you like best?' He replied, 'Camels (or cows).' (The narrator is in doubt, for either the leper or the bald-headed man demanded camels and the other demanded cows.) So he (i.e. the leper) was given a pregnant shecamei, and the angel said (to him), 'May Allah bless you in it.

' The angel then went to the bald-headed man and said, 'What thing do you like most?' He said, 'I like good hair and wish to be cured of this disease, for the people feel repulsion for me.' The angel touched him and his illness was cured, and he was given good hair. The angel asked (him), 'What kind of property do you like bests' He replied, 'Cows,' The angel gave him a pregnant cow and said, 'May Allah bless you in it.' The angel went to the blind man and asked, 'What thing do you like best?' He said, '(I like) that Allah may restore my eye-sight to me so that I may see the people.' The angel touched his eyes and Allah gave him back his eye-sight. The angel asked him, "What kind of property do you like best?' He replied, 'Sheep.' The angel gave him a pregnant sheep. Afterwards, all the three pregnant animals gave birth to young ones, and multiplied and brought forth so much that one of the (three) men had a herd of camels filling a valley, and one had a herd of cows filling a valley, and one had a flock of sheep filling a valley. Then the angel, disguised in the shape and appearance of a leper, went to the leper and said, I am a poor man, who has lost all means of livelihood while on a journey. So none will satisfy my need except Allah and then you. In the Name of Him Who has given you such nice color and beautiful skin, and so much property, I ask you to give me a camel so that I may reach my destination. The man replied, 'I have many obligations (so I cannot give you).' The angel said, 'I think I know you; were you not a leper to whom the people had a strong aversion? Weren't you a poor man, and then Allah gave you (all this property).' He replied, '(This is all wrong), I got this property through inheritance from my fore-fathers' The angel said, 'If you are telling a lie, then let Allah make you as you were before. ' Then the angel, disguised in the shape and appearance of a bald man, went to the bald man and said to him the same as he told the first one, and he too answered the same as the first one did. The angel said, 'If you are telling a lie, then let Allah make you as you were before.

' The angel, disguised in the shape of a blind man, went to the blind man and said, 'I am a poor man and a traveler, whose means of livelihood have been exhausted while on a journey. I have nobody to help me except Allah, and after Him, you yourself. I ask you in the Name of Him Who has given you back your eye-sight to give me a sheep, so that with its help, I may complete my journey' The man said, 'No doubt, I was blind and Allah gave me back my eye-sight; I was poor and Allah made me rich; so take anything you wish from my property. By Allah, I will not stop you for taking anything (you need) of my property which you may take for Allah's sake.' The angel replied, 'Keep your property with you. You (i.e 3 men) have been tested and Allah is pleased with you and is angry with your two companions."

This historic example of Bada utilised by Allah [swt] serves as the practical example of what had previously been referred to by the Shia and Sunni ulema as Bada, namely to impoverish after giving wealth, or to make sick after keeping healthy. The most fortunate thing is that the tradition contains the word “Bada” if these Nasibi choose to ponder over this tradition carefully it will dawn on them that Bada is not an exclusive Shi’a doctrine.

Incident Two: Allah [swt] kept changing the units of prayers after every decision

We read in ‘Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 429’ that when Holy Prophet [s] was ascended to heavens, he said:

“…fifty prayers were enjoined on me. I descended till I met Moses who asked me, 'What have you done?' I said, 'Fifty prayers have been enjoined on me.' He said, 'I know the people better than you, because I had the hardest experience to bring Bani Israel to obedience. Your followers cannot put up with such obligation. So, return to your Lord and request Him (to reduce the number of prayers.' I returned and requested Allah (for reduction) and He made it forty. I returned and (met Moses) and had a similar discussion, and then returned again to Allah for reduction and He made it thirty, then twenty, then ten, and then I came to Moses who repeated the same advice. Ultimately Allah reduced it to five. When I came to Moses again, he said, 'What have you done?' I said, 'Allah has made it five only.' He repeated the same advice but I said that I surrendered (to Allah's Final Order)'" Allah's Apostle was addressed by Allah, "I have decreed My Obligation and have reduced the burden on My slaves, and I shall reward a single good deed as if it were ten good deeds."

If the Nasibies like that of Sipah-eSahabah (kr-hcy.com) abhor the belief of Bada’ like their Jewish brethren, then they should denounce the change in the units of prayers and should accordingly perform 50 units that had been initially enjoined. The logical thing would be for Nasibis, at the rejecters of Bada’ to reject praying five times a day, unlike other Muslims who believe that Allah [swt] can change what He likes, anywhere and are anytime (i.e. Bada’).

.Incident Three: Allah [swt] kept changing the permissibility or forbiddance of Nikah al-Mutah having ruled on it once

Qadhi Thanaullah Panee Pathee in his authority work ‘Tafseer Mazhari’ Volume 3 page 22

"Imam Sha'afi had said 'I don't know of anything in Islam with the exception of Mut'ah that was halaal on one occasion, then made haraam, then made halaal and then haraam’. Some 'ulama have said that it was abrogated on three occasions while some have said that it was abrogated more than thrice".

Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 3 page 22

Ibn Katheer also made similar comments in his Tafseer of this verse:

"The verse refers to Nikah Mut'ah that was allowed in the beginning of Islam, but was then abrogated. Shafi and a group amongst the Ulema said that it was Mubah twice and abrogated twice. Some say that it was mubah once and then abrogated, so say that it occurred on may occasions"

Tafseer Ibn Khateer, Surah an-Nisa, page 3

The Nasibi rejecters of Bada’ may try to escape from this belief in other incidences but their stance about Nikah al-Mutah is such a thorn in their throats that they can neither swallow nor spit. According to them Mutah is adultery while they also subscribe to the belief that Allah [swt] does not change his decisions i.e they do not believe in Bada’. Then would they like to tell us as to why according to their belief Allah [swt] kept changing his decision on the issue of Mutah and made ‘adultery’ Halal twice (God forbid)?

Chapter 6

The reason which made Nawasib to contaminate the Shia belief of Bada'

The Nasibi slander against Allah [swt]

After reading previous chapters, now readers must be wondering as to which virus struck the Nasibi stomach that caused them indigestion to the Shia belief of Bada’ when the Ulema of Ahle Sunnah believe in it albeit with different terminology. The actual reason that Nawasib like that of Sipah Sahabah (kr-hcy.com) attack the Shia belief of Bada’ is on account of ‘frustration’. Their ulema have left behind for them such absurd and blasphemous beliefs in respect to the Creator of the entire universe, Allah (swt), that these adherents had no other choice to attack the Shia to save themselves. In this campaign, those of our readers who are fond of internet surfing would have come across the following reference from various Nasibi websites:

Nawasib states:

"Bada’h"; ALLAH tells a lie. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No.1, Page No. 148. A Shia doctrine.)

Whilist we have proven that nobody subscribes to the view that Bada’ means to lie, rather it means a change in Taqdeer by Allah [swt] we have substantiated the fact that the Sunni Ulema also uphold this belief and it can be evidenced from the Holy Quran also. The Nawasib paint a fictitious picture of this doctrine by ‘telling lies’ about Bada’ to cover up their own filthy belief epitomised by Shah Ismaeel Shaheed. Shah Ismael qoutes someone saying:

"Impossibility is a defect, and a defect in Allah is impossible"

Then he replies:

"If ‘impossible’ is related to the abilities of Allah within His being, that this isn't within the fold of Allah's power. Then we do not accept it. The mentioned lie (about Allah) that can Allah make a false introduction about an event or a complete false event itself and then reveal it on angels or prophets, then this is possible, because then it would mean that the abilities of a man are more than that of Allah, because such a thing (telling a lie) is within the fold of the abilities of a human being."

Yak Rowza, page 217

Trying to console an adherent inquiring about the blasphemous statement of their pioneer Deobandi Imam Imdadullah Mujahir Makki, Maulana Rasheed Ahmed Gangohi further confuses him by stating:

“A copy of the letter by Haji Imdadullah Sahib Muhajir Makki, in connection to the possibility of telling a lie by Allah Almighty, for clearing doubts of Maulvi Nazir Ahmed Sahib Rampuri.

Doubt: It is written in “Buraheen al-Qate’a” that Allah can tell a lie”.

Then a few lines further in his attempts to clarify the doubts of the inquirer, Gangohi says:

“It is the belief of all Muslim researchers, the saints and scholars that telling a lie is within the jurisdiction of the abilities of Allah (swt), your doubts have been clarified, no one is of the belief of its occurrence. This is a complex issue and not something to be said in front of common masses.”

'Fatawa Rasheediyah' by Maulana Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, page 237

More references:

1. Talefat-e-Rasheed, page 98 Kitab-Aqaid

2. Tazkarah Khaleel, page135

3. Al-Jahad Al-Maqal, page 41

And we want to send a message directly to the ignorant Nawasib of (kr-hcy.com) at this point:

"O illegitimate progeny of Yazeed! If the meanig of the word Bada is to "lie" like what you deceitfully attribute to the Shi'a then that term has been used in exactly the same manner in Sahih Bukhari. Will you according pass the relevant takfeer edict against:

a.) The Prophet of Islam (s) and Abu Hurariah who narrated that statement.

b.) Imam Bukhari who recorded this kufr belief in his Sahih

c.) Ibn Hajar, Badruddin Aini, Qastalani, and Ibn Atheer who provided the same manner commentary for the word Bada that the Shia advance.

Clearly you can only set your sights on the Shi'a when you have cleared your house if the above kufr beliefs, so kindly issue takfeer against them and then comeback to us!"

Then by using the non-controversial belief of Bada’ i.e. change in Taqdeer by Allah [swt], these filthy Nawasib try to prove that Shia believes that Allah [swt] is ignorant as to what to do that is why he needs to change the decision He (swt) previously. We have already rejected such assertion since:

Imam Jafar Sadiq [as] said: ‘Bada’ never takes place with Allah [swt] due to a lack of knowledge [ignorance]”

Usool al -Kafi Volume 1, Kitab al-Tawheed Baab al-Bada', Hadith #10

Let us now reveal the reason that made Nawasib attribute such an absurd belief to the Shia of Ahlubayt [as]. The famed Deobandi scholar Maulana Hussain Ali records in his authority work ‘Balagat-ul-Hayran’ about Mutazzilah; one of the sects of Ahle Sunnah:

“Allah doesn't know what His believers are going to do but when they commit their deeds, He knows.”

Tafseer Balagat-ul-Hayran by Maula Husain Ali, page 157-158 (Published by: Himayat-e- Islam press Lahore)

For those who may give a feeble attempt to disown Mutazzilah amongst Ahle Sunnah, we may remind them of the words of their master Imam Ibn Tamiyah who testified that its not the case:

“The claim (of the Shi'a Ulema) that all the groups of Ahl'ul Sunnah seek to prove the Khilafat of the first three caliphs on Qiyas (conjecture) is false because there are sects that don’t rely on Qiyas such as the Mutazzalite of Baghdad, and the Dhareeya such as Dawoud and ibn Hazm and others and sects of Ahlluhadith and Sufia”

Minhaj as Sunnah, Volume 3 page 401

So we just saw how cleverly these pathetic Nawasib accuse Shias of Ahlulbayt [as] of committing blasphemy against Allah [swt] by using the belief of Bada as a proof while we have already proved that the belief of Bada is totally Islamic and its Jews and Nawasib who oppose it, but we always get surprised on the shamelessness of the Nawasib when we read the following belief they up hold regarding Allah [swt].

Iman is to believe in Allah, His angels, His books, His messengers, qadr, the good and the evil is all from Allah

Musnad Abu Hanifa, page 152

Alhamdulilah, according to Shia belief, Allah [swt] is the source of mercy, blessings and good but according to our opponents, thier concept of God is the one who is the source of evil as well and yet they yap at Shias for believing in Bada which has roots in Quran and Sunnah!

Challenge

The internet over the years has seen another deceit of the Nasibis, who in their hatred of Shias do not even care about their own respect. Being humiliated in debate forums, they still haven’t stopped their evil act of copy/pasting one liners supposedly from Shia books, like:

Nawasib states:

Bada’h"; ALLAH tells a lie. (Asool Kaafi, Vol. No.1, Page No. 148. A Shia doctrine.)

The Answering-Ansar.org team challenges them if any devious Nasibi website, or even common Nasibi provides a scanned page of this one liner about Bada’ from Al-Kafi having the word ‘lie’, the AA team will close down the website and become Sunnis. If the liars who forged this one liner and lied on the Shia book, cannot produce the scanned page (which they will never be able to do), then we leave it to them and our readers to decide on what their stance should be about such people.

Chapter 7

The all time association of Nawasib with Jews and the Kufar of Quraysh about their views over Bada'

It is quite interesting to see that the infidels of Quraysh, Jews and Nawasib have always been best friends and its evidence comes from the fact they have always shared similar views such as their rejection of the of Bada’. The Kufar of Quraysh mocked at the capability of Allah [swt] to alter destiny by saying that He [swt] stating he incapable of doing so. Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti records:

Ibn Abi Shayba, ibn Jarir, ibn al-Munder and ibn Abi Hatim reported from Mujahid may Allah be pleased with him that he said: "When the verse revealed 'and it was not given to any Messenger that he should bring a sign except by the Leave of Allah' the Quraish said:  ‘Oh Muhammad, we see that you have nothing and Allah has finished from all affairs’.

So the following verses was revealed to warn them 'He establishes or effaces whatever He wills'… In every Ramadhan Allah [swt] removes or confirms what He will about the people’s provisions (rizq), calamity and what is given and destined to them."

So we come to know that the Nasibi notion of rejecting the belief of Bada’ has been inherited by them from their ancestry which infiltrated Islam with noxious intentions but whenever these people get the chance, they reveal their true colors by affirming their adherence to their ancestral beliefs.

Beside Nawasib and the infidels of Quraysh, other bosom buddies are the Jews who also reject Bada’ and not to forget one of such example we have already cited before:

“Jews and the pagans of Mecca criticized and mocked at the change of qibla from Baytul Muqaddas.”

Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 1, page 180 ( published by Darul Ishaat Karachi)

An esteemed Sunni scholar Allamah Shahrastani records:

“Jews have termed abrogation as strictly prohibited. They hold the view that there will not be any Shariah after Musa [as] because abrogation in affairs is Bada’ which is not permissible for Allah [swt]”

Al-Malal wal Nehel, Volume 1, page 222 Chapter 2 (Published in Cairo)

We can see that the Jews due to their foolishness and ignorance devised an incorrect meaning for Bada’ and thus rejected it, while amongst the people of truth, the same changes and alterations, defacement and affirmation, abrogation and instruction, increment and reduction is known as Bada’. This doesn’t take place due to lack of knowledge of Allah [swt] (God forbid) that it should be deemed impermissible for Allah [swt] rather its occurrence is already included in the absolute and definite knowledge of Allah [swt]. The stubborn and ignorant Jews and their mindless adherents reject it by offering different / incorrect meanings. Thus we see a statement from Shaykh Saduq in this matter which is quite similar to the one of Allamah Shahrastani. He writes:

“The Jews believe that Allah, Who is blessed and Exalted above all, (after creating the universe) relinquished the affair of (creation). But we say that He, Who is Exalted above all, “Everyday He exercises (universal) power” [55, 29]. One particular affair does not distract Him from another. He quickens and kills, He creates and sustains and acts as He wills. We say: “Allah effaces what He will, and establishes (what He will) and with Him is the Mother of the Book (Ummul Kitab) [13, 39]”. He destroys only that which exists and creates only that which does not exist. This is not the kind of Bada’ which Jews and their followers mention. The Jews, may Allah curse them attributed such kind of Bada’ and those who follow their desire from the people, who are against us also followed the Jews”

E'iteqadat by Shaykh Saduq, 27-28 (Published in Delhi)

The Jews take the meaning of Bada’ in the sense that Allah [swt] was unaware of anything prior to its occurrence and on the basis of this incorrect notion they reject it and attack the people of truth for adhering to its actual definition. The Nawasib have likewise demonstrated their historic association with the Jews on this issue. The harsh reality is the brainless Jews and Nawasib misinterpreted it, stubbornly remained on this stance, attacking those who adhered to their interpretation of this doctrine.

It is clear that the Nasibi opposition to the Shi’a on Bada’ is due to three main reasons,

1. Face saving, in light of the blasphemous statements of their Mullahs about Allah they have been forced to deflect attention away from themselves and on to others.

2. Their spiritual and monetary attachment with Jews

3. To reinforce their hatred of the Shi’a by any means necessary. We are sure that one day Nasibis will come up saying that there are many Gods (naudbillah), just because the Shi’a believe in Tawheed. We hope that the day comes soon.

Chapter 8

Copyright

All rights, including copyright, in the content of these Answering-Ansar.org web pages are owned or controlled for these purposes by the Answering-Ansar.org team.

You can distribute the download version of "Adobe® PDF" documents of the AnsweringAnsar.org articles, as long as the documents remain in their original state and none of the contents are modified in any format.

The Answering-Ansar.org reserves the right over the contents of the articles if they are used in the original format. You can freely distribute the Islamic references and quotes that we use in our articles in any format.

When using our articles in your websites or if in distribution in print format, please include the source as Answering-Ansar.org.

Our web site contains links to third party sites. These links are used for the convenience of our users; however, they are not under the control of Answering-Ansar.org. We are not responsible for their contents, nor should they be considered endorsements of the individual linked sites.

However, it is possible that the site could contain typographical errors. If such a condition is brought to our attention, a reasonable effort will be made to fix or remove it.

If you wish to reproduce, print and distribute our articles in book format, then you will need a written permission of Answering-Ansar.org. If you wish to do so, then please contact us for further details.

www.feedbooks.com
Food for the mind

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 - Introduction

Chapter 2 - The concept of Bada’ in Quran

First Incident: The incident of Musa [as] wherein Allah [swt] made changes in the covenant He [swt] had made with Musa [as]

Second Incident: The incident of Yunus [as] wherein Allah [swt] revoked the due wrath on the nation of Yunus [as]

Third incident: The incident of the sacrifice of Ismaeel [as] by Ibrahim [as]

Incident Four: Change of Qibla, an example of Bada’

A slap to Nawasib pertaining to the change in qibla

Chapter 3 - The unanimity among the Shia and Sunni Ulema in the belief of Bada’

Reply one: Belief of Bada’ is mentioned in Quran

Reply Two: Both Shia & Sunni believe in the concept of Bada’ but with different terminologies

Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani was able to make change in Qaza Mubram (established)

Reply Three: The word “Bada” along with its relevant meaning also exists in Sunni texts

Hadeeth One:

.Hadeeth Two:

Hadeeth Three:

.Hadeeth Four:

.Hadeeth Five:

Hadeeth Six:

End Comments:

Chapter 4 - The Belief of Bada’ and its relation to Imamate

The tradition stating the change in time for the establishment of a true Islamic government

Reply

Deciding the time for the reappearance of Imam Mahdi [as]

Reply

The disloyalty in citing the incident accompanied with ignorance

Reply

Nasibi Objection to the stance of Imam Jafar [as]

Bada that place for the Imamate of Imam Hassan Askari [as]

Reply

The incident of Prophet Lut [as] and the concept of Bada’

Reply

Chapter 5 - Some incidents of Bada’ recorded in Sunni books

Incident One: Allah [swt] had “Bada” in case of three Israelis

Incident Two: Allah [swt] kept changing the units of prayers after every decision

.Incident Three: Allah [swt] kept changing the permissibility or forbiddance of Nikah al-Mutah having ruled on it once

Chapter 6 - The reason which made Nawasib to contaminate the Shia belief of Bada'

Challenge

Chapter 7 - The all time association of Nawasib with Jews and the Kufar of Quraysh about their views over Bada'

Chapter 8 - Copyright