An objection about a poem mentioned in fazaile durood has been raised by a brother. The poem says :

Raha jamaal pe tera hijab e Bashriyat
Najana kaun hai kuch bhi kisine Juz e Sattar’

“Your beauty had been under the veil of mortality/humanity,
No one was able to identify who was the ‘Juz-e-Sattar’ (Branch/Part of Sattar)”


In the above poem, the author said that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was under the veil of humanity.

That is the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was in reality Allah who came to earth as a human being.

In the second line, he says that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was part/branch of Allah (Sattar).

If this is not shirk, what else is shirk? If other religions say that Allah came to earth as human, what we say about that belief….

Above were his comment. as i dont know urdu, if you shed some light it will help a lot.


In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.

The quoted section is taken from the last qaseedah of Hadhrat Maulana Qasim Nanotwi rahimahullah reproduced in Fadha’il Durood of Hazrat Sheikh Zakariyyah rahimahullah. Here is the scan of the particular part.

beauty of rasulullah - qaseeda qasimi from fazail durood 2

I have taken the liberty to highlight the specific portions.

Now, let us see the contention and then answer it.

Issue 1: The claimant has contended that the statement “Raha jamaal pe tera hijab e Bashriyat” is talking a the dhaat of Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam. If that were not the case, he would not have commented on it by saying “In the above poem, the author said that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was under the veil of humanity.” Of course, that is not what the author said. The author said that “the beauty of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was under the veil of humanity.” Such a statement is nothing controversial. Allama Ibrahim ibn Muhammad Bajuri rahimahullah (1277h) in his famous Sharah on Al Shamail Al Muhammadiyyah has mentioned,

“It has be explicitly mentioned that from the perfection of one’s Imaan is to have I’tiqad that the beautiful apparent qualities never gathered in a body of a human to the level that gathered in the body of Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam, and along with that too, his (i.e Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam’s) full beauty never became apparent, otherwise no eye had the ability to see it.” (pg. 37)

The couplet that preceded the one quoted also indicates that the author is exemplifying the quality of beauty. Otherwise there was no need to compare the beauty of Sayiduna Yusuf alayhisalam with that of Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam. Hence there is nothing qabeeh in the first part of this couplet “Raha jamaal pe tera hijab e Bashriyat

Issue 2. The claimant has also contended with the second sentence of the couplet, “Najana kaun hai kuch bhi kisine Juz e Sattar’“, and then contended that it means “No one was able to identify who was the ‘Juz-e-Sattar’ (Branch/Part of Sattar)”.

My response is that this translation is grossly biased to say the least. In order to correctly translate, allow me to give three words and their respective meanings.

word 1: Juz’ / جزء : This is an arabic word. The translator has confused the original word جز of urdu with جزء of arabic. Juz’ means a part, or a portion. Below is the page from the arabic to english dictionary called Hans Wëhr, Pg. 146

juz- arabic hanswher pg146

word 2: Juzw / جزو: Juzw is the urdu equivalent of the arabic جزء. The claimant could not strike this difference between the arabic word and the urdu term. Below is the pertinent scan from Ferozul Lughat Pg 458.

juzw ferozul lughat pg 458

word 3: Juz / جز : Juz is an urdu word  which is an abbreviation of the second word Juzw above. However, it is not only an abbreviation of juzw, rather is also a Persian word Juz. This is why it has multiple meanings. While being an abbreviation of juzw, one of its meaning is indeed “part or portion”, but at the same time it also carries a primary meaning from its Persian origin meaning “besides/Except”. This meaning can be corroborated in both urdu and persian dictionaries. The Pg. 458 of Ferozul Lughat mentions:

 juz ferozul lughat pg 458

Hence, both meaning are ascribed to it. The primary Persian meaning can be checked in Persian dictionary. You may use one of the dictionaries available here : Click Here

Or see here for search result on the Juz : Click Here

Response: Considering the meanings of the word, the appropriate meaning of the second line should be:

“No one came to know , who he really was except Allah “

Or more contextually it would be:

“No one knew the extent of his beauty, except Allah”

With this meaning, the statement is a continuation of expounding the beauty of Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam. Makhluq was not able to encompass the real beauty of Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam, then who shall really harness the reality of his beauty besides the creator who created Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam.

One begs the question, why would one choose a meaning and reconstruct a sentence which would render the author mushrik? Why not adopt a meaning which is contextual to the language, poetry and befitting the aim of the poetry itself. The entire poetry is expounding the grandeur of Rasulullah salallahu alayhi wasallam.

Just imagine! Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’an:

{وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِنْ رُوحِي} [الحجر: 29]

{وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِنْ رُوحِي} [ص: 72]

…and breathed into him my soul…

Do we really attribute the Ruh blown into Adam alayh salam to be part of Allah’s soul, while the wording of the quran apparently suggest that? If that is the case, then why go out of the way to establish a meaning of Juz as a part of Allah, instead of opting for the academically sound meaning of besides/except, rendering the statement void of any problems.

And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best

Mufti Faisal bin Abdul Hameed al-Mahmudi