Tag: Tarikh

Praise be to Allah.The problem of global warming is regarded as one of the most serious environmental problems of our time, concerning which experts have held many conferences and published many articles about its dire consequences. These experts attribute this rise in temperature to the accumulation of gases in the atmosphere that is caused by factories, power stations and car emissions, which has led to a rise in air temperature and ocean temperature, which threatens to melt the ice-caps and cause flooding of land, which is expected to change the features of some countries completely and to change the climate of vast areas on earth.  
We could not find anything about this in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, apart from one hadeeth which some scholars who are specialized in sharee’ah and environmental sciences say has to do with this topic, and some of the most prominent specialists in the world agreed with them, which is that the Arabian Peninsula will again become meadows and rivers. They attribute that to a complete change in the earth’s climate and the melting of the Arctic ice cap due to global warming. 
What we think is that Arabia becoming meadows and rivers again is something concerning which there is no doubt, but we cannot be certain that it will happen because of the melting of the ice cap, because that is known only to Allaah. But we mention this view because it is relevant and because it has been said by some specialists, both Muslims and kaafirs. 
The hadeeth is: 
It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The Hour will not begin until the land of the Arabs once again becomes meadows and rivers.” Narrated by Muslim (157). Meadows refers to spacious land with a great deal of vegetation. 
1.
Dr. Zaghloul al-Najjaar says: 
This hadeeth is a scientific miracle that describes a natural fact that was not understood by scientists until the late twentieth century, when it was proven by definitive evidence that the Arabian Peninsula was meadows and rivers in ancient times. Climate studies have also indicated that the arid desert is now on its way to becoming meadows and rivers again, because the earth throughout its long history passes through climatic changes that take place gradually over long periods of time, or they may be sudden and swift. 
Climate studies indicate that we are coming into a new rainy period, the evidence of which is the shift of the ice-cap in the northern hemisphere towards the south, and a noticeable fall in winter temperatures. 
The fact that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) referred to this ice age in his hadeeth “until the land of the Arabs once again becomes meadows and rivers” is proof of his Prophethood, and shows that he was always connected to divine revelation, and was taught by the Creator of the heavens and the earth. End quote. 
See: https://bit.ly/2J76pX9
2.
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Majeed al-Zandaani said: 
Professor Alfred Kroner, one of the most famous geologists in the world, attended a geological conference in the College of Earth Sciences in the King ‘Abd al-‘Azeez University. I said to him: Do you have any proof that Arabia was once gardens and rivers? He said: Yes, this is well known to us and it is a scientific fact. Geologists know this because if you dig in any area you will find signs that tell you that this land used to be meadows and rivers. There is a lot of evidence.
I said to him: Do you have any evidence that Arabia will once again become meadows and rivers? He said: This is something real and proven. We geologists know it and measure it and calculate it. We can say approximately when it will happen, and it is not far off, it is quite close. I said: Why? He said: Because we have studied the history of the earth in the past, and we have found that it passes through many stages, one of which is the ice ages. What does ice age mean? It means that a certain amount of sea water turns into ice and collects at the North Pole, then it begins to shift towards the south, and when it shifts towards the south it covers whatever is beneath it, and the climate on earth changes. Among the climatic changes is the change that takes place in Arabia, where the weather becomes cold and Arabia becomes one of the lands which has the most rain and rivers on earth.
I said: Can you confirm that for us?  
He said: Yes, this is an undeniable fact. 
I said to him: Listen, who told Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) of that? This is all mentioned in a hadeeth that was narrated by Muslim; he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The Hour will not begin until the land of the Arabs once again becomes meadows and rivers.” Who told Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) that Arabia was once meadows and rivers? He thought, then he said: The Romans. I said to him: And who told him that Arabia would once again become meadows and rivers? He thought for a moment and said: The One Who is above! Then I said to him: Write it down. So he wrote in his own hand: I am astonished at the scientific facts that I have seen in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, which we could not prove until recently by modern scientific methods. This indicates that the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not attain this knowledge except by revelation from above. 
By Allaah, I spent only two and a half hours with this German until he said all of that. This giant among scientists wrote that and approved of it, which indicates that there is one science, one truth, One God.  
End quote from https://bit.ly/2xZKfUp
And Allaah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.All of this is baseless. He did not fight the jinn and no such thing happened at all. Rather this is false and is one of the lies and fabrications that people have invented.  Abu’l-‘Abbaas Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) stated this clearly and said: “It is a lie which has no foundation. It is one of the false stories fabricated by the liars.”

Praise be to Allah.History of the Green Dome 
The dome over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) dates back to the seventh century AH. It was built during the reign of Sultan Qalawun, and at first it was the colour of wood, then it became white, then blue, then green, and it has remained green until the present. 
Professor ‘Ali Hafiz (may Allah preserve him) said: 
“There was no dome over the sacred chamber. There was in the roof of the mosque above the chamber a waist-high enclosure of brick to distinguish the location of the chamber from the rest of the mosque’s roof. 
Sultaan Qalawun al-Salihi was the first one to build a dome over the chamber. He did that in 678 AH. It was square at the bottom and octagonal at the top, made of wood, and built on top of the pillars that surrounded the chamber. Planks of wood were nailed to it, over which plates of lead were placed, and the brick enclosure was replaced with one made of wood. 
The dome was refurbished at the time of al-Nasir Hasan ibn Muhammad Qalawun, then the leaden plates slipped, but they were fixed and refurbished at the time of al-Ashraf Sha’ban ibn Husayn ibn Muhammad in 765 AH. It fell into disrepair and was renovated at the time of Sultan Qayit Bey in 881 AH. 
The chamber and dome were burned in the fire that swept through the Prophet’s mosque in 886 AH. During the reign of Sultan Qayit Bey the dome was rebuilt, in 887 AH, and strong pillars to support it were built in the floor of the mosque, and they were built of bricks to the correct height. After the dome had been built in the manner described above, cracks appeared in its upper part.  When it proved impossible to refurbish it,  the Sultan Qayit Bey ordered that the upper part be demolished and rebuilt strongly using white plaster. So it was built solidly in 892 AH. 
In 1253 AH, an order was issued by the Ottoman Sultan ‘Abd al-Hamid to paint the dome green. He was the first one to colour it green, and the colour has been renewed whenever necessary until the present. 
It became known as the green dome after it was painted green. It was previously known as the white dome or the fragrant dome or the blue dome.” (Fusul min Tarikh al-Madinah al-Munawwarah by ‘Ali Hafiz (p. 127, 128)
The ruling on building the Green Dome
The scholars, both in the past and in modern times, criticized the building of this dome and its being given a colour. All of that is because of what they know of shari’ah closing many doors for fear of falling into shirk. 
These scholars include the following: 

Al-San’ani (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Ta-thir al-I’tiqad: 

“If you say: A great dome has been built over the grave of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), costing a great deal of money, I say: This is in fact great ignorance of the situation, because this dome was not built by him (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) or by his Companions or by those who followed them, or by those who followed the Tabi’in, or by the scholars and imams of the ummah. Rather this dome was built over his grave (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) on the orders of one of the later kings of Egypt, namely the Sultan Qalawun al-Salihi who is known as King Mansur, in 678 AH, and was mentioned in Tahqiq al-Nasrah bi Talkhis Ma’alim Dar al-Hijrah. These are things that were done on the orders of the state and not on the basis of shar’i evidence.”

The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked: 

There are those who take the building of the green dome over the Prophet’s grave in the Prophet’s Mosque as evidence that it is permissible to build domes over other graves, such as those of the righteous and others. Is this argument correct or what should our response to them be? 
They replied: 
“It is not correct to quote the fact that people built a dome over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) as evidence that it is permissible to build domes over the graves of the righteous dead and others, because those people’s building a dome over his grave (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was haram and those who did it sinned thereby, because they went against what is proven in a report from Abu’l-Hayyaj al-Asadi who said: ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) said to me: Shall I not send you on the same mission as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) sent me? Do not leave any image without erasing it or any high grave without levelling it. 
And it was narrated that Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade plastering over graves, or sitting on them or building over them. Both reports were narrated by Muslim in his Sahih. So it is not correct for anyone to quote the haram action of some people as evidence that it is permissible to do similar haram actions, because it is not permissible to go against the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) by citing the words or actions of anyone else. And because he is the one who conveyed the command from Allah, and he is the one who is to be obeyed, and we must beware of going against his commands, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And whatsoever the Messenger ((peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)) gives you, take it; and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it)” [al-Hashr 59:7]. 
And there are other verses which enjoin obedience to Allah and to His Messenger. And because building up graves and erecting domes over them are means that lead to associating their occupants with Allah, and the means that lead to shirk must be blocked.” (Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Baz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaq ‘Afifi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allah ibn Qa’ud. Fatawa al-Lajnah al-Daimah (9/83, 84) 

The scholars of the Standing Committee also said: 

“There is no proof in the fact that a dome was set up over the Prophet’s grave for those who take it as an excuse for building domes of the graves of the awliya (“saints”) and righteous people, because the building of a dome over his grave was not done on his instructions and was not done by any of his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), or by the Tabi’in, or by any of the imams of guidance in the early generations whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) testified were good. Rather it was done by people of bid’ah (innovation). It was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever introduces anything into this matter of ours that is not part of it will have it rejected.” And it was proven that ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said to Abu’l-Hayyaj: Shall I not send you on the same mission as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) sent me? Do not leave any image without erasing it or any high grave without levelling it. Narrated by Muslim. As it is not proven that he (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) built a dome over his grave, and it is not proven from any of the leading imams; rather what is proven shows that to be an invalid action, and no Muslim should feel any attachment to the action of innovators who built a dome over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).” (Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Baz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaq ‘Afifi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allah ibn Ghadyyan, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allah ibn Qa’ud. Fatawa al-Lajnah al-Daimah (2/264, 265) 

Shaykh Shams al-Din al-Afghani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

“Al-‘Allamah al-Khajandi (1379 AH) said, discussing the history of the green dome that was built over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and explaining that it is an innovation that was done by some sultans and ignorant persons who erred and made a mistake, and that it is contrary to the clear sahih hadiths and reflects ignorance of the Sunnah, and that they went to extremes and imitated the Christians who are confused and misguided: 
It should be noted that until the year 678 AH, there was no dome over the chamber which contains the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), rather it was built by the king al-Zahir al-Mansur Qalawun al-Salihi in that year (678 AH), when this dome was built. 
I say: He did that because he had seen in Egypt and Syria the adorned churches of the Christians, so he imitated them out of ignorance of the command and Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), as al-Walid imitated them by adorning the mosque, as was mentioned in Wafa al-Wafa. 
It should be noted that undoubtedly this action of Qalawun was contrary to the authentic hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), but ignorance is a great calamity and exaggeration in love and veneration is a real disaster, and imitation of foreigners is a fatal disease. We seek refuge with Allah from ignorance and exaggeration and imitation of foreigners.” (Juhud ‘Ulama al-Hanafiyyah fi Ibtal ‘Aqaid al-Quburiyyah, 3/1660-1662) 
Why wasn’t the Green Dome demolished?
The scholars have explained the Shar’i rulings concerning the building of this dome and its obvious effects on the followers of bid’ah’ who have developed an attachment to this structure and its colour, and they praise and venerate it a great deal in their poetry and writings. Now it is up to the authorities to implement these fatwas, and this is nothing to do with the scholars.  
The reason why it is not demolished is so as to ward off fitnah and for fear that it may lead to chaos among the ordinary people and the ignorant. Unfortunately the ordinary people have only reached this level of veneration towards this dome because of the leadership of misguided scholars and imams of innovation. They are the ones who incite the ordinary people against the land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries and its ‘aqidah and its manhaj. They are very upset about many actions that are in accordance with shari’ah in our view and contrary to innovation in their view. 
Whatever the case, the shar’i ruling is quite clear, and the fact that this dome has not been demolished does not mean that it is permissible to build it or any dome over any grave, no matter what grave it is. 
Shaykh Salih al-‘Usaymi (may Allah preserve him) said: 
“The fact that this dome has remained for eight centuries does not mean that it has become permissible, and being silent about it does not indicate approval of it or that it is permissible. Rather the Muslim authorities should remove it and put it back as it was at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). They should remove the dome and the adornments and engravings that are found in the mosques, above all the Prophet’s Mosque, so long as that will not lead to an even greater fitnah. If it would lead to an even greater fitnah, then the ruler should postpone the matter until he finds an opportunity for that.” (Bida’ al-Qubur, Anwa’uha wa ahkamuha, p. 253)
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.We put this
question to Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Jibreen, may Allaah preserve him, who
answered as follows.

 The dove
does not have any particular meaning in Islam. It is simply one of the
birds that Allaah has permitted us to eat, just like any other permissible
bird.

 In
Islam, the dove does not stand for peace or for anything else. It is
sufficient for us Muslims for us to follow the commands of Allaah to
establish justice on earth.

Praise be to Allah.
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And indeed she did desire him, and he would have inclined
to her desire, had he not seen the evidence of his Lord”

[Yoosuf 12:24]
Her desire was to commit
sin, but as for Yoosuf (peace be upon him), if he had not see the evidence
of his Lord, he would have inclined to her desire – because of human nature
– but he did not, because of the evidence mentioned. 

Because he hadseen seen the evidence of his Lord, he did not
incline to her desire. 

Abu Haatim said: I used to recite ghareeb al-Qur’aan
to Abu ‘Ubaydah, and when I reached the verse (interpretation of the
meaning): “And indeed she did desire him, and he would have inclined to
her desire” [Yoosuf 12:24], Abu ‘Ubayd said: This is to be understood as
meaning that he saw the proof of his Lord, and so he did not incline to her
desire. 

Al-Qurtubi, al-Jaami’ li Ahkaam al-Qur’aan, 9/165. 

Al-Shanqeeti said in Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/58): 

This may be answered from two angles: 

1 – That what is meant by saying “Yoosuf would have inclined
to her desire” is that a thought crossed his mind, but the influence of
taqwa (piety) deflected that thought. One of them said: this is the natural
inclination and the instinctive desire that is restrained by taqwa. There is
no sin in that because this is something that is instilled in man and is not
under his control. It says in the hadeeth that the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to divide his time equally among his
wives and treat them fairly, then he would say: “O Allaah, this is how I
divide that over which I have control, so do not take me to task for that
which is beyond my control” – meaning the inclination of the heart. [Abu
Dawood, al-Sunan, hadeeth no. 2134. 
This is like the fasting
person’s inclination towards cold water and food, while at the same time his
taqwa prevents him from drinking or eating whilst he is fasting. 

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
said: “Whoever thinks of an evil action but does not do it, one hasanah will
be recorded for him.” [Narrated by al-Bukhaari in his Saheeh, no.
6491; Muslim, no. 207] 

2 – Yoosuf (peace be upon him) did not think of doing
anything at all, because he was prevented  from doing so because of the
proof of his Lord. This view which was favoured by Abu Hasaan and others is
more correct according to the rules of the Arabic language. 

Then he started to quote the evidence to support the view he
favoured. Based on the above, the meaning of the verse – and Allaah knows
best – is that if Yoosuf (peace be upon him) had not seen the proof of his
Lord, he would have inclined towards her desire, but because he had seen the
proof of his Lord he did not incline towards her desire and did not think of
it at all. Similarly, just thinking of something without doing it is not
regarded as a sin. And Allaah knows best. May Allaah send blessings and
peace upon his noble Prophet.

Praise be to Allah.You should note that one of the ways in which Allah deals with His chosen slaves is to test them according to the level of their faith, to show who is sincere and who is not. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): 
“Alif-Laam-Meem.
[These letters are one of the miracles of the Quran, and none but Allah (Alone) knows their meanings.]
2. Do people think that they will be left alone because they say: ‘We believe,’ and will not be tested.
3. And We indeed tested those who were before them. And Allah will certainly make (it) known (the truth of) those who are true, and will certainly make (it) known (the falsehood of) those who are liars, (although Allah knows all that before putting them to test)” [Al-‘Ankaboot 29:1-3]
Those who are most severely tested are the Prophets, then the next best and the next best, as it says in the saheeh hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). 
If you study the seerah (biography) of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), you will see that he went through severe tests; he was even accused of being a liar, a sorcerer and a madman; garbage and filth were thrown on his back; he was expelled from Makkah; and his feet bled in al-Taa’if. This was the situation of all the Prophets who were rejected before him (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). 
Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab (may Allah have mercy on him) suffered the same as other sincere scholars and daa’iyahs, but in the end the message of truth that he brought prevailed. How could it be otherwise? How could the light of truth be extinguished? Think about this man and how Allah helped him to sow the seeds of Tawheed throughout the Arabian Peninsula and put an end to all kinds of shirk. If this indicates anything, it indicates that he was sincere in his call and made sacrifices for that cause as far as we can tell, and of course his efforts were supported and helped by Allah. 
But the enemies of this call have spared no effort to make false accusations concerning it. They claimed – falsely – that the Shaykh claimed to be a prophet, and that he did not respect the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) properly, and that he condemned all the ummah as kaafirs… and other fabrications and lies that were told about him. Anyone who examines these claims will realize for sure that they are all lies and fabrications. The books of the Shaykh which are widely circulated bear the greatest witness to that, and his followers who answered his call never mentioned anything to that effect. If the matter were as they claim, his followers would have conveyed the same ideas, otherwise they would have been disloyal to him. If you want to know more details about this and to clarify the matter, you should read the book Da’aawa al-Manaawi’een li Da’wah al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab by Dr ‘Abd al-‘Azeez al-‘Abd al-Lateef, which will answer all your questions, if Allah wills. 
With regard to calling his followers Wahhaabis, this is just another in a long series of fabrications made up by the enemies of his call, to divert people away from the call of truth and to place a barrier between his call and the people so that the call will not reach them. If you study the story of how al-Tufayl ibn ‘Amr al-Dawsi (may Allah be pleased with him) became Muslim, you will see the parallels with what happened in the case of Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab. 
Ibn Hishaam narrated in his Seerah (1/394) that al-Tufayl set out towards Makkah, but Quraysh intercepted him at the gates of the city and warned him against listening to Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). They made him think that he was a sorcerer who could cause division between man and wife… they kept on at him until he took some cotton and put it in his ears. Then when he saw the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), he thought to himself that he would take out the cotton and listen to him, and if what he said was true then he would accept it from him, and if he what he said was false and abhorrent, he would reject it. When he listened to him, all he could do was become Muslim on the spot. 
Yes, he became Muslim after putting cotton in his ears. Those who oppose the call of Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab fabricated lies the same way Quraysh did. Quraysh understood full well that the call of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had the power to reach people’s hearts and minds, so they exaggerated in their lies about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in an attempt to stop the truth reaching people. Similarly we see that those who speak against Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab and his followers repeat the same lies that were told against the original call. 
You should – if you follow the truth – not pay any attention to these lies and fabrications. You should look for the truth of the matter by reading the books of Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab, for his books are the greatest proof that these people are lying, praise be to Allah. 
There is another subtle point that should be noted, which is that the Shaykh’s name was Muhammad, the attributive of which is Muhammadi. The word Wahhabi is the attributive derived from al-Wahhaab (the Bestower), who is Allah, as He says (interpretation of the meaning): 
“Our Lord! Let not our hearts deviate (from the truth) after You have guided us, and grant us mercy from You. Truly, You are the Bestower [al-Wahhaab]” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:8]
As al-Zajjaaj said in Ishtiqaaq Asma’-Allah, p. 126, al-Wahhaab “is the One Who gives a great deal. This form (fa’’aal) in Arabic is indicative of something that is done to a great extent. Allah is al-Wahhaab (the Bestower) Who gives to His slaves one after another.” 
Undoubtedly the path of al-Wahhaab is the path of truth in which there is no crookedness or fabrication, and His party is the one that will prevail. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): 
“And whosoever takes Allah, His Messenger, and those who have believed, as Protectors, then the party of Allah will be the victorious” [Al-Maa’idah 5:56] 
“They are the party of Allah. Verily, it is the party of Allah that will be the successful” [Al-Mujaadilah 58:22]
Long ago they accused al-Shaafa’i of being a Raafidi (Shi’ah) and he refuted them by saying:
“If being a Raafidi means loving the family of Muhammad, then let the two races (of mankind and the jinn) bear witness that I am a Raafidi.” 
We refute the claims of those who accuse us of being Wahhabis by quoting the words of Shaykh Mullah ‘Imraan who was a Shi’i but Allah guided him to the Sunnah. He said: 
“If the follower of Ahmad [the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)] is a Wahhaabi, then I affirm that I am a Wahhaabi 
I reject the association of any other with Allah, for I have no Lord except the Unique, the Bestower (al-Wahhaab) 
Those who were called by the Prophet accused him of being a sorcerer and a liar.” 
(See: Manhaaj al-Firqat al-Naajiyah by Shaykh Muhammad Jameel Zayno, p. 142-143. 
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.What is Al-Masjid al-Aqsa?
Al-Masjid al-Aqsa (in Jerusalem) was the first of the two qiblahs (prayer direction), and is one of the three mosques to which people may travel for the purpose of worship. 
Who built al-Masjid al-Aqsa?
And it was said that Al-Aqsa Mosque was built by Sulayman (peace be upon him), as stated in Sunan al-Nasai (693) and classed as sahih by al-Albani in Sahih al-Nasai. 
It was said that Al-Aqsa Mosque  existed before Sulayman (peace be upon him) and that Sulayman rebuilt it; this is based on the evidence narrated in al-Sahihayn from Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: “I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, which mosque was built on earth first?’ He said, ‘Al-Masjid al-Haram [in Makkah].’ I said, ‘Then which?’ He said, ‘Al-Masjid al-Aqsa.’ I said, ‘How much time was there between them?’ He said, ‘Forty years. So wherever you are when the time for prayer comes, pray, for that is the best thing to do.’” (Narrated by al-Bukhari, 3366; Muslim, 520)
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was taken on the Night Journey (Isra) to Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem), where he led the Prophets in prayer in this blessed mosque. 
Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): 
“Glorified (and Exalted) be He (Allah) [above all that (evil) they associate with Him]
Who took His slave (Muhammad) for a journey by night from Al-Masjid Al-Haram (at Makkah) to Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa (in Jerusalem), the neighbourhood whereof We have blessed, in order that We might show him (Muhammad) of Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, lessons, signs, etc.). Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Seer.” [al-Isra 17:1]
Who built the Dome of the Rock?
The Dome of the Rock was built by the caliph ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan in 72 AH. 
It says in al-Mawsu’ah al-Filastiniyyah (4/203): 
“The name al-Masjid al-Aqsa was historically applied to the entire sanctuary (al-Haram al-Sharif) and the buildings in it, the most important of which is the Dome of the Rock which was built by ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan in 72 AH/691 CE, which is regarded as one of the greatest Islamic historical buildings. But today the name is applied to the great mosque which is situated in the southern part of the sanctuary plateau.” 
It also says in al-Mawsu’ah (3/23): 
“The Dome of the Rock is situated in the middle of the plateau of al-Masjid al-Aqsa, which is in the southeastern part of the city of al-Quds (Jerusalem). It is a spacious rectangular plateau which measures 480 meters from north to south, and 300 meters from east to west. This plateau occupies approximately one-fifth of the area of the Old City of Jerusalem.” 
Difference between al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock 
The mosque which is the place of prayer is not the Dome of the Rock, but because pictures of the Dome are so widespread, many Muslims think when they see it that this is the mosque. This is not in fact the case. The Mosque is situated in the southern portion of the plateau, and the Dome is built on the raised rock that is situated in the middle of the plateau. 
We have already seen above that the name of the mosque was historically applied to the whole plateau. 
This is supported by the words of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) in Majmu’at al-Rasail al-Kubra, 2/61: 
“Al-Masjid al-Aqsa is the name for the whole of the place of worship built by Sulayman (peace be upon him). Some people started to give the name of al-Aqsa to the prayer-place which was built by ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab in front of it. Praying in this prayer-place which ‘Umar built for the Muslims is better than praying in the rest of the mosque, because when ‘Umar conquered Jerusalem there was a huge garbage dump on the rock, since the Christians wanted to show their scorn for the place towards which the Jews used to pray. So ‘Umar issued orders that the filth be removed and he said to Ka’b: ‘Where do you think we should build a place of prayer for the Muslims?’ He said, ‘Behind the rock.’ He said, ‘O you son of a Jewish woman! Are you influenced by your Jewish ideas! Rather I will build it in front of it.’
Hence when the imams of this ummah entered the mosque, they would go and pray in the prayer-place that was built by ‘Umar. With regard to the Rock, neither ‘Umar nor any of the Sahabah prayed there, and there was no dome over it during the time of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. It was open to the sky during the caliphate of ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, Mu’awiyah, Yazid and Marwan… The scholars among the Sahabah and those who followed them in truth did not venerate the rock because it was an abrogated qiblah… rather it was venerated by the Jews and some of the Christians.” 
‘Umar denounced Ka’b al-Ahbar and called him the son of a Jewish woman because Ka’b had been a Jewish scholar and rabbi, so when he suggested to ‘Umar that he should build the mosque behind the rock, that was out of respect for the rock so that the Muslims would face it when praying, and veneration of the rock was part of the religion of the Jews, not the religion of the Muslims. 
The Muslims’ fondness for the picture of the Dome may be because of the beauty of this building, but this does not excuse them from the resulting mistake of not distinguishing between the Mosque and the buildings that surround it. 
This may be one of the plots and tricks of the Jews, because of their veneration for the rock and their facing it in prayer. Or it may be in order to give importance to the Rock so that they can fulfil their desire to build the so-called Temple of Solomon on the ruins of al-Masjid al-Aqsa. This is by making the Muslims think that al-Masjid al-Aqsa is the Dome of the Rock, so that if the Jews start to destroy al-Masjid al-Aqsa and the Muslims denounce them for that, they will tell them, “Al-Masjid al-Aqsa is fine,” and will show them a picture of the Dome of the Rock. Thus they will achieve their aims and be safe from the Muslims’ criticism. 
We ask Allah to restore the Muslims’ power and glory, and to cleanse al-Masjid al-Aqsa of the criminals, “for Allah has full power and control over His Affairs, but most of men know not.” (Surah Yusuf 12:21)
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.Al-Bukhaari (3610) and Muslim (1064) narrated that Abu Sa‘eed al-Khudri (may Allah have mercy on him) said: whilst we were with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and he was sharing out some wealth, Dhu’l-Khuwaysirah, a man from Banu Tameem, came and said: O Messenger of Allah, be fair! The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Woe to you! Who will be fair if I am not fair? You will be doomed and lost if I am not fair.” ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: O Messenger of Allah, give me permission to strike his neck. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Let him be, for he has companions, in comparison to whose prayer one of you would regard his prayer as insignificant, and he would regard his fasting as insignificant in comparison to their fasting. They recite the Qur’aan but it does not go any further than their collarbones. They will pass out of Islam as an arrow passes out of the prey. whilst we were with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and he was sharing out some wealth, Dhu’l-Khuwaysirah, a man from Banu Tameem, came and said: O Messenger of Allah, be fair! The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Woe to you! Who will be fair if I am not fair? You will be doomed and lost if I am not fair.” ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him) said: O Messenger of Allah, give me permission to strike his neck. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Let him be, for he has companions, in comparison to whose prayer one of you would regard his prayer as insignificant, and he would regard his fasting as insignificant in comparison to their fasting. They recite the Qur’aan but it does not go any further than their collarbones. They will pass out of Islam as an arrow passes out of the prey 
This Dhu’l-Khuwaysirah was the leader of the Khawaarij. See the answer to question no. 191140 
According to another report narrated by Abu Sa‘eed: ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib sent to the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) some gold from Yemen in a tanned leather bag, that had not been purified of the earth clinging to it. He shared it out among four men: ‘Uyaynah ibn Badr, al-Aqra’ ibn Haabis, Zayd al-Khayl and the fourth, who was either ‘Alqamah ibn ‘Ulaathah or ‘Aamir ibn al-Tufayl. One of his companions said: We had more right to it than these men. News of that reached the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and he said: “Do you not trust me, when I am the trustee of the One Who is above the heaven and the news of heaven comes to me morning and evening?” A man with sunken eyes, prominent cheeks, a high forehead, a thick beard and shaven head stood up, tucking up his izaar, and said: O Messenger of Allah, fear Allah! He said: “Woe to you! Am I not the one who should fear Allah the most among the people of earth?” Then the man turned and left, and Khaalid ibn al-Waleed said: O Messenger of Allah, should I not strike his neck (kill him)?  He said: “No, perhaps he prays.” Khaalid said: How many of those who pray say with their tongues what is not in their hearts? The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “I have not been commanded to check people’s hearts or split open their bellies (meaning checking what is in their hidden thoughts).” Then he looked at him as he was going back and said: “From among the progeny of this man will emerge people who recite the Book of Allah fluently, but it will not go any further than their throats. They will pass out of the faith as an arrow passes out of the prey.” 
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said: This man was Dhu’l-Khuwaysirah at-Tameemi. End quote. 
This man was a hypocrite. 
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
The Qur’an stated that this man was a hypocrite: “And of them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms” [at-Tawbah 9:58], i.e., he will criticise and cast aspersions upon you. By telling the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) to be just and fear Allah, after he had given that wealth only to those four people, he was accusing the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) of being unjust and not fearing Allah. Hence the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Am I not the one who should fear Allah the most among the people of earth? Do you not trust me, when I am the trustee of the One Who is above the heaven?” 
Such words would undoubtedly deserve execution, if anyone were to say them today. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) only refrained from executing him because he outwardly appeared to be a Muslim, by regularly praying, which is what people are to be fought for until they do it. His hypocrisy was because of what he caused the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) of offence, but the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) had the right to pardon him and overlook his misdeed. He used to pardon them and overlook their misdeeds in order to soften their hearts towards Islam, lest the people said that Muhammad was killing his companions.
End quote from as-Saarim al-Maslool (pp. 228-229) 
This is also indicated by the report narrated by Muslim (1063) from Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: A man came to the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in al-Ji‘raanah, when he was on his way back from Hunayn. In the cloak of Bilaal there was some silver and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was giving handfuls of it to the people. He said: O Muhammad, be fair! He said: “Woe to you! Who will be fair if I am not fair? I will be doomed and lost if I am not fair.” ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “O Messenger of Allah, let me kill this hypocrite! He said: “Allah forbid that the people should say that I kill my companions. This man and his ilk read the Qur’an, but it does not go any further than their throats, and they pass through it like an arrow passing through the prey.” 
The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did not rebuke ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) for calling him a hypocrite. 
It is also indicated by the report narrated by al-Bukhaari from the hadeeth of Abu Sa‘eed mentioned above (6933), in which Abu Sa‘eed said: I bear witness that I heard it from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and I bear witness that ‘Ali killed them, and I was with him. A man was brought who matched the description given by the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). He said: And these words were revealed concerning him (interpretation of the meaning): “And of them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms” [at-Tawbah 9:58]. 
The words of Allah, “And of them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms” [at-Tawbah 9:58], were revealed concerning the hypocrites. 
Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
Allah, may He be exalted, says ‘And of them’ that is, among the hypocrites ‘are some who accuse you’ that is, they criticize you with regard to the distribution of the alms or charity, when you share it out, and they make accusations against you. They are the ones who deserve to be accused, yet despite that their objection is not motivated by religious concerns; rather it is motivated by their whims and desires. Hence if they are given something they are pleased, but if they are not given something, they become enraged, i.e., they get angry.
End quote from Tafseer Ibn Katheer (4/144) 
Al-Qaari (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 
Dhu’l-Khuwaysirah was a man from Banu Tameem concerning whom the words of Allah, may He be exalted, were revealed (interpretation of the meaning): “And of them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms” [at-Tawbah 9:58]. Hence he was one of the hypocrites.
End quote from Mirqaat al-Mafaateeh (9/3799) 
See also: 
‘Umdat al-Qaari (16/143)
Daleel al-Faaliheen (1/186)
Tafseer Ibn ‘Atiyyah (3/46)
Sharh az-Zarqaani ‘ala al-Muwatta’ (1/251)
At-Tahdheer wa’t-Tanweer (10/232) 
See the answer to question no. 148986 for information on the difference between the hypocrite and the apostate 
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.We Muslims do not believe that there is any contradiction between the Holy Qur’an and the original Torah and Gospel, because we believe that they are all divinely revealed books that were sent down from Allah, may He be glorified. Thus they came from the same source, and as that is the case there cannot be any contradiction or conflict between them, as Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Do they not then consider the Quran carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much contradictions”
[an-Nisa’ 4:82]. 
Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, describes the Holy Qur’an as “confirming” the Books that came before it, and that which confirms something cannot contradict or conflict with it. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“It is He Who has sent down the Book (the Quran) to you (Muhammad SAW) with truth, confirming what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel).
Aforetime, as a guidance to mankind, And He sent down the criterion (of judgement between right and wrong (this Quran)).”
[Aal ‘Imraan 3:3-4]
“And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad SAW) the Book (this Quran) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures)”
[al-Maa’idah 5:48]. 
As for what we see nowadays of contradictions in the copies of the Torah and Gospel that are extant today, the reason for that is clear and obvious. It is because these two Books have fallen prey to distortion and alteration, with things being taken away, added and changed. That is in addition to the fact that the sources and manuscripts that have come down to us today cannot be trusted. This is what explains any differences that researchers or students find between these two Books and the Holy Qur’an which has been transmitted to us in a mutawaatir fashion (i.e., narrated by so many from so many that it is inconceivable that they could all have agreed upon a lie), as is attested by both believers and nonbelievers. 
For more discussion on this matter, please see fatwa no. 186196 
Nevertheless we say that Ibraaheem’s arrival in the land of Makkah al-Mukarramah – and indeed his building of the Sacred House – are historical events that are attested to in the Torah and other ancient historical books. We cannot deny the fact that there are different interpretations of these texts of the Torah and so on, and that the context is open to different interpretations. Our aim here here is to confirm that such indications exist. However, the matter should be left to scholars to examine the story in the Old Testament, in order to reach a definitive conclusion.
These references include the following: 
1.
In the book of Genesis 16:7 it says, after mentioning the story of Ibraaheem (Abraham) going in unto Haajar (Hagar) and her becoming pregnant, then Sarai’s [Sarah’s] complaint to Ibraaheem about her: 
[Biblical quotations in English are taken from the King James Version (KJV); some place names have been changed, followed by the place name, in brackets, that is mentioned in the KJV. This is done in line with the point the author is making – see below] 
And when Sarai [Sarah] dealt hardly [harshly] with her, she fled from her face.
7 And the angel of the Lord found her by a fountain [spring] of water in the wilderness, by the fountain [spring] in the way to the Hijaz (Shur).
8 And he said, Hagar, Sarai’s maid, whence camest thou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai.
…
13 And she called the name of the Lord that spake unto her, Thou God seest me: for she said, Have I also here looked after him that seeth me?
14 Wherefore the well was called Be’er lahai roi (Well of the Living One Who sees me); behold, it is between Kadesh and Bered.
See how the name of the Hijaz is mentioned, and Hajar’s departure to that place, after which the blessing of the “Well of the Living One Who sees me” is bestowed by Allah, may He be glorified and exalted; this is the Well of Zamzam. 
2.
In Genesis 13:1-18 it says: 
And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, towards the qiblah (into the south).
2 And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold.
3 And he went on his journeys from the south even to Bethel, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Hai;
4 Unto the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first: and there Abram called on the name of the Lord.
…
18 Then Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar unto the Lord.
In Genesis 20:1 it also says: 
And Abraham journeyed from thence towards the land of the qiblah (the south country), and dwelled between Kadesh and Shur, and sojourned in Gerar.
We have quoted these texts [in the original Arabic of this article] from the Torah as translated into Arabic by Sa‘eed al-Fayyoomi, (d. 943 AH); the King James Version of the Bible has been used here]. He was the first one to translate the Old Testament into Arabic. He also wrote a commentary for most of its books. We have not found this Torah anywhere else except in the book of Idrees ‘Abayzah entitled Madhkal ila Diraasat at-Tawraat wa Naqdiha ma‘a Tarjumatihi al-‘Arabiyyah li Sa‘diyyaa Ka’oon al-Fayyoomi (Introduction to the Study and Critique of the Torah, accompanied by its Translation into Arabic by Sa‘diyyaa Ka’oon al-Fayyoomi). 
In other well-known translations of the Torah [into Arabic], instead of the Hijaz it mentions “by a fountain [spring] of water in the wilderness, by the fountain [spring] in the way to Shur” (Genesis 16:7), and instead of the qiblah it mentions “the south” (Genesis 13:1).
[Translator’s note: some English translations say “Negev” instead of “the south’; in the Bible, this word is used for the direction “south”] 
For more information please see (in Arabic): Nabi Ard al-Janoob (Prophet of the Southern Land) by Jamaal ad-Deen ash-Sharqaawi (p. 18-109) 
3.
In Genesis 21:21 it says of Ismaa‘eel (peace be upon him): 
21 And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt.
This is how it appears in the Samaritan Torah (also known as the Samaritan Pentateuch), and in al-Fayyoomi’s translation of the Torah.
Although many passages in the Torah suggest that Paran is in Palestine, Imam al-Qarraafi said in his book al-Ajwibah al-Faakhirah (p. 165): Paran is Makkah, according to the consensus of the People of the Book. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said in al-Jawaab as-Saheeh liman baddala Deen al-Maseeh (5/200): 
There is no difference of opinion between the Muslims and the People of the Book concerning the fact that Paran is Makkah. But if they say that it is not Makkah, there is nothing strange in that, because they are known for their distortions and fabrications. 
He (may Allah have mercy on him) also said concerning the region around Mount Hira’ in Makkah:
That place is called Faaraan (Paran) to this day. End quote. 
‘Abd al-Haqq Vidyarthi (d. 1978 CE) stated in his famous book Muhammad in World Scriptures:
In the Arabic translation of the Samaritan Pentateuch (Torah), which was published in 1851 CE, it says that Paran is located in the Hijaz, as follows:
“And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt” (Genesis 21:21).
This translation remained in circulation for a long time, but when the Muslims alerted the Christian world to this prophecy, and that it constituted testimony to the truth of this Noble Prophet, the translation was changed. End quote 
4.
In the Old Testament, in Psalms 84:5-6, 10, there is mention of the valley of Baca. This passage, in the King James Version (KJV), reads as follows: 
5 Blessed is the man whose strength is in thee; in whose heart are the ways of them.
6 Who passing through the valley of Baca make it a well; the rain also filleth the pools.
…
10 For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand (elsewhere).
There is no valley on earth called Baca (or Bakkah) that contains a house of worship and a spring of water (Zamzam), in which one prayer is better than a thousand prayers offered anywhere else, other than Makkah al-Mukarramah. 
Baca (Bakkah) is one of the names of Makkah. This name is mentioned in the Holy Qur’an, where Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning)”
“Verily, the first House (of worship) appointed for mankind was that at Bakkah (Makkah), full of blessing, and a guidance for Al-Alameen (the mankind and jinns)”
[Aal ‘Imraan 3:96]. 
But the translators and commentators of the Old Testament distorted the word Baca to buka’ [weeping or crying; the Hebrew cognate denotes the same meaning], even though the meanings of place names should not be translated; rather the name should be transliterated, and even though the meaning of the (original) name has nothing to do with crying or weeping, as a result of their desire to eliminate all references to anything that is proven in the Holy Qur’an, such distortions occurred. 
In conclusion, we say: 
Even if nothing was mentioned in the Old Testament concerning Ibraaheem’s journey to the Hijaz, that does not indicate that this journey did not happen at all. The well known academic principle says that the fact that a thing is not mentioned does not mean that it did not happen. In other words, denying that something happened should take the form of a negative statement. The fact that no mention is made of its happening does not necessarily mean that it did not happen; rather the reason why it was not mentioned may be that it was omitted, forgotten, summarized in brief, and the like. If you find news of something in one newspaper, then you find that it is not mentioned at all in another newspaper, the fact that it is not mentioned in the latter does not mean that it did not happen. Whoever thinks in such terms is lacking in reason and is making no sense. This is also applicable in the case under discussion here. 
Furthermore, if we were to quote the words of non-Muslims who have investigated the story of the Ka‘bah and who really built it, and have determined that Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) is the one who built it, this article would become far too long. But we will limit ourselves to quoting one of the most famous of contemporary history books, The Story of Civilization, by Will Durant. This book is composed of forty-two volumes in which the author discusses the history of most civilizations, including the history of the Arabian Peninsula, concerning which he says: “It (the Ka‘bah) was built the fourth time by Abraham and Ishmael, his son from Hagar.
See Qissat al-Hadaarah, 13/18 (The Story of Civilization). 
And Allah knows best.

Praise be to Allah.
The clear text of the Qur’an indicates that everyone who was
on earth drowned in the flood, and no humans or animals were saved except
those whom Nooh took with him on board the ark. 

Allah, may He be exalted, said (interpretation of the
meaning):

“And We saved him and those with him in
the laden ship.

Then We drowned the rest (disbelievers)
thereafter”

[ash-Shu‘ara’ 26:119-120].

“(So it was) till
then there came Our Command and the oven gushed forth (water like fountains
from the earth). We said: ‘Embark therein, of each kind two (male and
female), and your family, except him against whom the Word has already gone
forth, and those who believe. And none believed with him, except a few.’”

[Hood 11:40]. 

“They denied him,
but We delivered him, and those with him in the ship, and We made them
generations replacing one after another, while We drowned those who belied
Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.). Then see
what was the end of those who were warned”

[Yoonus 10:73]. 

The Qur’anic text also indicates that the earth was only
populated after that by the descendants of Nooh (peace be upon him). As for
the believers who were saved with him in the ark, none of their descendants
were left. So all the people on earth now are descended from Nooh (peace be
upon him). 

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the
meaning): 

“And indeed Nooh
(Noah) invoked Us, and We are the Best of those who answer (the request).

And We rescued him and his family from
the great distress (i.e. drowning),

And, his progeny, them We made the
survivors (i.e. Shem, Ham and Japheth).

And left for him (a goodly remembrance)
among generations to come in later times.

Salamun (peace) be upon Nooh (Noah)
(from Us) among the Alameen (mankind, jinns and all that exists)!”

Verily, thus We reward the Muhsinoon
(good-doers)

Verily, he (Nooh (Noah) ) was one of
Our believing slaves.

Then We drowned the other (disbelievers
and polytheists, etc.)”

[as-Saaffaat 37:75-82]. 

‘Ali ibn Abi Talhah narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas: There was no
one left except the progeny of Nooh (peace be upon him). 

Qataadah said concerning the words “And,
his progeny, them We made the survivors”:
All people are among the progeny of Nooh (peace be upon him). 

Tafseer al-Qur’an al-‘Azeem by
Ibn Katheer, 7/22 

Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

The scholars differed concerning the number of people who
were with him on board the Ark. 

It was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allah be pleased with
him): There were eighty men, accompanied by their wives. It was narrated
from Ka‘b al-Ahbaar that there were seventy-two people. It was also said
that there were ten people. 

A number of the commentators said: The water rose until it
was fifteen cubits above the top of the highest mountain on earth. This is
the view of the People of the Book. It was also suggested that it was eighty
cubits, and that it covered the length and breadth of the earth, plains,
rugged terrain, mountains, desolate regions and sandy deserts, and there was
no one left of those who had been living on earth at all, neither young nor
old. 

Imam Maalik said, narrating from Zayd ibn Aslam: The
population at that time filled the plains and mountains… 

Allah did not give any of those believers who were with him
children or descendants, apart from Nooh (peace be upon him). Allah, may He
be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “And,
his progeny, them We made the survivors”
[as-Saaffaat 37:77]. So everyone on the face of the earth today, of all
races, are the sons of Adam who are descended from the three sons of Nooh,
namely Saam, Haam and Yaafith (Shem, Ham and Japeth). End quote. 

Al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah,
1/111-114 

Al-‘Allaamah at-Taahir ibn ‘Ashoor (may Allah have mercy on
him) said: The fact that the phrase “them
We made the survivors” begins with the
pronoun is to indicate exclusivity. In other words: There was no one left of
mankind except those whom Allah saved with Nooh in the ark, of his
offspring, then those who were descended from them. There was no one left of
the sons of Adam apart from the progeny of Nooh. So all nations are among
the progeny of the three sons of Nooh. The apparent meaning of this is that
those who believed with Nooh apart from his sons did not have any offspring.
Ibn ‘Abbaas said: When Nooh came out of the ark, the men and women who were
with him died, except for his sons and his wives. Thus we may respond to the
apparent contradiction between this verse and the verse in Soorat Hood (“We
said: ‘Embark therein, of each kind two (male and female), and your family,
except him against whom the Word has already gone forth, and those who
believe. And none believed with him, except a few.’”
[Hood 11:40]). This is based on the idea that the
flood covered the entire earth and destroyed all humans except those whom
Nooh carried on board the Ark. End quote. 

At-Tahreer wa’t-Tanweer, 23/47 

With regard to the words of Allah, may He be exalted,
(interpretation of the meaning):

“ ‘O offspring of those whom We carried
(in the ship) with Nooh (Noah)! Verily, he was a grateful slave’”

[al-Isra’ 17:3]

And

“Those were they unto whom Allah
bestowed His Grace from among the Prophets, of the offspring of Adam, and of
those whom We carried (in the ship) with Nooh (Noah), and of the offspring
of Ibrahim (Abraham) and Israel and from among those whom We guided and
chose. When the Verses of the Most Beneficent (Allah) were recited unto
them, they fell down prostrating and weeping”

[Maryam 19:58],

These words do not indicate that the offspring of the
believers whom Nooh (peace be upon him) carried with him survived; rather
what is meant is the sons of Nooh (peace be upon him) whose progeny
survived, not the other believers.

Al-‘Allaamah al-Ameen ash-Shanqeeti (may Allah have mercy on
him) said: The verse  “‘O
offspring of those whom We carried (in the ship) with Nooh (Noah)! Verily,
he was a grateful slave’”[al-Isra’ 17:3]
states that none of the offspring of those who were carried on the ark with
Nooh survived, apart from the offspring of Nooh, as it says in the verse: “And,
his progeny, them We made the survivors”
[as-Saaffaat 37:77]. End quote.

Adwa’ al-Bayaan, 3/13

And Allah knows best.