Al Hakam - 27 February 2026

Does Ramadan automatically reform us?

“When in Rome, do as the Romans do.”

We’ve all heard this saying before. It basically means: when you’re in a particular place, you follow the customs and traditions of that area. You move how everyone else is moving. In simple words, you adapt.

Now let’s think about that, but through the lens of Ramadan.

When the month of Ramadan arrives, the entire atmosphere changes. The mosque feels fuller. The Holy Quran comes off the shelf more often. Our tongues become moist with the remembrance of Allah and we become more present in our religion.

Then, of course, our nights become longer. Our hearts feel softer. It’s the month

in which Allah revealed the Holy Quran to the Holy Prophetsa. A month, and an opportunity, steeped in mercy.

And naturally, we step up. We pray more and occupy ourselves with good deeds. We refrain from idle talk that we might struggle with during the rest of the year. We feel that spiritual high.

But I want you to ask yourself: Is that change really you? Or is it just the environment carrying you?

Because it’s easy to be good when everyone around you is being good. It’s easier to wake up for Tahajjud when your sleep schedule revolves around sahoor. It’s easier to open the Holy Quran when reminders

are everywhere. But what happens when Shawwal hits? When the routine goes back? When life picks up speed again?

The Holy Quran reminds us: “Nay, man is a witness against himself. Even though he puts forward his excuses.”

(Surah al-Qiyamah, Ch.75: V.15-16)

This verse undoubtedly resonates with all of us on a personal level. We know ourselves better than anyone else. We know if our repentance is sincere or seasonal.

So the million-dollar question remains: Does Ramadan automatically reform us? Or does it merely present us with the tools and leave the real work to us?

Why showing up matters

Let me give you an example easy to relate to. Imagine a person, fully invested, signs up for a gym membership. They buy the fresh outfit and the new trainers, hoping for a “new beginnings” arc. Realistically they know that they’re not going to see overnight changes. So they wait.

Then, six months go by, and one day they look in the mirror and say, “Why haven’t I changed? Why haven’t I gained muscle? Why do I look the same?” So they decide to go to the gym and “see what’s going on”.

But here’s the twist in the entire scenario that flips the script. They haven’t actually been going. They signed up. They paid the membership fee. They liked the idea

Hazrat Abu Hurairahra narrated: “Allah’s Messengersa said, ‘Fasting is a shield. So when one of you is fasting, let him not speak obscenely, nor behave ignorantly. If someone quarrels with him or abuses him, let him say, ‘I am fasting’, twice. By Him in whose hand is my soul, the smell from the mouth of one who is fasting is more pleasing to Allah the Exalted than the fragrance of musk. [Allah says,] ‘He has left his food, his drink and his desires for My sake. Fasting is for Me, and I am its reward.’ And a good deed is rewarded tenfold.’”

The Concealing of Virtue

On hearing the views of certain friends in relation to various expenses, the Prom- ised Messiahas said: “Allah the Exalted knows well that I possess such tolerance as far as food is concerned that I can very easily eat twice a day on one paisa alone. Once, I was intrigued at heart to see the extent to which a human being can bear hunger. To test this, I ate nothing for six months—I would have a morsel or two every now and then. After six months, I estimated

(Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab as-sawm, Bab fadli s-sawm, Hadith 1894) Continued on page 3

27 February

27 February 1914: On this day, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Ira received a revelation, upon which he decided to move out of the city to the open air. This was also the advice of the doctors. Following the advice of physicians, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Ira moved to the house of Hazrat Nawab Muhammad Ali Khanra, which was named “Kothi Dar-us-Salam” and was in the suburbs of Qadian. It was thought that fresh air from the countryside would help in his recovery. (Tarikh-e-Ahmadiyyat, Vol. 4, p. 470)

27 February 1922: During his visit to India, the Prince of Wales, who would later ascend to the throne as King Edward VIII of England, received a thoughtful gift from Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra – a book specially authored for him. To support the expenses associated with its printing and related costs, members of the Jamaat generously contributed one anna each. On this day, a delegation from the Jamaat had the honour of meeting the distinguished royal visitor to present this gift. The book was elegantly translated into English

This Week in History

by Hazrat Chaudhry Zafarulla Khanra. (Tarikh-e-Ahmadiyyat, Vol. 4, p. 293)

28 February

28 February 1922: Hazrat Musleh-eMaudra was in Lahore, and on this day, the principal of Dyal Singh College, Lahore, visited Huzoorra. This meeting continued for almost three hours. (Al Fazl, 6 March 1922, p. 2)

28 February 1971: On this day, the second Ahmadiyya hospital in Ghana opened in Asokore. The opening ceremony was attended by 4,000 people and the first doctor for the hospital was Dr Syed Ghulam Mujtaba. (Tarikh-e-Ahmadiyyat, Vol. 27, p. 8)

1 March

1 March 1972: On this day, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih IIIrh announced the establishment of Majlis-e-Sehat to organise sports and physical exercise for the people of Rabwah, Pakistan. Huzoorrh desired that every resident of Rabwah should exercise daily. (Tarikh-e-Ahmadiyyat, Vol. 28, p. 30)

For more details, see “Rabwah – National Centre of Sports” at alhakam.org (11 May 2018, p. 3).

2 March

2 March 1947: On this day, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra wrote a letter to MA Jinnah, saying:

“On HMG’s new declaration, Sir M Zafrullah Khan approached Sir Khizar, suggesting that at this critical juncture, he should not fail his community. Malik Sahib then asked Sir Muhammad Zafrullah Khan to come to Lahore. As I also, on my way to Sind, had to stay there for one night, Sir Muhammad came there yesterday and discussed the matter with me. Following this, last night, he had a long discourse with Malik Sahib and Qizilbash. They have agreed to resign. […] Now you have a great lever to get Muslim rights from your opponents.”

(Jinnah Papers, Vol. 1, Part I, pp. 164-165)

For further details, see “Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud’s services to the Muslim cause: Guidance and support to leaders of the Pakistan Movement” at alhakam.org (5 March 2021, p. 20).

3 - 4 March

4 March 1889: On this day, while residing in Ludhiana, the Promised Messiahas published an announcement for those who were keen to take the bai‘at. Huzooras informed people that he would be staying in Ludhiana until 25 March. (Majmua-e-Ishtiharat, Vol. 1, p. 201)

4 March 2018: On this day, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa laid the foundation stone for the new administrative block at the Baitul Futuh Mosque complex in Morden, UK. The administrative block, which was to include multi-purpose halls, offices and accommodation facilities, was being rebuilt after a fire in September 2015 had caused widespread damage at the site. (“Head of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community Lays Foundation Stone for New Administrative Block at Baitul Futuh Mosque”, pressahmadiyya.com)

5 March

On this day, Hazrat inaugurated the Nasir Mosque in Gillingham, UK. On this occasion, Huzoor held an audience with local Ahmadi Muslims. In the evening, a special reception, attended by more than 180 dignitaries and guests, was held to mark the opening of the mosque.

(“New Mosque Opened by World Muslim Leader in Gillingham”,

1 March 2014: Khalifatul Masih V World www. pressahmadiyya.com)

3 March 1907: On this day, Syed Habibullah ICS, who was the magistrate of Agra, arrived at Qadian before the Zuhr prayer. Although the Promised Messiahas was unwell, he showed great hospitality and gave adequate time to the guest.

For more details, see “Coming from every distant track: Syed Habibullah Khan Sahib visits Qadian and meets with Promised Messiah”, at alhakam.org (16 April 2021, p. 13).

5 March 1953: On this day, Master Manzur Ahmad Sahib was martyred in Baghban Pura, Lahore, Pakistan. In the atrocities against Ahmadis in Lahore, Master Manzur Sahib was the martyr who was martyred before the implementation of martial law by the government to stop planned attacks on Ahmadis. (Friday Sermon, 7 May 1999)

5 March 1990: On this day, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih IVrh was in Portugal, where Huzoorrh addressed a press conference and responded to the questions asked by the journalists. (Silsila Ahmadiyya, Vol. 4, p. 862)

Prayers for the persecuted and the protection of the world

During his Friday sermon, delivered on 20 February 2026, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, Khalifatul Masih Vaa, urged the Jamaat to pray for Ahmadis facing false allegations, the wider Muslim Ummah and the protection of innocent lives amidst the threat of global destruction. He said:

Continued from page 1

of transformation. But they’ve just been at home the whole time, expecting that simply being associated with the gym would, somehow, produce results. I’m sure we’d laugh at that, right?

But, before we laugh, we must observe this pattern deeply. Because we all know the obvious truth: a membership doesn’t change your body. In actuality, it’s the effort, the consistency, the discipline that helps us change. It’s all about showing up when you don’t feel like it. The gym is just a facility. The progress comes from the work. And Ramadan is no different.

Ramadan is akin to a spiritual training camp. It definitely provides us with the structure. The setting. The momentum. The reminders. But the results? They depend

“During these days, particularly pray for those Ahmadis who are going through the hardships of having false charges levelled against them. May Allah the Almighty create ease for our Ahmadi brothers. Remember the Muslim Ummah in your prayers as well. Pray for the world to be

on whether you actually engage, whether you push yourself, whether you carry that discipline even beyond the month.

Logically, it’s clear that we can’t expect a life changing reform in 30 days if the things we do aren’t changing our lives. We must have the intent of an active transformation. Ramadan doesn’t automatically reform a person. It allows them to reform themselves. And just like the gym, the question isn’t whether the system works. The question is much simpler: did you?

To seek mercy from the Merciful is a sign of His mercy

No doubt, this month offers a huge chance to change ourselves and strengthen our bond with God and do good for humanity. If the idea of improving even crosses your

saved from destruction as well. May Allah the Almighty safeguard the innocent people from such evils and if a war or destruction is inevitable, then may Allah the Almighty protect the innocent from it and seize the oppressors. [Amin.]”

mind, know this: it is itself a mercy from Allah. For it is He who has instilled in your heart the desire to change and live more in line with Islam.

When we read the story of Adamas, we see that it was Allah who taught him words by which he sought forgiveness (Surah alBaqarah, Ch.2: V.38). Even in this, there is a subtle but powerful lesson: when we turn to Allah, it is not entirely our own decision. It is by His grace that we are given the ability to turn to Him, to reform ourselves.

A final thought to contemplate on I want you to imagine meeting yourself, or perhaps, your potential self. The self you could become if you fully exerted your God-given faculties: the best version of yourself. Imagine, for a moment, reaching such spiritual heights that your connection

What does the word ‘Ramadan’ mean?

Discover how the word Ramadan means far more than fasting—rooted in “scorching heat,” it symbolizes a sacred fire that burns away sin, ignites spiritual transformation, and brings the cooling rain of divine mercy; read here.

Read this artcile at: www.alhakam.org

Continued from page 1

that I could extend this state of affairs to even six years. During this time, I continuously received my meals from home twice a day but I desired to keep this state of mine a secret. The difficulty that I bore in order to keep this secret was a burden that perhaps others could not bear due to hunger; I would distribute those two meals to two or three people in need. In this state, I would offer my five daily prayers in the mosque and none of the people who knew me could tell by any signs that I was eating nothing.”

with the Divine is so unbreakable and unshakable.

If you met that version of yourself, would you be inspired?

Often, the limitations we feel within are not the limits of our ability, but the laziness of our nafs. What if we are capable of becoming something greater? What if Ramadan is the training ground, the opportunity to start that transformation, to begin shaping ourselves into the version we were always meant to be?

Know this: the human being is ever a witness over their own nafs, even if they offer excuses. It is only we who know the potential of who we can be. The real question is: can we begin polishing the mirror in which we see ourselves?

(Jalees Ahmad, Al Hakam)

The duty of travellers to refrain from fasting in Ramadan: A juristic examination

Iftekhar Ahmed Ahmadiyya Archive & Research Centre

The Holy Quran, in Surah al-Baqarah, discusses the obligation of fasting during the month of Ramadan. A key question arises from verse 185 concerning the traveller:

Is refraining from fasting (fitr) a binding specification of the ruling for the traveller – whether termed an obligation (‘azima) or an obligatory concession (rukhsa wajiba) – meaning the traveller must not fast and perform makeup days (qada’) later? Or is it merely a permissible or recommended concession (rukhsa mubaha/mustahabba), leaving the fast optional?

This distinction is important to understanding the correct legal ruling.

Terminology note: In this article, fitr denotes non-observance of the fast on a given day, i.e., not fasting or breaking the fast, not the communal sunset meal commonly called iftar

Verse 184 establishes the foundational principle:

“O ye who believe! fasting is prescribed for you, as it was prescribed for those before you, so that you may guard against evil.” (Surah al-Baqarah, Ch. 2: V.184)

The term “prescribed for you” indicates a universal command. Thus, the original state (asl) is the obligation to fast. The discussion centres on interpreting verse 185 and how it modifies this initial instruction. The central point is: Is the verse to be read in its literal sense (haqiqa) or according to a non-literal reading (majaz) that posits an implied clause (idmar/taqdir)?

The Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd (d. 595/1198), in  Bidayat al-Mujtahid, frames this as follows:

“The reason for the disagreement is based on the interpretation of the words of the Exalted, ‘And whosoever of you is sick or on a journey, (let him fast the same) number of other days,’ whether the verse is taken literally […], or it is taken metaphorically, in which case the underlying implication would be: ‘[And whosoever of you is sick or on a journey] and he does not fast (fa-aftara), [only then] (let him fast the same) number of other days’ […]. Those who interpret the verse literally […] said that the obligation of the traveller is [fasting] a number of other days, because of the words of the Exalted, ‘(let him hast the same) number of other days’. Those who assumed the implied words ‘and he does not fast’ (fa-aftara) said that his obligation is a number of other days in case he does not fast. Both groups support their interpretation on the basis of traditions (athar).” (Ibn Rushd, Bidayat al-mujtahid wa-nihayat al-muqtasid, ed. Farid ‘Abd al‘Aziz al-Jundi [Cairo: Dar-Hadith, 2004], Vol. 2, pp. 57-58)

Quranic text: Ramadan fasting and ‘other days’

The relevant verses, 185 and 186 of Surah al-Baqarah, provide the textual foundation. Verse 185, following the general command to fast in verse 184, specifies the ruling for the sick and the traveller. It does not simply state that they are allowed to refrain from fasting. Instead, it prescribes a different timeframe for their fasting duty: “(let him fast the same) number of other days.” The wording functions as an assignment of when the obligation is to be discharged (“other days”), rather than as a conditional allowance that only applies if the traveller first chooses not to fast.

This verse thereby establishes two distinct periods for fulfilling the fast: (1) The “fixed number of days” (ayyaman ma‘dudat) of Ramadan applies to the general population who are resident (hadir) and healthy (salim). (2) In contrast, the “other days” (ayyamin ukhar) are designated for the sick and the traveller. The latter is presented as the alternative way in which they have to fulfil their fasting duty, not as an option alongside fasting in Ramadan.

Furthermore, the Andalusian scholar Ibn Hazm (d. 456/1064) stresses that this verse, Ch.2, V.186, is decisive (muhkam), its command regarding the traveller is general (‘amm) covering all types of journeys, and it functions to explicitly transfer the obligation to “other days,” rather than merely present an option. (Ibn Hazm, al-Muhalla bi-lathar, ed. ʻAbd al-Ghaffar Sulayman alBindari [Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya]), 1988, Vol. 4, pp. 384, 399)

The general population is commanded to fast  during Ramadan. The sick and traveller are commanded to fast an equal number of  other days. The Quran makes a distinction in when the obligation is fulfilled

for these groups.

This raises the question: How can fasting during Ramadan be considered optional for the traveller, when the Quran assigns them other days? If mere permission were intended, different wording could have been employed. The specific instruction for makeup days (qada’) on “other days” establishes this ruling as a binding obligation (‘azima) for the traveller.

Ar-Razi’s grammatical analysis: Evidence for obligation (‘azima)

Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi’s (d. 606/1210) grammatical analysis of  fa-‘iddatun, in Surah al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.185, provides significant support for the  ‘azima position. He shows the phrase can be read in two distinct grammatical cases, each suggesting the obligation (wujub) of makeup days (qada’), and thus, the necessity of refraining from fasting (fitr) during Ramadan for the sick and traveller. (Ar-Razi, at-Tafsir alkabir [Beirut: Dar Ihya’ at-Turath al-‘Arabi], 1999, Vol. 5, p. 245)

When  fa-‘iddatun is read in the nominative case (marfu‘), the verse implies: “Then upon him is [the obligation of] fasting an equal number of other days” (fa-‘alayhi sawmu ‘iddatin min ayyamin ukhar). This reading necessitates an implied “upon him” (‘alayhi) when understood literally. ArRazi states that “upon” (‘ala) here signifies obligation (wujub). The nominative reading directly emphasises the obligatory nature of  qada’, showing that making up missed days is the  primary requirement, not a consequence of choosing to refrain from fasting. (Ibid.)

Alternatively, when  fa-‘iddatan is read in the accusative case (mansub), the verse,

when understood literally, functions as a command: “Then  let him fast an equal number of other days” (fa-l-yasum ‘iddatan min ayyamin ukhar). This imperative form also underscores the compulsory nature of making up the missed days. Ar-Razi indicates that this accusative reading also signifies obligation (ijab). (Ibid.)

Importantly, whichever grammatical reading is adopted – and both are valid – the verse clearly establishes the binding nature of  qada’. This inherent, grammatically demonstrable obligation necessitates refraining from fasting (fitr) during Ramadan. The Quran does not say, “If you refrain from fasting, then make it up.” It states directly, “Your obligation is to fast an equal number of other days.” The duty of  qada’ is primary, not conditional upon fitr. (Ibid.)

This grammatical understanding is taken up by later grammarians and exegetes like Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d. 754/1344), who notes the default reading of fa-‘iddatun is nominative, implying an underlying structure: “Then upon him is [the obligation of] a number […] or: the obligation is a number, or: the ruling is a number [of other days]” (fa-‘alayhi iddatun […] aw: fa-l-wajib, aw al-hukmu ‘iddatun). (Abu Hayyan, al-Bahr al-muhit fi t-tafsir, ed. Sidqi Muhammad Jamil, Beirut: Dar al-Fikr [1992], Vol. 2, p. 184)

This construction, i.e., treating ‘a number [of days]’ (‘iddatun) as the predicate of an implied obligation, supports the reading that the traveller’s primary duty is fasting on other days (qada’), rather than fasting during the journey itself. (Ibid.)

The majority (jumhur) view: An unnecessary implication (muqaddar)

The majority of scholars (jumhur), viewing the allowance for travellers as merely a permissible or recommended concession (rukhsa mubaha/mustahabba), posit an implied phrase (muqaddar) within verse 185 of Surah al-Baqarah and thus interpret it in a figurative sense (majaz). This approach, as summarised by figures like Ibn Rushd, involves interpreting the verse by inserting “if he refrains from fasting” (faaftara) before the command to fast other days (fa-‘iddatun min ayyamin ukhar). (Ibn

Rushd, ibid.)

Ar-Razi explains this exact argument used by the jumhur, stating that their position is that the verse necessitates an ellipsis (idmar) because the implied meaning (taqdir) would be: “and he does not fast, then [upon him is] a number of other days” (fa-aftara fa-‘iddatun min ayyamin ukhar). (Ar-Razi, ibid.)

This insertion of a  muqaddar is unnecessary and forced. It appears designed to reconcile the verse with a pre-determined conclusion – that fasting during travel is optional – rather than allowing the Quranic text to speak for itself.

The argument for obligation (‘azima) requires no such addition. The necessity to refrain from fasting (fitr) for the traveller is derived directly from the literal understanding of the verse assigning them “other days,” effectively replacing the Ramadan obligation with the obligation of  qada’. The verse, as it stands, is complete and coherent.

Indeed, classical exegetes like Abu Hayyan recognise the strength of reading the text as it stands. He invokes the interpretive principle (asl) that the text should be read without assuming omitted words (la hadhf). Based on this principle, he notes that the apparent (zahir) and literal meaning of the verse directly assigns the makeup days (‘idda) as the obligation of the traveller. Importantly, Abu Hayyan points out that a necessary consequence of reading the text literally, following this rule, is that should a traveller fast during Ramadan, that fast would not suffice (lam yujzihima) to meet the obligation, leaving the requirement for makeup days firmly in place. (Abu Hayyan, ibid., p. 186)

This perspective is strongly echoed by jurists like Ibn Hazm, who emphatically rejected the insertion of such an implied condition like “in case he does not fast” (faaftara) as a forged claim with no evidence (da‘wa mawdu‘a bi-la burhan), unsupported by the explicit Quranic text. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 399)

The claim that both interpretations require a  muqaddar is incorrect. The  jumhur add words to create a permissible or recommended concession (rukhsa mubaha/mustahabba) where none is explicitly stated. The  ‘azima position,

conversely, derives the necessity to refrain from fasting (fitr) from the  literal Quranic text without additions. The obligation (‘azima) is inherent in the structure of the verse. (Ar-Razi, ibid., pp. 245-246)

Ar-Razi’s refutation of majority (jumhur) arguments

Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi not only supports the obligation (‘azima) view grammatically but also directly refutes the main arguments used by the majority (jumhur) to justify implying “in case he does not fast” (faaftara).

Al-Qaffal (d. 365/976) argued that verse 186 (“Therefore, whosoever of you is present at home in this month, let him fast therein”) establishes fasting as a universal obligation upon everyone without exception. If this is the case, then verse 185 cannot simply mean what it appears to say on its own. It must contain an implied, unstated phrase (idmar), namely, “and he does not fast” (faaftara), to make sense alongside verse 186’s blanket command.

Ar-Razi, however, responds by exposing a problem with this reasoning. If we truly read verse 186 as universally binding on everyone with no exceptions, then verse 186 itself would also need an implied phrase to exclude the sick and the traveller, since everyone agrees that they are not obligated to fast during their illness or travel. In other words, al-Qaffal’s reading creates the very same problem it tries to solve.

Ar-Razi then invokes a well-known principle of legal interpretation (qa‘ida usuliyya): when there is a conflict between reading a verse as a specification (takhsis), i.e., narrowing the scope of a general rule, and reading it as containing an unstated implication (idmar), specification is always preferred. Accordingly, verse 185 has to be understood as specifying and narrowing the general command of verses 184 and 186, defining what the traveller and the sick person is obligated to do, rather than being forced to carry an unstated hidden phrase. (Ibid., p. 246)

Similarly, Ibn Hazm countered the majority’s reliance on the general command, “Therefore, whosoever of you is present at home in this month, let him fast therein” (Ch.2: V.186). He argued that this general command is immediately qualified by the very next clause concerning the sick and the traveller, stating that Allah explicitly designated “other days” for them, thereby  transferring the obligation due to travel and negating the applicability of the initial general command to the traveller during the journey itself. (Ibn Hazm, ibid.)

Al-Wahidi (d. 468/1076), in his book atTafsir al-Basit, offered a different argument. He reasoned as follows: the obligation to make up missed fasts (qada’) only arises when someone has actually not fasted (fitr), not simply because they were sick or travelling. So, since the verse commands makeup fasting, and makeup fasting logically presupposes that one did not fast, the verse must contain a hidden, unstated phrase: “and he does not fast” (fa-aftara). Ar-Razi considers this argument “extremely weak” (wa-hadha fi ghayat assuqut), and his refutation rests on a careful reading of the verse’s actual wording. He points out that Allah did not say “upon him is the  making up of what he missed” (fa-

‘alayhi qada’u ma mada). Rather, what Allah actually said was: “upon him is the fasting of an equal number of other days” (fa-’alayhi sawmu ‘iddatin min ayyamin ukhar). This is an important distinction. The verse is simply imposing an obligation to fast on a different set of days; it is not framed as compensating for days one did not fast. And if the verse is simply saying “fast on other days instead,” this does not logically require that the non-fasting must have already occurred. Therefore, al-Wahidi’s claim that the verse inherently implies a prior nonfasting is unfounded. (Ar-Razi, ibid.)

Finally, the  jumhur cite ahadith like that reported by Hamza al-Aslamira to justify implying  fa-aftara. In this hadith, Hamzara asked the Holy Prophetsa:

“Should I fast while traveling?”, and he used to fast frequently. The Holy Prophetsa replied:

“If you wish, fast, and if you wish, do not fast.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1943)

Ar-Razi states that using such a hadith to override the direct implication of the Quran is jurisprudentially invalid, as it would constitute abrogation of the Quran by a solitary hadith (naskh al-Qur’an bikhabar al-wahid), which is impermissible. The explicit Quranic text takes precedence. (Ar-Razi, ibid.)

Quranic evidence: Divine intent for ease

Beyond refuting the majority (jumhur) view, the Holy Quran offers direct textual support for  fitr, i.e., refraining from fasting, being the obligation (‘azima) for the traveller. A key piece of evidence lies in the theological statement within verse 186:

“Allah desires ease for you and He desires not hardship for you” (Surah al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.186)

In his analysis, Abu Hayyan connects the divine intention for ease (yusr) mentioned in the verse specifically to the concession to the traveller, explaining that refraining the fast (fitr) aligns with this intended ease, while fasting during the journey represents the hardship (‘usr) that Allah does not desire for them. (Abu Hayyan, ibid., p. 199)

It has been reported from notable early authorities, including ‘Alira, Ibn ‘Abbasra, Mujahid and ad-Dahhak, that they specifically identified the “ease” (yusr) mentioned in this verse with refraining from fasting (fitr) while travelling, and the “hardship” (‘usr) with fasting during the journey. This directly links the Quranic statement about desiring ease to the specific act of the traveller refraining from fasting, suggesting that refraining from fasting (fitr) is the divinely intended path of ease for them. (Ibid.)

Building on this understanding of divine ease (yusr), ar-Razi convincingly argues that this declaration of divine intent must be understood in the immediate context of the preceding discussion about fasting obligations. The “ease” (yusr) Allah desires for the sick and traveller is specifically not to fast (fitr) during Ramadan and fulfil their obligation through makeup days (qada’)

later. Conversely, the “hardship” (‘usr) Allah does not desire is compelling them to fast during Ramadan despite their condition. This interpretation aligns perfectly with the  ‘azima position, indicating a divine preference for the traveller not to fast during the journey itself, but rather to utilise the concession provided. (Ar-Razi, ibid., p. 245)

Sunnah and Companion practice: Affirming obligation

The Sunnah and the understanding of the Companionsra further affirm the position that  fitr during Ramadan travel is an obligation (‘azima), not merely an option.

Most telling is the Holy Prophet’ssa categorical dissociation of righteousness from fasting during travel:

“It is not of righteousness (al-birr) to fast while travelling.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1946)

While the jumhur often limit this to hardship, the fundamental principle of Islamic jurisprudence and Quranic exegesis “consideration is given to the general wording, not just the specific occasion” (al-‘ibratu bi-‘umum al-lafz la bi-khusus assabab) – strongly emphasised by authorities like Ibn Hazm in this context – suggests broader application, negating righteousness (al-birr) from the act of fasting during travel itself. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 400)

Furthermore, the statement attributed to ‘Abd ar-Rahman ibn ‘Awfra underscores this:

“The one who fasts while traveling is like the one who refrains from fasting while resident.” (Sunan an-Nasa’i, Hadith 2285)

This powerful analogy equates the perceived piety of fasting in travel with violating the obligation of refraining from fasting when resident, indicating that the  rukhsa is required (wajiba). Ibn Hazm notably considered the chains for this statement to be rigorously authentic (fi ghayat as-sihha). (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 404)

Hazrat Aishara was also reported to have explicitly forbidden fasting during Ramadan travel. Abu Salama b. ‘Abd arRahman b. ‘Awf narrated from his father, ‘Abd ar-Rahman b. ‘Awfra, who said:

“‘Aishara, the Mother of the Believers, forbade me from fasting Ramadan during travel.” (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 403)

This direct prohibition (nahatni) from Hazrat Aishara adds significant weight to the position that refraining from fasting (fitr) was considered the required practice.

Further Prophetic evidence underscores this obligation, using language that indicates the removal of the duty itself. The Holy Prophetsa is reported to have said regarding the traveller:

but that the requirement itself is temporarily removed by divine decree, reinforcing the position that refraining from (fitr) becomes the designated and required course during the journey.

The following actions and explicit statements of key Companions like Hazrat Umarra, Ibn ‘Umarra, Ibn ‘Abbasra, Abu Hurairahra, and Abu Sa‘id al-Khudrira confirm this understanding.

Ibn ‘Umarra stated:

“If he fasts, he must make it up.” (anNawawi, al-Majmu‘ sharh al-Muhadhdhab, ed. Muhammad Najib al-Muti‘I (Jeddah: Maktabat al-Irshad), 1980, Vol. 6, p. 269)

He further underscored the gravity of insisting on fasting by using a powerful analogy regarding this concession:

“It [the concession] is only a charity that Allah has bestowed upon you. Do you see? If you were to give a charity and it was rejected back to you, would you not become angry?” (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 403)

Ibn Hazm noted that this implies ‘Ibn Umarra viewed fasting during Ramadan travel as something potentially angering to Allah, a description not used for merely permissible acts. His disapproval was also practical. When a woman travelling with him insisted on fasting, Ibn ‘Umarra reportedly told her, “Do not accompany us (la tashabina)!” (Ibn Hazm, ibid.)

Moreover, Ibn ‘Abbasra said:

“Fasting [in Ramadan while traveling] does not fulfil the obligation.” (an-Nawawi, ibid.)

Furthermore, Ibn ‘Abbasra explicitly described the allowance to refrain from fasting during travel as a binding ruling (‘azima):

“Refraining from fasting in Ramadan during travel is a binding ruling (‘azma).”

(Ibn Hazm, ibid.)

He also advised taking the path of ease Allah intended, contrasting it with hardship. When asked about fasting during travel, he reportedly said:

“[When it comes to] ease and hardship, take the ease of Allah the Exalted.” (Ibid.)

These statements underscore his view that accepting the concession of fitr was not merely permissible but the required course, aligning with Allah’s intent for ease (yusr).

Hazrat Umarra took decisive action:

ibid., p. 186)

Consistent with this view, Abu Hurairahra instructed his own son who had fasted during travel, as reported:

Al-Muharrar b. Abi Hurairah said: “I fasted [in] Ramadan during travel, so Abu Hurairah ordered me to redo it when I was back home with my family and to make it up, so I made it up.” (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 404)

This demonstrates his clear view that the fast performed during travel was invalid for fulfilling the Ramadan obligation.

Abu Sa‘id al-Khudrira expressed his strong disapproval of a traveller insisting on fasting by saying:

“If he were to die, I would not pray on him [i.e., I would not perform the funeral prayer for him].” (Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Matalib al-ʻaliya bi-zawaʼid al-Masanid al-thamaniya, ed. ʻAbd Allah b. ʻAbd alMuhsin b. Ahmad al-Tuwayjiri, Riyadh: Dār al-ʻAsima; Dar al-Ghayth, 1998, Vol. 6, p. 87)

This shows the gravity of disregarding the allowance.

Reflecting the understanding that the Holy Prophet’ssa final instructions were decisive, the esteemed  tabi‘i Ibn Shihab azZuhri (d. 124/742) stated:

son Muhammad al-Baqir (d. 114/733) and al-Qasim b. Muhammad b. Abi Bakr (d. after 105/723) – grandson of the first Caliph, Abu Bakrra, and also one of the seven fuqaha’ of Medina, all of whom disapproved of and/ or prohibited fasting during Ramadan while travelling, demonstrating a strong consensus among the succeeding generation.

Addressing Hamza al-Aslami’sra hadith of choice

The majority (jumhur) use certain ahadith to argue for the permissibility of fasting during Ramadan travel. A primary example they cite is the hadith reported by Hamza b. ‘Amr al-Aslamira:

“If you wish, fast, and if you wish, refrain from fasting.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1943)

“Indeed, Allah Almighty has lifted from the traveller the fast”. (Jami‘ at-Tirmidhi, Hadith 715)

This direct statement, employing the verb wada‘a, meaning lifted, removed or relieved of, strongly indicates that the very obligation of fasting during Ramadan is suspended for the traveller. It signifies not merely a permission to refrain from fasting,

“He ordered a man who fasted [in] Ramadan while traveling to make it up”. (‘Abd ar-Razzaq, Al-Musannaf, ed. Habib ar-Rahman al-Aʻzami (Johannesburg: alMajlis al-‘Ilmi, 1983), Vol. 4, p. 270)

Abu Hurairahra also held this view, stating as a general principle:

“Whoever fasts during travel, he must make up (qada’) [the fasts].” (Abu Hayyan,

“Refraining from fasting (fitr) was the latter of the two practices [regarding fasting or not fasting while travelling] from the Messengersa of Allah, and one takes from the command of the Messengersa of Allah the later of his commands, whichever is later.”

(Ibn Hazm, ibid.)

This important principle highlights that the Holy Prophet’ssa final ruling emphasising  fitr implies abrogation (naskh) of any earlier permission.

The leading tabi‘i Sa‘id b. al-Musayyib (d. 94/715), one of the seven fuqaha’ of Medina, directly countered the argument of personal strength, which is often used to justify fasting during travel. When asked by a man if he should fast while travelling, asserting his ability to do so (inni aqwa ‘ala dhalik), Sa‘id replied:

“No, [...] the Messengersa of Allah was stronger than you, yet he used to shorten [the prayer] and refrain from fasting.” (Ibid.)

This response firmly grounds the ruling in the Holy Prophet’ssa established Sunnah, dismissing personal capacity as a relevant factor for overriding the concession.

This understanding continued among other prominent tabi‘un, such as Sa‘id b. Jubayr (d. 95/714), Ibrahim an-Nakha‘i (d. 96/714), ‘Ata’ b. Abi Rabah (d. 114/732) –who explicitly disallowed the obligatory fast during travel while permitting voluntary ones, ‘Urwa b. az-Zubayr (d. 94/713) – who mandated qada‘ and was another one of the seven fuqaha’ of Medina, ash-Sha‘bi (d. 103/723), Zayn al-‘Abidin (d. 94/712) – the great-grandson of the Holy Prophetsa, his

The jumhur interpret this as a general authorisation applicable even during Ramadan. However, this interpretation faces several jurisprudential challenges: Firstly, the hadith’s wording is general (‘amm), encompassing fasting during travel without specifying Ramadan, whereas verse 185 is specific (khass) and addresses the traveller’s Ramadan duty by directing it to “other days” (ayyamin ukhar). According to the established principle of takhsis al‘amm bi-l-khass, when a general text and a specific text address the same subject but the specific text carries a distinct ruling, the specific governs its own domain. Since verse 185 provides an explicit directive for the specific case of Ramadan travel – mandating that the traveller fast on other days – the hadith’s general permission of choice cannot override this specific Quranic ruling. The hadith therefore pertains to voluntary or non-Ramadan fasts, while the Quran’s explicit directive regarding Ramadan travel remains determinative.

Secondly, the reliance on tark al-istifsal, i.e., arguing that the Holy Prophet’ssa general reply encompasses Ramadan because he did not ask Hamzara for specifics, does not settle the matter. The principle of tark al-istifsal holds that when a questioner poses a general question and the Holy Prophetsa provides a general answer without requesting clarification, the answer is taken to cover the full scope of the question. However, this principle operates on the assumption that no contextual indicator (qarina) narrows the scope of the question. In Hamza’sra case, such a qarina exists: the narration itself describes him as someone who used to fast frequently, a characterisation pointing to a habitual devotional practice rather than the Ramadan obligation. This contextual detail provides strong grounds for understanding the question as pertaining to the maintenance of his voluntary fasting habit during travel, not to the communal Ramadan duty, which would not ordinarily occasion such an individual inquiry. The Holy Prophet’ssa permissive reply, “if you wish, fast, and if you wish, refrain from fasting,” fits naturally as an answer to a question about voluntary practice, where choice is indeed appropriate. The tark alistifsal argument, therefore, cannot be invoked without first accounting for this contextual indicator, which significantly limits the question’s likely scope. Moreover, even if one were to set aside this qarina and

treat the reply as general in its fullest sense, the resulting generality would still remain subject to specification (takhsis) by verse 185, as established above.

Thirdly, usuli methodology requires that reconciliation (al-jam‘) between texts be attempted before resorting to abrogation (naskh). The jumhur claim to achieve reconciliation by reading both texts as granting a choice during Ramadan travel: the Quran assigns other days in case the traveller refrains from fasting and the hadith confirms that fasting is also permissible. However, this form of reconciliation comes at a significant cost. It effectively reduces the Quran’s specific directive [“(let him fast the same) number of other days”] from an operative command defining the traveller’s obligation to a mere conditional permission that applies only if the traveller happens to choose fitr. On this reading, the Quranic verse’s independent force is stripped away. It ceases to prescribe anything and instead becomes dependent on a prior voluntary act that the verse itself never mentions. This is not genuine reconciliation but the subordination of one text to the other. A more methodologically sound reconciliation, one that preserves the full operative meaning of both texts, is achieved through takhsis: the hadith establishes a general permission of choice for fasting during travel, applicable to voluntary and non-Ramadan fasts, while the

Prophet’ssa permissive answer addressed that specific concern. The permissive answer, therefore, cannot be straightforwardly extended to the Ramadan obligation. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 398)

Having established above that the hadith most likely pertains to voluntary fasting and not the Ramadan obligation, a further, concessive argument may be advanced: even if one were to accept, for the sake of argument, that this hadith pertains to Ramadan travel, the jumhur’s interpretation still overlooks a significant detail in another version of this incident narrated in Sahih Muslim

“It is a concession (rukhsa) from Allah, so whoever takes it, it is good (hasan), and whoever loves to fast, then there is no sin on him (fa-la junaha ‘alayhi).” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1121e)

The wording here draws a clear distinction between the two options. Accepting the concession and not fasting is described with the commendatory term hasan, which implies positive merit. Fasting, by contrast, is merely declared free from sin (la junaha ‘alayhi). In both Quranic and juristic usage, the expression la junaha consistently functions to lift a potential prohibition or apprehension of wrongdoing, rather than to affirm the merit of an act. Applied here, the same linguistic function implies that fasting during travel was the act requiring reassurance of permissibility, not refraining from fasting. The resulting hierarchy –commendation (hasan) for refraining from fasting and mere permissibility (la junaha) for fasting – suggests only the absence of prohibition for fasting, not that it fulfils the specific obligation or reward of Ramadan, thereby supporting the view that accepting the concession is the primary, rewardable act (rukhsa wajiba).

Refuting arguments from ‘no censure’ and the conquest journey

In addition to the hadith of choice, the jumhur also point to narrations describing Companions travelling with the Holy Prophetsa where some fasted and others broke their fast without mutual censure (la ya‘ibu). An example is the report from Anasra:

“Indeed, the Companions of the Messengersa of Allah used to travel, and neither the one fasting would find fault with the one refraining from fasting, nor the one refraining from fasting with the one fasting.” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1118b)

Quran specifies the ruling for the particular case of Ramadan travel, where the traveller is directed to fast on other days. Neither text is set aside or reduced to redundancy. The hadith governs its domain and the Quran governs its own.

Furthermore, Ibn Hazm critiqued the versions of this tradition that grant an unrestricted choice during Ramadan travel, raising both chain-based (isnad) and contextual (matn) objections. On the chain-based level, he identified weaknesses in the transmission paths of those versions that explicitly mention Ramadan in their wording, finding their reliability diminished compared to the base narration, which contains no such specification. The addition of a Ramadan context in these weaker versions cannot, therefore, be treated as established. On the contextual level, Ibn Hazm reinforced the point about Hamza’sra devotional character by drawing on the specific description of him as one who maintained constant fasting (asrada assawm). He argued that this description marks a pattern of supererogatory devotion, an individual practice exceeding the norm, and therefore points to a question about voluntary fasting rather than the universally observed Ramadan duty. This strongly suggests that his question concerned whether he should maintain his voluntary fasting habit during travel and the Holy

Finally, some proponents of the jumhur’s position claim that this hadith post-dates the revelation of verse 185, arguing that it therefore modifies or effectively abrogates the Quranic directive. This claim faces two difficulties. First, the precise chronology of this incident relative to the verse’s revelation has not been definitively established. Second, even if the hadith were shown to post-date the verse, a solitary report (hadith ahad) cannot abrogate or override a Quranic ruling. The jumhur might respond that they are not claiming outright abrogation (naskh) but rather specification (takhsis) or clarification (bayan) of the Quran by the hadith. However, verse 185 already addresses the specific case of the traveller during Ramadan and assigns a determinate ruling – fasting on other days. There is no ambiguity or generality in the verse’s treatment of Ramadan travel that requires further specification or clarification by an external text. To use a solitary report to render this explicit Quranic directive inoperative for the very case it was revealed to address is, in substance, abrogation, regardless of the terminology employed. Furthermore, the hadith’s own wording, using la junaha for fasting, as discussed above, reads more naturally as a concession operating within the Quranic framework than as an abrogation of it.

The jumhur argue that this would demonstrate general permissibility of fasting during Ramadan travel. This conclusion, however, does not follow from the evidence. It is important to note, first, that this narration describes the Companions’ general travel practice, “they used to travel” (kanu yusafirun), without specifying that these journeys took place during Ramadan. The fasting and refraining from fasting it describes may well pertain to voluntary fasting during travel at other times, making it irrelevant to the specific question of the Ramadan obligation. Moreover, even if Ramadan were assumed, the mere absence of mutual censure is a descriptive observation about interpersonal conduct, not a normative legal pronouncement establishing optionality. The absence of open reproach among individuals does not establish that both practices were equally valid before Allah. Several factors could account for this: some Companions may not yet have received the final ruling, others may have exercised forbearance in avoiding public correction, or these events may predate the Holy Prophet’ssa definitive later commands on the matter. Drawing a legal ruling of permissibility from the silence of individuals would be an argument from absence, which cannot override the positive textual evidence from the Quran and the Holy Prophet’ssa explicit statements.

Another significant event cited by the jumhur is the Holy Prophet’ssa journey for the Conquest of Mecca. They highlight his initial fasting during this journey as proof that fasting during Ramadan travel is permissible, overlooking the significance of his later action. As narrated in Sahih alBukhari and Sahih Muslim

“The Messengersa of Allah went out in the month of Ramadan for the Conquest of Mecca, and he proceeded until he reached al-Kadid, then he broke his fast, and ordered the people not to fast.” (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir alQur’an al-‘azim, ed. Sami b. Muhammad asSalama [Riyadh: Dar Tiba li-n-Nashr wa-tTawziʻ], 1999, Vol. 1, p. 503)

The decisive point is not that the Holy Prophetsa initially fasted, but that he subsequently broke his fast and explicitly ordered others to do so (amara an-nasa bil-fitr). The initial fasting, whatever its basis, was superseded by this definitive public command during the same journey. This command established fitr as the expected

and required course, supporting the ruling of obligation (‘azima). The jumhur’s attempt to restrict this command solely to the context of impending battle constitutes an unfounded specification (takhsis), limiting the Holy Prophet’ssa general order to refrain from fasting to a particular military context without any textual evidence for such a restriction. This contradicts the established principle that consideration is given to the general wording, not the specific occasion (al-‘ibratu bi-‘umum al-lafz la bi-khusus assabab). The Holy Prophet’ssa command was phrased in general terms, “he ordered the people to refrain from fasting,” and there is no indication in the narration that this order was conditioned upon the imminence of battle.

Indeed, when some persisted in fasting despite this command, the Holy Prophetsa responded by characterising them as:

“Those are the disobedient ones.” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1114a)

Jurists like Ibn Hazm viewed this designation as a definitive statement establishing fitr as obligatory (fard) for the traveller, rendering continued fasting after the command an act of disobedience (ma‘siya). The jumhur’s attempt to limit this designation to the specific battle context faces the same objection outlined above: the Holy Prophet’ssa words, “those are the disobedient ones,” are a general characterisation of those who refused the command to refrain from fasting, and restricting it to combat situations requires a limitation unsupported by the text. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 399)

Ibn Hazm further emphasised that the Holy Prophet’ssa own action of refraining from fasting while travelling in Ramadan serves as the definitive interpretation of Allah’s command in verse 185, he being the one most knowledgeable of divine intent and the source from whom the ruling must be taken. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 395)

Addressing further hadith contentions

Further ahadith presented by the majority (jumhur) to support optional fasting also fail to negate the obligation (‘azima) of fitr for the traveller.

One such narration is from Jabirra b. ‘Abd Allah:

to the man’s specific condition. Again, according to the established principle that consideration is given to the general wording, not the specific occasion (al-‘ibratu bi-‘umum al-lafz la bi-khusus as-sabab), the Holy Prophet’ssa negation of righteousness from fasting during travel carries general applicability. The specific occasion, i.e., the sight of a man in distress, prompted the statement, but does not limit its legal scope. This implies that accepting the rukhsa of fitr is the correct and righteous course for the traveller, and that fasting during travel, regardless of the traveller’s physical state, falls outside the category of birr

The  jumhur also cite the hadith of Abu ad-Darda’ra:

“The Messengersa of Allah was on a journey and saw a crowd and a man who was being shaded. He asked, ‘What is this?’ They said, ‘A fasting person.’ He said, ‘It is not of righteousness (al-birr) to fast while traveling.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1946)

The jumhur interpret this statement as limited to cases of extreme hardship, arguing that the Holy Prophetsa negated righteousness only because the man in question had reached a state of visible distress. However, the Holy Prophet’ssa words are formulated as a general proposition: “It is not of righteousness to fast while traveling” (laysa min al-birr as-sawmu fi s-safar). He did not say, “It is not of righteousness to fast when it causes you such difficulty,” nor did he qualify his statement by reference

“We went out with the Messengersa of Allah in the month of Ramadan during intense heat […] and none among us was fasting except the Messengersa of Allah and ‘Abd Allah b. Rawahara.” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1122a)

They argue that the Holy Prophet’ssa own fasting during this Ramadan journey demonstrates the permissibility of fasting during Ramadan travel. However, this argument requires examination. Ibn Hazm questioned whether the fast the Holy Prophetsa and ‘Abd Allah b. Rawahara observed on this occasion was necessarily the obligatory Ramadan fast or a voluntary fast undertaken during the month of Ramadan. Within the framework of the ‘azima position, the traveller’s Ramadan obligation is transferred to other days. Accordingly, any fast a traveller undertakes during the journey, even in the month of Ramadan, would be voluntary rather than a fulfilment of the Ramadan duty. The narration itself does not specify the nature of the fast, and the fact that the overwhelming majority of the Companions were not fasting is itself noteworthy, suggesting that fitr was already the prevailing practice among them. Moreover, even if the fast were understood as a Ramadan fast, this incident is situated chronologically before the Holy Prophet’ssa later, definitive commands establishing fitr as the required practice, including the command during the Conquest journey and the designation of persistent fasters as “disobedient” (al-‘usat). Following az-Zuhri’s principle that one takes from the Holy Prophet’ssa commands the later of them, this earlier practice would be considered superseded (mansukh) by the later instructions. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 397)

Finally, a narration from Sunan adDaraqutni concerning ‘A’ishara fasting and completing prayers during Ramadan travel faces serious reliability challenges on both levels of hadith criticism. Regarding the chain of transmission (isnad), the narrator ‘Ala’ b. Zuhayr has been subject to criticism by hadith scholars, and there are well-established doubts about whether ‘Abd ar-Rahman b. al-Aswad actually heard from ‘A’ishara directly, introducing a probable discontinuity (inqita‘) in the chain. Regarding the content (matn), the narration mentions an ‘umra performed in Ramadan, a detail that sits uneasily with the established records of ‘A’isha’sra pilgrimages and raises questions about the report’s overall accuracy.

Given these combined weaknesses in both chain and content, this narration cannot be reliably adduced as evidence for the permissibility of fasting during Ramadan travel. (Sunan ad-Daraqutni, 2293)

Obligatory concession (rukhsa wajiba) for the traveller

The preceding analysis has established, through Quranic text, Prophetic statements and Companion practice, that fitr during Ramadan travel functions as the traveller’s reformulation of the obligation (‘azima). This conclusion is further reinforced by a recognised principle in Islamic jurisprudence: that of the obligatory concession (rukhsa wajiba). According to this principle, accepting a divinely granted concession (rukhsa) is not always merely permissible (mubaha) or recommended (mustahabba). Rather, when the conditions warranting the concession are met, accepting it becomes obligatory (wajib). In the case of travel during Ramadan, where the Quran itself transfers the traveller’s fasting duty to other days and declares that Allah desires ease for His servants, refusing the concession amounts to rejecting a divinely ordained arrangement.

The Holy Prophetsa underscored the importance of accepting concessions, stating:

“Indeed, Allah loves that His concessions (rukhas) be accepted, just as He loves that His obligations (‘aza’im) be fulfilled.” (Ibn Hibban, al-Musnad as-sahih, ed. Muhammad ‘Ali Sunmiz; Khalis Ay Damir, Beirut: Dar Ibn Hazm, 2012, Vol. 5, p. 474)

Al-Mundhiri graded the chain (isnad) of this hadith as good (hasan). The wording is significant: it does not merely permit acceptance of concessions but declares that Allah loves their acceptance in the same manner as He loves the fulfilment of obligations. This places the acceptance of applicable concessions on the same plane of divine expectation as the performance of standard duties. Specifically, regarding Ramadan travel, the Holy Prophetsa commanded:

“It is upon you to adhere to Allah’s concession which He has granted you.” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1115c)

The imperative form ‘alaykum bi, a construction that denotes binding instruction in Arabic usage, makes this a clear directive, not a mere suggestion or recommendation.

Moreover, specific versions of the laysa min al-birr incident include the explicit command “so accept it!” (fa-qbaluha). Ibn Hazm argued forcefully that this direct command (amr) transforms the concession into a mandated obligation (rukhsa

muftarada), reinforcing the duty to accept Allah’s ordained ease. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 401)

Ibn ‘Umarra further emphasised the gravity of refusing this concession. When a man claimed he was physically capable of fasting during travel, Ibn ‘Umarra did not engage with the claim of personal strength but responded with a Prophetic warning:

the phrase “And fasting is good for you” (wa-an tasumu khayrun lakum) in verse 185, claiming it endorses fasting during Ramadan travel as preferable. This interpretation detaches the phrase from its specific context within the verse. Two main lines of reasoning refute this misuse:

Abu Tu‘ma narrated to us that he said: I was with Ibn ‘Umar when a man came to him and said: “O Abu ‘Abd ar-Rahman, I am capable of fasting while traveling.” Ibn ‘Umarra said: “I heard the Messengersa of Allah say: ‘He who does not accept Allah’s concession, the weight of his sin will be like the mountains of ‘Arafa.’” (Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, ed. Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, Cairo: Dar al-Hadith, Vol. 5, p. 51)

The context in which Ibn ‘Umarra deployed this hadith is itself instructive. The man’s claim of personal strength, “I am capable of fasting while traveling,” is precisely the reasoning many use to justify fasting during Ramadan travel. Ibn ‘Umar’sra response dismisses personal capacity as irrelevant to the ruling and redirects the matter to the acceptance or rejection of a divine concession, with a severe warning of sin attached to refusal. Under genuine travel conditions, therefore, accepting this concession by refraining from fasting is not simply an easier option. It is the divinely intended, and thus required, action.

Wa-an tasumu khayrun lakum: Correct contextual understanding

The majority (jumhur) often misapply

Firstly, Ibn Hazm argues strongly that this phrase is misapplied entirely to the traveller. He explains that it relates specifically to the provision regarding fidya for those who could fast only with extreme difficulty (wa-‘ala lladhina yutiqunahu) mentioned earlier in verse 185. That context, involving a choice between fasting with great difficulty or offering fidya, is distinct from the traveller’s situation, which involves the transfer of the fasting obligation to makeup days (qada’). The phrase “And fasting is good for you” addresses those who face the fidya option and encourages them that fasting, despite their difficulty, is the better of the two alternatives available to them. Applying this phrase, which is textually situated within the fidya discussion, to the traveller’s entirely different legal scenario is, according to Ibn Hazm, a distortion (tahrif) that twists the Quran’s meaning. While the understanding of the historical application of the fidya provision varies among scholars, Ibn Hazm’s core point rests on the phrase’s undeniable textual link to the fidya context within verse 185, making its application outside that specific scenario incorrect. (Ibn Hazm, ibid., p. 393)

Secondly, even if one were to consider the phrase applicable beyond the fidya context, as a general exhortation to fast, it still does not support fasting during travel. Verse 185 addresses distinct groups and assigns each a specific obligation. For the healthy resident, who is obligated by verse 186 to fast during the month itself, “fasting is good for you” naturally refers to fasting during

Ramadan. For the sick and the traveller, whose obligation is modified to qada’ on “other days” (ayyamin ukhar), “fasting is good for you” pertains to their own assigned duty, that is, fasting on those other days. The phrase wa-an tasumu khayrun lakum, read within this framework, encourages each group to fulfil its respective obligation diligently. It encourages the traveller to fulfil the obligation of qada’ later, not to fast during the journey in place of the obligation that has been transferred from them.

Both lines of reasoning demonstrate that using wa-an tasumu khayrun lakum to justify fasting during Ramadan travel is incorrect. The phrase, whether understood within its immediate fidya context or as broader exhortation, does not contradict the obligation (‘azima) ruling derived from the command of qada’ for the traveller.

Conclusion: The obligation of fitr for the traveller

The interpretation of Surah al-Baqarah, verse 185, regarding the traveller’s fast in Ramadan distinguishes between taking the text literally (haqiqa) or implying unstated conditions (majaz). This analysis demonstrates that the position of ‘azima, where refraining from fasting (fitr) becomes the modified obligation requiring makeup days (qada’), aligns directly with the Quran’s plain and literal meaning. The verse assigns travellers “other days,” a structural and grammatical directive, as demonstrated through ar-Razi’s analysis of the nominative and accusative readings of fa-‘iddatun, reinforced by the principle of divine ease (yusr) mentioned in verse 186 and supported by the interpretive rule, upheld by Abu Hayyan and Ibn Hazm, that the text should be read without assuming omitted words.

This Quranic understanding is strongly

supported by the Sunnah and the practice of the early Muslims (salaf). Prophetic statements negating the righteousness (albirr) of fasting during travel, the definitive later commands establishing fitr as the final ruling, as emphasised by az-Zuhri’s principle that one takes from the Holy Prophet’ssa commands the later of them, and the consistent understanding and actions of prominent Companions and tabi‘un who mandated qada’ or deemed the fast invalid (la yujzi’), all point to fitr being required. The principle of rukhsa wajiba, emphasising the obligation to accept Allah’s concessions, further solidifies this view.

Conversely, the common view of a permissible or recommended concession (rukhsa mubaha/mustahabba) relies on an unnecessary textual insertion (muqaddar/ mudmar), critiqued by both ar-Razi and Ibn Hazm, and on interpretations of ahadith that overlook established principles: the precedence of the specific (khass) Quranic text over general (‘amm) narrations through takhsis, the proper methodology of reconciliation (al-jam‘) that preserves rather than neutralises the operative force of each text and significant distinctions within the ahadith themselves, such as the hierarchy between hasan and la junaha in the Sahih Muslim version. Furthermore, applying waan tasumu khayrun lakum to the traveller detaches the phrase from its specific textual context within verse 185.

Therefore, the collective evidence firmly concludes that fitr for the traveller during Ramadan is an obligation, regardless of whether it is called ‘azima or rukhsa wajiba It is the modified divine requirement, replacing the duty to fast in Ramadan with the duty to perform qada’ on other days, reflecting divine wisdom and mercy.

NEWS National Peace Symposium held in Georgia

Hibatul Hay Sadiyya Ata Secretary Tabligh, Lajna Imaillah Georgia

Lajna Imaillah Georgia held the 2nd National Women’s Peace Symposium on 8 February 2026 at the Gino Seaside Hotel in Tbilisi.

With this year’s theme, “Women and Interfaith Harmony”, Lajna Imaillah Georgia welcomed 70 attendees, which included 56 external guests from different faiths, backgrounds, cultures and professions, including leaders of different faiths, representatives of the German embassy and the Qatar embassy, journalists, politicians, academics, charity representatives and members from the local communities. The guests were given a tour through an Islam exhibition and had the opportunity to browse through a bookstall with the Jamaat literature in Georgian, English, Russian and Arabic languages.

The event started with a recitation from the Holy Quran, followed by a

short introduction of the Jamaat and Lajna Imaillah. This was followed by some greetings from the President of the International Women’s Association, Mrs Maria Fischer; Bishop Rusudan Gotsiridze of the Evangelical Baptist Church in Georgia; and Rebecca Linnhoff, cultural attaché of the German embassy.

The highlight of the evening was the speeches by the panel speakers. The speakers included Pastor Irina Soley of the Evangelical Lutheran Church; Mrs Ilona Levinets, co-founder of the Progressive Judaism Centre Dor L’Dor Georgia; Dr Tamar Grdzelidze, professor of Religious Studies at Ilia State University; and Khola Hübsch Sahiba, German Ahmadi Muslim journalist.

After the speeches, there was a quick feedback round, followed by dinner, during which guests had the opportunity for dialogue and to exchange ideas and ask

questions. The points discussed during these conversations included, “Is it obligatory for Muslim women to observe purdah?”, “Equality of men and women in Islam”, “Can peace be achieved by such programmes?”, “Jesus in India”, “The Promised Messiahas”, “Why is there a need for a women’s organisation such as Lajna Imaillah?” and “Whether Islam rejects other religions?”

Maia Rizhvadze said:

“As an ethnic Georgian Muslim, the symposium was motivational for me. It showcased how to build bridges between different religions.”

Natia Kodiashvili said:

“It is my first time at the symposium and I think it is very important, since we need peace. I am happy to be here.”

Nestan Ananidze, a Georgian human rights lawyer, said:

“It was a nice and interesting symposium, which was well organised. I really enjoyed

the speeches; they were inspiring and to me, it was a safe space to express our thoughts on that matter.”

Ilona Levinets, a speaker at the symposium, said:

“I am a member of the Peace Synagogue here in Georgia. It was a warm atmosphere today and felt like home. Everyone was able to express themselves.”

Dr Tamar Grdzelidze, Professor of Religious Studies, said:

“It was interesting and inspiring to see women of different religions come together.”

Mrs Maria Fischer, President of the International Women’s Organisation, said:

“I liked that certain parts of the Holy Quran were explained, which are usually not clear to others. I appreciate that the roles of women were explained. I have been to the General Peace Symposium a few years ago and this one was different, since it was organised by women for women.”

Ahmadiyyat in the West: Conversion in America and religious unity in Berlin (1926)

53 new converts

Between October 1925 and December 1925, a total of fifty-three American men and women, residing in various cities across the United States, entered the fold of Islam Ahmadiyyat. Some of these individuals accepted the faith of Islam through correspondence, while others embraced this pure religion as a result of the dedicated missionary efforts of American Ahmadi preachers.

Missionary efforts in America

Among our missionaries, the services of Sheikh Ahmad Din of St. Louis, Sheikh Karam Ilahi of Indianapolis, and Sheikh Mustafa of New York City are particularly noteworthy. These friends are carrying out the work of Islamic propagation with great diligence, devotion, and self-sacrifice.

Sheikh Karam Ilahi and Sheikh Ahmad Din frequently travel beyond their own localities to nearby towns and villages for the preaching of Islam.

Majlis-e-Shura

Sheikh Ahmad Din, in fact, is presently away on such a preaching tour. Upon his return, I intend to convene a special gathering of the Ahmadis of this city, wherein consultation will be sought regarding the future means and methods through which the propagation of Islam may be further expanded. It is hoped that this Majlis-e-Shura (consultative assembly) will strengthen and invigorate our missionary endeavours.

Conversion of an enthusiastic student

Among these fifty-three new converts is a particularly passionate young man whose Islamic name has been given as Muhammad Latif. He is a native of the Philippine Islands

and a graduate of Glasgow. At present, he is pursuing studies at the Divinity College of the University of Chicago. His original intention had been to qualify as a Doctor of Divinity (DD) and thereafter serve in the propagation of Christianity.

From Christian divinity to Islamic mission

However, when he came to hear about our mission of Islam Ahmadiyyat, he began attending our gatherings. After participating in only two such gatherings, he became convinced of the truth of the Islamic message. He has since commenced a thorough study of our literature and now aspires to become an Islamic missionary himself.

He states that he will strive with all his ability in the propagation of Islam and in the refutation of Christianity. After accepting Islam Ahmadiyyat, he withdrew from the divinity course and instead enrolled in English Literature.

Social and financial trials

Owing to his acceptance of Islam, Muhammad Latif was compelled to relinquish his employment. Furthermore, the landlord of the residence in which he had been living issued him a strict notice to vacate the premises within twenty-four hours and treated him with considerable harshness.

Despite these trials, by the grace of God, he has demonstrated steadfastness, perseverance, and a true Islamic spirit in every respect. Friends are requested to pray that Allah the Almighty may grant him steadfastness in faith.

Five-year work

It has now been five years since the establishment of the mission of Islam Ahmadiyyat in America. During this period, the nature and extent of the work accomplished have continued to appear before friends and supporters through various reports and publications.

Up to the present time, 1221 men and women in this country have entered the fold of Islam. The central Chicago Mission, along with its four branches established in other cities, is progressing day by day.

The role and suspension of The Muslim Sunrise

For the propagation of Islamic teachings and beliefs, the magazine The Muslim Sunrise was launched. It continued to run

successfully for three years; however, for the past year and a half its publication has remained suspended.

The reason for this discontinuation was the high cost of printing and circulation in contrast with the relatively small number of subscribers. The financial condition of our central association and the American Mission was not such that it could continue to bear this heavy burden.

There is no doubt that this magazine –Shams-ul-Islam – served as the right arm of our preaching efforts, and through it our mission attained considerable recognition even in foreign countries.

The need for literature

In addition to a capable missionary and a regularly issued monthly journal, another extremely vital requirement for propagation is adequate literature. No leader or missionary can spread his beliefs or mission unless he possesses sufficient means and written material.

Literature in the hands of a missionary is akin to a rifle and ammunition in the hands of a soldier. If a missionary possesses no literature, how can he carry out the work of preaching?

This need is especially acute in a country like America, for it is the land where literature and advertisements are the founders of present-day civilisation. The lives of its people have become so deeply intertwined with modern civilisation that they scarcely find time to attend to religious matters. If high-quality literature were available, we could distribute it among the people in trains and automobiles, in parks and places of entertainment, and in factories, offices, and shops – and in this manner properly fulfil the obligation of tabligh

The nature and form of missionary literature

Literature printed in India, or written in an Indian style of composition, cannot be regarded with the same appreciation in America. Consequently, such literature cannot produce the effective results that are required, nor can it meet the intellectual and cultural needs of the American audience in the manner that locally produced material can.

It is therefore necessary that different kinds of literature be prepared and printed here in America itself, according to local requirements, and issued in the form of handbills and pamphlets for immediate use in missionary work.

Growing disenchantment with Christianity

As knowledge continues to advance, people are gradually and naturally drifting away from Christianity. In the eyes of other nations, this country is considered strongly bound to the Christian religion, primarily because numerous American missions are established abroad.

Perceptions vs. reality of American Christianity

The abundance of missionaries and the extensive propaganda carried out by the clergy create the impression that the American nation is deeply and firmly Christian. I myself received an education in an American mission school and had heard many admirable accounts regarding America. However, upon arriving and living here, I found reality to be quite the opposite of what I had imagined.

Personal observations cross social classes

I have interacted with various segments of society: I have dealt with the labouring classes, lived through student life here, associated with businessmen, and met individuals belonging to both higher and middle social circles. I have also engaged in frequent dialogue with scholars and clergy.

After this prolonged experience, I cannot refrain from expressing the view that in America, no more than ten per cent may truly be called Christians – by which I mean those who genuinely believe in the divinity of Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity, and the concept of atonement.

Religious demographics and identity

Approximately one-tenth of this country is populated by people of the Jewish faith. Of the remaining nine-tenths, based on my five years of experience, I would say that not more than another one-tenth can be described as Christian in the doctrinal sense defined above.

Large portion of society receptive to Islamic Monotheism

In summary, nearly half of the population of this country does not, in reality, belong to any particular religion – though nominally they ascribe themselves to Christianity.

Readers should understand that a large portion of the population believes in Divine Unity and is averse to doctrines such as Atonement and the divinity of Christ. In other words, they stand intellectually closer to Islam.

A question of religious affiliation

The question naturally arises: if such people feel aversion toward Christianity, why do they continue to identify themselves as Christians?

The answer is quite simple: if they do not call themselves Christians, what else are they to call themselves?

There exists before them no widely recognised alternative religion whose affiliation they might adopt. Our mission, however, remains unaware of – or unable to reach – these individuals.

Yet this is hardly surprising, for the mission itself has not attained sufficient recognition. And how could it when it lacks adequate resources and literature?

From Muhammad Yusuf Khan (BSc), 4448 South Wabash Avenue, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

(Translated by Al Hakam from the original Urdu, published in the 19 February 1926 issue of Al Fazl)

How an Ahmadi missionary in Berlin reshaped a Western scholar’s view on religious unity (1926)

J Rohoska

Neglect of the science of religions in Europe

The science of religions, excepting Christian faith, is rather neglected in Europe. Since the Reformation, the divinity schools and well-established theological faculties of the celebrated universities of Europe have been dealing one-sidedly with Christian theology. Though their aim should be the pursuit of truth, they chiefly serve only ecclesiastical and sectarian interests.

The search for truth is ever a hard task and is ever attended with impediments. The comparative science of religions, which to some extent counterbalances the onesidedness of Christian theology and widens the religious horizon of Europe, occupies a very low place in the curriculum of the royal universities of Europe. I think it has never been able up till now to have any independent chair in any university, except in Holland.

Influence of German theology

The European science of theology has been under the influence of German scholarship for centuries, and in the early part of the present century, the celebrated Berlin Professor Harnack was an authority in theological questions. Regarding comparative religious science, this distinguished German theologian never sympathised with the powerful initiative of the eminent Oxford professor, Max Müller. The magnificent work of the Oxford School has been called an amateur work by him.

The German professor, being a high official before the war, looked down on any science of religion which was in any way calculated to prove detrimental to the official Church theology. The religious thinking (I mean the Protestant theology) is still under this influence in this country.

The church’s attitude toward comparative religion

Christian people of Europe are not very much interested in the “heathen” religions of Zarathustra, Confucius, Buddha, etc. They do not want to have anything to do with comparative religious science. I, therefore, do not hope much from the Church. Theology is not inclined to find out the religious psychology of the masses. It is concerned only with making formulas, and the Church sees the solution to the problem

in avoiding it.

It may well do it, because it is afraid of the conclusions of the comparative science of religions. The Church is afraid of the comparative science of religions, because if all religions are studied in a scientific spirit, Christianity shall have to descend from the Olympian heights of its distinction and shall have to mingle with the community of other world religions possessing a high standard of ethics, and the bars of exclusive distinction of Christianity will altogether fall down.

Consequences of religious equality

What will be the result of this fall? No great trouble, I think! Such persons as in their hearts long for the happiness of mankind, whether they are Christian or not, will welcome this change in Christianity and its association with other world religions on equal footing.

If this is done, and Christianity bids farewell to its position of privilege, which it has held for so many centuries, religious peace would be assured. It is a wonderful step towards the realisation of the ideal of one herd and one shepherd. We hope the day of spreading Christianity with fire and sword is done forever.

At present, but a few fanatical missionaries are earnestly attached to the idea that all the nations of the world should be made to join a universal Christian Church. It may be the ideal of some theological men or some priests, but it was never the ideal of the gospels at all. The ideal of the gospels is not universal Christianity, but a universal brotherhood.

Universalism and religious conflict

As Christians like a universal Christianity, the Buddhists like a universal Buddhism, and Jews a universal Judaism, etc. If they have their wishes realised, then that small peace that already exists among religions would disappear.

Religious thinking has been directed to a right path by the comparative study of religions. It has been pointed out that the element, which is admitted to be the essential element of religion, exists in all religions. This essential element is that very common treasure of ethics which one can find in the teachings of all prophets, who are the great ethical teachers of mankind.

The ethics of human brotherhood is an element of permanent value, being of much greater importance than the other

elements in religion. This discovery in the science of religion will exercise a decisive effect upon the transformation of the religious worldview as much as the physical discoveries have brought about some changes in the physical worldview.

Europe and the spiritual light of the East Europe has been ruling over the world for a very long time. It scarcely has any religious life and does not seem to have any way to lead the world in religious matters, as it has done in secular matters. It has no light, no stirring of soul. West ever got light from the East. Ex oriente lux! It is destined to do so now.

Some religious ideas of the East, and especially those of India, came over to Europe, and they found a fertile soil here. Europe does not get much from the ChurchChristianity of the priests and dogmas. I do not refer to theosophy. Theosophy may be a good theory. But I have nothing to do with that now. I only wish to draw attention to a reality, a fact.

Attempts at religious union

A great religious movement in India has put forward a magnificent idea. It is an old question how to put a stop to the social discrepancies by creating a uniform religious system. That well-known religious philosophical movement of the first centuries, which has been called syncretism by historians, made efforts to solve that question. After this movement, the Roman Catholic Church tried the same thing. It aimed at the creation of a universal religion. But both these failed to carry out that plan.

Such experiments of a religious union have been made since ancient times, in India, too. Religious men in India have kept themselves occupied for centuries to bring about a religious union on a common theological basis. They were to some extent successful in their attempts on account of their knowledge and the influence and authority they commanded. But they could not attain that universal union which has been their original intention.

Such a religious union cannot be brought into existence. Union of doctrines is, I suppose, a union of opinions. Union of opinions and, further, in higher degrees, union of convictions and unions of faiths are quite opposite to human nature. The more an individual becomes free from the pressure of that power which compels

him to such a union, the more he will be unwilling to sacrifice his dearest treasure – the individual faith of his own. The experiments of this kind of religious union have the great fault of being unnatural.

Basis of true religious union

Then are we wrong to speak of a religious union? Not at all. On the contrary, we are quite right to do so on the basis of a thing which is nearer to the real essence of religion than ever a doctrine. A great part of religious thinkers agree that the essence of religion is love.

This idea affords the ground for a possible religious union which would not be a union of doctrines but a union of brotherhood. This idea, as far as I know, is represented most clearly by the teachings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad[as] of Qadian, Punjab, India.

Encounter with the teachings of Ahmad

A few years ago, my esteemed friend Maulvi Mubarak Ali, Ahmad’s[as] missionary in Berlin, was kind enough to hand me some English translations of several books and pamphlets containing the teachings of that great man of God. I started reading those books. After I had read some pages, I was very much surprised by the simplicity and purity of their style, by which the most difficult problems of religion were opened before my mind.

Every sentence awakened and brought to light some ideas that lay slumbering in my soul before. His convincing words had the effect of a revelation upon me. Especially the teaching about peace among religions made a very deep impression on my mind and made me believe in the idea of a possible religious union.

Prophets and universal respect

God has ever revealed His will to mankind by His messengers. These messengers, who are called prophets, received divine revelation in different periods and among different nations. People, amongst whom a prophet was raised to reveal God’s will, were inclined to claim that prophet exclusively as their own.

It is, however, quite clear that, being messengers of that very one God, Who is the God of all human beings, they are all our common prophets. This is the principle of Ahmad[as]. This principle is to be realised. In forcible accents, he asks the followers of different religions to hold in equal respect the prophets of the religions besides their own.

That is the first requirement, without which it is impossible to bring religions near each other, for nothing is more painful and offensive to the adherents of a faith than to see the prophet they believe in being abused and criticised.

Need for comparative study

In order to respect equally all prophets, it is indispensable to know them and their teachings. If I were acquainted only with the teachings of my own religion, the others being unknown to me, I would have a very defective knowledge of the revelations of God. For that reason, Ahmad[as] suggested a study of the comparative science of religion.

The dream of 2,800 airplanes – Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud and World War II

Aizaz Khan Canada

It was during World War 2 that, for the first time in history, control of the skies would determine the fate of nations. Without sufficient aircraft, even the strongest empire could fall.

In this tense and uncertain period, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra saw a striking and vivid dream that was fulfilled so precisely and perfectly that it stands as a testament to his divine connection with the heavens.

Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra narrates the fascinating dream and its subsequent fulfilment in his own words:

“During the days when France had been defeated by Germany and the British were facing grave danger, I saw in a dream that I had gone to England and that the

There is no doubt that Ahmad[as] is a representative of a universal spirit, much more than it is acknowledged in Europe. By his suggestion to adopt the most advanced method for religious science in Europe and by wishing to bring about a close connection with the modern science of Europe, he draws the attention of Europe to himself.

Ahmad’s example and teachings

With great regard, Christian Europe should remember that great man, who, being himself a prophet and messenger of God and founder of a great and new religious community, set an example of how to hold in respect the prophets of other religions. As a true follower of Islam, he always mentioned the name of the Prophet of Christianity most respectfully, and he wished that the great man of God be respected by all nations.

He knows the teachings of Jesus Christ much more than many priests or theological men of Christian Europe.

Path toward religious union

Western people will see by means of religious historical research of religions that the great prophets all agree as to the essence of religion. When they understand that these religious teachers were all of them models for them in their practical lives and that they suggested the same salutary means for healing the sufferings of human beings, then they will find the right path to the religious union.

That union will not be founded on a

British had entrusted me with the task of defending England. I said that I first wished to inspect the military positions so that I could assess whether we lacked anything, and if so, how that deficiency could be made good. Accordingly, I visited all the military headquarters and government offices, and I reported to the Ministry that England lacked only airplanes. If airplanes were provided to me, I could carry out the defence of England very well.

“Meanwhile, still within the dream, a man came to me and handed me a telegram with the following words:

“‘The British Representative from America wires that the American Government has delivered 2,800 aeroplanes to the British Government.’

“After reading the telegram, I said that now the work had been accomplished and

union of doctrines and dogmas; it will not be brought about by decrees of synods. Nay, it will be realised in the souls of men longing for peace and brotherhood. Churches will never be able to perform this. They have hindered the free evolution of religion.

Unfettered conviction of mind and free association of religions will create that union by putting aside the officialdom of churches and by destroying disruptive influence.

Proposal for an ‘Ahmadi School of Religious Science’

that we no longer lacked anything.

“I narrated this dream during those very days to Chaudhry Zafrulla Khan Sahib, and he mentioned it to several British representatives and other distinguished Indian officers of the government.

“I saw this dream in June 1940. In the month of July, one day, I was sitting in Masjid Mubarak when a man came running and said that an urgent phone call had come for me. When I went, I heard the voice of Chaudhry Zafrulla Khan Sahib, but I sensed that his voice was trembling. He is a man of great courage, yet at that time there was a quiver in his voice. He said, ‘Have you read today’s latest news?’ I replied, ‘I have read it, but I did not notice anything particularly

Continued on page 13

One of the objects of The Review of Religions is to make known the teachings of Ahmad[as] in Europe and to suggest some ideas on how to do this work. By permission of the editor, I will make in the next issue of this journal a proposal for an “Ahmadi School for Science of Religion,” which could be established in one of the centres of the continent. – J Rohoska

(Transcribed and edited by Al Hakam from the original English, published in the February 1926 issue of The Review of Religions)

Continued from page 12

special in it.’ He said, ‘Congratulations, your dream has been fulfilled! A telegram has just arrived in which it is written:

“‘The British Representative from America wires that the American Government has delivered 2,800 aeroplanes to the British Government.’

“Thus, the very same words that had been shown to me in the dream were fulfilled within a month, and the British representative informed the Government of England from America that the American Government was giving 2,800 airplanes to the British Government.” (Sair-e-Ruhani, pp. 329-331)

World Hijab Day events held in Norway

Dr Nabila Anwar

Secretary Ishaat, Lajna Imaillah Norway

World Hijab Day was marked across Norway through a combination of physical stands and a digital awareness campaign organised by Lajna Imaillah Norway.

In total, nine stands were arranged nationwide. Six were held indoors at venues such as libraries, universities and shopping

National refresher course held by Majlis Ansarullah Belgium

Mohammad Arsalan

Belgium Correspondent

Majlis Ansarullah Belgium held its annual refresher course on 25 January 2026 at Baitus-Salam in Dilbeek.

The programme began with registration. After breakfast, the first session commenced under the chairmanship of Wasim Ahmad Sheikh Sahib, Sadr Majlis Ansarullah Belgium, with a recitation from the Holy Quran. This was followed by the Ansar

Historical confirmation of this dream’s fulfilment

Historical documentation proves that this dream was fulfilled precisely as was narrated by Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra. In July 1940, one month after Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra saw this dream, newspaper headings published the statement of the spokesman of the British Purchasing Commission, stating that precisely 2800 airplanes had been delivered by the U.S. to Britain. (The Strait Times, 27 July 1940, Page 9)

The specificity of the number strengthens the significance of the spiritual insight of Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra. It was not a general prediction about war, but a specific and measurable figure that was revealed to Hazrat Khalifatul Masih IIra

For a religious leader living far from the European frontlines to see such a specific number in a dream, and for that number to be publicly confirmed soon after, is certainly a sign of Divine insight.

This incident invites reflection and is a stark reminder that in an era defined by material power, true believers must continue to rely on Divine guidance communicated through Allah’s appointed Khalifa. With new tensions and uncertainties shaping the modern world, the underlying principle remains unchanged: a divine connection to Heaven will continue to illuminate human affairs in times of trial.

NEWS

malls, while three were outdoor stands located in city centres. As 1 February fell on a Sunday and many libraries and malls were closed, activities were therefore spread over three days – 31 January, 1 February and 2 February – allowing broader public participation and accessibility.

Despite outdoor temperatures reaching as low as minus 15 degrees Celsius, members remained enthusiastic and committed to celebrating the day, engaging with the public and spreading awareness about the message of Islam Ahmadiyyat.

The stands attracted considerable interest, welcoming over 1,000 visitors overall. Approximately 800 pamphlets and around 50 books were distributed to individuals wishing to learn more. Women

Pledge, poem and a speech by Sadr Majlis.

After this, various office-bearers presented their annual programmes and answered the questions of the elders and local administrators present. At noon, there was a break for prayer and lunch. Afterwards, different office-bearers, in groups, held discussions with the department-related administrators about their respective annual strategies. Naib Sadr Saff-e-Dom, Ismail Khan Sahib, informed the gathering about his annual planning.

Finally, the Sadr Majlis concluded the refresher course with a closing prayer after giving brief advice. The total number of participants was 84.

were also offered the opportunity to try on the hijab and receive one as a gift, which was warmly appreciated and often led to engaging and thoughtful conversations.

Many visitors expressed genuine curiosity about the meaning and significance of the hijab, asking about its spiritual, cultural and personal dimensions. The most frequently asked question was whether wearing the hijab is forced or a personal choice. These discussions provided an important opportunity to clarify misconceptions. Several attendees shared that they valued the chance to ask questions openly and to hear directly from Muslim women about their experiences.

Delegation of Jamaat Niger meets the Minister of Equipment and Infrastructure

Muhammad Jamal Niger Correspondent

On 7 January 2026, a delegation of Jamaate-Ahmadiyya Niger, led by Amir Jamaat Niger, Asad Majeeb Sahib, had a meeting with Colonel Major Salissou Mahaman Salissou, Minister of Equipment and Infrastructure of Niger.

The meeting took place at the minister’s residence, which is situated within walking distance from the Jamaat’s central office in Niamey. During the meeting, Amir Sahib introduced the honourable minister to the core beliefs, objectives and humanitarian efforts of Jamaat-e-Ahmadiyya, highlighting

This year’s event also highlighted a special milestone, as Lajna Imaillah Norway is celebrating its 50-year jubilee. Visitors were informed about this anniversary as well as the organisation’s history, activities and contributions to Norwegian society.

In addition to the physical outreach, a digital campaign was conducted through Lajna Norway’s Instagram and X accounts, further expanding the reach of the initiative. Media engagement was also notable, with three published articles and interviews featuring two Lajna members discussing the significance of the hijab and the purpose of World Hijab Day.

its emphasis on peace, moral reform and service to humanity.

The discussion was held in a cordial and respectful atmosphere, reflecting mutual goodwill. On this occasion, Amir Sahib presented the minister with a copy of the Holy Quran with a French translation, along with the book The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam. The minister received the gifts with appreciation and expressed keen interest in studying them.

The honourable minister warmly accepted an invitation to visit the Jamaat’s central headquarters. Noting the close proximity of the office to his residence, he remarked that he might even visit on foot during a weekend at a convenient time. The delegation thanked the minister for his openness and respectful engagement.

‘Kill

not your children for fear of poverty’: Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud’sra unique insight

In the Holy Quran, Allah the Almighty commands:

“Kill not your children for fear of poverty. It is We Who provide for them and for you. Surely, the killing of them is a great sin.” (Surah Bani Isra’il, Ch.17: V.32)

And yet, it is very rare to see a parent killing their child, unless in a case where the parent is mentally unstable. So, what is the real meaning of this phrase?

Interpretations given by nonAhmadi commentators

Non-Ahmadi commentators of the Quran have usually explained most of the verses literally. They have taken the same approach with this phrase and explained it in the literal sense. It is written in Tadabbur-e-Quran, a famous Urdu commentary by the renowned Pakistani Islamic scholar, Maulvi Amin Ahsan Islahi, that:

“[…] Meaning, when the true reality is that God alone is the true Provider, then what right does anyone has to take another’s life out of the fear of what that person will eat. In the period of ignorance, one of the major reasons behind the cruel practice of Arabs burying daughters alive was this very mindset: since women were not seen as earners, then why should they bear the burden of raising girls. The Quran struck directly at the root of this heartless crime and brought an end to such barbarity.” (Tadabbur-e-Quran, 2009, Vol. 4, p. 499)

Another famous Pakistani commentator, Maulvi Muhammad Shafi, writes in his commentary:

“This sixth commandment addresses a cruel custom of the age of ignorance. In those days, some people would kill their children, especially daughters, immediately after birth out of fear that they would become a financial burden. In this verse, God Almighty exposes the ignorance behind such thinking, reminding them that they are not the providers. Sustenance lies entirely in the hands of Allah alone. It is He Who provides for you, just as He provides for you, He will also provide for them. Why then would you become guilty of the grave sin of killing your children out of such misguided fear?” (Ma’arif-ul-Quran, 2008, Vol. 5, p. 474)

Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud’sra commentary

While non-Ahmadi scholars have linked

this to the barbaric act of some Arabs burying their daughters alive during the period of ignorance, Hazrat Musleh Maud, Khalifatul Masih IIra explained that this verse is not pointing to the killing of girls because the Arabs did not kill their daughters for the fear of financial expense.

He writes:

“[…] That is, ‘Do not kill your children out of fear that they will cost you money’ does not refer to the killing of daughters because this reason is not stated anywhere in the Quran that people killed girls out of fear of financial expense. Rather, the reason given is that they consider their birth a cause of humiliation for themselves, and therefore they kill them.

“Similarly, this verse cannot be interpreted to mean ‘do not kill children because of poverty or financial hardship,’ because the word imlaaq does not mean poverty or hardship. Rather, its meaning is the spending of wealth. Thus, the meaning of the verse is that, do not kill your children out of the fear that money will be spent.” (Tafsir-e-Kabir, 2023, Vol. 6, pp. 332-333)

Huzoorra then raises a question: does anyone actually kill their children out of fear of spending money? He explained that our experience of the world tells us that such cases are not found among sane people. In fact, even those who do not have enough money do not kill their children. Therefore, it becomes clear that this command addresses a different meaning of killing.

The true meaning of the phrase “do not kill”

Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra explained three meanings of the phrase ‘do not kill’:

1. When we observe the conditions of different humans, we learn that some people, out of stinginess, do not provide

proper care for their children. They do not give them sufficient food or the kind of nutrition necessary for growth. Such stingy people are indeed found only among the mentally unstable, who would poison or strangle their children out of fear that their wealth would be spent.

However, there are many ordinary, sane individuals who, despite having money, withhold good food from their children due to stinginess. They do not provide proper clothing, to the extent that sometimes children become ill due to lack of nutrition. Occasionally, inadequate clothing can lead to illnesses such as pneumonia. Such people exist in thousands and millions across the world, and in every country.

2. Similarly, “killing” can also refer to the moral and spiritual killing, that out of fear of spending money, they do not provide good education, therefore, becoming the cause of the moral or spiritual death of the child. In this verse, Allah advises believers to avoid such behavior and never withhold the expenses necessary for the child’s physical health or moral upbringing. (Ibid, p. 333)

3. The meaning of this verse can also be in the way some Sufi scholars interpret it. That is, it is forbidden to stop the birth of children merely out of fear that if the family grows, how will it be fed. Keeping this point in mind, preventing childbirth falls under the category of “killing children,” and killing one’s children is prohibited in every situation. Thus, the meaning becomes that killing a child (that is preventing childbirth) due to fear of spending wealth is not allowed.

(Ibid, p. 334)

Why did Allah use the word “kill”?

Explaining why Allah used the word ‘kill’, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra writes: “The word ‘kill’ is used because naturally,

humans feel aversion to physically killing their children. By using this term, attention is drawn to the fact that while you would never consider physically killing your child, but you do not think that you are unknowingly committing another kind of “killing” – neglecting their food and clothing and thus harming their health, or ignoring their moral education and thereby destroying their character.

“In my view, another reason for using the word “kill” is that if the verse had simply said, “spend on your children,” it would not have highlighted the indirect effects that negligence can have on a child’s life. But by choosing this specific word, all such indirect consequences are also included.

“For example, not ensuring proper food and clothing for the wife, or overburdening her with work during pregnancy or while she is nursing. All these are matters which negatively affect the child. As a result, children are lost before birth, or their health become weak.

“The expression la-taqtulū (do not kill) therefore forbids all these harmful practices, and this meaning could not have been conveyed as powerfully with any other wording.” (Ibid, p. 333-334)

At the end, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra writes:

“Thus, by using the words lā taqtulū (do not kill) and then adding the condition khashyata imlaaq (for fear of spending wealth), the Quran presents a comprehensive teaching regarding the upbringing of children, their nourishment, the care of the mother, and the value of her life.

“And it expresses this in such concise words that no other scripture offers anything comparable. In fact, the truth is that this matter is so subtle and profound that no other religious book has even touched it.” (Ibid, p. 334)

Conclusion

This phrase of Surah Bani Isra’il contains a message deeper than the literal meaning of prohibition of killing children. While non-Ahmadi scholars understood it as a condemnation of the barbaric custom of burying daughters during the period of ignorance, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra offered a broader picture and a more insightful explanation. He explained that the Quran is not addressing the physical killing of children, rather it is pointing out the subtle, everyday forms of negligence that can ruin a child’s life, health and character.

This interpretation reveals the remarkable depth of the Quranic language. In a single short command, Allah encompasses the entire philosophy of parental responsibility and child upbringing, reminding believers that sustenance comes from Him alone.

Friday Sermon

Mubarak Mosque, Islamabad, Tilford, UK

30 January 2026

Allah is supreme: The Prophet’ssa love at Uhud

After reciting the tashahhud, ta‘awwuz and Surah al-Fatihah, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa stated:

There are countless accounts about the Holy Prophet’ssa love for Allah the Almighty. In fact, every deed of his and every incident points to the fact that an ocean of divine love was always surging in his heart. We see one such instance during the Battle of Uhud, where his zeal for the love of Allah was expressed in an extraordinary and unique manner.

It is related that Hazrat Bara’ara narrated, “On the day of Uhud, we came up against the idolaters [in battle]. The Holy Prophetsa prepared a battalion of archers and appointed Hazrat Abdullah as their leader. He instructed them emphatically that they must not leave their post. They must not leave even if they see that we have overcome the enemy. And even if they saw that the enemy overcame us, they should not come to our aid.” That is, in both victory and defeat, they must not abandon their position. Towards the end of this incident, we are able to observe the intensity of his love for Allah. The narrator relates, “When the battle commenced, the enemy fled, so much so that I saw the idolatrous women running toward the hills. They had lifted their garments from their feet, and their anklets were visible. The Muslims then began to call out: ‘The spoils of war, the spoils of war!’ Hazrat Abdullah held his battalion back and said: ‘The Holy Prophetsa instructed me that you must not move.’ However, they did not obey. When they abandoned the mountain pass and approached the spoils of war, Allah the Almighty turned away from those Muslims. (That is, when they left the pass to collect the spoils of war, Allah the Almighty also turned away from them.) The tide of battle turned, and the enemy launched another attack, resulting in 70 Muslims being martyred.” He says, “During this time, the Holy Prophetsa, along with his Companions, had taken shelter at the foot of a mountain when Abu Sufyan climbed to an elevated place and called out: ‘Is Muhammad among the people?’ The Holy Prophetsa said: ‘Do not answer him.’ Abu Sufyan then called out: ‘Is Ibn Abi Quhafah among the people?’ The Holy Prophetsa again instructed: ‘Do not reply.’ Then Abu Sufyan called out: ‘Is Umar Ibn al-Khattab among the people?’ When there was no reply, Abu Sufyan said: ‘All of these men have been killed. Had they been alive, they would surely have responded.’

Hazrat Umarra could not restrain himself and called out: ‘O enemy of Allah! You have lied! Allah has kept alive the one who will humiliate you.’ Abu Sufyan then raised the slogan: ‘Glory to Hubal!’ Upon hearing this, the Holy Prophetsa became restless and said: ‘Respond to him!’ The Companions asked: ‘What should we say?’ He replied: ‘Say that Allah is the Most High and the Most Glorious.’ Abu Sufyan then said: ‘We have ‘Uzza, and you have no ‘Uzza.’ The Holy Prophetsa said: ‘Respond to him!’ The Companions asked: ‘What should we say?’ He replied: ‘Say that Allah is our Helper, and you have no Helper.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-maghazi, Bab ghazwati uhud, Hadith 4043)

When the honour and majesty of Allah the Almighty and his love for Him came into question, the Holy Prophetsa was not concerned for his own life. He immediately instructed the Companions to respond. Previously, he had chosen not to reply out of wisdom.

Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra has also written about this incident with reference to history. He writes that those Companions who were around the Messengersa of Allah, and who had been pushed back due to the onslaught of the disbelievers, regrouped around the Messengersa of Allah as soon as the disbelievers retreated. That is, the Companions gathered around his blessed body and lifted him up, for he had fallen unconscious. One Companion, Ubaidah bin al-Jarrah, pulled out with his teeth a nail that had become embedded in the Holy Prophet’ssa head, as a result of which two of his own teeth broke.

After a short while, the Holy Prophetsa regained consciousness. He had fainted due to his wounds, as I have mentioned. When he regained consciousness, the Companions sent men running in all directions across the battlefield, announcing that the Holy Prophetsa was alive and that everyone should come back. The enemy had spread the rumour – God forbid – that he had been martyred. The Muslim army, which had become scattered, began to regroup.

The Holy Prophetsa took them towards the foot of the mountain. When the remaining force had gathered there, Abu Sufyan shouted loudly and said, “We have killed Muhammad[sa].” The Holy Prophetsa

did not respond to Abu Sufyan, lest the enemy come to know the true situation and launch another attack. Otherwise, the enemy would think that since the Muslims were not dead but wounded, and since they were wounded, they would not be able to withstand another attack, and thus the injured Muslims might again fall prey to the enemy.

When no response came from the Muslim army, Abu Sufyan became convinced that his assumption was correct. He then shouted loudly, “We have also killed Abu Bakr.” The Holy Prophetsa instructed Hazrat Abu Bakrra as well not to respond. Then Abu Sufyan shouted, “We have also killed ‘Umar.” At this, Hazrat Umarra, who was very passionate, wanted to reply by saying that, by the grace of Allah, we are alive and ready to face you, but the Holy Prophetsa restrained him and said not to put the Muslims at risk and to remain silent. This was a time of weakness, and if the enemy attacked suddenly, greater harm could occur.

Now the disbelievers became convinced that they had killed the Foundersa of Islam as well as his right and left supporters. At this, Abu Sufyan and his Companions raised joyful slogans, crying out:

“Exalted is Hubal! Exalted is Hubal!” Meaning that their idol Hubal had prevailed and had ended Islam that day.

The same Holy Prophetsa, who had instructed silence when his own death was announced and when the deaths of Hazrat Abu Bakrra and Hazrat Umarra were proclaimed – so that the wounded Muslims might not be attacked again and the small remaining group might not be martyred at the hands of the disbelievers – now, when the honour of the One God was challenged and a slogan of shirk [associating partners with God] was raised on the battlefield, his soul became restless.

Turning to the Companions with great fervour, he said, “Why do you not respond?”

The Companions replied, “O Messengersa of Allah, what should we say?” He said, “Say:

“That is, ‘You are lying when you

claim that Hubal has been exalted. Allah alone, without any partner, is Exalted and Majestic. His alone is the highest rank, and not Hubal.’”

And in this manner, he conveyed to the enemies the news that he was alive.

The impact of this bold and courageous reply upon the army of the disbelievers was so profound that, despite the fact that their hopes were crushed by this response, and despite the fact that before them stood only a handful of wounded Muslims whom, according to material calculations, it was entirely possible to attack and kill, they did not dare to launch another assault. Content with the victory they had already gained, they celebrated and returned to Mecca. (Dibachah Tafsir-ul-Quran, Anwar-ulUlum, Vol. 20, pp. 252-253)

The Holy Prophetsa would not allow even the slightest trace of shirk to enter due to his love for God Almighty. It is related in a narration from Hazrat Ibn ‘Abbasra that a man once said to the Holy Prophetsa, “Whatever Allah wills and whatever you will.” Thereupon, the Holy Prophetsa said, “Have you made me equal to Allah?” Rather, say, “Whatever Allah alone wills.” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab al-Kaffarat, Bab al-Nahy an Yuqal Ma Sha’ Allah wa Shi’ta, Hadith 2117)

Not even the faintest aspect of shirk should be allowed to enter. Some people casually utter such phrases as “Whatever Allah wills and whatever you will.” Yes, one may say, “Whatever Allah wills, and by His grace”, and if he also prays, then blessings will be bestowed. Up to the extent of supplication, it is acceptable, but the phrase “and whatever you will” is incorrect, because the Holy Prophetsa strongly disapproved of it.

He was also concerned that people might turn graves into places of worship. Unfortunately, today the opposite is practised. I have mentioned this before as well that Muslims go to the graves of saints and worship there, even prostrating, whereas the Holy Prophetsa forbade turning graves into mosques.

Hazrat Aishara relates that during the illness in which the Holy Prophetsa passed away – that is, at his final moments – he said, “May Allah curse the Jews and the Christians; they turned the graves of their

prophets into mosques.” Hazrat Aishara said that had he not said this, his grave would have been left open, but she feared that it might be turned into a mosque; therefore, it was not left open so that it would not become a place of worship. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-jana’iz, Bab ma yukrahu min ittikhazi l-masjidi ‘ala l-qubur, Hadith 1330)

Nowadays, the authorities have made proper arrangements around it, erecting railings and walls, so that no form of shirk may take place. At least in this regard, they have done well, because he had intense hatred for shirk

Regarding the proclamation of the Oneness of God Almighty, a narration is reported as follows: Hazrat Ibn Abi Ka‘bra relates that the polytheists said to the Messengersa of Allah, “Tell us the lineage of your Lord.” Thereupon, Allah Almighty revealed:

“Say: ‘He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Self-Sufficient. He is One and Unique. He neither begets nor is begotten, because nothing that is born is free from death, and nothing that dies is without an heir. Allah, the Mighty and Exalted, neither dies nor has any heir, nor does He have any equal.’”

The narrator says: “He has no likeness, no equal, and none comparable to Him.”

(Sunan at-Tirmidhi, Abwab tafsiri l-qur’ani ‘an rasulillahsa, Bab wa min surati l-ikhlas, Hadith 3364)

The Holy Prophetsa never let any opportunity pass without mentioning the Oneness of God Almighty, and every word he uttered overflowed with love for Allah. On every occasion, whenever he spoke, each word clearly reflected that the love of Allah was deeply and abundantly embedded in his heart. Rather, his heart was completely filled with love for God, and there was nothing else in it besides that.

Hazrat Zaid bin Khalid Juhanira relates that the Holy Prophetsa led them in the morning prayer at Hudaibiyah following rainfall during the night. When he had finished the prayer, he turned towards the people and said, “Do you know what your Lord, the Mighty and Exalted, has said?” Allah Almighty knows the state of hearts. Whatever thoughts people had upon seeing the rain were known to Allah, and Allah the Almighty informed the Holy Prophetsa of them.

The people said, “Allah and His Messengersa know best.” The Holy Prophetsa said: “Allah states, ‘Among My servants, some would begin the morning in such a state that they would believe in Me, and some would deny Me. (That is, among the people there were some who, after witnessing the night’s rain, began the morning as believers, but some were disbelievers.) Whoever said: “Rain fell upon us due to the grace and mercy of Allah the Almighty,” that person believes in Me. And those who said that rain fell due to the grace of Allah the Almighty (they are believers, as I have said), and they are deniers of the stars – (in that era, stars would also be worshipped, and many idolworshippers of this kind also entered Islam and had not been fully educated. So some people would say that rain fell today because of such-and-such a star.) Thus, whoever said that rain fell today because of the stars are those who denies Me, and instead believes in the stars.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-

adhan, Bab yastaqbila l-imamy n-nasa idha sallam, Hadith 846)

Thus Allah the Almighty said to the Holy Prophetsa: “O Muhammadsa, just as you possess complete understanding of the Oneness of God Almighty, inform the believers as well regarding the vigour with which one must affirm the Oneness of Allah the Almighty and His love in every matter, and one must believe in it from the depths of the heart.

Hazrat Jabirra relates that a man came to the Holy Prophetsa and said: “O Messengersa of Allah, what are two things that make Paradise and Hell certain?” The Holy Prophetsa replied: “Whoever dies in such a state that he does not associate anyone with Allah will enter Paradise, and whoever dies in such a state that he associates partners with Allah will enter the Fire.” (Sahih Muslim, Kitab al-iman, Bab ad-dalil ‘ala mun mata laa yushrik billahi shay’an dakhala l-jannah…, Hadith 93)

Thus, even today, this answer suffices for anyone who asks about the meaning of shirk. Just as the Promised Messiahas has also stated that to place trust in provisions, trust in one’s own self, trust in one’s own ability, trust in one’s wealth, trust in one’s family and tribe, to place trust in one’s children – indeed, anything in which a person places trust without giving precedence to God Almighty, and places trust without proclaiming the name of Allah the Almighty, he becomes guilty of shirk [associating partners with God]. (Malfuzat, 2022, Vol. 2, p. 420)

Thus, we must continue to examine ourselves very carefully so that we remain protected from associating partners with God, act upon this guidance, and continue to establish the love of Allah the Almighty within our hearts. Then at another instance, it is mentioned in further detail, as narrated by Mahmud bin Labid, that the Holy Prophetsa said: “The thing that I fear most for you is minor associations of partners with God.’ The Companions said: ‘O Messengersa of Allah, what are minor associations of partners with God?’ The Holy Prophetsa replied: ‘Ostentation; on the Day of Judgement, Allah the Almighty will say: “Go to those for whom you used to show off in the world and see whether you find any reward with them.”’” (Musnad Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Vol. 7, Hadith Mahmud bin Labid, Hadith 24030, Alam alKutub, Beirut, p. 799)

Meaning you used to perform certain deeds to show them, so now seek your reward from them. Thus, showing off –that is, artificial principles and pretence adopted in order to show off in front of people – are things that Allah the Almighty greatly dislikes, because one is not doing those things to please Allah the Almighty, but rather to please people through display. We must examine our deeds from this perspective as well, because in the next world, no intermediary will be of use in this manner. It is only the grace of Allah the Almighty that can render any benefit, and acting in accordance with the practice of the Holy Prophetsa, while remaining obedient and subservient to him. These are the real things that will be of benefit, which Allah the Almighty Himself has expressed His pleasure for, because Allah the Almighty Himself has stated:

That is, He instructed the Holy Prophetsa to proclaim: “Tell the people, follow me; Allah will love you.” (The Holy Qur’an 3:32)

In another narration, Hazrat Abu Hurairahra relates that the Holy Prophetsa said:

“Allah, the Mighty and Glorious, has taken it upon Himself that for the one who goes forth in His cause, He shall either return him home with reward or spoils of war, or else admit him into Paradise. (Meaning that either he will gain victory or, if he attains martyrdom, he will enter Paradise), provided that it was firm faith and the acceptance of the Messengersa of Allah that motivated him to go forth in jihad. (This is the condition: one’s faith must be strong, and one must set out for jihad whilst fulfilling the due right of obedience and pledging allegiance to the Messengersa of Allah.)

“If it were not that I would cause hardship for my people, I would join every contingent of the army myself. My wish is that I be slain in the way of Allah, then brought back to life, then slain again, then brought back to life, and then slain once more.”

Here, the Holy Prophetsa expressed his deep yearning. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab aliman, Bab al-jihadi min ai-iman, Hadith 36)

Commenting on this Hadith, Hazrat Syed Waliullah Shah Sahib writes about this narration from Sahih al-Bukhari:

“The Holy Prophet’ssa statement:

“‘If it were not that I would cause hardship for my people’ means that the Holy Prophetsa had already experienced how eagerly the Companions fervently desired to follow him in every act. (The majority were deeply devoted to emulating him.) His noble example possessed such attraction and influence that the Holy Prophetsa would always consider the welfare of his people, lest his own actions should become a cause of hardship for them.”

Meaning, if he were to make every matter obligatory, it would eventually impose difficulty upon his people. Hence he said that he sometimes refrained from doing certain things so that his followers might not be overburdened.

Syed Waliullah Shah Sahib further writes, “The Holy Prophetsa had great love for Allah the Almighty, as even his opponents acknowledged this when they would say:

“[‘Muhammad is absorbed in the love of his Lord.’]

“Yet along with that love, he maintained perfect self-control and never once abandoned reason. Those who act with excess in their deeds should learn from this. To follow one’s passions blindly is neither a sign of perfect faith nor of high virtue (some people claim they act out of zeal, saying, ‘We must do this’ or ‘We must do that.’ But Allah the Almighty is pleased with moderation.) The pinnacle of righteousness lies in the middle path, for it requires struggle against oneself.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Urdu Translation, Vol. 1, Kitab al-iman, Bab al-jihadi min al-iman, Hadith 36, Nazarat Ishaat, Rabwah, p. 84)

Struggle against oneself and love for

Allah the Almighty: one must proceed bearing both in mind, never proceeding blindly.

Through his own example, the Holy Prophetsa showed us a path where the love of God reaches its utmost height, the expression of longing reaches its peak, and the spirit of sacrifice attains perfection – yet reason and balance are maintained, for even moderation itself is by Allah the Almighty’s command.

In another narration, it is related that the Holy Prophetsa strongly disliked taking help from idolaters. His noble wife, Hazrat Aishara, narrates that when the Messengersa of Allah set out for Badr and reached Harrat al-Wabarah, a place three miles west of Medina, he was met by a man famed for his courage and valour. The Companions of the Holy Prophetsa were very happy to see him, thinking he would join them in battle. When he came before the Holy Prophetsa, he said that he had come to join them and share in their expedition by rendering his help. The Holy Prophetsa asked, “Do you believe in Allah and His Messenger?” He replied, “No.” The Holy Prophetsa said, “Then go back, for I do not seek the help of any polytheist.” Hazrat Aishara relates that the man turned back, but when they reached Shajrah – a tree near Dhul-Hulaifah, seven miles from Medina, where the Holy Prophetsa used to wear the ihram – the man came again and repeated the same words. The Holy Prophetsa gave him the same reply, “Go back, for I do not seek the help of a polytheist.” The man left once more, but when they reached Baida, which lies ahead of Dhul-Hulaifah between Mecca and Medina, he came again. This time, when the Holy Prophetsa asked, “Do you believe in Allah and His Messenger?” This time, he replied, “Yes.” The Holy Prophetsa then said, “Now come along; you may go with us.”

Thus, no matter the circumstance, the Holy Prophet’ssa love for Allah and his honour for Him could not permit him to take assistance from an idolater, especially in a mission undertaken solely for the pleasure of God Almighty and the service of His faith. (Sahih Muslim, Kitab al-jihadi wa s-siyar, Bab karahah l-isti‘anah fi al-ghazwi bi kafirin…, Hadith 1817; Farhang-e-Sirat, pp. 71, 102, 105 and 162)

Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra states:

“Observe how deep was the Holy Prophet’ssa knowledge of God, how cautious he was, and how intensely he feared Him. Though he was the most perfect of all men, free from every sin, and though God Almighty Himself was his Protector and Guardian, yet even with all his purity and holiness, he lived in awe of Allah the Almighty at every moment. He excelled continuously in goodness, performing deed upon deed of the highest virtue. (He performed one virtuous deed after the other, and sin was entirely absent from him – not even its faintest trace existed. He performed the most exalted of deeds.) He was constantly engaged in the worship of Allah, and yet he feared Him greatly.

“Even while exercising utmost care in all things, when he would look upon the majesty of God and reflect upon His boundless self-sufficiency, he would renounce all his own deeds before the Divine and seek forgiveness, repenting whenever the occasion arose.

“Hazrat Abu Hurairahra relates:

“(This is a narration from Bukhari.)

“‘I heard the Holy Prophetsa say, “By Allah, I seek forgiveness from Allah and turn to Him in repentance more than 70 times a day, bowing before him.”’” (Siratun Nabisa, Vol. 1, p. 82)

The number 70 in Arabic is used to mean ‘countless’. Thus, the Holy Prophetsa would repent countless times.

Such was the Holy Prophet’ssa love for Allah the Almighty that he was always engaged in His remembrance. Hazrat Aishara relates that the Holy Prophetsa remembered God under all circumstances. (Sunan at-Tirmidhi, Abwab ad-da‘wah, Bab ma ja’a ‘an da‘wati al-muslimi mustajabah, Hadith 3384)

As has been mentioned by Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra, and it is established through many traditions of the Holy Prophetsa, he was always engaged in the remembrance of Allah.

Hazrat Samarah bin Jundubra narrates that the Holy Prophetsa said that there are four phrases that are superior to all other words. It matters not with which of them you begin. It is best for you to begin all things with these phrases. They are the best and most blessed of all utterances:

Umamahra relates that the Holy Prophetsa said, “Allah the Almighty offered to turn the entire valley of Batha (Mecca) into gold for me. I submitted: ‘O my Lord, let it instead be that one day I eat to my fill, and one day I remain hungry. When I am hungry, I shall fervently implore You and remember You; and when I eat to my fill, I shall praise You and thank You.’” (Musnad Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Vol. 7, p. 402)

The Holy Prophetsa did not desire gold. What he desired was for God to always be remembered, lest an excess of gold and wealth would lessen the remembrance of God.

The Promised Messiahas states that the Holy Prophetsa bore such hardships and constraints upon himself, or it can be said that his circumstances were financially strained, not because Allah the Almighty had not provided for him. Indeed, Allah the Almighty had provided for him in abundance. However, out of love for Allah and His remembrance, the Holy Prophetsa chose a life of simplicity and poverty. At the same time, the Holy Prophetsa would not reject blessings. He would partake of good, well-prepared food and other blessings and would give thanks to Allah the Almighty for them. (Tafsir Hazrat Masih-e-Maudas, Vol. 8, pp. 42-43)

Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra states, “The Holy Prophetsa was never heedless of death at any moment, and the fear of Allah was ever present in him that every day he would sleep with the conviction that perhaps death might come that very night and he would have to present himself before Allah the Almighty. Thus, he lived like a traveller who feels that the train may depart at any moment. Such a person never immerses himself in a task that would be difficult to abandon. (If one has to board a train, one remains alert, lest the train depart, or one becomes delayed. And so a person waits attentively for the train.) In the same way, the Holy Prophetsa was always prepared to go to his Beloved and regarded every passing moment as a result of His grace, while keeping death constantly in mind.”

Hazrat Hudhaifahra relates that it was the habit of the Holy Prophetsa that when he lay down on his bed, he would place his hand beneath his cheek and say: “O my Lord, may my life and death be for Your sake alone.”

And when he awoke from sleep, he would say: “All praise belongs to my Lord, Who has given us life after causing us to die, and to Him is the return.”

worship and stand humbly in the presence of his Master in order to settle his account, as though he had rendered no service at all. He would not sleep until he had fully entrusted his soul to God, declared his dissociation from the world and all that it contains, and placed his hand wholly in the hand of God.” (Siratun Nabisa, Vol. 1, pp. 83-85)

In one narration, Hazrat Anas bin Malikra narrates that the Messengersa of Allah said: “To sit with those who engage in the remembrance of Allah from the morning prayer until the sun rises is more beloved to me than freeing four slaves from among the progeny of Hazrat Ishmaelas; and to sit with those who engage in the remembrance of Allah from the Asr prayer until the sun sets is more beloved to me than freeing four slaves.” (Sunan Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Ilm, Bab fi al-Qasas, Hadith 3667)

That is, Holy is Allah, All praise belongs to Allah, There is none worthy of worship except Allah, and Allah is the Greatest. (Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab al-Adab, Kitab Fadl al-Tasbih, Hadith 3811)

Thus, if a person always remains mindful of these things and keeps them in view at all times, whether while speaking or while working, they will bring nothing but blessings.

Similarly, Hazrat Abdullah bin Bisrra relates that a Bedouin submitted to the Holy Prophetsa, “There are too many rules and virtuous deeds in Islam for me,” meaning that there are so many rules, commandments, and virtuous actions that, for a person like him, they felt overwhelming. Bedouins would ask such questions. He then said, “O Messengersa (of Allah, tell me something among them that I may firmly hold on to, and make that my primary practice.”

The Holy Prophetsa replied: “Remain continuously engaged in the remembrance of Allah.” The Holy Prophetsa said that he should constantly be occupied in the remembrance of Allah. He said:

“You should remain constantly occupied in the remembrance of Allah.” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab al-Adab, Bab Fadl al-Dhikr, Hadith 3973)

Then, in another narration, it is reported from Hazrat Jabirra that the Holy Prophetsa said: “The most excellent remembrance is ال

[There is no god but Allah] and the most excellent supplication is ہلل

[All praise belongs to Allah.]” (Sunan atTirmidhi, Abwab al-Da`wat, Bab Ma Ja’a an Da`wah al-Muslim Mustajabah, Hadith 3383)

In another narration, Hazrat Abu

Similarly, in another narration, Hazrat Abu Bakrahra relates that whenever the Holy Prophetsa was presented with something pleasing or was given glad tidings of any kind, he would immediately fall into prostration to offer thanks to Allah. All gratitude belongs before Allah the Almighty alone, and it is the demand of His love, His praise, and His worship that one should immediately bow before Him and offer thanks to Him.

Hazrat Bara bin Azibra narrates that the Holy Prophetsa said: “When you come to your bed, perform ablution, as you do for prayer. (Performing ablution before sleeping is a good practice.) Then lie down on your right side and recite the supplications (I shall recite the translation of these supplications; they are as follows):

“‘O Allah, I submit myself to You. I entrust my affairs to You, and I take You as my support, fearing You and loving You. There is no refuge and no place of salvation except with You. Salvation rests only with You. I believe in the Book that You have sent down, and in the Prophet whom You have sent.’”

The Holy Prophetsa said: “Recite this supplication, for if you were to pass away that night, you would pass away upon the fitrah [Islam].”

The Holy Prophetsa said that these should be a person’s final words. The narrator says: “I submitted that I will memorise these words, and while repeating them, I said:

“‘And in Your Messenger whom You have sent.’ I said that I would include these words as well. Upon this, the Holy Prophetsa said: “No, say:

“‘And I believe in Your Prophet whom You have sent.’” (Sahih Muslim, Urdu Translation, Vol. 14, Kitab dh-dhikri wa d-du‘a, Bab ma yaqulu ‘inda n-nawm wa ahkdhi al-madja‘, Hadith 4870, Noor Foundation, pp. 82-83)

From this, it becomes evident that every night, when the Holy Prophetsa went to his bed, he would settle his affairs and supplicate before God Almighty that even if he were to pass away, his life should still be in His name. And when he awoke, he would praise God Almighty for His favour, acknowledging that, from his side, he had already detached himself from the world; it was only by Allah’s grace that He had given him life again and granted blessing in his lifespan. Just as the first supplication shows that the Holy Prophetsa constantly remained mindful of death, so too does this supplication bear witness to the same reality.

There is yet another supplication that shows that the Holy Prophetsa regarded every moment of his life as the final moment. When he would lie down to sleep, he would settle his affairs with his Lord, as though preparing himself for every change. Accordingly, Hazrat Bara bin Azibra narrates that when the Holy Prophetsa went to his bed and lay down, he would lie on his right side and say:

“O my Lord, I entrust my life to You. I turn all my attention towards You. I place my affairs in Your hands and resign myself to Your protection. I hope for benefit from You, and I fear You, Your greatness, and Your self-sufficiency. There is no refuge from Your wrath, nor any place of salvation, except that salvation and refuge be sought from You alone. I believe in the Book that You have revealed and in the Messenger whom You have sent.”

He taught us this prayer and would regularly recite it himself as well. Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra writes: “People settle their accounts when closing their shops (in the evening, shop owners settle their accounts before they go to sleep) but they do not settle their accounts with God Almighty. (They pay no heed to it.) How eminent was that individual who spent morning till evening occupied in fulfilling the obligations owed to God Almighty, and who did not merely fulfil them himself, but simultaneously kept watch over thousands to ensure whether they too were discharging their duties. Yet, at night, before going to sleep, he would close his eyes to all his efforts and acts of

Owing to his love for Allah the Almighty, he gave preference to those who love Allah and those who engage in His remembrance over the progeny of Ishmaelas, i.e., over his relatives and close kin. He was willing to endure them remaining in bondage but could not bear separation from such individuals [who remember Allah]. How is it possible that there should be a gathering in which Allah the Almighty is remembered, in which His love is mentioned, and that he should remain distant from such a gathering? How exalted indeed is the station of divine love, a love which he was instilling among the people and which had itself reached its utmost perfection within him. Then, while counselling his followers that they should remain constantly immersed in the love and remembrance of Allah the Almighty, the Holy Prophetsa said: “The most beloved deed in the sight of Allah is that death should come to you while your tongue is engaged in His remembrance.” (Al-Jami‘ al-Saghir li al-Suyuti, Vol. 1, Harf al-Hamzah, Hadith 198, Dar Al-Kotob AlIlmiyah, Beirut, 2004, p. 19)

Hazrat Abu Dardara relates that the Holy Prophetsa said: “Shall I not inform you of a deed that is the best of all deeds, the purest in the sight of your Lord, that which raises your ranks to the highest levels and which is better for you than spending gold and silver, and even better than if you should encounter the enemy; wherein you would strike their necks and they would strike yours (i.e., facing the enemy in battle in which there would be death on both sides.)

Indeed, you may call this jihad, but the deed that I am about to tell you surpasses all this.”

The Companions submitted: “Certainly, O Messengersa of Allah.” These days, Muslims often claim that jihad is the most excellent of deeds. They do not smite the enemy; they kill their own people, which is the gravest of sins. In any case, here the Holy Prophetsa is stating that there is something even better than this. He said: “It is the remembrance of Allah. Engage in the remembrance of Allah; this is a jihad greater than all jihads.” Accusations are levelled against Muslims, whereas this is the real teaching.

Hazrat Mu‘adh bin Jabalra relates that the Holy Prophetsa said: “There is nothing that delivers a person more effectively from the punishment of Allah than the remembrance of Allah. If one occupies oneself in the remembrance of Allah, then in turn Allah the Almighty delivers one from all matters and punishments. (Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab al-adab, Bab fadli al-Dhikr, Hadith 3790)

Owing to his love for Allah the Almighty, the remembrance of Allah at all times was most beloved to the Holy Prophetsa

It is stated in a narration related by Hazrat Abu Hurairahra that the Holy Prophetsa said:

“If I say

(Holy is Allah),

(All praise belongs to Allah),

(There is none worthy of worship except Allah), and ربکا

(Allah is the Greatest), this is more beloved to me than all that upon which the sun rises.” (Sahih Muslim, Translated, Vol. 14, Kitab adh-dhikri wa d-du‘a, Bab fadli t-tahlili wa t-tasbihi wa d-du‘a, Hadith 4847, Noor Foundation, p. 66)

This was the intense passion of his love for God, that even in the final moments of his life, the blessed tongue of the Holy Prophetsa was occupied with the name of that True Beloved.

Hazrat Aishara relates that the Holy Prophetsa used to say – while he was in good health – that no prophet passes away until he is shown his abode in Paradise, and thereafter he is granted a choice. Hazrat Aishara further states that when the time of the Holy Prophet’ssa demise drew near, and his blessed head was resting upon her thigh, he fell unconscious. Then he regained consciousness, raised his gaze towards the roof of the house, and supplicated:

[O Allah, the most Exalted Companion].

(Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Kitab al-maghazi, Bab akhiru ma takallama bihi n-nabiyysa, Hadith 4463, Nazarat Ishaat, p. 351)

She narrates, “At that moment, I said to myself that now he would not choose to remain with us; rather, he was departing to Allah. From this, I understood that this was the very matter he used to explain to us during his days of good health; that the choice would be granted, and that now he was choosing to go to Allah.” Hazrat Aishara relates that the final words uttered by the Holy Prophetsa were:

[O Allah, the most Exalted Companion].

Hazrat Aishara relates at another place:

“Among the blessings of Allah upon me is that the Messengersa of Allah passed away in my house, on the day when it was my turn, while his head was resting between my chest and my collarbone. And among these blessings is that Allah combined my saliva with his saliva at the time of his passing.”

She explains how this happened: “Abdur Rahman came to me while he had a miswak in his hand, and I was supporting the Messengersa of Allah. I noticed that he was looking towards it, and I knew that he liked the miswak. I asked, ‘Shall I take it for you?’ He indicated yes by nodding his head. I took it and gave it to him, but it was hard for him. I then asked, ‘Shall I soften it for you?’ He again nodded his head in agreement. So, I softened it for him. (That is, she placed it in her mouth and softened the miswak.)

“There was a vessel of water in front of the Holy Prophetsa. (The narrator does not recall whether this vessel was small or big.) The Holy Prophetsa would dip his hand into the water and wipe it over his blessed face, saying:

“‘There is no god worthy of worship except Allah. Indeed, death has its hardships.’

“Then he raised his hand and began to say:

“‘Towards the Most Exalted Companion.’

“He continued until his soul departed, and his hand fell gently to his side. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-maghazi, Bab mardi n-nabiyyisa wa wafatih, Hadith 4449)

The Promised Messiahas states: “The Holy Prophetsa was given the choice at

the end that if he wished, he could live in this world, and if he wished, he could come to Him. The Holy Prophetsa submitted: ‘O my God! I now desire that I should come to You.’ And the last words that he uttered while his blessed soul departed were

. Meaning that, ‘I do not wish to live here now; I wish to go to my God.’” (The Light of the Holy Quran, p. 110) That is, he did not wish to remain in this world any longer; rather, he desired to go to his Lord. Allah the Exalted granted him the choice – had he wished to remain alive, it would have been so – but he declared that he no longer wished to remain in this world.

Thus, he presented himself before Allah the Exalted.

[“O Allah, send down blessings on Muhammadsa and on the people of Muhammadsa, and send blessings and peace. Surely, Thou art the Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious.”]

(Official Urdu transcript published in the Daily Al Fazl International, 20 February 2026, pp. 2-8. Translated by The Review of Religions.)