About Itmaamul-Hujjah
Understanding Islam
Bayaan at-Talbees Ahlul-Takfeer
Ahlu-Sunnah Versus the Ashari/Sufi Movement
The Senior Scholars Warn Against Extremism and Exageration in Religion
Muslim Authorities
Countering Islamaphobia
To Non Muslims
Salafi Conferences With Scholars
In recent times there has arisen a thought that has never befroe been propgated ever in the history of Islam. The essential root of this thought seems to have a connection with Mutazili ideas and actually comes from a people who delve into modernity of Islam. The following is an in depth description of the matter bi ithnillah
here is a stated of one of those who beleive in this concept about "itmaamul-Hujjah"
Itmamul Hujjah basically means something to the effect of consumation/completion/finality of excuses. It is a concept related to the prophets of God. A certain group/nation is chosen to receive a prophet. They are given the message, warned and given time to accept it. The Truth, at this point, is presented in the clearest light possible without doubt. Those who reject it are punished, those who accept it are given God's support.
for other material regarding their idea they have formulated then below are their links
What is below is a discussion about the issue and how this newly formulated idea, indirectly was understood by one who adopted this concept to say "There are no Kuffar in this day in age"
Repelling the Opression Against Islam That "There are no Kaafirs in This Age" and that Takfeer is Abandoned (In Absolute Terms wihtout any Tafseel in it)

Inal Hamdulillah Rabbil Alameen, wa salatu wa salamu 'alaa ashraa fil anbiyaa i wal mursaleen, wa salatu wa salamu anabiyeena wa 'ala aalihi wa sahbihi ajma'een, ama b'ad

Oh Brothers and Sisters in Islam, a great fitaan has come about in this time of ours that unfortunately some of us has fallen into and I ask Allah to guide us to His straight way, which is the way that our prophet has left us upon and the way that our companions have taken, and the way that their students had adopted from the companions, which is unfortunately a way that many of us in these times do not seek guidance in or make it the desicive criterion between the authentics of Islam from that which is alien to Islam.

Borthers and Sisters I must warn you, as I wish for my brother what I wish for myself (to be wwarned from danger) that there has arisen a concept. A concept that has no place in both words or the intended meanings of those words in the Book of Allah, in the prophetic sunnah, not even in tthe books of hadeeth. It suffices plainly by stating that no muslim ever in the history of Islam, from the people of the sunnah ever propagated such a concept. This concept is linguistically called "Itmaam ul-Hujjah" which means the completion of the decisive proofs.

Do to this concept, those who adopted it propagate that the decisive and clear criterion of truth and falsehood (the clear bayyinah) has ended, yes ended with the death of our noble prophet salallahu alaihi wa salam. This means that anyone who gives dawah of Islam to any one who is not a muslim and they reject, even due to kufr al-shakk, kufr al-juhood, and the rest of various types of kufr still cannot be called a kaafir (one who rejects Islam), yes, still cannot be called a kaafir.

Never was this the creed of our righteous salaf nor those who followed them after their time. This in itself is sufficient enough to abandon the matter. The actual pretext for their arguement is that since we give dawah to Islam to them, then it is just "our version" of Islam wallahul-musta'an. There is no doubt that there are various dawahs that have crept into Islam that was not from it like the dawah of the sufees, shia, brelvi, naqshbanee, habashi, deobandee, tableeghee, ikhwaanee, takfeeri and whatever of the various deviated sects out there.

Yet do to this fact of reality they go beyond the bounds of the reality and go on to say that Islam itself is not in its original purity as it was in the prophet's time.

The reason I say or speak about this concept is because it is the leading root cause for blasphemous statements like "there are no kuffar in our times" which is under the pretext of "our islam is not in its pure form no more" wa iyaadhubillah min adhaalik from such an innovated rhetoric.

I will respond to some of these accusations that the members of this adopted concept use to support their baseless claims.

We cannot perform takfeer on no one (muslim or not)

I say in response not only is this complete absolution, it is not found anywhere in the book and sunnah. There is not an over absolution in this regard. This both applies to Muslim and non muslim

Shaykh Abdul-Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh on Iqaamatul-Hujjah Prior to Takfeer

Question: I know that the one who mocks anything from the Sharee'ah of Allaah, or His Messenger, is upon great danger, reaching the level of kufr. So is it correct that I describe the one who does that, that he is a Kaafir, or what? May Allaah reward you.

So he replied: Whoever mocks anything from the relgion, or mocks Allaah the Sublime, or the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), then he is a kaafir, a murtadd, due to his saying, the Exalted, "Say, is it in Allaah and His signs and His Messenger, that you were mocking? Do not make excuses, you have already disbelieved after your faith..." (9:65-66).

This is the ruling upon the one who mocks. However, to apply this ruling upon a specific person requires the establishment of the proof (iqaamat ul-hujjah), and also knowledge of the fulfilment of the conditions (for this takfir) and the absence of any barriers (to it).

And this is not for anyone except one who is a firmly established scholar, who is grounded in this issue of establishing the proof, and also the conditions and barriers to takfir. And I love that I advise my brother Muslims and students of knowledge specifically that they are cautious of falling into this matter (i.e. making takfir) since it causes errors, and causes the minds to go astray, and let them entrust the affairs to those who are worthy of them."

From Majallut-ad-Da'wah, no. 1797 (21st June 2001, p.40).

it is clear here that the issue of takfeer is rebuked in a general sense and is not suppose to be practiced and then there is the exclusion of Islam "UNLESS added to this matter.

Stated by the Imaamu-Zaahid, The Alamaah, the Faqeeh Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-Uthaymeen
Question : What are the conditions and requirements of making takfeer (passing a judgement that a Muslim has left the fold of Islaam and has become a disbeliever), and what is the ruling regarding a person who commits an act of kufr (disbelief) in jest?
Answer : “The ruling about making takfeer upon a Muslim is dependant upon two conditions:
Firstly: That the proof has been established that this is a matter which is from disbelief (i.e. which can cause a person to become a disbeliever).
Secondly: Then applying this ruling to one who does such an act, having knowledge that this action is an act of kufr (disbelief) and intending it. However, as for the person who is ignorant, then he does not become a kaafir (disbeliever) by such an act - due to the saying of Allaah - the Most High:
“Whosoever opposes the Messenger, even after guidance has been plainly conveyed to him, and follows a path other than that of the Believers, We shall leave him in the path he has chosen and land him in Hell; what an evil destination.” [Soorah-Nisaa’ 4:115]
And His saying:
“And AIlaah will never misguide a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them as to what they should avoid.” [Soorah Tawbah 9:115]
And His saying:
“And We never send punishment until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning).” [Soorah al-Israa 17:15]
However, if such a person is one who has transgressed by intentionally turning away from learning and seeking clarification, then he is not excused - such as the one who comes to know that such and such an action is an act of kufr, but he does not try to confirm it, nor does he attempt to seek further clarification - then such a person will not be excused in this case.
If, however, the person did not intentionally intend to commit kufr by such an action, then he will not be judged as a kaafir (disbeliever) on the basis of that action. For example: Being compelled to commit kufr, whilst the heart is at peace with eemaan (faith). Or the example of one who looses control over his thoughts and does not know what he is saying - due to extreme joy, or other similar reasons. Such as the saying of the owner of the camel, so he lay under a tree waiting for death; and then suddenly the camels reigns are caught by the tree, so he takes hold of them and says:
“O Allaah! You are my Slave and I am Your Lord,” [Related by Muslim (no.6611) from Anas radi-Allaahu ’anhu]
committing a grave mistake due to his extreme joy. However, as for the one who commits an act of disbelief in jest, then he becomes a disbeliever, due to him intending disbelief - as the people of Knowledge have duly stipulated.

(Majmoo al-Fataawaa wa Rasa'il, 2/125-126).

So according to the dawah of the Itmaamis (those affected with this concept) then there is no such thing or there could never occur any such matter as "when one receives plain and correct guidance" because their banner that they hide under is "it is your version of guidance". This is instant nullification or blocking that nothing of this type of scenario could ever exist in this world except for the time of the prophet. I mean by this that in reality any muslim is virtually incapable (as incapable as we are in growing wings on our backs) to actually peform or grant dawah on what Islam necessitates to anyone.

again by the same Alamaah

Question: O Shaikh, may Allaah preserve you and take care of you – what is the meaning of the statement of Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, "Takfir of a specific individual requires specific evidence (takfir ul-mu’ayyan yahtaju ila dalil mu’ayyan)"?
Answer: You know, may Allaah bless you, that the (Shari’ah) rulings are sometimes associated with a description (wasf) and sometimes associated with an individual. For example we say, ‘Every believer is from the people of Paradise’. This is a general statement which is associated with a description, every believer is in Paradise and every disbeliever is in the Fire. However, do we say in the case of a specific individual, so and so is from Paradise? Do you say about this specific individual, so and so is from the people of Fire?
Hence, there is a difference between that which is associated with a description and that which is associated with an individual. When a person utters a statement of disbelief or commits an act of kufr, then we do not declare him to be a disbeliever until we look at what motivated him to do that.
Then, we behave with him (i.e. pass a ruling over him) based upon what his (specific) situation demands.
A man is compelled to prostrate to an idol, so he prostrates. And another is compelled to utter a statement of kufr, so he says it. Have both of these men disbelieved? No. Because Allaah has said,
Whoever disbelieved in All‚h after his belief, except him who is forced thereto and whose heart is at rest with Faith but such as open their breasts to disbelief, on them is wrath from All‚h, and theirs will be a great torment. [Nahl 16:106]
So His statement "Whoever disbelieves in Allaah after having faith" is inclusive of the one who disbelieves by words or deeds. So this man who prostrated to an idol under compulsion and the man who uttered a statement of disbelief under compulsion, is his action one of kufr or not? Yes, his action is one of kufr. But is he a kafir? No. This is because, there exists a preventative barrier that restrains from takfir, and that is compulsion.
And then [there is the case of] the man who exceeded in transgression against his own soul and who said to his family, ‘When I die, burn me and scatter my ashes into the sea’. He did this thinking that he will be saved from the punishment of Allaah by it. Then his family did what he had ordered them. And Allaah – the Mighty and Majestic – gathered his ashes together and brought him back and asked him ‘Why did you do it?’ He replied, ‘My Lord, I feared Your punishment’. And so Allaah forgave him. [Bukhari, Kitab ut-Tawhid].
The act of this man is one of kufr, why? Because he doubted in the power of Allaah, and doubted that Allaah is able to bring him together again and punish him. However, since the reason behind this act of his was his fear of the punishment of Allaah – the Mighty and Majestic – Allaah forgave him.
Hence, the meaning of the words of Shaikh ul-Islam – may Allaah have mercy upon him – it is said: the disbelief that is associated with a description, then judgement can be made by it in all circumstances, [such as] whoever disbelieves in Allaah will be in the Fire, whoever prostrates to an idol is a disbeliever, whoever says that there is another deity alongside Allaah is a disbeliever [and so on]. However, with respect to a specific individual, you must not make a judgement against him until you investigate; he could be ignorant and not know, or he could have made an interpretation (ta’wil) [that is incorrect], or there could be a situation in which he was made to utter words without actually intending them.
The Prophet – may the prayers and peace be upon him – informed us that Allaah rejoices more with the repentance of his servant than [the rejoicing of] a man who has lost his camel in the desert, seeking to find it but to no avail, so he despairs of finding it again. Then he rests under a tree and awaits death. And then he finds that the camel is tied to the tree by its reigns, so he takes it by the reigns and says out of extreme joy, ‘O Allaah you are my servant and I am your Lord.’ [Muslim]. This word here is a word of kufr since he claimed Lordship (rububiyyah) for himself and claimed Allaah is a servant. However, he did not actually intend this, but he was made to err on account of his great excitement and joy, and as the Prophet – may prayers and peace be upon him – said, ‘Allaah will not take him to account’.
Liqaa ul-Baab al-Maftooh (v36. No 1020)

The Imaam al Haafidh Ibnul-Qayyim al-Jauziyyah stated

And as for kufr it is of two types:

Kufr akbar (major kufr) and kufr asghar (minor kufr).

So kufr akbar - this necessitates eternity in the Hellfire.

And the (kufr) asghar: Necessitates the fulfilment of the threat (of Hellfire) without eternally abiding in it. As occurs in the saying of the Exalted - and it used to be from what was recited and then it was abrogated :

"And do not detest/hate your fathers, for that is disbelief from you"

and his (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) saying in the hadeeth:

"There are two matters in my ummah, by which (my) Ummah falls into kufr: Reviling the genealogy and wailing/lamenting (over the dead)"

And his saying in the Sunan:

"Whoever comes to a women from her anus has disbelieved in what was revealed upon Muhammad" and in another hadeeth: "Whoever comes to a sorcerer or a diviner and believes in what he says has disbelieved in what Allaah revealed upon Muhammad"

and his saying

"Do not become disbelievers after me, striking the necks of one another".

And this is the explanation of Ibn ‘Abbaas and the generality of the Companions regarding the speech of Allaah:

And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, then they are the disbelievers (5:44)

Ibn Abbaas said: "It is not the kufr that takes one out of the religion. Rather when he does it then it is [an act of] disbelief, and he is not like the one who disbelieves in Allaah and the Last Day" and Taawoos said the same and Ataa said: "It is disbelief less than disbelief, oppression less than oppression and rebellion less than rebellion"

And amongst them are those who interpreted the verse to mean the one who abandons the rule of Allaah while opposing and rejecting it (jahidan lahu) and this is the saying of Ikrimah! And this is a defective saying, since just the mere denial (juhud) of it is disbelief, regardless of whether he ruled by it or not.

And amongst them are those who explained it to mean abandoning ruling by all of what Allaah revealed, he said, and who enters into this the judgement of Tawhid and Islam! This is the interpretation of Abdul-Aziz al-Kinani, and this too is far from what is correct!! Since the threat (contained in the verse) is for the negation of ruling by the revealed legislation, and this can apply to abandoning all of the legislation of just some of it.

And amongst them are those who explained it to mean to rule in opposition to the text, deliberately, without being ignorant of it and nor due to error in understanding or interpreting it. Al-Baghawee quoted this from the scholars generally.

And amongst them are those explained to refer to the Ahl ul-Kitaab. And this is the saying of Qataadah, Dahhaak and others. And this is far (from what is correct) - and it is in opposition to the apparent wording - so it is not to be inclined towards.

And amongst them are those who explained it to mean the kufr that takes one out of the religion!

And what is correct is that judging by other than what Allaah has revealed is both types of kufr (disbelief) - kufr asghar (the minor disbelief) and kufr akbar (the major disbelief) - and [which of the two it is] depends on the condition of the ruler. If he believes in the obligation of judging by what Allaah has revealed n this situation but turned away from it - out of disobedience - and while acknowledging that he is deserving of punishment then this is kufr asghar. And if he (i’taqada) believes that it is not obligatory and that he has a choice in the matter - along with his firm belief that it is the judgement of Allaah - then this is kufr akbar - and if he was ignorant in the matter or made an error then he is one who errs (mukhtee’) and his ruling is as the same for those who err (i.e. one reward).

In the last paragraph what was stated for the ruler is also applied to the ruled (the average muslim since the ayaah "Whoever" in "Whoever rules by other than what Allah has revealed" is in arabic "man" and is left upon its general implication to mean anyone.)

So here he mentions that there are two type of kufr, one that does not exit from the fold, and one that does. Whoever performed kufr or uttered kufr is in one of these two categories, and the result of this (which of the two he falls in) depends on the condition of the one in question.

Brothers and Sisters, it is clear from the above proofs that no one from this ummah exclusively made a prohibition of takfeer in its total absolute form.

Islam is not in its pure form anymore

another truth by which falsehood is reached is the utterance of this statement.

True- it is true that various dawahs have entered in Islam that marred the overall overview of Islam

False- Islam is not in its pure form anymore

The actual utterance of this statement has several implication that I personally beleive and hope that the people who utter it dont mean, nevertheless it is still misguidance by which Allah's refuge is sought

implication 1
This statement implies that because the various dawahs that has been innovatedly incorperated into Islam, then by default this also distorted the actual entity of the message of Islam itself. I think that this is why they stand on the absolute pretext that "no one can give the decisive guidance or message of Islam" since they render each and every person's dawah (even if it just be limited to the explicit hadeeths about Islam like the hadeeth "what is Islam, what is emaan, what is ihsaan") to be "thats your version of the message of Islam"

This goes against A. Allah as He Himself promised the preservation of this religion no matter how much the people of falsehood (form the muslims or not) hate it
B. Goes against the prophet who said
"there will never cease to be a group in my ummah who remaings upon the truth, victorious over their advesaries and who repel refute the false claims of the ignorant and dispel the fabrications of the liars"
C. The companions upon ijmaa who have agreed that "following the path of the beleivers leads to success" and the beleivers meaning them like in the ayaah

“And whosoever opposes the Messenger after the guidance has been made clear to him, and follows a path other than that of the Believers; We will turn him to what he has turned himself to, and burn him in Hell. What an evil abode.” [Sooratun-Nisaa‘ 4:115]

D. the beleifs of the Mujtahid Imaams, from the salaf and t hose who followed their way in that the deen of Islam has been Sent down by Allah and revealed throuhg the prophet, and understood and implemented by the companions and preserved by their students and their students. This was the fulfillment of Allah when He promised that "and no falsehood shall enter it".

Implication 2

What this statement also implies, knowingly or not, is that since Islam is not in it's pure form, then we as muslims are incapable of giving the correct dawah of Islam to the kuffar or those who have not received the message.

Outside of the very fact that this idea leads to nullifcation of the 4 points mentioned above in "implication 1" this idea is actually insinuating that we muslims, all of us, the entire umah, is not upon the Islam that was revealed to Muhamamd by Allah, and laid down by the prophet, and explained by the companions and established by the tabi'een.

This implies that we, as muslims, who attribute ourselves to Islam, have actually fallen into the ayaah

“And whosoever opposes the Messenger after the guidance has been made clear to him, and follows a path other than that of the Believers; We will turn him to what he has turned himself to, and burn him in Hell. What an evil abode.” [Sooratun-Nisaa‘ 4:115]

This is because we are not, according to them, following the path of the beleivers, because the correct Islam was their Islam, and since Islam is distorted in our times now, then no muslim is upon their islam, and thus has fallen into this ayaah.

this in itself is shown to be baseless in the 4 points I gave out in "implication 1"

It is ironically amazing that these people affected by this thought warn us that we fall into takfeer and condemning each other, but yet we are ourselves condemned automatically for nothing, on a matter that is not our fault.

Implication 3

This also implies the denial or negation of the very fact that "We have not punished any nation before you until We have sent a messenger to them"

The Imaams of this nation have explained that messengers of the message is not limited to justthe prophet or messenger. Example of this is
But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad SAW) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission. (Chapter #4, Verse #65)

This ayaah is forever a hujjah upon the ummah of Muhamamd till the Day of Judgement. To limit Muhamamd to be the person that he was "his own self" is incorrect because the intended meaning is whoever goes to Allah which they will find His decisions in the quraan or the Messenger, which is the sunnah that he brought.

Yet on the day of Judgement, according to their concept, if america doesnt accept islam or Britian or the other disbeleiving nations, they will not go to hellfire because they did not receive the perfect message that was with the prophet only (an accusation made by them)

So He the Most High says along with this message "In order that they may have no excuse againist Allah"

So our creed, the muslim creed, is that no nation shall be punished for a matter that they did not have knowledge of. But once they have received an iota of this knowledge as in the prophet's statement
"give dawah even if it be a single ayaah", they will not have any excuse against Allah if they denied the message, which is a matter that they reject due to their concept and Allah's refuge is sought.

Now we come to some statements of one who was infected with this concept

it was said
As i said, "If someone was to sincerely believe that Islam allowed such an act"... due to some far fetched opinion, then what? It is a must to correct understanding, however it is not your place to decide who is a kaffir or not. I dont recall Allah giving that authority to Ibn Kathir (r.h) either. I see that you havent learn much from your short spell at UI. Did you read what i wrote in the link? There is no such thing as a kaffir in this age. How can you have rejectors when the truth isnt in a perfect form, like it was when the Prophet (pbuh) was around?

The greatest of both falsehood and ignorance was propagated in this statement by which I seek refuge from Allah from such an abomination and that He the Most High guides the maker of this statement to His straight way.

Kufr that takes one out of Islam is not limited to the mere scenario of not beleiving that the arguement they have is in the quraan. Just because a munaffiq beleives that his arguement is supported by the quraan has no weight at all on the mere fact that His kufr is a nullifier of Islam. Subhanallah Im in a state of shock that one who beleives in Allah and the last day could ever formulate these words in their minds and actually allow these thoughts to find way on the net wallahul-musta'an.

the truth will always be in its perfect form. The prophet said "its night is like its day and no one deviates from it except that he is destroyed" whcih are the words that stand till the day of judgement, and not words that the foolish people make to last only during the lifetime of the prophet wa iyaadhubillahi mina dhaalika.

The addition of distorted forms of Islam is not an automatic nullification or the distortion of the correct Islam. If such an ignoramous from the muslims were to beleive this then our deen has not been saved from corruption like our Lord revealed that He would, AND our deen would be as flawed as the christians and jews by which allah would have still needed to send another revelation and perfect that and protect it from corruption and I aks Allah to guide us away form this falsehood Ameen.

It was also errornously said
Incorrect. He isnt a rejector of the Message of Islam, he is a rejector of YOUR VERSION, or YOUR EXPLANATION of the Message of Islam. Remember that. I dont recall anyone saying that you get revelation, therefore you cant possibly convey the Message as the Prophet (pbuh) could. So if someone rejects what you say, they dont reject Islam. I hope we are on agreement with that.

1. The message only becomes "that person's message" of Islam if, AND ONLY IF, such a one comes with a matter foreign to the book and the sunnah. Otherwise in the generaltiy it is still the complete and clear bayyinah and the message of Islam.

2. One who speaks with giving authentic information of Islam is not to be labeled or called, or given the attribute that such a one is receiving revelation. Just because someone claims they are giving the correct dawah of Islam (which can happen as our deen is not lost as advocated by you people), is not equal or tantamount to the claim that they are receiving revelation. This understanding of how to give dawah is foreign to the understanding of our predecessors and was not with them or the Imaams of the sunnah who followed their way.
3. Just because no one posses the qualities of the prophet's form of dawah like his distinctive righteous character, his facial light or radiance, his manners, is not by default a nullification of the actual precision or authenticness of Islam in one's dawah of Islam.

so overall akhee, no one from the people of the sunnah can ever agree with you in this as this goes against the whole of the religion regarding this matter.

In it not our place to decide who a kaafir is or not

First of all I would like to ask where on earth or where did such a person derive this claim from.

1. Judging one to be a kaafir or not is not equal or tantamount as judging one to be in the fire or paradise

Unfortunately these people affected by this rhetoric mistakenly attribute the legitamate and valid takfeer (based on conditions) to automatically be rendered as judging people, and this is incorrect and none of the people oft he sunnah or the righteous predecessors ever claimed such a claim.

labeling is not judgement in the sense of one's akhiraa (afterlife) such a judgeing is condemned by the consensus of the muslis, but labeling based on the worldy matters is not and intertwining them ot be the same is incorrect and shows that such a one has not wosdom or any knowledge at all in understanding the implications of the does and dont's of the religion from its basic matters.

So we, as muslims, ask these people, what do you mean by "it is not our right to judge"? If they mean to judge someone to be in the fire or not, then they are correct 100 percent and there is no disagreement in this.

If they mean that it is not our right to label for the worldy sake then all the matters that pertaineind to inheritance in the quraan, the dhimmi tax, marraige matters, food matters, can not be implemented and Allah and His messenger failed to reveal a decisive and CLEAR criterion due to the fact that labeling is forbidden in its absolute form (by them)

On top of this we say that you are not suppose to combine both of them and lump them up as if labelling is automatically condemning one to the fire or not.

Another profund blunder in this doctrine of their's is the nationalizing of establishing the proof of Islam on people. They say that anyone not from the blood of Bani Isma'eel cannot establish the hujjah of Islam upon the recipient of the message, but if one is from bani Isma'eel , then one is able to do so,

Of course, it is readily visible that the implication of this idea implies that the "hujjah' of Allah Tabaraku wa ta'ala cannot be established except based on tribal affiliation

Allah's refuge is sought from these concepts that have no basis in Islam and Allah is Azeezul-Hakeem

Subhanakallah wa bi Hamdik, ash haadu an lla ilaha illa ant, wa stagh firooka wa atubu elaik

asalamu alaikum warahmatullah