Dr. Mohsin Khan's incorrect translation of Bukhari Ahadith

[haqq]

Assalaamualaikum,

In the link below you will find an excellent article on Waseelah. The writer exposes the incorrect translation (regarding Waseelah) of Bukhari Shareef by Dr. Moshin Khan (the Salafi). The errors that the author exposes are only related to Waseelah but only Allah knows how many other Ahadith he has incorrectly translated.

It's a must read for all.

http://www.themajlis.net/Sections-article94-p1.html

Was-salaam,
Haqq

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

other mistranslations of classical texts include Imam an-Nawawi's Riyad us-Salihin - dar-us-salam print.... full of errors and salafi commentary.

[haqq]

assalaamualaikum,

Yes, indeed.

The Tafsir ibn Kathir translated and published in English is not complete. They have omitted many Ahadith and commentary of the great Muffasir (ibn Kathir).

One example is that in the original Arabic Tafsir of Surah Jumu'ah verse no. 2, "And others among them who have not yet joined them. And He is the Almighty, the All-Wise", ibn Kathir (r.a.) records Hadith from Bukhari, Muslim, At-Tirmidhi, An-Nasa`i, Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn Jariri.

"Hadhrat Abu Hurayrah (R.A.) said, "We were sitting with the Prophet , when Surat Al-Jumu`ah was revealed to him;

[وَءَاخَرِينَ مِنْهُمْ لَمَّا يَلْحَقُواْ بِهِمْ]

(And others among them who have not yet joined them.) They said, `Who are they, O Allah's Messenger' The Prophet did not reply until they repeated the question thrice. At that time, Salman Al-Farisi was with us. So Allah's Messenger placed his hand on Salman, saying,


«لَوْ كَانَ الْإِيمَانُ عِنْدَ الثُّرَيَّا لَنَالَهُ رِجَالٌ أَوْ رَجُلٌ مِنْ هؤُلَاءِ»


(If faith were on Ath-Thurayya (Pleiades), even then some men or a man from these people would attain it.)'' Muslim, At-Tirmidhi, An-Nasa`i, Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn Jarir collected this Hadith. This Hadith indicates that Surat Al-Jumu`ah was revealed in Al-Madinah and that the Messenger's Message is universal. The Prophet explained Allah's statement,


[وَءَاخَرِينَ مِنْهُمْ]


(And others among them) by mentioning Persia. This is why the Prophet sent messages to the kings of Persia and Rome, among other kings, calling them to Allah the Exalted and to follow what he was sent with. This is why Mujahid and several others said that Allah's statement,

[وَءَاخَرِينَ مِنْهُمْ لَمَّا يَلْحَقُواْ بِهِمْ]

(And others among them who have not yet joined them.) refers to all non-Arabs who believe in the truth of the Prophet. Allah's statement,

[وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ]

(And He is the Almighty, the All-Wise.) asserts that He is Almighty and All-Wise in His legislation and the destiny He appoints. "

NOW. What the Darus Salam's translation of Tafsir ibn Khathir leaves out is the commentary of Muffassir ibn Kathir. In the commentary ibn Kathir says that the Ulama hold the view that when Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wassallam) placed his mubarak hand on Salman Farsi (R.A.) and said "a man from these people would attain it", they believe that this man can be no one else except al-Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah (R.A.). Because no one from Persia has attained such status in all the branches of Islam as al-Imam al-Azam.

The obove is the opinion of Muffasir ibn Kathir and many other great classical Sholars and it can be found in the original arabic version.

Muffassir ibn Kathir was a Muqallid of the Shafi Math-hab but they portray him as being a salafi.

Was-salaam,
haqq

[true_hanafi]

Assalam alaikum

i thought that this is the best translation of the quran, how about yusuf ali translation, but it is in old english, a new translation is out by Saheeh international, though i don't know the mathab of the translator nor the publishers.

The noble quran by Dr. taqi din hilal and mushin khan aqidah is correct i think????, but i think they differ in fiqh issues with Hanafis, though i heard Albani was hanafi, because his fiqh books have the same views as the hanafi mathab.

May Allah guide us to the straight path

True Hanafi

[ibn_abdullah]

Is this only in terms of the translation? Is there alteration in the arabic? I actually have Fath ul-Bari bi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari by Imam ibn Hajar printed by Dar ul-Taqwa. This publishing house seems to be Salafi influenced because on the cover they have the name of Shaykh Abdul Aziz ibn Baaz and Muhammad Fuwaad Abdul Baaqi. My question is that this book is the complete arabic text of the ahadith and the commentry; now would the arabic have been changed in the text of the hadith? and in the text of the commentary?

Sometimes i prefer books printed solely in the subcontinent and i guess from Syria etc. if i know the publishing house isn't influenced.

[Abu Usama]

Assalam alaikum

i thought that this is the best translation of the quran, how about yusuf ali translation, but it is in old english, a new translation is out by Saheeh international, though i don't know the mathab of the translator nor the publishers.

The noble quran by Dr. taqi din hilal and mushin khan aqidah is correct i think????, but i think they differ in fiqh issues with Hanafis, though i heard Albani was hanafi, because his fiqh books have the same views as the hanafi mathab.

May Allah guide us to the straight path

True Hanafi

Salam,

I also think that dr. muhsin's khan's translation is one of the better one. I have the yusuf ali one, but i'm not into the old english.

Albani didn't follow a madhab and called people away from following the madhabs. In other words, he definately was not hanafi.

[haqq]

Assalaamualaikum,

Abduallah yusuf ali's english commentary of the quran is off -----> http://www.themajlis.net. Check the Q&A on the home page or search yusuf ali in q&a.

The ibn Kathir Tafsir is good but one should know that it is not complete. The arabic one is the complete one. When reading the english Tafsir of ibn Kathir by Dar us salaam, if you notice any thing which you don't understand, you must consult a proper scholar.

One should avoid reading Bukhari with out a proper shaykh. A lot of people get confused.

Avoid both Mohsin Khan and Yusuf Ali's translation. Stick to Tafsir Uthmani. Tafsir Uthmani is a good one. Another excellent Tafsir is the Ma'ariful Qur'aan by Mufti Shafi Uthmani (ra). Put all the other Tafsir Kitaabs down and go out and get the Ma'ariful Qur'aan. It is very detailed.

Also, one should only read books transalted by reliable sholars ----> http://www.themajlis.net/Sections-article144-p1.html

Albani is the modern day father of the Salafi movement.

And Allah Knows Best.

Was-salaam,
Haqq

[talib al-habib]

salaams

I think that we should remember not to take fiqh and aqida from ANY English translation of the Qur'an, as mere translation of words and phrases of the Arabic text into English is inadequate. Personally, I like the way that Yusuf Ali's translation uses pseudo-Shakespearean Ye Olde English; I just find it more aesthetically pleasing. Personal opinion. The best reliable modern translation is probably the one recently produced by ITS (Abd al-Hakim Murad, Aisha Bewley and co). I think its called, 'the Majestic Qur'an.' The Noble Qur'an by Taqi ad-Din and co is not only inelegant and clumsy, but chock-full of typical Salafi doctrinal errors interpolated into its very text.

In terms of Tafsir Uthmani; I have read parts of it, but honestly I just couldn't get my head around it. I'm sure that the original Urdu is concise and excellent for lay people, but the English translation is just impossible! For example, the basmala is translated as, 'IN the Name of Allah, Exceedingly Generous, Excessively Merciful' (or something like that). It's more correct in terms of literal transaltion (ie: sigha al-mubalagha instead of ism al-tafdil), but it loses all the majesty of the original. Some earnest brothers used to try studying it after zuhr on campus, but the poor english used to put people off. I have been reliably told that a much better English commentary is Ma`arif al-Quran by Mufti Muhammad Shafi. Hope no-one's offended by my views on Uthmani - I know people hold it very close to their hearts!

was salam

PS: be careful of the Majlis guys. They're very pious, but also extremely harsh in their judgements and criticism. I used to get their magazine to count how many times they used the word 'kufr' on their front page (usually about 8, sometimes 12 or 13). The focus of their spleen tends to be either 'kuffar' modernists or 'mushrik bid`ati' Barelwis. They feel that excessive strictness is actually a virtue. I know them personally; and they put as many people off Islam as they draw towards it. No doubting their zeal, though; and they're far more knowledgeable than they give themselves credit for through their writings.

Just thought I'd better give an example (from their Q&A):

Q: Is is necessary to perform all the Sunnat Muakkadah salats. Some say this is not necessary in view of it being only Sunnat. Is this correct?

A: Answer: The statement "is only Sunnat", is kufr. [?!?] When any act of the Deen is regarded as being insignificant and unimportant, such an attitude is termed istikhfaaf which is kufr. A person who neglects the Sunnatul Muakkadah Salaat without valid Shar'i reason is a faasiq. It is a grievious sin to neglect the Sunnatul Muakkadah Salaat. It is a punishable offence.

OK, the middle bit we agree with. But kufr? If we're going thhe 'husn az-zann' route, we might say that, 'yes, they mean 'kufr' in terms of spiritually, as in a defect in one's faith,' but how many people reading that article (distributed all over South Africa) will apply husn az-zann, and how many more will think, 'Islam really is a harsh religion' ? I think more Sufi and less Ibn Hazm is required, especially in an era when young Muslims are teetering on the brink of kufr, and any slight shove will send them toppling. Allah knows best...

[MoOMoO]

:salam:

I have a headache! I am a convert to Islam, and I can only read English. I am working on my Arabic, but subhanALLAH. Most of the books I own, Riyad us Saliheen (dar us salam) and M.Khan Translation are Salafi? How in the world am I gonna find clear and true books without being misguided in to one sect or another.

[talib al-habib]

salaams MooMoo

1. congratulations, masha-allah, on becoming Muslim.. May Allah reward you with the best in this world and the hereafter.
2. nice tag - what does it mean
3. the best way to save yourself from misguidance is the way that has been advocated by every single scholar in Islamic history (OK, slight exaggeration) viz: get attached to scholars who have a living, vital and unbroken link to the Beloved Prophet (peace and blessings upon him). This is the only thing that has kept any of us free from deviant sects.
4. I'm sure it will be mentioned again and again: try www.sunnipath.com

take care

[talib al-habib]

salams

Sidi Ahmad Zarruq said, Rasulullah (s) said, 'knowledge is not [transmitted] through lines on a page (sutur) but through hearts (sudur).'

[haqq]

Assalaamualaikum,

Talib al-habib,

Jazaakallah, for your opionin on the Majlis. You say they are very pious but later you go on to critize them? You say they are very knowlegable but you don't agree with their rulings? What are you trying to say here? You say they are pious and knowledgable but you say be careful of the majlis guy?

How could you not understand that to say "only sunnah" is to belittle the Sunnah and kufr. Hadhrat Umar bin Khattaab (ra) was also harsh in his dealing with the people and rulings, would you say he ran people away from islam too???

As for runing people from Islam, It is only Allah who gives hidayah and not you or me. Our job is to speak the Haqq in the face of baatil. The Qur'aan commands to adopt Taqwa but we tell people to stay away from the pious who practice taqwa because they are going to run you away from Islam!!! If I, for one, am unable to practice the teaching of the mutaqqi ulama, than it's my fault and weakness but I should not be pointing fingers at those who encourage taqwa.

It is only because we are weak that we are unable to heed the naseehat of the pious.

Do the majlis practice what they preach?
Are they Staunch on the Sunnah?
Are they scared to speak the Haqq?
Do they worry about what people are going to say?
Are they constantly engaged in the path of Allah?
Do they compromise on the Sunnah?
Do they practice and encourage Taqwa?
Is not the above what our Nabi (saw) taught us?

We look for the criteria above and if they fit, we stick to them.

Just because you and I are weak doesn't mean that we critize the Haqq.

You on the other hand should be carefull of Judging the Pious Ulama. Allah might not like how you critize the Auliyah of Allah.

And Allah Knows Best.

Was-salaam,
Haqq

It is only because we are weak and look for an easy way out (different relaxed opinion. one that suits our nafs) that we start pointing fingers and say "they run people away from Islam because they are harsh".

[Abul Hasan]

Assalam alaikum

i thought that this is the best translation of the quran, how about yusuf ali translation, but it is in old english, a new translation is out by Saheeh international, though i don't know the mathab of the translator nor the publishers.

The noble quran by Dr. taqi din hilal and mushin khan aqidah is correct i think????, but i think they differ in fiqh issues with Hanafis, though i heard Albani was hanafi, because his fiqh books have the same views as the hanafi mathab.

May Allah guide us to the straight path

True Hanafi

:salam:

Muhsin Khan and al Hilali's translation of the Qur'an tries to get across their pseudo-Salafi aqeeda and is incorrect in many places, as is the translation of Bukhari. In fact, Mr Khan left out much from the original arabic in Sahih al Bukhari - including 2 examples of Ta'wil of the Sifat!

As for al-Albani - he was from a Hanafi family, but in his 20's he rebelled and spent the rest of his life attacking the Hanafi Madhhab and its contemporary Ulama like: Shaykh al Kawthari and Shaykh Abdal Fattah Abu Ghudda.

The most funniest nd contradictory thing though - is the fact that al-Albani's only Ijaza in Hadith was from a Hanafi Muhaddith from Halab! He is the Shaykh of our Shaykh: Muhammad Raghib al Tabbakh - who was the teacher of the following Ahnaf: Abdal Fattah Abu Ghudda, Nurud Din Itr, Abdullah Sirajud Din al Halabi and Ibrahim al Salkini. The pseudo-Salafi's forget to mention that Shaykh Raghib was a Hanafi Muhaddith!!


Wassalam

[Abu Usama]

Salam,

I've never heard of the majlis guy before this, so i cannot comment on that much. But i have certaintly seen a trend in people in which they attack their fellow muslims and are extremely harsh towards them and this is not a good thing because one of the major principles of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is the net benefit from any action you take. If your "speaking out" is going to produce more harm then good, then it is not permissable to do this.

[Mossy]

I've always wondered how wide siratul mustaqeem actually is.. It strikes me that in the case of the majlis crew, there really isn't all that much leeway, although in fact there are a number of areas in which one can legitimately differ from the position they hold.

Two people on Haqq need not have the same standpoint on things or take the "strictest" viewpoint on these.

Naseeha can also be targeted at a given audience without diluting the message, as I believe was clarified by the edit below.. It may not be well to judge ulema on a number of things, but one can certainly judge the impact of a given message with reference to oneself and ones own reaction towards it.

Gentle words and advice are preferable when speaking, if sincere advice will turn people away, then there's definately something wrong with it's delivery.

"Verily this religion is inexorable, so enter its depth gently (Ahmad, 12618); if you try to seize it all at once, it will overpower you" (Bukhari, 39).

Thinking about it, the corollarys of dawah and naseeha are interesting - in effect, many muslims to who you speak would be counted as kaffirs under the viewpoint of say the majlis, hence this form of advice would be dawah, would it not?

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

as far as qur'an translations go, my personal opinion is that 'The Majestic Qur'an' is by far the greatest.

it was completed by a group of turkish scholars, and edited by others including Sidi Abdal-Hakim Murad. It doesn't have an extensive commentary - but what it does have is excellent.

i have seen the other mentioned qur'ans... this one stands out - and it is of excellent quality.

[true_hanafi]

Assalam alikum

on the issue of Sh. Abdul Hakim Murad, as anyone heard the book called Al-hawa (desires) by Ibn Qayyim and footnotes by saleh a saleh, it refutes all the sufis scholars such as Ibn Arabi, and modern sufis Hamza Yusuf, Abdul Hakim and Nuh Keller, i am bit confused, Dr Saleh as saleh refutes the sufis in detail, i read the book and i am confused about tawussuf (sufism), he says that Ibn Arabi was a kaffir, because he stated Allah is in everything, he quotes his books called Makki revelations.

May Allah protect us and Guide us
True_Hanafi

[talib al-habib]

salaams brother Haqq

I think that Mossy and Abu Usama have covered most of what my reply would have been. You listed several points above which, knowing the Majlis al-Ulama (or Mufti A.S Desai, as it mostly comprises), could have come straight out from their own defence of their methodology. I do not debate either their piety or their correctness (on most issues). I do, however, take issue with the way in which they go about giving nasiha/da`wa, and have mentioned as such to them. Your conflation of piety and correctness betrays your mindset, which no doubt is similar to that if the Majlis: it doesn't matter how you say the truth, just say it. What about, 'Invite to the path of your lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching...'

Brother, the strictest way is not always right. In addition to the ahadith quoted, I would add, 'verily, Allah loves that you are strict in matters that he has enjoined strictness, and he loves that you take dispensations in matters that he has afforded one.' ie: deen is meant to be easy, not harsh. The path of taqwa is the best road for the muttaqin, no doubt; but not everyone is cut out for that path. If, as Mossy so nicely put it, you narrow the Sirat al-Mustaqim to the width of your own piety, you will push many people off it.

As for belittling the Sunnah being kufr, for that verdict to be passed the belittlement should be as clear as the sun. To say that sunnah salat can be left out (btw, it was in reference to musafir salat) because they are 'only sunnah' is perhaps not the ideal way of saying something that is essentially correct: sunnah salat are not legally binding in the same way as fard salah are. Why did the ulema from the Majlis not fulfill their obligation to exercise husn az-zann in regards to this statement, as I have just done?

It is, unfortunately, a plethora of examples such as this, over many years, that have hardened many peoples' opinion of the Majlis al-Ulama and caused their often correct message to fall on deaf ears. This is a great pity, for they are definitely staunch upholders of the Sunnah, and sometimes have the outspokenness to say what others hesitate to do. If you and I were like this, it might be excusable through our ignorance of the etiquettes of daw`ah and the sunnah of nasiha, but this is not a reason that can be applied to such learned muftis. [deep breath]

I am sorry, brother Haqq, for the offence that I will have undoubtedly caused you. It is never easy when those that you love and respect are criticised, even if it be in the best of ways. Perhaps this is something that the Majlis should think about as well, before they use the words 'kufr,' 'bida`' and 'shirk' with such wanton abandon against those who profess to be the followers of Sayyidina Muhammad, who was a rahma [comfort, mercy, source of compassion and tranquility] to mankind, peace and blessings without end upon him.

was salam

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

first of all, anyone who attempts to 'refute' those scholars must be from the puritanical movement that has plagued the ummah for the last few centuries.

secondly, there has been no 'confusion' about tasawwuf in the history of islam except from some extremists here and there, including the adherents of the salafi movement today. what they fail to realise is that the same scholars they (the salafi's, or anti-sufi's) they quote also were sufi - Imam Nawawi, Imam Hajar al-Asqalani, ibn Taymiyya, ibn Qayyum, ibn Rajab etc etc.... poor 'dr' saleh as saleh hasn't been reading around has he? or has he sat with scholars who actually know of all these books? ibn Taymiyya wrote about tasawwuf in his 'fatawa'. it is accepted by ahl al-sunna scholars worldwide - no need to be confused. If you want basic tasawwuf without much 'sufism' (meaning tariqa) then read 'purification of the heart' by Shaykh Hamza Yusuf....

thirdly, there has been difference of opinion on ibn arabi. most of the sufi scholars do not believe he was a kafir, and it all boils down to understanding of what he means in his texts. Shaykh Faraz Rabbani wrote about this at sunnipath:

"
Scholars have differed about Shaykh Muhyi al-Din Ibn `Arabi. Some declared
him a disbeliever because of what they found in his books, in terms of
expressions used that contradict the shari`ah, according to the way they
understood it. And others said he was among the greatest saints and
righteous and they considered those expressions to be of the terminology of
the Sufis without its being contradictory to the shari`ah even though the
outward meaning may have seemed as such, but the intended meaning certainly
was not.
Many of our realized imams from Ahl al-Sunna, our `Ashari masters such as
Shaykh al-Islam Zakariya al-Ansari, who was an imam of the many sciences of
theology, tafsir, hadith, fiqh and Arabic have tread the same path, as well
as their great students such as the Imam of Egypt, al-Shihab Ahmad al-Ramli
and his son, Al-Shams Muhammad al-Shams al-Khatib al-Shirbini and the
pillars of the late scholars such as Shaykh al-Islam al-Shihab Ibn Hajar
al-Haitami. The latter has elaborated on the issue of al-Shaykh al-Akbar,
and has defended him at length in his great work, Al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyah,
so whoever wishes may refer to it. (f. There is a short biography about Ibn
`Arabi in the Reliance of the Traveler and Shaykh Nuh has written an article
about him, that can be found at the website, www.masud.co.uk:

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/amat.htm

Shaykh al-Islam Zakariya objected, in his book al-Ruddah from “Sharh
al-Rawd”, when Imam ibn al-Muqri called Ibn `Arabi and his followers
disbelievers, saying, “And it (i.e. Ibn al-Muqri calling Ibn `Arabi a
disbeliever) is only according to his understanding, as some of them did
from the outward meaning of his sayings. And the truth is that they are [f.
the foremost of the] believers and their words are aligned with their
terminology like the rest of the Sufis. And these meanings are a reality
according to what they intend even if it requires that others need to
interpret, for if they only understood the outward, it would entail
disbelief. Because words that have particular terminological usages are
literal when they are used in their very terminology and are considered to
be figurative when used out of their terminology.

Thus, whoever understands it according to its terminology, understands it
soundly. And many great scholars, gnostics of Allah, considered Ibn `Arabi
to be of foremost believers, among them is Shaykh Taj al-Din ibn Ata’iLlah
and Shaykh AbduLlah al-Yafi`I, and this high rank of theirs is not maligned
by the outward purport of their words to those who are not Sufis because of
what we have just said. Because it may be that when a gnostic of Allah is
drowned in the ocean of oneness and beholding of Allah-such that his self
vanishes in Allah and his attributes vanish in Allah’s attributes and he is
oblivious to anything other than Him-certain expressions may come out in
this state, that may seem to indicate hulul and ittihad (indewelling and
union with Allah [s. see Reliance of the Traveler w7.1] ) because of the
deficiency of language to express the state that he has risen to, rather it
has nothing to do with those two things, as the erudite scholar al-Sa`d
al-Taftazani has said.”

This is some of the what the scholars have said about Shaykh Muhyi al-Din
ibn Arabi. And it is my belief, and it is the belief of my shaykhs, realized
men in the spiritual path following in the footsteps of realized scholars of
the Sacred Law that I mentioned and others, also, that: that Shaykh Muhyi
al-Din is among the Imams of our noble Sufis and that his words that appear
in discussions of Sufism are completely in line with their terminology
without them being meant as hulul or ittihad (indwelling and union with
Allah) of the creation with the Creator nor the opposite, and without any
negation of responsibility for the morally responsible.

A person who doesn’t tread the spiritual path with a shaykh who is
knowledgeable, who acts upon his knowledge and is realized in Allah should
be warned of going near the books of the Shaykh, such as the Futuhat,
because those who are not familiar with their terminology, in most cases,
will be misled by the outward purport of his words. So he would either
believe in something false that wasn’t even itended, or he would deny [f.
and condemn] their true spiritual experiences that are not contradictory to
the shari`ah. And it is also unfit for those who are not known of being of
sound Sufism to speak the words of the Sufis unless by way of ascribing them
[s. those words] to the Sufis, and without believing just the outward
meaning of their words, as has been stated by Ibn Hajar in the Tuhfa, in the
chapter of apostasy.

And the questioner should know that no one has the knowledge of
what is in people’s hearts nor the ends of their works except Allah. And
having a better opinion is (husn al-dhann) that our Imams said what they
said about Shaykh Ibn `Arabi, in praise or blame, only to serve the deen in
what seemed correct to them. Also, the one thing that our imams do agree
upon is that it is haram to believe any false belief that may seem to be
indicated by the words of Shaykh Muhyi al-Deen and others.

And those whose faith is established, we don’t declare them disbelievers,
except with certainty. And the basis that is used regarding apostasy is that
whoever says something whose outward is disbelief, but may carry some
meaning that could be interpreted otherwise, he is not declared a
disbeliever until it is confirmed what he intended by it, [f. and that he
actually intended disbelief]. And we have seen that great imams of
verification have explicitly stated Ibn `Arabi’s high rank after having
thorough knowledge of what he said. And they considered those words that
were open to interpretation to be in accordance with the terminology of the
Sufis, such that those words were not intended as disbelief.

And Allah knows best the truth and unto Him is the return and the final
abode."

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

regarding the sunna mu'akkada prayers - they are heavily emphasised in the hanafi school, although i am doubtful as to whether omiting them leads to kufr - as opposed to doubting they are sunna's...

it is worth mentioning that the majlis could have stated the Maliki opinion which is that most of these prayers are actually legally nafila - with the only sunna mu'akkad prayers being salat al-witr, the 'id prayers, the solar eclipse prayer and the rain prayer. all the rest are optional with the exception of the fard - of course! (that doens't mean they are not 'sunna' -meaning the prophet (s) practiced them).

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

regarding dr saleh as-saleh - his views have no basis and are actually incorrect. i have read parts of this book, and his writing is nothing by misinformed blind hatred for sufis...

As-Saleh states "the case of Nuh Ha Mim Keller is very much representative of those who follow the late Ash-'arite scholastic theology and share a brand of mysticism and blind imitation of Mathaahib."

do u see where he is coming from?

"The dangerous aspect is the deception approach, which is used by those who hold such concepts. In this regard, one does not see a great deal of difference between the concepts and approach of Nuh Ha Mim and those of another person by the name of Hamza Yoosuf" (229). They seem to hold the same methodologies and thoughts and as everyone will see, this is not an attack on them per se, but a warning against deviant philosophies and since they adhere to these philosophies they must be warned against. We ask Allah to guide them and us to the straight path."

emmm. Shaykh Nuh is a murshid in the shadhilli path; and concentrates on his murids. Shaykh Hamza does not claim to be a sufi, and is not part of a sufi tariqa, and is an active da'i that calls to Islam - not sufism.

As-Saleh states that "Today mystic Sufis attempt to influence the Muslims, especially in the West (due to the inability of many Muslims to read the original Arabic texts), by presenting themselves as followers of "mainstream or traditional Islam," and that those who expose the corrupt doctrines of esoteric Sufism are named 'extremists.' They [claim] that they are "lovers of humanity," and stress the call for "Unity with diversity," meaning that the Muslim should "understand and tolerate" the different philosophies among Muslims misleadingly claiming that the basic foundations of the creed ('Aqeedah) are agreed upon by all Muslims, but there is diversity in the branches of the religion!" (As-Saleh, 231).

...brother, why are you reading this trash. it doesn't deserve refutation!

[true_hanafi]

Assalam alaikum

the reason why i read is to find out what the salafi view is, it is good to know what they are up to.
They have produced many good books such as Kitab Al Tauhid, which i think is one of the best book on this topic.
Sh. Abdul Wahab, rahimuallah quotes the Quran and sunnah in this book, can you recommend any other books of this nature

True_Hanafi

[Abu Usama]

hahaha

[faqir]

Assalam alaikum

the reason why i read is to find out what the salafi view is, it is good to know what they are up to.
They have produced many good books such as Kitab Al Tauhid, which i think is one of the best book on this topic.
Sh. Abdul Wahab, rahimuallah quotes the Quran and sunnah in this book, can you recommend any other books of this nature

True_Hanafi



:lol:

[Yusuf]

hahaha

Why dont u guys jus briefly correct the brother instead of mocking him. Not everybodys as knowledgable as you.

[Mustafa]

Bismillah-hir-Rahman-hir-Rahim

Wa alaikum as salaam

'True Hanafi':

We don't sit with the people of bid'ah, we don't listen to the people of bid'ah and we don't read the works of the people of bid'ah. The Prophet (upon him be blessings and peace) told us to stick to the majority, and so that's what we do, using our time to get closer to Allah. We don't waste our time reading or listening to people who will not help us achieve our aim.

Shaykh Hamza mentions that one of the salaf used to put cotton wool in his ears just so he wouldn't be affected by the words of the people of bid'ah. If you let their words into your heart it can take an age for them to be uprooted. There is no excuse to find out what 'they're upto.' A man at the end of time will consider himself a mum'in, and think himself safe from the Dajjal. He'll listen to the Dajjal to find out 'what he's upto' and thereby he becomes confused by the corruption attached to the arguments of the Dajjal.

In your other thread about about the ahl-ul-hadith and their views on the Deobandis, you mentioned that the speaker points out the 'kufr' of the Deobandis. If that is the case, then that is a clear sign that the speech is pure nonsense.

As for Dr Saleh-as Saleh - he may well be a pious man destined for Jannah, but in his knowledge of tasawwuf, he is completely ignorant. I'm not saying this to denigrate him (and Allah knows best what's in the hearts) but to warn you and to state a fact.

If Dr Saleh truly believes that Ibn al Arabi considered Allah to be in 'everything' then that is a clear sign that the Dr is speaking pure nonsense. Wahdat-al-Wujood is something to be experienced, not put into words. It's the *realisation* of tawhid, and Allah knows best, and the less said the better.

Sidi Faraz Rabbani told a friend of mine that we don't refute Dr Saleh's book because of Imam al Ghazali's advice on not debating with the ignorant ones.

If you feel that you're getting confused and you have an urge to listen to what they're saying, then that is a sign from Allah that you need to find yourself a traditional scholar, sit at his feet, and learn the deen. It is *not* a sign that you continue listening, reading and debating with the people of bid'ah. Stop reading books and take the deen from a living source.

In the *temporary* absence of a teacher, you should start with the articles at www.masud.co.uk and www.sunnipath.com.

May Allah grant you tawfiq and create for you the means to become a true Hanafi.

Wa salam
Your brother in Islam

[Yusuf]

BarakAllahu fikan akhi Mustafa for your beneficial post.

[Abu Usama]

Why dont u guys jus briefly correct the brother instead of mocking him. Not everybodys as knowledgable as you.

I was not mocking him

:lol:

[haqq]

Assalaamualaikum,

Respected talib al-habib:

Each of the four rightously guided khalifs (ra) had different dispositions. Non can be critisized. Just like that, Ulama too have different dispositions. Some are more vocal than others. Some are more critical than others and etc.

Allah Ta'ala uses each one of his servant in one way or another in His deen. Allah is using you in someway that I am not being used. Just take the Maktab Struggle (http://www.themajlis.net/Article24.html) for example. Look at the blessed work they are doing.

Yes, they are very vocal. They are hard in their method but that's their way. Everyone has their method. I take their disposition and method to be closer to Hadhrat Umar (r.a.). And we all know how the pious and rightously guided Hadhrat Umar (r.a.) was. We all should read about Hadhrat Umar (r.a.), if we have not already.

My experience has been quite the opposite of what you say of the Majlis. And I personally know quite a few people here in the US who are staunch followers of their Naseehas. Not only in the US but there are thousands (1000s) of people all over the world who keep Islaahi (spiritual reformation) contact with him (Hahrat Mufti A.S. Desai). Yes, his naseehas are hard on the nafs and we sometimes let our 'ego' get in the way. But that is only our weekness. One purpose of Islaah is to kill your ego. Most people can not take criticism because of their ego.

He only encourages Taqwa, which is the Quranic command. So everyone has their method. I and many others find the majlis' method attractive and closer to taqwa. We have benefited a lot thru contact with them and their naseehas.

talib al-habib - Jazaakallah for your naseeha.

May Allah Ta'ala reward you for you sincere intention.

Was-salaam,
Haqq

[talib al-habib]

salams brother Haqq

jazakallah for your advice. I accept your view on the Majlis al-Ulama, and sincerely pray that Allah reward them for their sincerity and efforts. Though of course I disagree with some aspects, I pray that Allah can give all of us some of their istiqama. was salam

[true_hanafi]

assalam

I am confused about this issue of Wahdat wujud, I got a book from Azhar Academy By Maulana Ashraf Ali, he says this is when you see everything is Allah. If someone believes this is a a kaffir.

Book name: FURU UL IMAN
Author: M. Ashraf Ali Thamvi
Publishers: Adam Publishers and Distrubutors
Page No:12-13

He also states " No one is existing expect Allah" Page 12

Available@ Azhar Academy via they Website

Allah knows Best

[Mossy]

Maulana Ashraf Ali isn't quite correct then if that is what he believes it to mean..

Here is a short piece from an article by Ustadha Umm Sahl (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/nabulsi.htm#WW) which hits closer to the mark.. However, it doesn't cover the entire, somewhat esoteric topic. If you want a proper explanation of it, I would recommend you contact an appropriate Shaykh. Misunderstandings are very easy when you do not have the same frame of reference as the person you are attempting to comprehend..

Funnily, I don't think Ibn Arabi ever even referred to that particular doctrine as such.

[Abu Usama]

Salam,

I think when it comes to the words of the sufis, we must not take some of their sayings literally. So that Ibn Arabi said that he see's Allah (swt) in created things does not literally mean that he believes Allah and his creation is one, but means that he see's the greatness, knowledge and power of Allah (swt) reflected in the creation.

[faqir]

From Ask-imam.com

http://islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=8075


1. In the terminology of the Soofis, Wahdatul Wujood means to believe that all the Mawjoodaat (things present around us) are an indication of Allah’s presence and to believe that everything besides Allah is subjective.


Mufti Muhammad Kadwa
FATWA DEPT.

CHECKED AND APPROVED: Mufti Ebrahim Desai

[Ansari]

assalam

I am confused about this issue of Wahdat wujud, I got a book from Azhar Academy By Maulana Ashraf Ali, he says this is when you see everything is Allah. If someone believes this is a a kaffir.

:salam:

Where did he said that? He said that wahdat ul wujud is unity or oneness of ALlah (unity of existence)...He only says its useless and wastage of time when you are trying to prove this from the quran and hadith.

And he says that this is understood by only those who experience it. It states clearly on page 12. He calls it "excessive exaggerations" and as far as i understand he's not really opposed to it but he only says one should be very careful, forget it, not really believe in it and avoid it.

[haqq]

Assalaamualaikum,

JazaakAllah Pako for clearing things up. A lot of people take things out of context or they just mis-quote!

'true_hanafi' - I think you should try to study under a qualified Shaykh.

Sometimes people use the "mis-quotes" because just want to defame the great personality (Hadhrat Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi). This is a trend that the Salafi adhere to.

Again, Pako, JazaakAllah for catching that.

Was-salaam,
haqq

[Muawiyah]

I am confused about this issue of Wahdat wujud, I got a book from Azhar Academy By Maulana Ashraf Ali, he says this is when you see everything is Allah.


A better translation would be:

"When you see that only Allah Ta'ala exists" i.e the creation are not worth being called "existances"

As Hadhrat Mawlana Moosa Roohani-Baazi rahimahullah said in his Qaseedah:



و*لا معبود الّا الله حقّا*ً

هو الموجود عند السّالكينا

سواه احسبه ظلّا أو حبابا*ً

فيبقٰى وجه رب*ّ العالمينا


And there is no true diety except Allah

And He is the only existance according to the Saalikeen

And the {existance of the} creation is like a shadow or a bubble of water

And only the zaat of Allah is Everlasting


And indeed one of the Sahaabah Radhi Allaahu 'anhum, Labeed Radhi Allaahu 'anhu said something similar in his jaahili days.



ألا كل شئ ما خلا الله باطل

وكل نعيم لا محالة زائل


Verily everything except Allah is Baatil

And all bounties are without doubt transient

In Sahih Bukhari it has been narrated through Abu Hurayrah Radhi Allaahu 'anhu that Rasoolullah Sallallaahu 'alyhi wa Sallam called this verse the truest verse ever said by 'Arab poets.

[ali125]

Assalaamualaikum,

In the link below you will find an excellent article on Waseelah. The writer exposes the incorrect translation (regarding Waseelah) of Bukhari Shareef by Dr. Moshin Khan (the Salafi). The errors that the author exposes are only related to Waseelah but only Allah knows how many other Ahadith he has incorrectly translated.

It's a must read for all.

http://www.themajlis.net/Sections-article94-p1.html

Was-salaam,
Haqq

assalam-o-alaikum
thanks haqq for directing us to the link
they siad that sheikh-ul-islam and his follower's comments upon presenting a dead body in waseela is baseless. but they(the majalis) themselves has claimed it permissible without presenting any proof from sharia