Speculation 10: The Reference of Wahid al-Zaman Hyderabadi

Speculation 9: No Mention in Friday Sermon
August 27, 2015
Final Word
August 27, 2015

BACK Return to Table of contents


Speculation 10: The Reference of Wahid al Zaman Hyderabadi

Some Shia have used the text of Wahid al Zaman Hyderabadi to prove this one daughter ideology where it is mentioned that Sayyidah Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha is the only daughter of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

Originally, the one daughter ideology was fabricated by some Shia. Hence, those affected by Shia ideologies also mention such absurd things. We will now briefly present the ideologies of Wahid al Zaman Hyderabadi (the translator of the sihah) from his own writings. It is important to note that Wahid al Zaman was at one stage a Sunni Hanafi. In this time he wrote Nur al Hidayah, the translation of Sharh al Wiqayah.

His biographer writes that he had a mixed personality. He lived as a muqallid (following the hanafi mazhab) for some time after which he became a ghayr muqallid (not conforming to any mazhab). In this time he wrote the translations of the sihah. After a long period, he was affected by the writing of Mulla Mu’in Sindhi Tahtahwi, Dirasat al Labib, and developed Shia ideologies. In this era, he wrote Anwar al Lughah, also known as Wahid al Lughat. In many places of this book, he revealed his Shia ideologies. Some texts will be reproduced which will reveal his erroneous beliefs.

Wahid al Zaman writes concerning the khilafah:


Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu considered himself most worthy of khilafah, and he was. Due to his close relationship, virtue and valour he was most befitting of taking the place of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Nonetheless, because Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not issue any emphatic statement regarding the khilafah at the time of his death and the Sahabah chose Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu as khalifah based on their opinions and considering the need of the time, Sayyidina ‘Ali adopted patience and kept silent. Had he unsheathed his sword and fought, Islam would have been obliterated.[1]


He writes elsewhere:


There is difference of opinion regarding this matter from the early days as to who is more virtuous between Sayyidina ‘Uthman and Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. The majority of the Ahlus Sunnah regards Sheikhayn (Sayyidina Abu Bakr and Sayyidina ‘Umar) to be superior to Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhum whereas I do not find any categorical proof for this. This matter does not form the basis or pillars of din, yet the mutakallimin (theologists) forcefully included it into ‘aqa’id.[2]


Wahid al Zaman exposes his beliefs regarding Sayyidina Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu:


Amazing! How can Muawiyah’s analogy be on those pure souls whereas he was neither from the Muhajirin nor from the Ansar? He did not serve Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam nor sacrifice his life for him but instead continued opposing him. He accepted Islam on the day of the Conquest of Makkah out of fear. After the demise of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, he advised Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu to assassinate ‘Ali, Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Thereafter, he oppressively and tyrannically trampled the right of the rightful one and without consultation appointed himself as the khalifah and ruler. He killed thousands of Sahabah, tabi’in and friends of Allah. He remained obstinate on his deviation and became an enemy to the Ahl al Bayt from whom he got this honour. He would brazenly revile and curse Sayyidina ‘Ali on the pulpit and issued orders to all the orators to revile and curse Sayyidina ‘Ali (Allah forbid!).[3]

He writes further on the same page:

Can the heart of any true Muslim who has a spark of love for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam ever tolerate to praise Muawiyah? Nevertheless, the method of us Ahlus Sunnah is that we observe silence with regard to the Sahabah. Accordingly, to observe silence regarding Muawiyah is our way which is the safest and most cautious path. However, to praise and compliment him and to celebrate words of honour for him like Sayyidina or “May Allah be pleased with him” is brazen audacity and nerve. May Allah protect![4]


Moreover, Wahid al Zaman exposing his hidden beliefs has used words like oppressor and transgressor for Sayyidina Muawiyah and Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. He writes:


We — the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah — do not declare Muawiyah, ‘Amr ibn al ‘As and Hajjaj, etc. to be infidels nor do we feel it better to curse them. Nonetheless, we consider them as oppressors and transgressors and hand their affair over to Allah. If He wishes, He may pardon them for He is the Most Merciful of those who show mercy. Those who have deemed Muawiyah and ‘Amr ibn al ‘As to be worthy of honour and praise because of being companions are in manifest error.[5]

He writes at another juncture exposing his hatred for Sayyidina Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

Some shallow minded scholars present this fallacious proof that Sayyidah Aisha, Sayyidina Talhah and Zubair radiya Llahu ‘anhum also fought Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. So whatever is their ruling is the ruling regarding Muawiyah. The answer to this is that those three personalities made an ijtihadi mistake which they retracted from, repented and regretted not like Muawiyah who remained the enemy and rival to the Ahlul Bayt ‘alayh al Salam until death and who issued orders to all the orators to curse Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[6]


We will present one text at the end which depicts the strong belief of Wahid al Zaman regarding mourning. He writes:


Most people have reckoned Muharram as the beginning of the hijri year. However, after the martyrdom of Imam Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu took place in Muharram, it no longer remained a month of happiness. If all the Muslims together begin the year from Shawwal, it will be more appropriate. The first of Shawwal will be the first day of the year. On that day, people can be happy and eat and drink. The month of Muharram has become a month of grief due to the martyrdom. Other nations celebrate on the first day of the year while Muslims cry and grieve on this day.[7]


To answer all these allegations, studying my book Mas’alah Aqriba’ Nawazi, the chapter of Sayyidina Amir Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu will prove beneficial. These allegations have been taken from unfounded and baseless narrations and the ‘ulama’ have replied to them. Here, we wish not to answer them. Our object of reproducing the above texts was to reveal the concealed ideologies and beliefs of Wahid al Zaman, who in his final stages had Shia beliefs. The Shia believe Sayyidah Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha was the only daughter, which is his preferred view also.

Who can prevent him from acting in direct opposition to the Qur’an, Sunnah and Islamic history? A man, who was first a Sunni Hanafi, then became a ghayr muqallid and then went into further deviation by becoming a Shia; what credibility is there in the words of such a chameleon? May Allah Ta’ala grant the Muslims steadfastness on the basic essentials of din.


NEXT⇒ Final Word

[1]Anwar al Lughat regarding the quality of weakness

[2]Anwar al Lughat regarding the quality of sin

[3]Anwar al Lughat mulaqqab sec. 18 regarding the quality of honour

[4]Anwar al Lughat mulaqqab sec. 18 regarding the quality of honour

[5]Anwar al Lughah regarding the quality of patience

[6]Anwar al Lughah regarding the quality of patience

[7]Anwar al Lughah regarding the quality of reversion

Back to top