Turkish Hanafis

[Mossy]

Does anyone have any information about these ulema? Some of the rulings and comments I've heard from them are very, very different from that of say the Deobandi ulema.

[faqir]

I see a difference in the Arab Hanafis as well.

[faqir]

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi - he was a turkish Hanafi was he not?

Also, what about Fethullah Gulen - is he a qualified shaykh?

[iqadeer]

Just curious, which rulings are very very different from Deobandis?

[Mossy]

Just curious, which rulings are very very different from Deobandis?

You'll notice a lack of bushy beards and niqaabs.

[abby]

The Imam of my mosque, is turkish, and hanafi, yet is clean shaven...

I've always wondered about that..

[faqir]

Just curious, which rulings are very very different from Deobandis?


Here is an example where Arab Hanafis differ....

Children's Picture Books

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question:

Is it permissable to buy and/or sell children''s books with
illustrations? These would be early reading picture books.

------------------------------------------------------------------------


Walaikum assalam,

The fatwa of leading Hanafi scholars from Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere,
is
that pictures in children's books take the same ruling as dolls for
children: they are permitted to buy and sell, because they too serve a
similar (if not even more obvious) educational interest. Many (or even
most) Hanafi scholars from the Indian Subcontinent disagree.

And Allah alone gives success.

Faraz Rabbani.


[This message contained attachments]

[muslim786]

The Imam of my mosque, is turkish, and hanafi, yet is clean shaven...

I've always wondered about that..
I don't think any hanafi, turkish or otherwise will allow an Imam to have a clean shaven face.

[Ansari]

I don't think any hanafi, turkish or otherwise will allow an Imam to have a clean shaven face.

Lots of people from turkey at my place. I pray in their mosque and the qualified imams that come from turkey always shave their beard. However, you will sometimes see a trimmed beard, but most of imams have a clean shaven face. I have never seen a fistful beard (once i saw it though, but those are just members of the mosque).

I think turkish hanafi's are lenient on some issues. And i think there is also a 'fight' or a heated discussion between strict and lets say 'loose' ulema. And then there is this discussion about government scholars.

The imams or the people behind the imam always have their pants below their ankle (there are exceptions). I personally heard an imam say there is nothing wrong with a silver chain for men. They are also lenient regarding riba. You'll even see the imam playing football were the knee is not covered.

and oh yeah. Their taraweeh prayers are so fast. I think they would be accused of bida by strict deobandi's. For example they always have their own type of programme for a collective dua which they alwats follow (one after the farz and one after the namaz). And there is also a special person for opening the tasbih. The imam also finishes with the word 'alfatihah' and there are plenty more examples. You will see a lot of diversity amongst turkish people.

[Abu Usama]

Salam,

about the trousers below the ankles, there is ikthilaf on that issue on whether it is tahrime or tanzihan, however, the majority including Allama ibn Abidin and Imam al-Lackhnawi say that its makruh tanzihan.

As for trimming the beard below fist length, Allama ibn Abidin says that no-one has allowed this from the hanafi scholars. But i guess you could maybe say that the imam might be following another madhab in this issue of the size of the beard. But even still, i don't care what madhab someone follows, but if they are clean shaven, they should never ever be made imam.

I recall a scholar once relating a hadith to the affect that the imamat of the fasiq is not accepted (unfotunately i do not know the reference for this though).

[Mossy]

I recall a scholar once relating a hadith to the affect that the imamat of the fasiq is not accepted (unfotunately i do not know the reference for this though).

www.themajlis.net ;)

The Hanbali madhab agrees too I believe.

Pako, could you ask the Turkish imams why they seem to differ from the standard position on the beard?

[faqir]

Asalamu alaykum,

I visited Istanbul and none of the Imams at the beautiful masajid were clean shaven.

They did not, however, have a fistful beard.

I don't have a problem praying behind a clean shaven Muslim as being clean shaven in the Shafii madhab is not sinful to my knowledge.

Wasalam.

[muslim786]

Asalamu alaykum,

I visited Istanbul and none of the Imams at the beautiful masajid were clean shaven.

They did not, however, have a fistful beard.

I don't have a problem praying behind a clean shaven Muslim as being clean shaven in the Shafii madhab is not sinful to my knowledge.

Wasalam.
i have seen many turkish hanafi imams and all had beards, some as brother faqir has pointed out did not have fist lengths but many did.
the people brother pako is talking about seem like modernists not hanafis at all.

[Ansari]

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi - he was a turkish Hanafi was he not?


yes, he is hold in high regard. He wrote the famous risale nur. Even though sometimes his books are kind of difficult to read.

By the way. I got this book 'the words' and his picture is on the back of the book, with no beard.

see also:
www.risale-inur.com.tr

English link:
http://www.nur.web.tr/english/

[Ansari]

Anyone ever heard about the Mihr Foundation and Dr. Iskender Ali Mihr?

http://www.mihr.com/english/index.htm

And this 'HACET (REQUIREMENT) SALAAT':
http://www.mihr.com/english/hacetsalaat.htm

[ozgurislam]

they also blow on the tasbeeh after reciting ayatul kursi after salaat :lol:

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

I saw a picture of one of the shaykhs of the Halveti-Jerrahi tariqa, and he had a mustache with no beard. The tariqa seemed sound to me otherwise though, in terms of its principles and its beliefs.

I think their lack of fistful beards probably has a lot to do with the secular nature of Turkish society right now: people with very traditional or conservative appearances are often discriminated against, and may even find themselves being physically harrassed.


Anyone ever heard about the Mihr Foundation and Dr. Iskender Ali Mihr?

http://www.mihr.com/english/index.htm

And this 'HACET (REQUIREMENT) SALAAT':
http://www.mihr.com/english/hacetsalaat.htm

[Omar HH]

I saw a picture of one of the shaykhs of the Halveti-Jerrahi tariqa, and he had a mustache with no beard. The tariqa seemed sound to me otherwise though, in terms of its principles and its beliefs.

I think their lack of fistful beards probably has a lot to do with the secular nature of Turkish society right now: people with very traditional or conservative appearances are often discriminated against, and may even find themselves being physically harrassed.

There are many `Ullema in North Africa without beards that are very pious. There are many Qur'an recitors without beards.

Yet with this I do NOT reccomend the shaving of the beard in any way or form as it is haram according to the vast majority.

Wassalam.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

There are many `Ullema in North Africa without beards that are very pious. There are many Qur'an recitors without beards.


I confess I do not understand this. "Pious" means "striving to follow the Sunna", and growing at least a minimal beard is the easiest of sunnas to follow, as one simply stops shaving for a while.

Have you seen many 'ulema in North Africa with this look? If not, where did you read this?

[Omar HH]

I confess I do not understand this. "Pious" means "striving to follow the Sunna", and growing at least a minimal beard is the easiest of sunnas to follow, as one simply stops shaving for a while.

Have you seen many 'ulema in North Africa with this look? If not, where did you read this?

This was narrated by Shaykh Abu Qanit. It is also narrated in al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyyah (which I have right in front of me) that there is an opinion that it is not obligatory within the Maliki madhab (but it is a weaker position).

Some people do not wish to have beards and see it is a good deed instead of obligatory. They are pious scholars that fear Allah and avoid sinning. They pray and fear Allah.

I hate when people say they are not pious because they have a beard.

Someone who follows the bare minimum first of all - the five pillars and avoiding halal and haram in fiqh - is pious.

Many people who are beards (or even sinful scholars for that matter) will be in hellfire for a long time while many people without beards and whom are not scholars will be in Jannah.

Of course according to the majority having a beard would be the way to go.

But because some people choose not to and believe it is not obligatory does not mean they are not pious. Such a harsh opinion would lead to not assuming the best of your Muslim brother, and not honoring the scholars of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama`ah whom are heirs to the Prophet :saw: which are the ultimate signs of impiety.

Carrying a staff is Sunnah. So is wearing a ring. So is wearing a turban. So is using a miswak. Yet we do not call those who do not carry staffs, do not wear rings, do not sit on the floor when eating, drink while standing up, do not pray Salat al-Tahajjud and do not wear turbans as impious.

Thus these `Ullema follow the opinion that it is Sunnah and thus not obligatory and some of them do not wish to have beards. Big deal.

Piety is in the heart. Yes our actions are part of piety - this is true - but like I said there is ikhtilaf in fiqh whether people like it or not.

I have personally seen with my own eyes on video that one of Habib `Ali's Qur'an recitors has no beard. Yet Habib `Ali has said one who is a `Alim or a student of `Ilm really should have a beard.

Wassalam.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

Some people do not wish to have beards and see it is a good deed instead of obligatory. They are pious scholars that fear Allah and avoid sinning. They pray and fear Allah.

Piety means taqwa, which in turn means being cautious and not even going near what is forbidden. Fearing Allah means staying far away from what is forbidden. Scholars, who are inheritors of the prophets, should be held to a higher standard than others. Scholars who violate such an obvious sunna, which is so easy to fulfill, and which the majority of scholars have deemed obligatory, are not people from whom I would wish to take knowledge, and certainly not fatwas on the halal and the haram, and these are definitely not people with whom I would take bayat.



I hate when people say they are not pious because they have a beard.

As long as we're sharing our opinions: I hate it when people denigrate and make fun of the fistful beard, which is after all, the sunna of the Prophet(s) and the first blessed generations.


Someone who follows the bare minimum first of all - the five pillars and avoiding halal and haram in fiqh - is pious..

The "bare minimum"? Have our standards fallen so low that we are satisfied with the "bare minimum" as a definition of pious? Sidi, we are Muslims, and we are people of high standards, especially when it comes to our scholars. Remember, we are talking about scholars here, not ordinary people. We are talking about those who, because of their knowledge, are ambassadors of the deen to others, and on whom we ordinary Muslims have to rely for accurate knowledge of the rulings of Allah. Therefore they should be held to a higher standard, shouldn't they?


Many people who are beards (or even sinful scholars for that matter) will be in hellfire for a long time while many people without beards and whom are not scholars will be in Jannah.

Of course according to the majority having a beard would be the way to go.

But because some people choose not to and believe it is not obligatory does not mean they are not pious. [/SIZE]

Only if you assume a "bare minimum" definition of piety, as you did above. And the major 'ulema of Ahl as Sunnah do not hold such a bare minimum definition.

[QUOTE=Omar HH]
Such a harsh opinion would lead to not assuming the best of your Muslim brother, and not honoring the scholars of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama`ah whom are heirs to the Prophet :saw: which are the ultimate signs of impiety.

"Assuming the best of your Muslim brother" is appropriate in some circumstances, and not in others. When it comes to scholars, people are entitled to be wary of those scholars who do not stick to simple and easily fulfilled sunnas that were emphasised by the Prophet:saw: himself, and which the sounder opinions in the school they claim to follow deem obligatory.

"Honoring the scholars of the Ahl as Sunnah" depends on their acting appropriately for their role. As you pointed out, there are sinful scholars as well, and we should be on guard lest we start listening to one of these.

Saying these are the ultimate signs of impiety is incorrect.




Carrying a staff is Sunnah. So is wearing a ring. So is wearing a turban. So is using a miswak. Yet we do not call those who do not carry staffs, do not wear rings, do not sit on the floor when eating, drink while standing up, do not pray Salat al-Tahajjud and do not wear turbans as impious.

It's interesting you mention drinking while standing up: to be seen drinking while standing up used to be enough for scholars to not accept hadiths from you, because they felt that a person who did not honour the Sunnah in his actions could not be trusted to preserve it in his words.

Shaving the beard has been declared forbidden by the majority of scholars, and thus is on a different level from the other sunnas you mention, for which there is no such majority view. There are clear instructions in the hadiths to leave the beard alone. Moreover, the Prophet :saw: himself turned away in disgust from those who shaved their beards. To the best of my knowledge, he did not do so from those who did not wear a turban, or did not wear a ring, or did not carry a staff, or ate at tables.

Do you think anyone in the Salaf generations would have accepted fatwas from someone who shaved his beard? I really doubt it.



Thus these `Ullema follow the opinion that it is Sunnah and thus not obligatory and some of them do not wish to have beards. Big deal.

I follow the opinion that 'ulema who shave their beards without a Shariah excuse are not among those from whom people should be taking knowledge. I think this is a big deal for scholars.



Piety is in the heart. Yes our actions are part of piety - this is true - but like I said there is ikhtilaf in fiqh whether people like it or not.
I have personally seen with my own eyes on video that one of Habib `Ali's Qur'an recitors has no beard. Yet Habib `Ali has said one who is a `Alim or a student of `Ilm really should have a beard.

Wassalam.

What Habib Ali said (in the Sunnipath Q&A) was that it is despicable for a student of knowledge or one who pretends to the path of tasawwuf to shave, even thoiugh as a Shafi'i he considers it permissible. In my view, this comment applies even more to people who are known as scholars. Do we want to take knowledge from someone who we know engages in despicable actions?

[Omar HH]

It's okay,

You can believe they are not pious.

Whatever.

Wassalam.

Shaykh `Abdal Ghani al-Nablusi listened to music and he was one of the greatest Walis.

"And whoever shows enmity to a Wali of mine..."

Wassalam.

[Omar HH]

Shaving the beard has been declared forbidden by the majority of scholars, and thus is on a different level from the other sunnas you mention, for which there is no such majority view.

You should know two words: ijm`a and jamhur. There is no ijm`a on the beard. NEITHER is there a jamhur. Jamhur means all 4 Imams agreed that it was haram - and there are two narrations from Imam al-Shafi`i on the subject. If you take the other definition of jamhur which says that the mashhur is agreed upon by all four madhabs then there is no jamhur either as Imam Nawawi gave the mashhur Shafi`i opinion that it is makruh as narrated in Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari.

Thus the beard fails ijm`a as does it jamhur and thus goes into the third classification of issues which is ikhtilaf.

Secondly even if it was jamhur it is still not allowed to condemn people and goes against the ijm`a which says it is HARAM to condemn something for which there is difference of opinion in fiqh as long as there is no ijm`a. Thus even if we assume there is jamhur (although I do agree that the majority considered the beard Wajib and I do have a beard myself!) there is still not ijm`a and thus it is HARAM (and sinful) to condemn scholars which do not have beards.

From laws of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil as Sidi Salman said in his blog:


However, due the difference that exists regarding the issue one should not go about condemning those who permit Music - in specific the ‘Ulema who are the “heirs of the prophet’s”

The only reason I have replied to this is to clarify to other people in defense of these scholars.

It is rationally possible for someone to be a Wali without a beard (as wilaya is reached by avoiding the haram and doing the Wajib as well as at least some good deeds and purifying the heart and one cannot reach wilaya until fana fil af`al at least - if you want references please see Sharh al-Mabahith by Ibn `Ajibah ;)). It is haram to make a Wali upset and is one of the kabair according to many `Ullema. Thus it is haram to condemn these people.

Shaykh Abul Qanit says of harming the Awliya':

> Please can you give me an explanation of the 19. Darqawi Letter.
>
> Resistance to the fuqara, the affiliated with Allah, and to all the
> slaves of Allah comes form great ignorance and dullness since the people
> of beginnings must err. The people of the ends have no protection, let
> alone those who are at the beginning. The Prophets, peace be upon them,
> have protection, peace be upon them. Whoever sees himself among them is
> mistaken, so we should remind him with kindness and gentleness. If he is
> reminded, blessed is Allah! If not, our Lord knows us all better since
> He, the Exalted! Said, "You who believe! Watch out for yourselves. The
> one who is misguided will not harm you if you are guided".

Allah Most High has said in a hadith which is recorded in Ibn Majah
and other collections (e.g., Bukhari):

"... Whoever shows enmity against a friend of Mine, I declare war
against him! ..."

What this means, in upshot, is that if someone makes a friend of Allah
upset (purposely or due to complex ignorance), this person is in BIG
trouble.

And no one has protection from the wrath which Allah unleashes for such
a crime, not the person in the beginning of the Path, nor the person
who has finished the Path (meaning attained full ma`rifah), nor the
person who is in the middle of the Path. The only people who have
protection from this wrath are the prophets (May Allah bless them and
give them peace) - but none of us are prophets.

Thus, it is very, very dangerous and an act full of foolishness to make
a friend of Allah upset. It is as good as material and spiritual suicide.

This is what al-Darqawi means by "Resitance" or "Opposing" the fuqara'.

But one should also be careful about showing enmity to regular people
(all the slaves of Allah) as some of them may be "friends of Allah in
disguise" just like the honest and sincere fuqara' are.

[For example, if you saw most of the scholars in the Maghrib on
the street, you would not be able to distinguish them from the common
people. Thus, one should not judge by appearances. This
culture of khumul (being hidden) - except for one's students - has many
advantages and in the end leads to people who are more sincere and
more throughly experienced and qualified - as these people can pretend
to be normal in order to learn how the society actually works and what
the people are actually like - as the people will not put on a show
for them - unlike someone dressed like a religious authority in front
of which people will act differently and superficially.]

And only "dullminded" and stupid people can engage in such foolish acts
in which the Powerful Creator declares *war* against them.

Now when he says, "we should remind him with kindness and gentleness",
it means that we should remind the person who is engaging in enmity
with us that "Allah does not like that His friends be dealt with such
bad manners and people who show enmity to them or hurt them are likely
to suffer great trials and punishments in this world, in the interworld,
and in the hereafter."

If the person is reminded and takes heed, then may Allah bless him (as
we have nothing against him personally).

But if he does not cease his attacks, then we entrust his affair to
Allah (i.e. we expect Allah to declare war against him) and we entrust
our affair to Allah also (i.e. Allah knows we are free of the false
accusations that he is hurling at us).

Now, we will mention the context of this letter:

Know that if you travel the Path to Allah with sincerity, you will
gain more tawfiq and blessings than the common man or external scholar
can ever hope for. This causes *some* common people or external scholars
to be jealous of those of the Path. And they hurl accusations (verbal
and physical abuse) at the sincere fuqara'.

This happens every time a man/woman reaches the state of sincerity with
His Lord like a pattern from Allah - as Allah says "And like thus, we
appointed for each prophet enemies from the Shayateen of Ins and Jinn..."
[al-Qur'an 6:112] - hinting at the fact that Allah has a pattern of
appointing "enemies" of His friends - so that His act of Vengence may
have a domain to be carried out in. These enemies become the target
of His Vengence as one of His names is al-Muntaqim (The Avenger).

al-Darqawi is instructing his disciples that when they come across
such attacks, they should first remind the person of the grave act
he is committing and then entrust their affair to Allah (i.e. they
expect Allah to vindicate the fuqara' and deal with this enemy in a
painful manner until he repents).

In the end, the one who is misguided will not harm those that are
guided - rather, it is very likely that the one who is misguided will
incur great harm to himself due to his ignorant attacks on the friends
of Allah.

[This brings us to a needing a definition of a
friend of Allah "wali" in the hadith. The
definition is:

"al-waliyyu al-muttaqiyyu hasala lahu `ala
d-dawami l-fana'u fi-l af`ali awi l-fana'u
fi s-sifati awi l-fana'u fi dh-dhaat. aw
huwa al-muttaqiyyu fi l-baqa'."

"The Wali (friend of Allah) is the person who
Allah has given tawfiq to in obeying Him and
not disobeying Him (both externally and
internally) in most circumstances and has given
tawfiq to always or almost always be in one of
four states: (1) annihilation in His actions,
(2) annihilation in His attributes,(3) annihilation
in His Entity, or (4) in the state of subsistence
(which entails constant full ma`rifah coupled with
non-egocentrism)."

Reference(s):
This definition is derived from al-`Asqalani,
Sharh Bukhari, hadith #6021, raqa`iq, tawadu`

`Asqalani states that the wali is "The person who obeys
Allah regularly and sincerely worships Him." Now, it
is our view that a person cannot become truly *sincere*
until he gets rid of the "I" in his worship. And
such only happens either through fana' or baqa'
with its various levels.

One should note here that it is possible to achieve
fana' fi l-af`aal without a spiritual Path - and this
is the limit the common man can reach without further
training. Thus, people who are not associated with
a spiritual path can also be awliya' (friends of Allah).

If the person undergoes some formal training (even if
self-taught - as long as he is very astute), then he
can reach fana' fi s-sifaat even without a qualified
teacher. [This is what Ibn `Ajibah says in his Sharh
of al-Mabahith al-Asliyyah in the section of taking
a spiritual teacher. But, if he does not have a teacher
and is also not astute (unaware of the pitfalls), then
Shaytan is likely to become his teacher - and in such a
case is likely to commit a grave mistake which will
land him in Allah's punishment either in this world
or the next.]

And in order to reach either fana' fi dh-dhaat or
baqa', the person must have a completed kamil teacher;
otherwise, the chances are very slim.

And people are of varying degrees in their wilayah.]

Thus we learn three things here:

[1] It is not allowed to call someone sinful if there is a difference of opinion, even if there is jamhur against something.

[2] Calling a `Alim sinful for something of which there is a difference of opinion or even saying he does not have taqwa is bad adab and it is haram to condemn someone for which there is a difference of opinion - especially the inheritors of the Prophets :saw:.

[3] Calling a `alim sinful for something which there is a difference of opinion is by ijm`a sinful and thus such a person does not have taqwa.

[4] If this `Alim is a Wali this will result in a very serious sin indeed.

[5] Wa Allahu `Alim.

After all of this I would like to say that brothers please grow a beard as it is indeed easy.

Wassalam.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

It's okay,

You can believe they are not pious.

Depends on the context in which you are looking at the matter.



Whatever.

Wassalam.

Shaykh `Abdal Ghani al-Nablusi listened to music and he was one of the greatest Walis.


I did not know that, and I cannot comment. You've probably heard this from Sheikh Nuh, but the contexts in which certain scholars permitted listening to music were often very different from ours:
http://www.sunnipath.com/resources/questions/QA00004456.aspx

[Omar HH]

Depends on the context in which you are looking at the matter.



I did not know that, and I cannot comment. You've probably heard this from Sheikh Nuh, but the contexts in which certain scholars permitted listening to music were often very different from ours:
http://www.sunnipath.com/resources/questions/QA00004456.aspx

I have heard from Shaykh Nuh and in other audios he said "there is even the difference of some notable `Ullema like Shaykh `Abdal Ghani al-Nablusi"

And I have his book and have read it in Arabic so I do know the context.

And yes he allows to listen to it for entertainment with conditions. Note I encourage everyone to follow the jamhur with this as well just making a point here.

Please go buy his book Ibah al-Dalalat fi Sami` al-Alalat which has some very strong proofs and shows his fatwa at the end ;)

Also the Sahaba `Abdullah ibn Ja`far used to play music with the `Oud and sing poetry and this was narrated in many different narrations by different people who witnessed him. And the Sahaba were upright. Thus proving that someone can be upright and do something most scholars were haram.

As for Shaykh `Abdal Ghani - proof that you can be a huge wali and yet do something which most scholars thought was haram (and there IS jamhur on music).

Wassalam.

Wassalam.

[Omar HH]

Btw my dear brother I did not wish to start an argument. Only to explain the answer to your question.

Wassalam.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

[1] It is not allowed to call someone sinful if there is a difference of opinion, even if there is jamhur against something.

We are not talking about calling people "sinful", we are talking about whether it is appropriate to call them "pious" when they shave their beards, and they are 'ulema. At least Habib 'Ali would call this action "despicable", and I find it hard to reconcile "despicable" with "pious".

Calling an 'alim "pious" implies that he is someone from whom one could take knowledge, and we should be very cautious about who we take knowledge from, as were the Salaf.

Can you imagine the Salaf taking fatwas from those who shaved their beards? I cannot. Why are we dropping our standards, then?




[2] Calling a `Alim sinful for something of which there is a difference of opinion or even saying he does not have taqwa is bad adab and it is haram to condemn someone for which there is a difference of opinion - especially the inheritors of the Prophets :saw:.


If I saw an 'alim and knew he shaved his beard, I would think well of him as a person, and make excuses for him in my mind. But taking fatwas from him or taking baya with him? No way, and I would advise others against it. While one gives him the benefit of the doubt as a person, one should be cautious about who one takes knowledge from, and to my mind this caution entails screening out those who do not adhere to simple and easy sunna actions that are held to be obligatory by the majority.

But maybe that's just me at this stage of my development. Perhaps hanging out with the Tablighis is finally getting to me, and I'm now ready to go on a rampage and condemn everyone who shaves, wears pants below the ankles, or uses a toothbrush instead of a miswak.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

Btw my dear brother I did not wish to start an argument. Only to explain the answer to your question.

Wassalam.

No problems, it's helped me to clarify my thoughts a little on this topic.

Wa al-Salam.

[Omar HH]

We are not talking about calling people "sinful", we are talking about whether it is appropriate to call them "pious" when they shave their beards, and they are 'ulema. At least Habib 'Ali would call this action "despicable", and I find it hard to reconcile "despicable" with "pious".

Your analogy is extremely weak. You are confusing taqwa with avoiding difference of opinion which is of the excellence of taqwa.

The definition of taqwa is (as the `Ullema tell us) avoiding acts of disobedience and if one does not believe it is an act of disobedience then this does not make one impious.

As I said `Abdullah ibn Ja`far listened to music and even played music while singing. There are many narrations of this. And `Abdullah ibn Ja`far was a pious person. Yet the majority opinion says music is haram. Thus even if you believe he is not sinful - if you believe he is impious you are saying a Sahaba is impious.

Secondly Sidi - by calling one impious for not commiting a sin is illogical and incorrect. If the `Alim was Shafi`i for instance how is he impious for doing something makruh? What about the `Ullema that use television to get their message across which is PICTURES - are they impious for taking the other opinion? The point is not only can you not call someone sinful for valid ikhtilaf but you cannot call them impious as well and this goes agianst adab. What you can say is "they do not follow the opinion of others."

Avoiding differences of opinion is from the perfection of taqwa not taqwa itself. Taqwa is avoiding sin. And if a scholar follows a different opinion one cannot call the heirs to the Prophet's impious unless they do something which is agreed upon as sin.

Is a Hanafi who marries without a Wali (which is invalid in the other schools as far as I know) impious even though he did not sin? Obviously not.

Simply calling someone impious for not having a beard - especially a `Alim - is extremely bad adab and is as far as I know haram and a sin. Thus I advise you to take back your words.

Wassalam.

[Omar HH]

How about you send this quesiton into Sunnipath:

If a Scholar is a Shafi`i and has a shaved beard and the mashhur in his madhab says that this is not sinful is it allowed to call this scholar "impious" although he is not sinful?

I think that will settle this lol ;)

Wassalam.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

Your analogy is extremely weak. You are confusing taqwa with avoiding difference of opinion which is of the excellence of taqwa.

Analogy? What analogy? I am relying on Habib 'Ali's opinion that it is "despicable" for a student of knowledge (and hence even more so for a scholar) to shave his beard. This opinion clearly indicates that people of knowledge are held to a higher standard than ordinary people. So I have my doubts about the claim that in Morrocco you will find many pious 'ulema who shave their beards.

You're right that there are degrees of taqwa. As Ibn Juzayy put the matter:
There are five degrees of taqwa:

That the slave should protect himself from kufr (covering over the truth), and that is the station of Islam;
That he should protect himself from acts of disobedience and forbidden things, and it is the station of turning or repentance (tawbah);
That he should protects himself from doubtful matters, and that is the station of caution or carefulness (wara');
That he should protect himself from even those things that are permitted, and that is the station of doing without (zuhd);
That he should protect himself from the presence of other than Allah in his heart, and it is the presence of witnessing (mushahadah).

Are we to assume that there are many pious scholars in Morrocco who fail to make it to even the third level of taqwa in simple and easily handled matters?


As I said `Abdullah ibn Ja`far listened to music and even played music while singing. There are many narrations of this. And `Abdullah ibn Ja`far was a pious person. Yet the majority opinion says music is haram. Thus even if you believe he is not sinful - if you believe he is impious you are saying a Sahaba is impious.

Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Ja'far, may Allah be pleased with him, was not, to the best of my knowledge, considered one of the people of 'ilm and fatwa. You would have a better example in the wars between the Companions, which were over differences of opinion among the people of knowledge, and despite which we still say they were all pious. May Allah be pleased with them all.


Secondly Sidi - by calling one impious for not commiting a sin is illogical and incorrect. If the `Alim was Shafi`i for instance how is he impious for doing something makruh? What about the `Ullema that use television to get their message across which is PICTURES - are they impious for taking the other opinion? The point is not only can you not call someone sinful for valid ikhtilaf but you cannot call them impious as well and this goes agianst adab. What you can say is "they do not follow the opinion of others."

To accuse people of going against adab without paying attention to what exactly they are saying is also going against adab.

I did not call any scholar pious or impious (as I am not even convinced that you will find any scholars with shaved faces in Morrocco or other lands where the Maliki school is dominant.) I am speaking in general terms about the hypothetical scholars who are alleged to do this, just as Habib 'Ali was speaking in hypothetical terms about students of knowledge who shave their beards (I have met many students of knowledge, and not one of them has shaved his beard: that would be weird.)

As I said, I remain to be convinced that such people exist at all in Morrocco or other Maliki lands, or in any significant numbers, or even to meet a single one of them.

The situation of Hanafi scholars in aggressively secular states like Turkey is very different: the scholarly tradition has been under attack there for a long time, and people with conservative looks are in some danger of being harrassed.



Avoiding differences of opinion is from the perfection of taqwa not taqwa itself. Taqwa is avoiding sin. And if a scholar follows a different opinion one cannot call the heirs to the Prophet's impious unless they do something which is agreed upon as sin.

Is a Hanafi who marries without a Wali (which is invalid in the other schools as far as I know) impious even though he did not sin? Obviously not.

Simply calling someone impious for not having a beard - especially a `Alim - is extremely bad adab and is as far as I know haram and a sin. Thus I advise you to take back your words.

Wassalam.

Jazakallah khair for your advice and for your noble concerns. Commanding the right and forbidding the wrong is a duty, so may Allah reward you for carrying out this duty to the best of your ability.

However, it is also bad adab (perhaps even haram and a sin) to criticise someone for something they did not do. When a person is talking in hypothetical terms, that is not the same thing as "calling someone impious for not having a beard". Thus I recommend that you read carefully, and point me to the exact words you think I should take back.

Wa al-Salam

[muslim786]

Analogy? What analogy? I am relying on Habib 'Ali's opinion that it is "despicable" for a student of knowledge (and hence even more so for a scholar) to shave his beard. This opinion clearly indicates that people of knowledge are held to a higher standard than ordinary people. So I have my doubts about the claim that in Morrocco you will find many pious 'ulema who shave their beards.

You're right that there are degrees of taqwa. As Ibn Juzayy put the matter:

Are we to assume that there are many pious scholars in Morrocco who fail to make it to even the third level of taqwa in simple and easily handled matters?



Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Ja'far, may Allah be pleased with him, was not, to the best of my knowledge, considered one of the people of 'ilm and fatwa. You would have a better example in the wars between the Companions, which were over differences of opinion among the people of knowledge, and despite which we still say they were all pious. May Allah be pleased with them all.



To accuse people of going against adab without paying attention to what exactly they are saying is also going against adab.

I did not call any scholar pious or impious (as I am not even convinced that you will find any scholars with shaved faces in Morrocco or other lands where the Maliki school is dominant.) I am speaking in general terms about the hypothetical scholars who are alleged to do this, just as Habib 'Ali was speaking in hypothetical terms about students of knowledge who shave their beards (I have met many students of knowledge, and not one of them has shaved his beard: that would be weird.)

As I said, I remain to be convinced that such people exist at all in Morrocco or other Maliki lands, or in any significant numbers, or even to meet a single one of them.

The situation of Hanafi scholars in aggressively secular states like Turkey is very different: the scholarly tradition has been under attack there for a long time, and people with conservative looks are in some danger of being harrassed.



Jazakallah khair for your advice and for your noble concerns. Commanding the right and forbidding the wrong is a duty, so may Allah reward you for carrying out this duty to the best of your ability.

However, it is also bad adab (perhaps even haram and a sin) to criticise someone for something they did not do. When a person is talking in hypothetical terms, that is not the same thing as "calling someone impious for not having a beard". Thus I recommend that you read carefully, and point me to the exact words you think I should take back.

Wa al-Salam



One should never call any `Alim impious for doing something of which there is disagreement. This is haram. At least for the lay people man.

What about Shaykh Ramadhan Al Bouti?

[Neyzen]

iskender ali mihr is a kafir. he claims to be a prophet. never and ever listen to him guys.

[Neyzen]

:)
yes, he is hold in high regard. He wrote the famous risale nur. Even though sometimes his books are kind of difficult to read.

By the way. I got this book 'the words' and his picture is on the back of the book, with no beard.

see also:
www.risale-inur.com.tr

English link:
http://www.nur.web.tr/english/


salaam

im a turkish hanafi muslim. i do agree with you, many turkish imams dont have beard. and taraweh prayers are really fast. people just hurry to be out of mosque in ramadan. :S

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi was not a hanafi turkish muslim. He is Shafi muslim, he is a kurd originally though. About his beard, well said nursi was exiled through all of his life. People wanted him to take his turban off, but he said unless u cut my head off, u cant take it off. do you think secularist people would have let him keeping beard? he had strugless during all of his life.

Fethullah Gulen is a new person. He is such a moderate muslim. MashaAllah he has been giving dawah. May Allah help him

massalamah

[Omar HH]

Ustadh `Amr Khaled is a great man - no beard.

;)

Wassalam.

[al-Hanbali]

I did not call any scholar pious or impious (as I am not even convinced that you will find any scholars with shaved faces in Morrocco or other lands where the Maliki school is dominant.)

All you have to do is go to the Maghrib in Ramadan and watch the T.V. program called ad Durus al Hasaniyah. There you will see people teaching who dont have beards. If you listen to them and read thier books you would have no doubt that they are Alims.

[ozgurislam]

As salamu aleykum,

Some the present turkish ulema do have beard like Cavit Aksit and Enver Baytan.(altough not a fistfull)

Was salaam

[Muhammed Bahauddin]

As Salamu Alaikum

Thats funny.

Turkish Hanafiyya never allow to shave the beard, the turkish hanafiyya most time follow the arabic "version".

I think, you all dont know much about the situation in Turkey. The most ppl, which are Imams in the Mosque, are against the Turban and traditional islamic clothes. Do you think they would ever allow a beard?

Who has a beard, means, he stayed back in time. Not every turkish imam in a mosque is a Alim. Of course not!!!

True Hanafiyya Alims are: Ahmed Mahmud Unlu, Timurtas Ucar, Mahmud Ustaosmanoglu (which is a great Awliya and Naqshibandi Shaykh) and much more.

They say that shaving the beard is such a great sin, its near to kufur, because Allah did creat man with the beard and with shaving it, you say, i know better as YOU what looks better.

They are strongly against shaving the beard.

I know all this, cause I am a Turkish Hanafi :)

As Salamu Alaikum

[Sunni_Student786]

Brother Bahauddin,

How large of a following do those Hanafi Ulema that you spoke of above (i.e. Ahmed Mahmud Unlu, Timurtas Ucar, Mahmud Ustaosmanoglu) have in Turkey among the masses?

Also, do they have circles of student whom they teach? Or do they teach at specific madrassas or Universities?

Any info that you would have in this regard would be appreciated.

Jazakallahu Khair.

Wa'salaam.

[ozgurislam]

As a matter of fact todays we have no real Ulema in Turkey and that is the truth!!!

I am also a Turkish Hanafi

[Muhammed Bahauddin]

As Salamu Alaikum

Ahmad Mahmud Unlu is a pupil of Great Shaykh Mahmud Ustaosmanoglu (which was a great friend of Sayyid Malik al Alawi (ra) and he was called from him the Kutub) Ahmad Mahmud Unlu is travelling in Turkey and other countries and is giving Durus. Shaykh Mahmud has much Madrasas, where you can learn the traditional Islam and those Madrasas are not allowed in Turkey. The islamic University, so called "Imam Khatip" schools are nothing against those Madrasas. The most time in Imam Khatip you dont learn much stuff. Surely, Mahmud Efendi has much pupils and he did teach much Scholars. You recognize the pupils and murids from theire beard, the jubba and the turban.

Timurtas Ucar did Die already (Rahmatullahi aleyh). He was a great speacher and did only talk the truth. Today in Turkey, you dont see much ppl like this but its going on. Mahmud Efendi is very much known in Turkey. He self is not speaking anymore, cause he is not allowed to speak and he is very sick, may Allah give him shifa.

I'm his pupil too, alhamdulillah, may Allah makes me a good pupil. amin.

[clip- sorry no pics]
This is ahmed mahmud unlu

Mahmud Efendis Pupils all everywhere in Turkey.
He self lives in Istanbul, Fatih Carsamba
As Salamu Alaikum

[Neyzen]

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi - he was a turkish Hanafi was he not?

Also, what about Fethullah Gulen - is he a qualified shaykh?


said nursi was a kurdish originally, and also he was shafi.

fethullah gulen is a moderate muslim scholar. his ideas are excellent. i can say he is the hamza yusuf of turkey.


http://fgulen.com

you can learn more of him

massalamah

[ozgurislam]

well actually none of the turkish ''ulema'' can speak freely, the government military is watching and controlling them.

i remember the prime minister Tayyip Erdogan calling the people in a debate : soldiers of islam or something like that whereafter they put him in prison.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

One should never call any `Alim impious for doing something of which there is disagreement. This is haram. At least for the lay people man.

What about Shaykh Ramadhan Al Bouti?

What about saying that they are not scrupulous? Can I say that some 'ulema are not full of wara' if they shave their beard (this is the third degree of taqwa according to Ibn Juzayy)?

We should all take it for granted that everyone is pious in the basic sense of sticking to the halal and avoiding the haram according to their beliefs. The Salafis are pious in this sense too. So when you describe someone as "pious", especially a scholar, it generally means a higher level of piety than the normal level that we ascribe to Muslims.

Does Shaykh Al Bouti shave his beard?

[Sunni_Student786]

....
Does Shaykh Al Bouti shave his beard?

The Shaykh does not shave his beard, but it is not a fist length either.

BUT, I don't believe that he intentionally pares it down to that length because I myself do not shave, nor even trim my beard (save to even it out and get rid of some stray hairs) and, for the life of me, I cannot get my to grow out beyond one finger's length away from my face, thus making it about the same size as Shaykh al Bouti's. I think that this is also the case with many other Ulema who, although having short beards, do not shave them. Because I personally cannot, for the life of me, develop a beard that is a fist length's, despite being quite full, I am often times willing to give the Ulema the benefit of the doubt when their beards seem rather "trim". I think that others should do the same rather than assuming that they are intentionally trimming them down.

Wa'salaam.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

The Shaykh does not shave his beard, but it is not a fist length either.

BUT, I don't believe that he intentionally pares it down to that length because I myself do not shave, nor even trim my beard (save to even it out and get rid of some stray hairs) and, for the life of me, I cannot get my to grow out beyond one finger's length away from my face, thus making it about the same size as Shaykh al Bouti's. I think that this is also the case with many other Ulema who, although having short beards, do not shave them. Because I personally cannot, for the life of me, develop a beard that is a fist length's, despite being quite full, I am often times willing to give the Ulema the benefit of the doubt when their beards seem rather "trim". I think that others should do the same rather than assuming that they are intentionally trimming them down.

Wa'salaam.

I agree with this: I know brothers who have virtually no hair at all on their faces, even though they do nothing to them.

[Omar HH]

Yo Sa'd what your saying about disagreement from scholars CAN be said BUT by pious scholars with many other conditions. You have to be a Shaykh before you can call someone "unscrupolous" thats the thing.

Also it's funny that the same Imam Ibn Juzayy (rahimahullah) you quote - and I should know as he is one of my favorite scholars of all time, I have his book al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyyah as well as his work on Usool, and I am currently reading his entire book insha Allah right now - is the very same scholar who noted the opinion that the beard is Sunnah and not fard ;).

Yet thats not the mashhur - mashhur is fard and I have a beard.

But... "aint that funny" lol ;)

Wassalam.

[Muhammed Bahauddin]

As Salamu Alaikum

I thought mashur is Wajib and not Fardh O.o

[Omar HH]

In the Maliki madhab they are the same thing.

But you know Hanafis - they are complicated ;)

[slaveof Allaah]

As-Salamuilkum Wa Rahmatulahi Wa Barakatahu...

I Honestly do not understand all this controversy regarding the beard. Yes there are differences amongst the Madahiib regarding the length of the beard and if shaving, yet ultimatley the beard is one of the most aparent and basic sunnahs. This keeping of the beard should not be disputed, because even though the great and honarble Imams held differnt opionions regarding the beard, Nabi Karim Sallal lahi Alahi Wa Sallam, kept a fist length beard. In many riwaayat, in which even the tabiyyen saw Nabi Karim Sallal lahi Alahi Wa Sallam, he Sallal lahi Alahi Wa Sallam, allways is reported to have a beard, ONE THAT COVERS HIS Sallal lahi Alahi Wa Sallam'S CHEST. Ultimatley, it is foolish for us to state that shaving the beard is halal, b/c even l-Durr al-Mukhtar, Umm, Muwatta of Imam Malik and all the kitaab of Hanbali Fiqh, there is absoloutely no claim that being clean shaven is halal. AND LETS REMEMBER THAT ALTHOUGH A SUNNAH IS NOT A FARDH, FOLLOWING THE QURAN AND SUNNAH ARE THE PATHWAYS TO JANNAH.
Please do not think that I am saying to rebel and not adhere to your Madhab, Im simply trying to re-inforce the Sunnah just as the Pious generations before us did.

May ALLAH RABBUL IZZAT forgive me for my shortcommings and inspire us all towards the Siratul Mustakeem

As-Salamuilkum Wa Rahmatuahi Wa Barakatahu
And ALLAAH TA'LA knows best.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

In the Maliki madhab they are the same thing.

But you know Hanafis - they are complicated ;)

You know the truth: it can be complicated :cheesygri