The Official Sunni/Salafi Debates Thread

[lumumba_s]

As salamu `alaykum,
I disagree, I have seen a few with bad adab, and a very bad way of discussing things.I apologize for my fervor and poor adab in our last interaction . . .

[lumumba_s]

The group that comes most to mind when the key words "tawheed" and "daleel" are mentioned are the salafees, hands down, and that's because a large part of their activity is in explaining those mattersThat is from your perspective. From the perspective of those who have been or are the targets of their "explanations", it is because they have throw those words around and beat everyone else over the head with them; while their daleels are often nothing more than a barrage of Qur'anic and hadith citations, that they usually have no authority in, cited in a manner that is intended to cause inundation.

And I often find that most frequently, it is the Salafis or newly converted Traditionalists who tend to view the world as a dichotomy between Salafis, Sufis and Shi'a. The Sufis that I know reserve the word for those who they deem superior to them and they have a great deal of mutual respect for scholars of law, language and other disciplines, who may not necessarily agree with their methodology for spiritual growth. Salafism is to a large degree, a rejection or ignorance of mainstream tradition and when people leave that train of thought, they tend to gravitate to the other superficial extreme.

And unless you claim to have direct communication with the awrah of the people of the past that supersedes transmitted knowledge, the Khalaf vs. Salaf "concept" is a methodological lie.

[Musleemah]

As salamu `alaykum,I apologize for my fervor and poor adab in our last interaction . . .

actually you were not on my mind when i said that.
u have good adab in ur discussions, the ones that I have seen.
so keep it up.

[Musleemah]

to akhi Ibn Islam

there are many Salafis who do dawah with akhlaq, not all but many do, you will also find many who don't sadly.

and you will find that in all.
even in ash'aris, some discuss with adab and some have very bad akhlaq.

I have come across Salafis who have akhlaq and ones who don't in their discussions.
and seen same with ash'aris and sufis.

so it doesn't have to do with ones beliefs, it has to do with one being human, the issue of akhlaq is one of the hardest things, not many have good akhlaq, not just in discussing but in dealing with people in general and the hardest is when dealing with one's family and people he lives with.

I ask Allah to grant us good akhlaq.

[truesalafi]

MAS’ALAT-UL-QIRAATI KHALF-AL-IMAM
(Reading of Al-Fatiha behind the Imam)

Those of us who adhere to the madhab of Imam Abu Hanifah believe that when an individual performs salaah alone then, it is wajib to recite al-Fatiha, but when one is praying behind the Imam then, al-Fatiha should not be recited, whether the Imam is reciting loudly or quietly. The evidence available from the Qur’an and Sunnah are as follows:

Allah says in the Qur’an:
“When the Qur’an is recited, listen to it.”
[Surat-ul-A’raaf: 204]


Hafidh Ibn Kathir writes [that]:

The Prophet SAW said: The Imam’s recitation is enough for the followers.
[Tafsir Ibn Kathir under Surah Al Fatiha]

The position taken by those who adhere to this madhab, is that it is impermissable to recite behind the Imam in any salaah.

There are people who believe that we should recite behind the Imam even when the Imam recites loudly or quietly. Their evidence is from the Hadith, in which the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said:

The Salaah of the person who does not recite Al-Fatiha, is not accepted
[Bukhari Muslim Kitabul Saklah Chapter Wujub-ul-Qiraat]

Rather than reciting this in isolation, when we read other sources of Islamic Law, we can establish that the meaning of this Hadith is that it is essential to recite Al-Fatiha when praying Salaah alone. Some people have also established from the above Hadith that it implies that the recitation of al-Fatiha in every rakaah is fard compulsary.

It is also worth mentioning that this Hadith is established from a single narration, so an action cannot be proved to be fard from such type of narration. There is proof from Qur’an and Sunnah which supports the view that if someone reads any part of the Qur’an in the Salaah, the Salaah will be accepted.

Allah says in the Qur’an:

Recite the Qur’an (in Salaah) that which is easy for you

[Surat-ul-Muzzammil: 20]

If surat-al-Fatiha was fard then, the verse would have stated this explicitly. There is also another Hadith which states that the Prophet taught a man how to perform salaah, yet he [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] did not mention Al-Fatiha.

Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim write [that]:

The Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] was sitting in the masjid and a man came and performed salaah. The Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] ordered him to perform salaah again. When he finished, the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] told him again to perform Salaah. The man said “This is the best way that I can perform salaah. Teach me a better way.” The Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said “When you stand, say takbir then recite from the Qur’an whatever is easy for you.”
[Bukhari & Muslim, baabu wujoob-il-Qiraah]

Imam Darral Qutini writes [that]:

The Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] said that whoever joins the salaah with the Imam in ruku (before the Imam stands straight), that ruku will not have to be repeated.

[Daar Qutini chap Adrak Imam Qabl al Rakooh]

If the recitation of Surat al Fatiha was fard, the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] would have told the man to recite al-Fatiha first and then to recite any other part of the Qur’an which was easy for him. Also the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] would not have said that the ruku of the person, who joins the Imam while the Imam is in rukoo, does not have to be repeated. In such a case Al-Fatiha is missed. If Al-Fatiha was fard, the person joining the Salaah at rukoo would have had to repeat his Salaah– simply because a fard was missing.

Alama Sa’eedi writes:

The meaning of the above debated Hadith is similar to the following ahadeeth:

The Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] said that

“whoever lives close to the mosque and does not pray in the mosque his salaah is not accepted.”

There is another Hadith, which states that if a person makes wudu and does not recite Bismillah, the wudu is invalid. There is also another Hadith stating that a person is not Muslim if his neighbour sleeps in a hungry state. Another Hadith states that if a person does not fulfil their promise then, he is not a Muslim. Of course, the person who doesn’t fulfil their promise is still a Muslim, and in the same way, if someone doesn’t recite Al-Fatiha in salaah, his salaah is still accepted but without full Excellency. If this wasn’t the case, the Prophet should have said: “The salaah of the one who does not recite al-Fatiha is false.”
[Sharh Muslim Baab Wujoobe Qiraat] By Allama Sa’eedi

There is a further explanation of this Hadith, which we shall touch upon later, InSha’Allah. We accept that there are scholars who hold the view that people should recite al-Fatiha behind the Imam. The scholars have also written books on this subject.

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

Some scholars say that Al-Fatiha should be recited behind the Imam. The scholars of Hadith say this opinion is weak. Qur’an and authentic Hadith and the opinion of the early Muslims (salaf) is with those scholars who say that Al-Fatiha should not be recited behind the Imam.

[Tanaww Ibaadaat, Page 76 by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah]

Hafidhh Ibn Kathir writes [that]:Imam Ahmad and Imam Abu Hania say there should be no recitation behind the Imam during any Salaah. This is more accurate because Imam Shafi has one opinion which is similar to this.
[Tafsir Ibn Kathir under Surah Araf verse 204]

Surley, after reading such statementsit should suffice to understand which position is in accordance with the Prophets [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] command of “pray as you see me pray.”
Whoever decides to embark on their own research on this subject, will find it difficult not to arrive at the same conclusion of Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah and Hafidhh Ibn Kathir.

Let us now examine the evidence of the people who insist that they should recite behind the Imam.

Essentialiy, they claim that there are three Ahadith which state that the Prophet said that we should recite behind the Imam. In fact, there is not a single Hadith in which the Prophet has commanded us to recite behind the Imam. As we have seen thus-far there is proof from the Qur’an and Sunnah to suggest that we should NOT recite behind the Imam.

Let us examine the three narrations which have been put forward.

The first narration is from Ali bin Abdullah from Sufiyan from Zuhri from Mahmood who reported that:

The Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] said that the salaah of whoever does not recite Al-Fatiha is not complete.
[Bukhari Muslim Baabu Wujoob-il-Qiraa’h]

Those who recite behind the Imam put forward this Hadith as their evidence to recite Surah al-Fatiha in every salaah behind the Imam. There is no word in this Hadith that proves that Al-Fatiha should be recited behind the Imam. If we take the literal meaning of reciting behind the Imam, then this narration would go against the Qur’an and authentic ahadith. The actual meaning of this narration is that when a person is praying alone and does not recite al-Fatiha then, his salaah is not complete. This is the actual opinion held by narrators of this narration. The following proves this.

Imam Muslim writes [that]:

Ma’mar reported from Zuhri that the Prophet Muhammad said that the salaah of the person who does not recite Surah Al-Fatiha and another part of the Qur’an is not accepted.

[Muslim, Bab al Qira’]

Imam Muslim’s narration confirms that this Hadith is for the person who is praying alone because, when a person prays alone he reads Surah Al-Fatiha and another part of the Qur’an. Even the people who recite Al-Fatiha behind the Imam they, do not say that there should be another part of the Qur’an recited. So it is clear that this Hadith is for those people who are praying alone.

An objection raised

Imam Bukhari narrated a narration from Sufiyan which is about the wujub of only reciting Al-Fatiha and Imam Muslim narrates from Ma’mar a Hadith which says that the person’s prayer is not accepted if they do not recite Surah Al-Fatiha AND another part of the Qur’an. We prefer Sufiyan’s narration over Ma’mar’s because Sufiyan is more reliable.

This objection can be cleared easily by looking at what the books of al-jarhu-wat-ta’deel say about the quality of Hadith narrators.

Imam Dhahabi and Hafidhh Asqalani write [that]:

Imam Yahya bin Mo’een was asked by his students, who had memorised more of Imam Dhahabi’s narrations, as to whom he prefered. He replied: “Imam Ma’mar. “Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said that Sufiyan heard Ahadith from Imam Zuhri at a young age, so this is why, when he reported Ahadith from Zuhri, he made mistakes in 20 of them.
[Tahzeeb ut Tahzeeb, Meezaan ul- ‘itidaal, biography of Sufiyan and Ma’mar]

This reference proves that Ma’mar’s narration is more authentic than Sufiyan’s narration.

Hafidhh Ibn Kathir writes [that]:

Sufiyan sometimes committed Tadlees [which means that when he narrated some of the Hadith, he made out that he heard it directly from Zuhri, but he had actually heard it from someone else who in turn heard it from Zuhri]. One day, Sufiyan was sitting with his students and he told them a Hadith, which he was narrating from Zuhri. One of the students questioned: “Did you hear this directly from Zuhri?” Sufiyan paused and said: “No, I heard it from Abdul Razzaq, who heard it from Ma’mar, who heard it directly from Zuhri.”
[Iftisaaru Uloom il Ahadith, Baab ut Tadlees, by Hafidhh Ibn Kathir]

This reference, proves that Sufiyan at times committed Tadlees, but Ma’mar did not. Someone may say that Sufiyan’s narrations are prefered over Ma’mar’s, even if Ma’mar is more reliable concerning Zuhri’s narrations than Sufiyan. This claim is dealt with below.

Sufiyan’s narrations prove that we should read Al-Fatiha even if we are praying behind an Imam
The answer is No. Let us examine what Imam Zuhri and his other students, Imam Malik and others, (including Sufiyan,) understood from this narration. The main narration comes from Imam Zuhri then his students, Imam Malik, Sufyan, Yunus, Ma’mar, Auzai’ee and others narrate this narration.

Imam Abu Dawud writes [that]

Sufiyan narrates from Imam Zuhri that the Hadith that a prayer of the person who does not recite Al-Fatiha and another part of the Qur’an is not accepted is meant for the person who is praying alone. Imam Zuhri says that when the Prophet used to lead the prayer loudly the people used to recite behind him. This narration is from Imam Zuhri, narrated by Sufiyan, Ma’mar, Abdullah bin Muhammad, Auzai’ee, Abdur Rahman bin Is-haaq, Yunus, Usama and Imam Malik.

[Abu Dawud, Baab Tark ul Qiraa’h Khalf ul Imam]

From this we can prove that the Hadith concerning nullification of the prayer, of the one who does not recite Al-Fatiha in their prayer is meant for that person who is performing salaah alone, and not behind the Imam. This is what Imam Sufiyan, his teacher and colleagues understood by this narration. This Hadith is found in two versions; One version is narrated by Sufiyan, this concerning just reading Al-Fatiha – (this is without any clarification.) The other version is that the persons prayer is not accepted who does not recite Al-Fatiha AND another part of the Qur’an. This narration comes from Sufiyan, Ma’mar and others. The second narration is an explanation of the first one. Imam Sufiyan himself explained that this narration is for that person who is performing salaah alone.

More evidence supporting the recitation behind the Imam

Imam Muslim writes [that]:

Someone asked Abu-Hurairah “What do we do when we are behind the Imam, should we recite Al-Fatiha or not?” He answered “Recite it in your heart.”

[Muslim Baab Wujube Qiraat]

The people who recite behind the Imam take evidence from this narration by saying that reciting Al-Fatiha behind the Imam is fard as Abu-Hurairah said that it should be recited in the heart. These words are neither from Allah nor the Prophet, but are the words of Abu-Hurairah himself. In Bukhari, Muslim, and other books of Ahadith, there is no such narration, which says that when you are behind the Imam you must recite Al-Fatiha in your heart. There are, however, narrations, which say that when the Imam is reciting Al-Fatiha one should listen to it.

Imam Muslim writes in Sahih Muslim:

Abu Hurairah said that the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] said that when the Imam recites, listen and stay quiet.
[Muslim Baab ut Tashahhud]

How is it possible that Abu-Hurairah is contradicting his own narrations? The actual meaning of Abu-Hurairah’s words concerning reciting in the heart is to contemplate its meanings. This is the true meaning which does not go against the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

Qadhi Shawkani writes (Imam Qurtubi has also written something similar):

The word “Nafsaka(Your self)” means to think about the meaning.
[Fath ul Qadeer, under Surat ul-Araf, Aayah 203]

Imam Nawawi writes [that]:

Some Maliki scholars have explained Abu-Hurairah’s words about “reading in the heart”, as to think about the words of Al-Fatiha, because if you read something in the heart it cannot be called recitation because recitation is actually when one reads from the tongue. So it is only called recitation when the tongue is actually moving. The proof of this is that all the scholars say when a woman is in an impure state she cannot recite with the tongue, but she can think about the meaning in her heart.
[Shara Muslim Baab Wujoobe Qiraat]

From the above we can see that Abu-Hurairah’s words do not mean to recite behind the Imam but rather they mean to think about the meaning in the heart.

The status of the words of the companions

It is said that the words of Abu-Hurairah prove that recitation behind the Imam is fard. This objection can be easily cleared, as the words of the companions cannot prove something to be fard, wajib, halal or haraam. (The Qur’an and Ahadith of the Prophet can only prove this), particularly when the words of the companion contradict any Hadith that, the companion have himself or herself reported. The words of the companions are normally proof of something when there is nothing related to it, (from the Qur’an and Sunnah).

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes [that]:The words of the Sahaba cannot prove anything to be fard, wajib, halal or haraam, especially when words go against authentic Hadith. So when the words go against the Hadith it is not necessary for Muslims to follow it. There is a narration saying that Abu-Hurairah used to wipe his neck during wudu. We know that to perform this wiping is against Sunnah. This is why groups of scholars criticise those people who wipe the neck during wudu.
[Kitab ul Wasila Baab Hadith ul Ama]

After Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah’s statement one cannot prove that reciting Al-Fatiha behind the Imam from Abu-Hurairah’s words.


More evidence supporting recitation behind the Imam

Imam Abu-Dawud writes [that]:

Ubada bin Samid reported: Once we prayed Fajr behind the Prophet, He experienced difficulty in his recitation. When he finished praying he asked “Maybe one of you was reciting behind me”. We said, “Yes”. The Prophet said “Do not recite anything behind me except Al-Fatiha”. Narrated by Muhammad bin Is-haaq, Muqhool, and Naf’e from Ubada.
[Abu Dawud Baab ul Qiraat Fi Salaah]

From this narration, one cannot prove that the recitation behind the Imam is necessary. Here are some reasons for this.

1) This narration opposes the Qur’an and the authentic Ahadith, which say that one should not recite behind the Imam of (which we have mentioned but a few above);

2) This narration is very weak. The reason for this is that the narrators of this Hadith have been criticised by the scholars of Hadith;

3) Abu-Dawud, who collected this Hadith, wrote a second chapter in which there is the full explanation of this Hadith. When we read the full explanation we can see that we should not recite behind the Imam, and

4) The narrator of this narration himself never recited behind the Imam.


The narrator of this Hadith

Abu-Dawud writes [that]:

Muqhool sometimes got this narration confused because sometimes he said he got the narration from Ubada and sometimes that he said he heard it from Naf’e and sometimes he said he heard it from Mahmood.
[Abu Dawud Baab Qiraa’ah Khalful Imam]

The other narrator of this Hadith is Naf’e who is unknown.

Imam Dahabi and Hafidhh Asqalani write [that]:

Naf’e only ever narrated one Hadith (which was the one above). This is the reason why Imam bin Abdul barr says that he is unknown. Imam Bukhari and Imam Abu Hatim never mentioned Naf’e’s name in their books. Ibn Habban said that Naf’e’s narration is weak, but he was not a liar.
[Mizan ul Ittadeel Tahzeeb al Tahzeeb biography of Naf’e bin Mahmood]

The other narrator of this narration is Muhammad bin Is-haaq, who was very knowledgeable in Islamic history but very weak in narration of Hadith.

Imam Dhahabi and Hafidhh Asqalani write [that]:

The scholars of Hadith have different opinions about Muhammad bin Is-haaq. Yahya bin Mo’een says that he is authentic but his narration of Hadith is not good. Ali Ibn Madini says his two narrations are unknown. Nasai said that he is not strong in the knowledge of Hadith. Imam Dar Qutni said that his Hadith cannot be used as evidence. Imam Abu Bakr said that Muhammad bin Is-haah was Qadri. Imam Hashaam and Imam Salaiman said that he was a liar. Imam Malik said that he is a liar and is a Dajjal. Abdullah bin Mubarak said, “I saw Muhammad bin Is-haaq in Masjid ul Haif, I did not go near him because people might have said that I have wrong beliefs like him.” Imam Ahmad said “When he narrates Hadith, he narrates Hadith from those people whom he never met. Imam Yahya bin Sa’eed says “I bear witness that Muhammad bin Is-haaq is a liar. He has narrated one thousand Hadith’s which no one else has narrated.” Imam Bukhari never wrote any Hadith that was narrated by Muhammad bin Is-haaq. No one can use his narration of Hadith as evidence for halal and haraam. But there are a few people who praised him like Imam Shoba.
[Mizan ul I’tidaal, Tahzeeb ut Tahzeeb, Tazkarat ul Huffaaz, biography of Muhammad bin Is-haaq]

We can see that the majority of scholars have criticised Muhammad bin Is-haaq so how can we use his narration as evidence?

1) Imam Abu Dawud writes [that]:

One day the Prophet [May Allah blss him and grant Him peace] was leading the prayer. After he had finished praying he said “Perhaps some of you were reciting behind me?” The followers said “Yes”. The Prophet said “That was why I was facing difficulty in reciting”. Abu Hurairah, Imam Zuhri and Imam Auzai’ee said that after this advice from the Prophet everyone stopped reciting behind the Imam.

[Abu Dawud Baab Man al Qiraat]

From this narration, we can see that people used to recite behind the Imam but stopped it afterwards.

2) Imam Abu Dawud writes [that]:

Naf’e reported: One day, Ubada and I, performed salaah behind Abu Naeem, Ubada was standing besides me. He recited behind the Imam. When the salaah was over, I asked him “Why, when the Imam was reciting loudly, did you recite behind him?” He told me about the Hadith that has been mentioned above.

[Abu Dawud Baab Qiraat Khalful Imam]

From this, we can see that Naf’e (who is the narrator of the Hadith) did not recite behind the Imam, and nor did the other people who were there. Secondly, it is proved that Ubada was reciting Al Fatiha loud enough so that the next person could hear him. So the people who use this Hadith as evidence should only recite loud enough so that the next person can hear them. If everyone recites loudly behind the Imam it would sound like similar to the “Amin” said in unison. So these are the reasons why this narration cannot be used as evidence, we also know that, there are authentic Ahadith that say when, the Imam is reciting, you should listen to it. So how can we leave the authentic Hadith and follow the weak Hadith?
Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes [that]:

To listen to the recitation of the Imam is mentioned in the Qur’an and the authentic Ahadith. The whole Ummah agrees on this. All the companions say that when the Imam recites Al-Fatiha or any other Surah it is fard to listen and to stay quiet. Imam Shah’s saying is also like this. This is the reason that the knowledgeable Shafi scholars like Imam Qadri and Imam Abu Muhammad say that if the Imam is reciting loudly, and someone recites behind him, that person would be denying the Qur’an, Sunnah and the opinion of all the companions.

[Tanow al Ibadaat Page 87 by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah]

After Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah’s statement, no one can say that recitation behind the Imam is fard and that the one who recites behind the Imam his salaah will not be accepted.


Evidence from the Qur’an for not reciting behind the Imam

Allah says in the Qur’an:

“When the Qur’an is being recited, listen to it and be silent”

[Surah Araf verse 204]

Hafidhh Ibn Kathir explains the meaning of this verse as follows:

You should remain quiet when the Imam is reciting Qur’an loudly in the fard salaah. There is a Hadith in which the Prophet said, “When offering Salaah behind the Imam you should recite takbir when he recites takbir, and when he recites Qiraat you should remain quiet”.

There is also another narration:

Abdullah Ibn Masud heard some people reciting Qiraat behind the Imam and said to them "What is wrong with you? Why are you not obeying the Qur’an?”

This implies that when the Qur’an is being recited remain quite. Imam Zuhri states that this verse was revealed because one man used to recite behind the Prophet SAW. Abu Hurairah said that before this verse, was revealed people were in the habit of reading behind the Imam aloud in salaah Fajr, Maghrib and Isha salaah and when this verse was revealed they stopped this practice.

Imam Zuhri says that in the salaah, where the Imam recites loudly, you should not recite behind him because the Imam’s recitation is sufficient for you, even if you cannot hear. But there were some people who thought that they could recite behind the Imam if his voice did not reach them, but I (Ibn Kathir) say that this is wrong, no one should recite behind the Imam, whether his voice reaches them or not. This is because Allah says in the Qur’an

“When the Qur’an is being recited, listen to it and remain quiet”.
A group of scholars say the following:

Imam Ahmad and Abu Hanifah say that a person should not recite Qiraat behind the Imam in any Salaah, because the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] stated that the Imam’s reciting is sufficient for the followers.

Imam Shafi has two opinions on this subject:
1) A person should recite Qiraat behind the Imam
2) A person should not recite Qiraat behind the Imam.

I (Ibn Kathir) say that the second opinion is correct as it corresponds with the Qur’an.

Imam Bukhari states that a person is entitled to recite Qiraat in every salaah behind the Imam weather the Imam recites quietly or loudly, but the Sahaba and Tabi'een say that it is essential to listen to the Imam and remain quiet. This is the opinion held by Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, Ibn Jubair, Ibn Masud, and many other great Sahaba and Tabi'een.
[Tafsir Ibn Kathir under Surah Araf verse 204 By Hafidhh Ibn Kathir]

Imam Tabari writes [that]:

This verse was revealed about salaah, but some scholars say that the verse is not for salaah but is also for the Jumma and Eid Khutbah. The companions agree with this. Ibn Masud, Abu Hanifah, Imam Zuhri, Zaid, Ibn Musaib, Hasan Basri, Ubaidh, Ata, Dhahak, Ibrahim, Nakhai, Qatada, Shabi (who had seen 500 of the Prophets companions), Sadai all hold this opinion.
[Tafsir Tabari, Surah Araf verse 204 by Imam Tabari]

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes [that]:

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal says that the whole Ummah has agreed upon the fact that the verse which states “When Qur’an is recited, listen and remain quiet”, was revealed for salaah, and all scholars agree that it is not essential for the Muqtadi (follower) to recite but he should stay quite and listen. This opinion is authentic because it is in line with the Qur’an.
[Fatawah Ibn Taymiyyah Volume 2 Pages 143, 168 and 412 by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah]

From the tafsirs of Hafidhh Ibn Kathir and Imam Tabari it is clear that the verse from Surah Araf was revealed for salaah. The Sahaba and Tabi’een also agreed on this. It may still be said that the Sahaba and Tabi'een, who say that this ayah was revealed for salaah, made a mistake. To remove this doubt, Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Kathir were quoted. These are the names of the people who along with other great scholars have passed the deen down to us. When these people interpret any verse of the Qur’an, they say that their interpretation is authentic and any other opinion is useless. This is because of their knowledge in the Islamic Sciences.

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes [that]:

The Tabi’een gained knowledge from the Sahaba and settled in different places. The people of Makka had the most knowledge in Qur’anic Tafsir because Ibn Abbas once lived there, and his students gained knowledge of Tafsir from him. An example is Mujahid who was the most knowledgeable in interpreting the Qur’an. Imam Shafi, Ahmed and Bukhari used to prefer the Tafsir of Mujahid over others. Indeed, Mujahid was the “sign of Allah on this earth”. Students of Abdullah Ibn Abbas were Ata Ibn Rubah, Ikrima, and Sa’eed bin Jubair.

In Kufa Abdullah Ibn Masud taught the people the knowledge of the Qur’anic Tafsir. They, and their students, had great knowledge in the field of Tafsir.

In Madina, Zaid bin Salaam had the most knowledge of the Qur’anic Tafsir. This is the reason why Imam Malik's quotations of Tafsir are from Zaid bin Aslam. Hasan al-Basri, Musrooq, Qatadah, and Abu Aliya, who were also great scholars of Tafsir.
[Usool ut Tafsir p21, 66 by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah]

Hafidhh Ibn Kathir writes [that]:

Mujahid, Ikrima, Ata, Hasan Basri, Musrooq, Sa’eed and Abu Aliya had great knowledge of Tafsir but Mujahid was the “Proof of Allah on this earth”. Sufiyan ath Thawri used to say that if Mujahid's Tafsir had said such and such a thing then futher research is useless as his Tafsir is sufficient.
[Muqadama Tafsir Ibn Tafsir by Hafidhh Ibn Kathir]

Therefore, if anyone should state that Surah al Araf’s verse was not revealed for salaah, his statement can be ignored. This is because this opinion would be against the Sahaba and Tabi’een. This is proved from the above statements.

Not reciting Qiraat behind the Imam, evidence from the Hadith

Imam Muslim writes [that]:

Abu Musa Ashari reported that the Prophet SAW taught us how to perform salaah, and said “First straighten the rows, then one person should become Imam, then follow him, when he says takbir say takbir and when he recites, remain quiet.”

[Sahih Muslim book of Salaah Chapter Tashahud, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Musnad Ahmad, Nayl ul Awtaar, Kitabul Qiraat, Muhallah Ibn Hazm Chapter Salaah]

Imam Muslim writes [that]:

My student, Abu Nasr, asked me if the Hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah in which it says “…when the Imam recites, stay quiet…” is authentic. I (Imam Muslim) said “Yes, it is authentic.”
[Sahih Muslim Chapter Tashahhud]

Imam Muslim writes [that]:

Zaid bin Thabit was asked if a person should recite behind the Imam, he in reply said “Behind the Imam there is no Qiraat”
[Sahih Muslim Chapter Sujud e Tilawah]

Imam Malik writes [that]:

Jabir reported that if a person performs Salaaqh and fails to read Surah Al-Fatiha, his Salaah is nullified, but if he is behind the Imam then his Salaah is valid.

[Muatta Imam Malik Chapter Majati Umal Qur’an]

Imam Malik further writes [that]:

Nafi (who was a famous student of Ibn Umar) reported that when anyone asked Ibn Umar: Should a person recite Surah Al-Fatiha behind the Imam, he used to reply that the Imam’s reciting of Surah Al-Fatiha is sufficient for you. Ibn Umar did not read Surah Al-Fatiha behind the Imam.

[Muatta Imam Malik book of Salaah Chapter Qiraat Khalful Imam].

Imam Ahmad writes that Ibn See’reen asked Ibn Umar “Should I recite Al-Fatiha behind the Imam?” He replied that the Imam’s recitation is sufficient for you.
[Musnad Ahmad narration’s of Ibn Umar].

Imam Ahmad writes [that]:

Jabir bin Abdullah reported that the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] said that the Imam’s recitation is the persons recitation who is reading behind him.

[Musnad Ahmad narration’s of Jabir bin Abdullah].

Ibn Majah also wrote this Hadith in his book of salaah. In Ibn Majah’s narrative chain, there is a person called Jafar who is considered weak.

Imam Ahmad writes [that]:

Abu Hurairah narrated that the Prophet SAW said that the Imam is selected to be followed and when he says takbeer you say takbir, when he goes into raku you go into raku, when he goes into sajdah you go into sajdah, but when he reads Qiraat you remain quiet.

[Musnad Ahmad narration’s of Abu Hurairah also Nasai Nayl al Awtaar Muhalla Ibn Hazm Chap of Salaah Kitabul Qiraat, Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah volume 2 Page 144].

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal reports [that]:

Abu Darda reported that one day the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] told us (and I was the closest to the Prophet) about recitation behind the Imam. He said that the Imam’s recitation is sufficient for the Muqtadi.
[Musnad Ahmad narration’s of Abu Darda].

Imam Tirmidhi writes [that]:

Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said that instruction from the Hadith that states, “…Salaah is not accepted if Surah Al-Fatiha is not read…” is for that person who is reading alone.

[Tirmidhi Chapter of Qiraat Khalful Imam].

Imam Abd al Razzaq (who was a great teacher of Imam Bukhari and Muslim) writes [that]:

Ali said that he who recites Qiraat behind the Imam goes against nature. One person asked Ibn Musood whether he should recite behind the Imam, Ibn Musood replied “No”. Zaid bin Aslam reported that the Prophet had prohibited a person from reading Qiraat behind the Imam.

Abu Is-haaq said that Ibn Masood’s students did not recite behind the Imam. Abaidullah asked Jabir bin Abdullah whether he recited behind the Imam at Zuhr and Asr? He replied “No”?

[Musanaf Abdul Razzaq Chapter on Qiraat Khalful Imam].

Imam Abdul Razzaq, who died in 221H, was neither a Hanafi nor Abu Hanifah’s student. No one can say that Imam Abdul Razzaq made up the narration to support the Hanifi position, so it should be accepted that this narration is not fabricated.

Imam Ibn Abi Shaiba writes [that]:
The Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] said that for any person, who recites behind the Imam, my wish is that fire should be placed in his mouth.

Nafi, Zahid bin Aslam, Ibn Umar, Jubair and Said Ibn Jubair say that there is no Qiraat behind the Imam whether he reads aloud or reads quiet.

[Musanaf Ibn Abu Shayba Chapter on Qiraat Khalful Imam].

Imam Ibn Abi Shayba, who strongly opposed Abu Hanifah, had written a full chapter against Abu Hanifah. In the same book he wrote the above narration without criticism. If this narration had not been true then, he would have rejected them it or criticised them it. Also, because he has not criticised this reports, it is proof in itself that the narration had taken place. No one can say that he had fabricated these narrations in order to support Abu Hanifah.

Imam Dar Qutini writes [that]:

The Prophet said that there is no recitation behind the Imam. Ali says that a person who recites Qiraat behind the Imam has gone against Sunnah.

[Dar Qutni Chapter on Qiraat]

Dar Qutni was also opposed to Imam Abu Hanifah, and tried to tamper with ahadiths, which supported the Hanafi School. He did not critisise the above, true narrations, which means that the above narrations are authentic.

Imam Dahabi writes [that]:

One man was performing Salaah behind the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] and was reciting. The person next to him tried to stop him with certain signals or signs. When the prayer had finished, they went to the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] and told their case. The Prophet SAW said the Imam’s Qiraat is sufficient for the followers.

[Talqis Mustadrak Chapter on Salaah by Imam Dahahbi].

The book, Mustadrak, is written by Hakim. In this book there are all sorts of narrations both authentic and fabricated. Imam Dhahabi has, in his book, examined every Hadith to see whether it is authentic. Imam Dhahabi’s above Hadith has been recorded as authentic; therefore, there can be no doubt about this Hadith.

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes [that]:

When the Imam recites loudly it means that the Muqtadi should listen. This is the reason that the Imam recites loudly so the Muqtadi can say Amin with him. When the Imam recites quietly, they do not say Amin with him. If the Imam should recites and the Muqtadi's also recites, this will mean that the Imam has been given the order to recite to people who do not want to listen to the Qiraat. This is the same as saying to a person to do a speech to a nation that does not want to listen to it. This is such nonsense that Islam does not permit it. There is a Hadith, which states that when a Khutba is being read and a person is talking, it is as though a pile of books is loaded onto a donkey. This is similar to a person reciting Qiraat behind the Imam in the audible prayers.

[Fatawah Ibn Taymiyyah Volume 2 Page 147 by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah].





So now it should be clear, without any doubt whatsoever, with all that has been mentioned and all the evidence to support the claim that when the Imam recites qiraat the Muqtadi should stay quiet and listen – for the Imam's recitation is sufficient for the Muqtadi.

For those who say if you do not recite AL FATIHA behind Imam your salah is not complete, how do they perform "sajda sahu', when they comit a mistake in its recitation? Do they do 'sajda sahu" even if the Imam does not do it? Then what is the use of having an Imam , when they don't follow him?

[AbdulQahhar]

MashaAllah :D

May Allah swt gives u the best of the rewards here and in the hereafter my bro.
Excellent post!

[fearhopelove]

My shaykh states that if the Imam recites out loud, you may not (using the Qur'an reference).

He said IF the imam pauses then you recite what you can of the Fatihah but NOT through the imam's recitation. For example, the Fatihah is over and everyone says 'ameen' you may begin your recitation silently UNTIL the imam begins reciting the next surah. He said this was a fatwa from Ibn Baz - that is my understanding.

He also added that this pause is not in the sunnah. Nor did the sahabah or tabi'een do it.

My shaykh has daleel, but I'm irresponsible and can not recall them.

Apparently, there is difference of opinion, just follow what you believe is the best.

[ozgurislam]

As salamu aleykum,

However in silent salah and in the last 2 rakat of loud salah where the al fatiha is read silent by the imam then it is aloud to recite al fatiha:

A number of Hanafi ulama have also held the view that, although not obligatory, it is better to recite Surah al Fatihah behind the Imam in silent salah such as Dhuhr and Asr. (If done, it should be so quietly and in such a manner that it does not confuse others or clash with their recitation, especially the Imam's.)

The desirability of reciting Surah al Fatihah behind the Imam in silent salah has also been narrated from Imam Abu Hanifah as mentioned by Zahidi in al Mujtabaa*, and more famously from Imam Muhammad bin Hasan al Shaibani as quoted by many authors.

This was also the view of many later Hanafi ulama including Imam Abu Hafs al Kabeer (one of the students of Imam Muhammad, d. 264 AH), Shaikh al Tasleem (d. 737 AH), Mulla Ali al Qari (d. 1014 AH), Shaikh Ahmad Mulla Jeewan (d. 1130 AH), Shah Abdul Raheem Dihlawi and his son Shah Waliullah Dihlawi (d. 1176 AH), and Allamah Abdul Hayy Luckhnawi (d. 1304 AH). Many others including Allamah Abdul Hayy Luckhnawi (d. 1304 AH) and Shaikh Ahmad Mulla Jeewan have actually ascribed the above opinion to a large group of Hanafi ulama and not just a select few.


Allamah Abdul Hayy Luckhnawi has a comprehensive work exclusively on the subject titled :

Imam al Kalam fi ma Yatallaq bi al Qiraat Khalf al Imam

In which, after extensive research, he concludes that the above view (the desirability of reciting Surah al Fatihah behind the Imam in silent salah) is the most correct.

Maulana Dhafar Ahmad Thanvi Uthmani also dedicated a book:

Fatihah al Kalam fi al Qiraat Khalf al Imam

To the topic in which he confirms that it is permissible for the congregation to recite Surah al Fatihah behind the Imam in silent salah.

Source: The Salah of a Beleiever in Quran and Sunnah by Shayk Abu Yusuf Riyadh ul Haqq.

[Salafi]

MAS’ALAT-UL-QIRAATI KHALF-AL-IMAM
(Reading of Al-Fatiha behind the Imam)
........

The position taken by those who adhere to this madhab, is that it is impermissable to recite behind the Imam in any salaah.


Assalamo 'alaikum

impermissable=HARAM or MAKRUH TAHREEMI? according to most hanafis it is MAKRUH TAHREEMI (MAKRUH near haram not haram) .

wassalam

[Cloud_Strife]

Salam alaikoum ;

in my home country as well ( France ) , they are growing ; you will find a lot of young reverts ; I used to steady a bit in Egypt and I was really surprised to see so much french salafi living and steadying there ; we were only two , to follow a madhab ... But the sufis are growing as well maybe more than the salafi ; don't know exactly but these last years I saw many Reverts following the sufi path ... But where I live now , in Germany , there are more sufis ...


Salam alaikoum
Masha'Allah. Sprechen sie Deutsch? Ich bin in Deutschland aufgewachsen. Jetzt lebe ich in den Staaten aber wurde gern zuruck zxu Deutschland kommen.

A brother mentioned the term "salafi burnout" and I think this happens quite often.
I was never a Salafi (in their sense of the word),but I was too close to some of their beliefs .... Insha'Allah, Salafism will die out and people will practice traditional Islam according to Ahl Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

I don't hate the Salafis,they are our brothers. However, I pray for the new muslims especially, that they stick to the Main Group which is the people of the 4 madhabs.
Just a reminder to the people who think Salafism is growing very fast, remember that most of the Ummah follows a madhab, that's over a billion people. There's about 20 million people in Saudi Arabia, and perhaps a few million outside of it. It should be obvious which group is dominant.

[Sunni_Student786]

Cloud_Strife,

Most of the Ummah as of RIGHT NOW follow a madhab and few dispute that. What people are saying is that Salafiyyah or, more specifically, la-madhabi ideologies, are GROWING at a rapid clip.

Furthermore, the vast majority, to the best of my knowledge, who do follow a madhab only do so because they have never encountered la-madhabi ideology. In the vast majority of Muslim countries, you will find the influence of Salafiyyah and/or La-Madhabi schools of thought to be very strong in the cities as opposed to the rural areas.

I had a friend who went overseas to Morocco. Before he went, we both believed, based on what we had read, that 90% of people there would follow the Maliki madhab and accept the VALIDITY of Tasawwuf (that doesn't necessarily mean that they would practice it, but just believe in its validity). However, when he went, he said he was in for a shock when he saw the influence of Salafi/La-Madhabi thought in the cities, particular among the literate and those under 40.

He said, though, that in the countryside, the Maliki madhab was followed exclusively and he even found a fair number of people who had memorized Imam Maliki's Muwatta. For the most, he said, those people in the cities who did not concern themselves much with the details and particulars of the deen, but who prayed, fasted, etc., followed the Maliki madhab because that was all they knew and even they, when asked which madhab they followed would say "I follow the Quran and Sunnah", as though, astaghfirullah, following a madhab and following the Quran and Sunnah were mutually exclusive. Those who were more "into Deen", because of the wide availability of materials printed in Saudi Arabi and Jordan, as well as the fact that they decided study Islam on their own, were out and out Salafis or Salafis in all but name.

My purpose for writing the above was so that people developed a clearer picture of where, and how much, influence Salafi has, and is gaining, and so that we are not lulled into a false sense of security regarding the position of Ahlus Sunnah and Taqleed among the masses just because the majority of Muslims "follow" a madhab without even knowing that they do so or that there are Muslims who don't.

Wa'salaam.

[Cloud_Strife]

Cloud_Strife,

Most of the Ummah as of RIGHT NOW follow a madhab and few dispute that. What people are saying is that Salafiyyah or, more specifically, la-madhabi ideologies, are GROWING at a rapid clip.

Furthermore, the vast majority, to the best of my knowledge, who do follow a madhab only do so because they have never encountered la-madhabi ideology. In the vast majority of Muslim countries, you will find the influence of Salafiyyah and/or La-Madhabi schools of thought to be very strong in the cities as opposed to the rural areas.

I had a friend who went overseas to Morocco. Before he went, we both believed, based on what we had read, that 90% of people there would follow the Maliki madhab and accept the VALIDITY of Tasawwuf (that doesn't necessarily mean that they would practice it, but just believe in its validity). However, when he went, he said he was in for a shock when he saw the influence of Salafi/La-Madhabi thought in the cities, particular among the literate and those under 40.

He said, though, that in the countryside, the Maliki madhab was followed exclusively and he even found a fair number of people who had memorized Imam Maliki's Muwatta. For the most, he said, those people in the cities who did not concern themselves much with the details and particulars of the deen, but who prayed, fasted, etc., followed the Maliki madhab because that was all they knew and even they, when asked which madhab they followed would say "I follow the Quran and Sunnah", as though, astaghfirullah, following a madhab and following the Quran and Sunnah were mutually exclusive. Those who were more "into Deen", because of the wide availability of materials printed in Saudi Arabi and Jordan, as well as the fact that they decided study Islam on their own, were out and out Salafis or Salafis in all but name.

My purpose for writing the above was so that people developed a clearer picture of where, and how much, influence Salafi has, and is gaining, and so that we are not lulled into a false sense of security regarding the position of Ahlus Sunnah and Taqleed among the masses just because the majority of Muslims "follow" a madhab without even knowing that they do so or that there are Muslims who don't.

Wa'salaam.

That's very sad to hear. I think again as you said th fact is Saudi Arabia does spend a lot of money on Islamic literature, printing Qur'ans and such.
Do you really think though,that Wahabism is that strong? I mean, I think some people think that becasue it comes from Saudi Arabia it's closer to actual Islam, because they are Arabs, Hijaz is there,etc.
I know for me, it was basically lack of knowledge,but one day I just realized that this isn't the way to practice deen,because we have over a thousand years of traditional islamic scholarship. Wahabism is relatively new,and it cannot turn the traditional scholarship upside down.
Another reason why they might have some influence is the fact that Wahabis are very much involved in doing da'wa. ALso, Saudi Arabia pays for people to come there and study Islam in their universities. These people come home,of course,and then say this is bidah,this is shirk,and so on. I know there were some Wahabis in Bosnia (where sufism was pretty strong) after the war in 1992,but it didn't catch on.

I think knowledge is the solution. But how we do tell peope to be careful of Wahabis without getting them angry and causing disunity? I know at our own masjid,we sometimes have speakers who are Salafis. A few weeks back there was a khutbah about Bidah-subhan'Allah. I'm concerned b/c most people at the masjid are Indo-Pakistani and African,very few salafis I imagine, but I pray insha'Allah that they won't succumb to teachings which are not part of traditional Islam.

Lastly, I wanted to say that many (!!!)many people who adpot salafism will go back to traditional Islam. Many people experience a salafi-burn out as has been mentioned. So I think even those in Morocco or wherever wahabism 'seems like it's growing, will eventually insha'Allah come to traditional Islam.
Sunni-Student, i think if you look at some of the comments left in the blog of the brother umar lee who wrote about the dying of wahabism, you'll notice many people had a burn-out. One story was sad, a brother who used to have a large beard and prayed,but now drinks alcohol doesn't pray,doesn't fast.
ya Muqallibul quloob, thabbit qulobanaa 'alaa deenik.

[UaHuSsain]

I was born and raised in the Northeast, but then moved down to the south, and I am now in the midwest. From what I have seen, the south has the most salafi influence, with Houston being the main Hub of Salafi Airlines and with major connections in Birmingham Alabama and Memphis TN.

I talked to a friend of mine and he told me that in most of the Arab countries, the concept of La-madhabi has become very popular, and that if you ask the average Joe one the street of his/her madhab, he probably will say, "I really don't follow one." Is this really true?

[YousefAbusSafar]

I can only speak on Jordan.

In Jordan the common folk about half of them pray and half of them don't (there's a noticable age gap in the most of the older people tend to be more religoius and middle aged less and children and teenagers less). Very few common folk will tell you they follow a madhhab as they pretty much just pray (if they do) how there parents taught them without regard to where that method came from.

With regard to students of knowledge and scholars, the students of knowledge who go through the Jordanian educational system and specialize in one of the Islamic sciences offered in the colleges in most cases follow a madhhab. You find some la madhhabi's in the colleges but they are a minority by and large.

The Islamic specialization departments in Jordanian colleges in all cases I've heard of teach hanafi fiqh.

As for the non college crowd, i.e. those who attend the durus at the masajid then this is quite varied and maybe more evenly divided but I couldn't give a percentage.

It should be noted that even in Jordan there were salafi's who were learning and studying madhhab based fiqh and adhered to the usul of a madhhab although the only ones there I met were limited to hanbali's.

The la madhhabi/madhhabi issue is not at all paralell to the salafi/traditional issue. Most of salafi scholars are traditional in there approach, espcecially those in Saudi Arabia most of whom follow a madhhab and hanbali fiqh is taught and studied there but all the fatawa I've read from the saudi shuyukh (the salafi ones) permit and often encourage the following of a madhhab for any non mujtahid, and as is known Shaykh ibn Baz and Shaykh 'Uthaymin, even though they practiced ijtihad to an extent (in choosing the opinion they viewed strongest even outside the hanbali madhhab), adhered to the usul of the hanbali madhhab.

And I too find la madhhabism very dangerous and ask Allah to protect the ummah from falling into the extreme of la madhhabism/dhahiri type fiqh on the one hand and the other extreme of bigotry for ones madhhab on the other, aameen.

[Nabil]

As-salamu'alaykum,

There is a lot of discourse on this issue hear I see.

Who are these groups? Ive not been given a straight answer because nobody I talk to can agree on what the beliefs of these groups are.

Do they depart from tauheed? and if so what are the details.

wassalam,

Nabil...

[Ansari_UK]

Asalaam alaikum brother

pls do a search of the forum there are many many topics.

In a nutshell they are 100% genuine Muslims but have been severly misled.

[الأسامة]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله تعالى وبركاته
Dear brother i just saw your Question about who are Salafiyen or whois the founder of this group of Muslims and i found for you teh correct right answer
-> http://saaid.net/monawein/index.htm
i hoope you find in there what allow you understand
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله

[zaidf]

salaam brother,
i too would recommed that u search on this forum on salafis because there are many threads on them

[Nabil]

As-salamu'alaykum,

Maybe Im looking for something that doesn't exist. I have never met a Brother claiming to be a Wahabi. As far as Abdul Wahab, I only have one book by him called Katab Al-Tauheed but it's not the creation of Wabhab himself. All it is, is a collection of Qur'an verses and Hadeith, put together in a way that explains how to avoid shirk, the Oneness of Allah(swt) and some discussion of the names and attributes of Allah(swt) according to the Qur'an and the Prophet(sallahu alayhe wassalam).
Now on the other hand I have not read Abdul Wahab's other books, and since there is so much opposition to his movement I thought perhaps he had strayed in those other books.

I still dont know about Salafism.

wassalam,

Nabil...

[الأسامة]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله تعالى وبركاته
َactualy there is nothing name Wahabis, there was only the Imam al Wahabi and i beleieve i already posted where you can find every thing about him (books, life.....)it's in arabic but you can use google for fast traduction from arabic to english any way and by the way you are right there was never a movment called Wahabis it's only shiia who call all suna wahabis Because this Imam he refound Islam when ppl left it and start forget about i beleieve if u just take a visit in there u will know much more ...
السلام عليكم ورحمة ال

[الأسامة]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله تعالى وبركاته
Speaking about KItab al taouheed That's a great book just chk first if it's the real one that the imam Has writen you know ....this days i found many books deferent of wht ther writers writen in them befor .
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله

[الأسامة]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله تعالى وبركاته
Speaking about KItab al taouheed That's a great book just chk first if it's the real one that the imam Has writen you know ....this days i found many books deferent of wht ther writers writen in them befor .
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله

[Nabil]

As-salamu'alaykum,

Insha'allah I will know soon if my book is correct.

I found an audio lecture on Kitab al Tauheed by Imam Yasir Qudhi. There is about 15 hours of material so it will take sometime for me to absorb all of it insha'allah.

wassalam,

Nabil..

[Abdullah Ibn Adam]

Please dear brother, don't read (or listen to lectures about) Kitab at-Tauheed of ibn Abdul wahab...

[sahih-baba]

salam
kitab at-tawhid? great book? here is a good idea - pour some oil on it, take it into the garden, get a lighter and set it on fire.

they are literal and ignorant interpretations of quranic ayat.

[Skilly]

Assalamu alaikum.

Kitab al tawheed, is a good book, and the audio lectures by yasir qadhi are great.

I recommend it.

[IbnShafiq]

As salamu alaikum,

Brother i dont think any non scholar should be reading anything written by Abdul wahab. Especially not books on tawheed. Insha'Allah some of the brothers or sisters with more knowledge can elaborate.

[Skilly]

As salamu alaikum,

Brother i dont think any non scholar should be reading anything written by Abdul wahab. Especially not books on tawheed. Insha'Allah some of the brothers or sisters with more knowledge can elaborate.

Assalamu alaikum bro

Bro, the books are self explained, it is a good book. You can benefit alot from it. It is also designed for the layman. Tawheed is the fundemntal of Islam.

I can show you plenty of e-books (pdf) in the net. Have a read.

[Nabil]

As-salamu'alaykum,

The reason I am listening to audio lectures is because I tend to comprehend more this way than by reading. Yasir Qadhi because his English is really good.
I find this Kitab al-Tauheed to be quite liberating so far.


Jazakallah khaira for everybody's input on this.


wassalam,
Nabil...

[Hanbali_NaqshbandiHanafi]

Asslamo Allaikum Brothers,

The bold highlighting is mine!

Source: http://www.central-mosque.com/aqeedah/tahawi.htm

Imam Abu Ja`far al-Tahawi (239-321) can be said to represent the creed of both Ash`aris and Maturidis, especially the latter, as he was also following the Hanafi madhhab. We have therefore chosen to include the entire translated text of his Statement of Islamic Doctrine commonly known as the `aqida tahawiyya. This text, representative of the viewpoint of Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a, has long been the most widely acclaimed, and indeed indispensable, reference work on Muslim beliefs, of which the text below is a complete English translation.

Imam Abu Ja`far Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Azdi, known as Imam Tahawi after his birthplace in Egypt, is among the most outstanding authorities of the Islamic world on hadith and jurisprudence (fiqh). He lived at a time when both the direct and indirect disciples of the Four Imams of law were teaching and practicing. This period was the greatest age of Hadith and fiqh studies, and Imam Tahawi studied with all the living authorities of the day. Al-Badr al-`Ayni said that when Ahmad died, Tahawi was 12; when Bukhari died, he was 27; when Muslim died, he was 32; when Ibn Majah died, he was 44; when Abu Dawud died, he was 46; when Tirmidhi died, he was fifty; when Nisa'i died, he was 74. Kawthari relates this and adds the consensus of scholars that Tahawi allied in himself completion in the two knowledges of hadith and fiqh, a consensus that included, among others, al-`Ayni and al-Dhahabi, with Ibn Taymiyya singling himself out in his opinion that Tahawi was not very knowledgeable in hadith. This is flatly contradicted by Ibn Kathir who says in his notice on Tahawi in al-Bidaya wa al-nihaya: "He is one of the trustworthy narrators of established reliability, and one of the massive memorizers of hadith." Kawthari calls Ibn Taymiyya's verdict "another one of his random speculations" and states: "No-one disregards Tahawi's knowledge of the defective hadith except someone whose own defects have no remedy, and may Allah protect us from such."

Tahawi began his studies with his maternal uncle Isma`il ibn Yahya al-Muzani, a leading disciple of Imam Shafi`i. However, Tahawi felt instinctively drawn to the corpus of Imam Abu Hanifa's works. Indeed, he had seen his uncle and teacher turning to the works of Hanafi scholars to resolve thorny issues of fiqh, drawing heavily on the writings of Abu Hanifa's two leading companions, Muhammad Ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani and Abu Yusuf, who had codified Hanafi fiqh. This led him to devote his whole attention to studying the Hanafi works and he eventually joined the Hanafi school. He now stands out not only as a prominent follower of that Hanafi school but, in view of his vast erudition and remarkable powers of assimilation, as one of its leading scholars. His monumental scholarly works, such as Sharh ma`ani al-athar and Mushkil al-athar, are encyclopedic in scope and have long been regarded as indispensable for training students of fiqh. He was in fact a mujtahid across the board and was thoroughly familiar with the fiqh of all four schools, as stated by Ibn `Abd al-Barr and related by Kawthari, and as shown by Tahawi's own work on comparative law entitled Ikhtilaf al-fuqaha'.

Tahawi's "Doctrine" (al-`Aqida), though small in size, is a basic text for all times, listing what a Muslim must know and believe and inwardly comprehend. There is consensus among the Companions, the Successors and all the leading Islamic authorities such as the four Imams and their authoritative followers on the doctrines enumerated in this work, which are entirely derived from the undisputed primary sources of Religion, the Holy Qur'an and the confirmed Hadith. Being a text on Islamic doctrine, this work sums up the arguments set forth in those two sources to define sound belief, and likewise, the arguments advanced in refuting the views of sects that have deviated from the Sunna.

As regards the sects mentioned in this work, familiarity with Islamic history up to the time of Imam Tahawi would be quite helpful. More or less veiled references to sects such as the Mu`tazila, the Jahmiyya, the Karramiyya, the Qadariyya, and the Jabariyya are found in the work. It also contains allusions to other views considered unorthodox and deviant from the way of Ahl al-Sunna. There is an explicit reference in the work to the controversy on the creation of the Qu'ran in the times of al-Ma'mun and others.

While the permanent relevance of the statements of belief in the `Aqida are obvious, the historical weight and point of certain of these statements can be properly appreciated only if the work is used as a text for study under the guidance of some learned person able to elucidate its arguments fully, with reference to the intellectual and historical background of the sects refuted in the work. Since the present book is intended exactly as one such aid towards understanding the details of Islamic belief with clarity, it is hoped that the quotation of the entire text of Tahawi's "Doctrine," which we consider as the doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a, will be of benefit to the reader. And may Allah grant us a true understanding of faith and count us among those described by the Prophet as the Saved Group.

TAHAWI'S STATEMENT OF ISLAMIC DOCTRINE (AL-`AQIDA AL-TAHAWIYYA)
In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate Praise be to Allah, Lord of all the worlds.

The great scholar Hujjat al-lslam Abu Ja'far al-Warraq al-Tahawi al-Misri, may Allah have mercy on him, said: This is a presentation of the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a, according to the school of the jurists of this religion, Abu Hanifa al-Nu`man ibn Thabit al-Kufi, Abu Yusuf Ya`qub ibn Ibrahim al-Ansari and Abu `Abdullah Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani, may Allah be pleased with them all, and what they believe regarding the fundamentals of the religion and their faith in the Lord of the worlds.

We say about Allah's unity, believing by Allah's help that:

1. Allah is One, without any partners.

2. There is nothing like Him.

3. There is nothing that can overwhelm Him.

4. There is no god other than Him.

5. He is the Eternal without a beginning and enduring without end.

6. He will never perish or come to an end.

7. Nothing happens except what He wills.

8. No imagination can conceive of Him and no understanding can comprehend Him.

9. He is different from any created being.

10. He is living and never dies and is eternally active and never sleeps.

11. He creates without His being in need to do so and provides for His creation without any effort.

12. He causes death with no fear and restores to life without difficulty.

13. He has always existed together with His attributes since before creation. Bringing creation into existence did not add anything to His attributes that was not already there. As He was, together with His attributes, in pre-eternity, so He will remain throughout endless time.

14. It was not only after the act of creation that He could be described as "the Creator" nor was it only by the act of origination that He could he described as "the Originator."

15. He was always the Lord even when there was nothing to be Lord of, and always the Creator even when there was no creation.

16. In the same way that He is the "Bringer to life of the dead," after He has brought them to life a first time, and deserves this name before bringing them to life, so too He deserves the name of "Creator" before He has created them.

17. This is because He has the power to do everything, everything is dependent on Him, everything is easy for Him, and He does not need anything. "There is nothing like Him and He is the Hearer, the Seer." (al-Shura 42:11)

18. He created creation with His knowledge.

19. He appointed destinies for those He created.

20. He allotted to them fixed life spans.

21. Nothing about them was hidden from Him before He created them, and He knew everything that they would do before He created them.

22. He ordered them to obey Him and forbade them to disobey Him.

23. Everything happens according to His degree and will, and His will is accomplished. The only will that people have is what He wills for them. What He wills for them occurs and what He does not will, does not occur.

24. He gives guidance to whomever He wills, and protects them, and keeps them safe from harm, out of His generosity; and He leads astray whomever He wills, and abases them, and afflicts them, out of His justice.

25. All of them are subject to His will either through His generosity or His justice.

26. He is Exalted beyond having opposites or equals.

27. No one can ward off His decree or delay His command or overpower His affairs.

28. We believe in all of this and are certain that everything comes from Him.

29. And we are certain that Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is His chosen Servant and elect Prophet and His Messenger with whom He is well pleased,

30. And that he is the Seal of the Prophets and the Imam of the godfearing and the most honored of all the messengers and the Beloved of the Lord of all the worlds.

31. Every claim to prophethood after Him is falsehood and deceit.

32. He is the one who has been sent to all the jinn and all mankind with truth and guidance and with light and illumination.

33. The Qur'an is the word of Allah. It came from Him as speech without it being possible to say how. He sent it down on His Messenger as revelation. The believers accept it, as absolute truth. They are certain that it is, in truth, the word of Allah. It is not created as is the speech of human beings, and anyone who hears it and claims that it is human speech has become an unbeliever. Allah warns him and censures him and threatens him with Fire when He says, Exalted is He: "I will burn him in the Fire." (al-Muddaththir 74:26) When Allah threatens with the Fire those who say "This is just human speech" (74:25) we know for certain that it is the speech of the Creator of mankind and that it is totally unlike the speech of mankind.

34. Anyone who describes Allah as being in any way the same as a human being has become an unbeliever. All those who grasp this will take heed and refrain from saying things such as the unbelievers say, and they will know that He, in His attributes, is not like human beings.

35. The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known. As the Book of our Lord has expressed it: "Faces on that Day radiant, looking at their Lord." (al-Qiyama 75:22-3) The explanation of this is as Allah knows and wills. Everything that has come down to us about this from the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in authentic traditions, is as he said and means what he intended. We do not delve into that, trying to interpret it according to our own opinions or letting our imaginations have free rein.

No one is safe in his religion unless he surrenders himself completely to Allah, the Exalted and Glorified and to His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and leaves the knowledge of things that are ambiguous to the one who knows them.

36. A man's Islam is not secure unless it is based on submission and surrender. Anyone who desires to know things which it is beyond his capacity to know, and whose intellect is not content with surrender, will find that his desire veils him from a pure understanding of Allah's true unity, clear knowledge and correct belief, and that he veers between disbelief and belief, confirmation and denial and acceptance and rejection. He will he subject to whisperings and find himself confused and full of doubt, being neither an accepting believer nor a denying rejector.

37. Belief of a man in the seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is not correct if he imagines what it is like or interprets it according to his own understanding, since the interpretation of this seeing or indeed, the meaning of any of the subtle phenomena which are in the realm of Lordship, is by avoiding its interpretation and strictly adhering to the submission.

This is the religion of Muslims. Anyone who does not guard himself against negating the attributes of Allah, or likening Allah to something else, has gone astray and has failed to understand Allah's glory, because our Lord, the Glorified and the Exalted, can only possibly be described in terms of oneness and absolute singularity and no creation is in any way like Him.

38. He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are.

39. Al-Mi`raj (the Ascent through the heavens) is true. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was taken by night and ascended in his bodily form, while awake, through the heavens, to whatever heights Allah willed for him.

Allah ennobled him in the way that He ennobled him and revealed to him what He revealed to him, "and his heart was not mistaken about what it saw" (al-Najm 53:11). Allah blessed him and granted him peace in this world and the next.

40. Al-Hawd, the Pool which Allah has granted the Prophet as an honour to quench the thirst of his Community on the Day of Judgement, is true.

41. Al-Shafa`a, the intercession which is stored up for Muslims, is true, as related in the hadiths.

42. The covenant which Allah made with Adam and his offspring is true.

43. Allah knew, before the existence of time, the exact number of those who would enter the Garden and the exact number of those who would enter the Fire. This number will neither be increased nor decreased.

44. The same applies to all actions done by people, which are done exactly as Allah knew they would be done. Everyone is eased towards what he was created for and it is the action with which a man's life is sealed which dictates his fate. Those who are fortunate are fortunate by the decree of Allah, and those who are wretched are wretched by the decree of Allah.

45. The exact nature of the decree is Allah's secret in His creation, and no angel near the Throne, nor Prophet sent with a message, has been given knowledge of it. Delving into it and reflecting too much about it only leads to destruction and loss, and results in rebelliousness. So be extremely careful about thinking and reflecting on this matter or letting doubts about it assail you, because Allah has kept knowledge of the decree away from human beings, and forbidden them to enquire about it, saying in His Book, "He is not asked about what He does, but they are asked" (al-Anbiya' 21: 23).

Therefore, anyone who asks: "Why did Allah do that?" has gone against a judgement of the Book, and anyone who goes against a judgement of the Book is an unbeliever.

46. This in sum is what those of Allah's Friends with enlightened hearts need to know and constitutes the degree of those firmly endowed with knowledge. For there are two kinds of knowledge: knowledge which is accessible to created beings, and knowledge which is not accessible to created beings. Denying the knowledge which is accessible is disbelief, and claiming the knowledge which is inaccessible is disbelief. Belief can only be firm when accessible knowledge is accepted and the inaccessible is not sought after.

47. We believe in al-Lawh (the Tablet) and al-Qalam (the Pen) and in everything written on the former. Even if all created beings were to gather together to make something fail to exist, whose existence Allah had written on the Tablet, they would not be able to do so. And if all created beings were to gather together to make something exist which Allah had not written on it, they would not be able to do so. The Pen has dried having written down all that will be in existence until the Day of Judgement.Whatever a person has missed he would have never got, and whatever he gets he would have never missed.

48. It is necessary for the servant to know that Allah already knows everything that is going to happen in His creation and has decreed it in a detailed and decisive way. There is nothing that He has created in either the heavens or the earth that can contradict it, or add to it, or erase it, or change it, or decrease it, or increase it in any way. This is a fundamental aspect of belief and a necessary element of all knowledge and recognition of Allah's oneness and Lordship. As Allah says in His Book: "He created everything and decreed it in a detailed way." (al-Furqan 25: 2) And He also says: "Allah's command is always a decided decree." (al-Ahzab 33: 38) So woe to anyone who argues with Allah concerning the decree and who, with a sick heart, starts delving into this matter. In his deluded attempt to investigate the Unseen, he is seeking a secret that can never be uncovered, and he ends up an evil-doer, telling nothing but lies.

49. Al-`Arsh (the Throne) and al-Kursi (the Chair) are true.

50. He is independent of the Throne and that which is beneath it.

51. He encompasses all things and that which is above it, and what He has created is incapable of encompassing Him.

52. We say with belief, acceptance and submission that Allah took Ibrahim as an intimate friend and that He spoke directly to Musa.

53. We believe in the angels, and the Prophets, and the books which were revealed to the messengers, and we bear witness that they were all following the manifest Truth.

54. We call the people of our qibla Muslims and believers as long as they acknowledge what the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, brought, and accept as true everything that he said and told us about.

55. We do not enter into vain talk about Allah nor do we allow any dispute about the religion of Allah.

56. We do not argue about the Qur'an and we bear witness that it is the speech of the Lord of all the Worlds which the Trustworthy Spirit came down with and taught the most honoured of all the Messengers, Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. It is the speech of Allah and no speech of any created being is comparable to it. We do not say that it was created and we do not go against the Congregation (jama`a) of the Muslims regarding it.

57. We do not consider any of the people of our qibla to be unbelievers because of any wrong action they have done, as long as they do not consider that action to have been lawful.

58. Nor do we say that the wrong action of a man who has belief does not have a harmful effect on him.

59. We hope that Allah will pardon the people of right action among the believers and grant them entrance into the Garden through His mercy, but we cannot be certain of this, and we cannot bear witness that it will definitely happen and that they will be in the Garden. We ask forgiveness for the people of wrong action among the believers and, although we are afraid for them, we are not in despair about them.

60. Certainty and despair both remove one from the religion, but the path of truth for the People of the Qibla lies between the two.

61. A person does not step out or belief except by disavowing what brought him into it.

62. Belief consists of affirmation by the tongue and acceptance by the heart.

63. And the whole of what is proven from the Prophet, upon him be peace, regarding the Shari`a and the explanation (of the Qur'an and of Islam) is true.

64. Belief is, at base, the same for everyone, but the superiority of some over others in it is due to their fear and awareness of Allah, their opposition to their desires, and their choosing what is more pleasing to Allah.

65. All the believers are Friends of Allah and the noblest of them in the sight of Allah are those who are the most obedient and who most closely follow the Qur'an.

66. Belief consists of belief in Allah, His angels, His books, His messengers, the Last Day, and belief that the Decree -- both the good of it and the evil of it, the sweet of it and the bitter or it -- is all from Allah.

67. We believe in all these things. We do not make any distinction between any of the messengers, we accept as true what all of them brought.

68. Those of the Community of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who have committed grave sins will be in the Fire, but not forever, provided they die and meet Allah as believers affirming His unity even if they have not repented. They are subject to His will and judgement.

If He wants, He will forgive them and pardon them out of His generosity, as is mentioned in the Qur'an when He says: "And He forgives anything less than that (shirk) to whomever He wills" (al-Nisa' 4: 116); if He wants, He will punish them in the Fire out of His justice, and then bring them out of the Fire through His mercy, and for the intercession of those who were obedient to Him, and send them to the Garden.

This is because Allah is the Protector of those who recognize Him and will not treat them in the hereafter in the same way as He treats those who deny Him, who are bereft of His guidance and have failed to obtain His protection. O Allah, You are the Protector of Islam and its people; make us firm in Islam until the day we meet You.

69. We agree with doing the prayer behind any of the People of the Qibla whether rightful or wrongful, and doing the funeral prayer over any of them when they die.

70. We do not say that any of them will categorically go to either the Garden or the Fire, and we do not accuse any of them of kufr (disbelief), shirk (associating partners with Allah), or nifaq (hypocrisy), as long as they have not openly demonstrated any of those things. We leave their secrets to Allah.

71. We do not agree with killing any of the Community of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, unless it is obligatory by Shari`a to do so.

72. We do not accept rebellion against our Imam or those in charge of our affairs even if they are unjust, nor do we wish evil on them, nor do we withdraw from following them. We hold that obedience to them is part of obedience to Allah, the Glorified, and therefore obligatory as long as they do not order to commit sins. We pray for their right guidance and ask for pardon for their wrongs.

73. We follow the Sunna of the Prophet and the Congregation of the Muslims, and avoid deviation, differences and divisions.

74. We love the people of justice and trustworthiness, and hate the people of injustice and treachery.

75. When our knowledge about something is unclear, we say: "Allah knows best."

76. We agree with wiping over leather socks (in ablution) whether on a journey or otherwise, just as has come in the hadiths.

77. Hajj and jihad under the leadership of those in charge of the Muslims, whether they are right or wrong-acting, are continuing obligations until the Last Hour comes. Nothing can annul or controvert them.

78. We believe in the the noble angels who write down our actions, for Allah has appointed them over us as two guardians.

79. We believe in the Angel of Death who is in charge of taking the spirits of all the worlds.

80. We believe in the punishment in the grave for those who deserve it, and in the questioning in the grave by Munkar and Nakir about one's Lord, one's religion and one's prophet, as has come down in the hadiths from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and in reports from the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all.

81. The grave is either one of the meadows of the Garden or one of the pits of the Fire.

82. We believe in being brought back to life after death and in being recompensed for our actions on the Day of Judgement, and the exhibition of works, and the reckoning, and the reading of the book, and the reward or punishments, and the Bridge, and the Balance.

83. The Garden and the Fire are created things that never come to an end and we believe that Allah created them before the rest of creation and then created people to inhabit each of them. Whoever He wills goes to the Garden out of His bounty and whoever He wills goes to the Fire through His justice. Everybody acts in accordance with what is destined for him and goes towards what he has been created for.

84. Good and evil have both been decreed for people.

85. The capability in terms of divine grace and favor which makes an action certain to occur cannot be ascribed to a created being. This capability is integral with action, whereas the capability of an action in terms of having the necessary health and ability, being in a position to act, and having the necessary means, exists in a person before the action. It is this type of capability which is the object of the dictates of the Shari`a. Allah the Exalted says: "Allah does not charge a person except according to his ability." (al-Baqara 2: 286)

86. People's actions are created by Allah but earned by people .

87. Allah, the Exalted, has only charged people with what they are able to do and people are only capable of doing what Allah has granted them to do. This is the explanation of the phrase: "There is no power and no strength except by Allah." We add to this that there is no stratagem or way by which anyone can avoid or escape disobedience to Allah except with Allah's help; nor does anyone have the strength to put obedience to Allah into practice and remain firm in it, except if Allah makes it possible for him to do so.

88. Everything happens according to Allah's will, knowledge, predestination and decree. His will overpowers all other wills and His decree overpowers all stratagems. He does whatever He wills and He is never unjust. He is exalted in His purity above any evil or perdition and He is perfect far beyond any fault or flaw. "He will not be asked about what He does, but they will be asked." (al-Anbiya' 21: 23)

89. There is benefit for dead people in the supplication and alms-giving of the living.

90. Allah responds to people's supplications and gives them what they ask for.

91. Allah has absolute control over everything and nothing has any control over Him. Nothing can be independent of Allah even for the blinking of an eye, and whoever considers himself independent of Allah for the blinking of an eye is guilty of unbelief and becomes one of the people of perdition.

92. Allah is angered and He is pleased but not in the same way as any creature.

93. We love the Companions of the Messenger of Allah but we do not go to excess in our love for any one individual among them; nor do we disown any one of them. We hate anyone who hates them or does not speak well of them and we only speak well of them. Love of them is a part of Islam, part of belief and part of excellent behavior, while hatred of them is unbelief, hypocrisy and rebellion.

94. We confirm that, after the death of Allah's Messenger, peace be upon him, the caliphate went first to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, thus proving his excellence and superiority over the rest of the Muslims; then to `Umar ibn al-Khattab; then to `Uthman; and then to `Ali ibn Abi Talib; may Allah be well pleased with all of them. These are the Rightly-Guided Caliphs and upright leaders.

95. We bear witness that the ten who were named by the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and who were promised the Garden by him, will be in the Garden, as the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, whose word is truth, bore witness that they would be. The ten are: Abu Bakr, `Umar, `Uthman, `Ali, Talha, Zubayr, Sa`d, Sa`id, `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, and Abu `Ubayda ibn al-Jarrah whose title was the Trustee of this Community, may Allah be pleased with all of them.

96. Anyone who speaks well of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and his wives and offspring, who are all pure and untainted by any impurity, is free from the accusation of hypocrisy.

97. The learned men of the Predecessors, both the first community and those who immediately followed: the people of virtue, the narrators of hadith, the jurists, and the analysts-- they must only be spoken of in the best way, and anyone who says anything bad about them is not on the right path.

98. We do not prefer any of the saintly men among the Community over any of the Prophets but rather we say that any one of the Prophets is better than all the awliya' put together.

99. We believe in what we know of the karamat or marvels of the awliya' and in the authentic stories about them from trustworthy sources.

100. We believe in the signs of the Hour such as the appearance of the Antichrist (dajjal) and the descent of `Isa ibn Maryam, peace be upon him, from heaven, and we believe in the rising of the sun from where it sets and in the emergence of the Beast from the earth.

101. We do not accept as true what soothsayers and fortune-tellers say, nor do we accept the claims of those who affirm anything which goes against the Book, the Sunna, and the consensus of the Muslim Community (umma).

102. We agree that holding together is the true and right path and that separation is deviation and torment.

103. There is only one religion of Allah in the heavens and the earth and that is the religion of Islam ("submission"). Allah says: "Surely religion in the sight of Allah is Islam." (Al `Imran 3: 19) And He also says: "I am pleased with Islam as a religion for you." (al-Ma'ida 5: 3)

104. Islam lies between going to excess and falling short, between the likening of Allah's attributes to creation (tashbih) and divesting Allah of attributes (ta`til), between determinism and freewill, and between sureness and despair.

105. This is our religion and it is what we believe in, both inwardly and outwardly, and we renounce any connection, before Allah, with anyone who goes against what we have said and made clear.

We ask Allah to make us firm in our belief and seal our lives with it and to protect us from variant ideas, scattering opinions and evil schools of view such as those of the Mushabbiha, the Mu`tazila, the Jahmiyya, the Jabriyya, the Qadariyya, and others like them who go against the Sunna and Jama`a and have allied themselves with error. We renounce any connection with them and in our opinion they are in error and on the path of destruction. We ask Allah to protect us from all falsehood and we ask His Grace and Favour to do all good.

[Ansari_UK]

Brother Nabil

Sincerely.

DONT TAKE YOUR RELIGION FROM REFORMERS.

Take it from the Salaf us Saliheen. The Pure Islam and not the Islam made 100 years ago in the Arabian desert, the Prophet salalahu alayhi wasalaam said "avoid areas of doubts" didnt he? and they are filled with doubts and inconsistencies (you will see this for yourself).

Click on this link

www.alhaqq.net download Aqeedah At Tahawiyyah which is the pristine pure Aqeedah of the Salaf and there are many Engligh video lectures of this shaykh. His English is second to none.

My "Wahabi" freind went to his lecture last week and was mesmerized by the clarity of speech and noor from the Shaykh.

Also visit

www.shaykhabdalqadir.com

The Wahabis and the Sufis
http://www.shaykhabdalqadir.com/content/articles/Art019_07062004.html

Wahabism was a polticial movement to gain power and finish the last true and remaining Khilafa. Period. The proof is in the pudding so they say, where is the Khilafa now? Nowhere because this movement is working overtime to stop it in KSA.

[Skilly]

Assalamu alaikum wr wb

Blimey I Just left and everyone has the opportunity to spread paranoia.

Since most of you have somekind of unfounded phobia, I feel obliged to post some material.

Well here is a taster for you. If you will like more let me know. Their are other translation available.





http://www.kalamullah.com/img/KitabTauhid.jpg





Kitab At-Tauhid is one of the best books on the subject of Tauhid (Monotheism) and ranks high in authenticity. In this book all the relevant verses of the Qur'an have been discussed reasonably, rationally, and sincerely. The essence of the Qur'an and Sunnah is placed in a very simple manner in this book.






- Download Book - (http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/kitab_ut_tawheed.pdf)

- Purchase Book - (http://www.dar-us-salam.com/store/main.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=Dus&Product_Code=007&Category_Code=)

[Ansari_UK]

The Prophet Salalahu Alayhi Waslaaam said Surah Ikhlaas is the best recitation for Tawheed. Also who was his shaykh and where was his ijazaahs?? do you have these or is it all cheap £1.99 oil money propaganda?

[Skilly]

The Prophet Salalahu Alayhi Waslaaam said Surah Ikhlaas is the best recitation for Tawheed. Also who was his shaykh and where was his ijazaahs?? do you have these or is it all cheap £1.99 oil money propaganda?

No the book is free on pdf or you can buy one. :lol:

[Hanbali_NaqshbandiHanafi]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Just purchased a copy of Sufis and Sufism: a Defence

http://madinahmedia.com/onlinestore/product_info.php?products_id=33&osCsid=4d01c592c7a78ffd6bbbd5b4cff10670

Will post some thoughts of the web after I have read it...

Jazakullah Kahirun Brother....

Are you connected with the Shaykh beause I went to Cordoba and waited for hours for the Murabatoon Mosque & it NEVER opened for Firday? Any ideas?


Brother Nabil

Sincerely.

DONT TAKE YOUR RELIGION FROM REFORMERS.

Take it from the Salaf us Saliheen. The Pure Islam and not the Islam made 100 years ago in the Arabian desert, the Prophet salalahu alayhi wasalaam said "avoid areas of doubts" didnt he? and they are filled with doubts and inconsistencies (you will see this for yourself).

Click on this link

www.alhaqq.net download Aqeedah At Tahawiyyah which is the pristine pure Aqeedah of the Salaf and there are many Engligh video lectures of this shaykh. His English is second to none.

My "Wahabi" freind went to his lecture last week and was mesmerized by the clarity of speech and noor from the Shaykh.

Also visit

www.shaykhabdalqadir.com

The Wahabis and the Sufis
http://www.shaykhabdalqadir.com/content/articles/Art019_07062004.html

Wahabism was a polticial movement to gain power and finish the last true and remaining Khilafa. Period. The proof is in the pudding so they say, where is the Khilafa now? Nowhere because this movement is working overtime to stop it in KSA.

[radaman12]

As-salamu'alaykum,

There is a lot of discourse on this issue hear I see.

Who are these groups? Ive not been given a straight answer because nobody I talk to can agree on what the beliefs of these groups are.

Do they depart from tauheed? and if so what are the details.

wassalam,

Nabil...

:salam:


here are some articles on them

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=918&CATE=1

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=124&CATE=24

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=1685&CATE=91

hope that helps.

[Nabil]

As-salamu'alaykum,

Thank you Brothes for all the information.

What is the harm in reading the writings of a reformer as long as this reformer is calling people to the Deen of Rasooulallah? (sallahu alayhe wassalam)

Let's set aside Wahab for a second.

Im reading Sayyad Qutab's "Milestones". Some Western critics calls him the "author of terrorism" but I dont see anything in his writing that instructs a person to carry out train bombings or any killing for that matter. At least not in Milestones. I understand he was murdered by the Egyptian gov. as they saw his movement a threat. Qutab, as far as I can tell was only calling people to Islam. I thought that people who are opposed to Islam also favored liberty and free speech. This is the banner that those who hate Islam prop up for all to see. Im coming to think there is no real freedom in secularism and that secularism is an empty promise like the deals offered by the shayton that never pay off in the end.

wassalam,

Nabil...

[sahih-baba]

salam

any salafis here calling to rubbish - forget it - we prefer ahl as-sunna 'ulama.

any ikhwanis here calling to sayyid qutb rubbish - forget it.

all from shaytan - that's right it's a spade - and it's called iblis.

we stick to ahl as-sunna strictly without compromise.

i wish the ottomans were around so they could hang all these salafis and others.

:-D

[Ansari_UK]

salam

any salafis here calling to rubbish - forget it - we prefer ahl as-sunna 'ulama.

any ikhwanis here calling to sayyid qutb rubbish - forget it.

all from shaytan - that's right it's a spade - and it's called iblis.

we stick to ahl as-sunna strictly without compromise.

i wish the ottomans were around so they could hang all these salafis and others.

:-D

Easy brother, i love my Salafi brethren, they are sincere in Islam just been misguided. I agree i detest some of the divisive Salafi scholars who split the Ummah with their rhetoric.

Also i love the Ottomans too, they made the Europeans quake in their boots in their heydey.

[Ansari_UK]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Just purchased a copy of Sufis and Sufism: a Defence

http://madinahmedia.com/onlinestore/product_info.php?products_id=33&osCsid=4d01c592c7a78ffd6bbbd5b4cff10670

Will post some thoughts of the web after I have read it...

Jazakullah Kahirun Brother....

Are you connected with the Shaykh beause I went to Cordoba and waited for hours for the Murabatoon Mosque & it NEVER opened for Firday? Any ideas?

Asalaam Alaykum,

Awesome book. You will not put it down after starting it. It defends Sayyid Maliki rahimahu Allah beautifully from all the slanders against him and blasts any arguments against "Shariah based Sufism" to the moon. (where they belong imo).

Yes he is my Shaykh, though i havent been to Cordoba so couldnt answer on that brother.

Walaykum Asalaam

[sahih-baba]

Easy brother, i love my Salafi brethren, they are sincere in Islam just been misguided. I agree i detest some of the divisive Salafi scholars who split the Ummah with their rhetoric.

Also i love the Ottomans too, they made the Europeans quake in their boots in their heydey.

salam
difficult for me to love salafis and ottomans at the same time.
nothing personal -if salafis changed i would love them and i do love them in preference to kuffar.
but they would also be quaking in their toe-touching khuffs if the ottomans were around! ;)

[sahih-baba]

Asalaam Alaykum,

Awesome book. You will not put it down after starting it. It defends Sayyid Maliki rahimahu Allah beautifully from all the slanders against him and blasts any arguments against "Shariah based Sufism" to the moon. (where they belong imo).

Yes he is my Shaykh, though i havent been to Cordoba so couldnt answer on that brother.

Walaykum Asalaam

salam
what is the name of the moroccan shaykh who wrote this book originally?
and what was the title in arabic?

wasn't it a response to the anti-sufi book "when the horses come galloping" ?

[Skilly]

salam
difficult for me to love salafis and ottomans at the same time.
nothing personal -if salafis changed i would love them and i do love them in preference to kuffar.
but they would also be quaking in their toe-touching khuffs if the ottomans were around! ;)

Otomon?

Quite humorous statement.

[sahih-baba]

Otomon?

Quite humorous statement.

no, skilly, not otomon, it's OTTOMAN which an english rendering of osman/'uthman.

they were great muslims - hanafi in fiqh, maturidi and pro-sufi....and highly successful for centuries, unlike the slavish traitor wahhabis.

[Ansari_UK]

salam
what is the name of the moroccan shaykh who wrote this book originally?
and what was the title in arabic?

wasn't it a response to the anti-sufi book "when the horses come galloping" ?

Abdul Karim Murad? forgot the other one as was two distinguished Ulema from the Qarriyyyiwin Islamic uni in Fez with a foreword by Shaykh Dr Abdal Qadir As Sufi.

The book with slanders against Sayyid Alawi (rahimahu Allah) was called Kitab al hiwar i think ("they came galloping).

As i said, my Madkhali salafi cousin couldnt put it down.....then we had to go. Alhamdullilah may Allah open his heart more to tassawwuff

[Nabil]

salam

any salafis here calling to rubbish - forget it - we prefer ahl as-sunna 'ulama.

any ikhwanis here calling to sayyid qutb rubbish - forget it.

all from shaytan - that's right it's a spade - and it's called iblis.

we stick to ahl as-sunna strictly without compromise.

i wish the ottomans were around so they could hang all these salafis and others.

:-D


As-salamu'alaykum,

Bro. Sayyad Qutib *was* hung to death. Did you know this? Hear is a short bio on his life and works.

Sayyid Qutb, the doyen of the Ikhwan al-Muslimun, had a very profound impact on the Muslim Arab youth coming of age since late 60s. Western writers in recent years have focused on him as one of the two most influencial Muslim thinkers of this century, the other being Sayyid Maududi. Qutb’s writings prior to 1951 are more of a ‘moralist’. It was after he was introduced to Maududi’s ideas, especially his emphasis on Islam being a complete way of life, and establishment of Allah’s order on earth as every Muslim’s primary responsibility that Qutb changed into a revolutionary. His two years sojourn (1948-1950) in the US opened his eyes to the malise of the western culture and non-Islamic ideologies.
After his return to Egypt he resigned his job in the Education directorate and devoted himself to the idea of bringing a total change in the political system. Ikhwan gained ideological vitality when Sayyid Qutb in his jail cell wrote a book in which he revised Hassan al-Banna Shahid’s dream of establishing an Islamic state in Egypt after the nation was thoroughly Islamized. Sayyid Qutb recommended that a revlutionary vanguard should first establish an Islamic state and then, from above impose Islamization on Egyptian society that had deviated to Arab nationalistic ideologies.
His subsequent 11 years behind prison walls gave him an opportunity to confirm what Maududi’s writing made him aware, and that is what convinced the secular Nasserites to condemn him to death on false accusations.
Other than Prophet Muhammad (s), the contemporary men who had great influence on me were my father, Imam Hassan al-Banna, and Shaheed Sayyid Qutb. The first two Islamic books that I studied as teenager were "Dirasat Islamiyya" (Studies in Islam, or Lessons in Islam) and Aladalah Alijtima’eyyah Fil-Islam (Social Justice in Islam) both by Sayyid Qutb. Although I have never met or seen Sayyid Qutb, I knew him (as most other Muslims involved with Islamic work) through his many books, like the two mentioned above, his great commentary on the Qur’an, Fithilal-el-Qur’an (in the Shades of the Qur’an), and other books.
Sayyid Qutb was born on 8 October 1906, in a village called "Musha" in the township of Qaha in the province of Assyout in Egypt. He entered the elementary and primary school of Musha in 1912 and finished his primary education in 1918. He dropped out of school for two years because of the revolution of 1919. His father was Haj Qutb, son of Ibrahi, and a well-known religious person in his village, and his mother was also a religious lady from a well-known family who cared about him and his two younger sisters, Hamida and Amina, and a younger brother, Muhammad. After completing his primary education in Musha, Sayyid Qutb moved to Cairo for further education where he lived with his uncle, Ahmad Hussain Osman. This was in 1920, when he was 14 years old. It should be noted that he memorized the Qur’an when he was about 10 years old in his village. He lost his father while he was in Cairo, so he convinced his mother to move with him to Cairo, where she died in 1940. After the death of his mother, he expressed his loneliness in several articles (Ummah, My Mother) published in the book, "Atatiaf Alarbaa" (The Four Lights), which his sisters, brother and he wrote.
In Cairo, he completed his high school education and enrolled in the teachers’ college, Darul Oloom, in 1929. In 1939 he qualified as an Arabic-Language teacher and received a Bachelor of Arts degree then joined the ministry of education. Very soon (about six years), he left his ministry job as a teacher and devoted his time to freelance writing. A factor leading to his resignation from the teaching job was his disagreement with the ministry of education and many colleagues regarding his philosophy of education and his attitude towards the literary arts.
From 1939 to 1951, an obvious switch in his writing towards the Islamic ideology was noted. He wrote several articles on the artistic expression of the Qur’an, as well as two books titled "Expression of the Qur’an" and "Scenes from the Day of Judgement." In 1948, his book "Social Justice in Islam" was published. In it he made it clear that true social justice can only be realized in Islam. In November 1948, he went to the United States to study educational curricula. He spent two and one half years moving between Washington DC., and California, where he realized the materialistic attitude of the literary arts and its lack of spirituality. He interrupted his stay in the United States and returned to Egypt in August 1950. Sayyid Qutb resumed his job as a teacher and inspector in the ministry of education before he resigned in October 1952 (again because of his repeated philosophical disagreements with the minister of education and many of his colleagues).
The period from 1951 to 1965 included his joining the Ikhwan (The Muslim Brotherhood). His ideas were quite clear about the fallacy of many of the prevailing social and political/economic injustices and the need for Islamic reform, and he became the chief editor of the newspaper of Ikhwan. During his period, several of his books appeared on Islamic ideology and Islam as a complete way of life. He was arrested when the Ikhwan was accused of attempting to overthrow the government in 1954 and was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment with hard labor. He remained in Jarah prison near Cairo for about 10 years after which due to his health condition, he was released when the Iraqi President, Abdul Salam Arif, intervened.
In 1965 he published his famous book, Mallem Fittareek (Milestones), which led to his re-arrest with the accusation of conspiracy against the Egyptian President, Abdul Nasser. He was tried and rapidly sentenced to death based upon many excerpts of his book, Milestones. There was quite an international uproar and protest in various Muslim countries with appeals to President Abdul Nasser to pardon Sayyid Qutb. In spite of several demonstrations and many objections in various Muslim countries, Sayyid Qutb was executed by hanging on August 29, 1966. He left behind a total of 24 books, including several novels, several books on literary arts’ critique, on the education of adults and children, and several religious books, including the 30 volume Commentary of the Qur’an.
Sayyid Qutb will always be remembered for his legacy of clearly defining the basic ideas of the Oneness and sovereignty of Allah, the clear distinction between pure faith and the association of partners with Allah (Shirk) overt and hidden, and the only hope for salvation of humanity. Sayyid Qutb was smiling when he was executed, showing his conviction of the beautiful life to come in paradise – a life he definitely and rightfully deserved.

wassalam,

Nabil....

[ozgurislam]

Shaikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi on Tafwid


Sidi Djibril recently provided me with a quote from the contemporary Sh. Yusuf al-Qaradawi - someone who most would consider a "salafi" [although this is likely to be untrue!].

Shaikh Al-Qaradawi in his work published last year, the 6th book of the silsila mubaraka about the unification of thoughts, section on the 'aqida between salaf and khalaf:


للقرضاوى بعنوان {{فصول فى العقيده بين السلف و الخلف و هو الكتاب السادس من سلسلته المباركه “نحو وحد فكريه”
يقول القرضاوى

بعد دراسه و بحث إستمر سنوات أرى أن الراجح أن مذهب
السلف هو تفويض المعنى لا الإثبات و أن هذا هو رأى أكثرالسلف

“After study and research which lasted for years, I realised that the most relied upon opinion as being the opinion of the salaf is the tafwid of the meaning (i.e. to leave the knowledge of the meaning to Allah) and not the ithbat of the meaning (i.e. to take the literal meaning), and that this opinion is the opinion of the majority of the salaf.”

:salam:


p.s. some further quotes from "salafi" authorities that need checking up:



First:

قال الشيخ محمد بن عبد الوهاب في رسالته في الصفات:
"بل أقروها كما جاءت؛ وردوا علمها إلى قائلها، ومعناها إلى المتكلم بها؛ وأخذ ذلك الآخر عن الأول؛ ووصى بعضهم بعضا بحسن الأتباع، وحذروه من اتباع طريق أهل البدع والاختلاف" .

هذ ما نقله أحمد بن حجر آل بوطامي في كتابه "الشيخ محمد بن عبد الوهاب وعقيدته" في الجزء الأول / 184 - 1. ونقله عنهم الدكتور عبدالعزيز بن محمد العبداللطيف في كتابه القيم "دعاوى المناوئين لدعوة الشيخ محمد بن عبد الوهاب عرض ونقد".


Second:

ومن العلماء الذين امتدحوا دعوة الشيخ محمد بن عبد الوهاب الشيخ محمود شكري الآلوسي رحمه الله فهو يقول عن عقيدة أهل نجد ومنهجهم ، وأنهم على نهج السلف الصالح:

(والحاصل أن مذهبهم في أصول الدين مذهب أهل السنة والجماعة وأن طريقتهم طريقة السلف التي هي الطريق الأسلم ؛ بل الأحكم ، وهي أنهم يقرّون آيات الصفات والأحاديث على ظاهرها ويكلون معناها إلى الله تعالى كما قال الإمام مالك في الاستواء ، ويعتقدون أن الخير والشر كله بمشيئة الله تعالى)

تاريخ نجد ص 48.


Third and a beautiful quote indeed:


الشيخ الفاضل عبد الرحمن السعدي في تفسيره "تيسير الكريم الرحمن" عند تفسير سورة آل عمران الآية السابعة بعد إيراد مقولة الإمام مالك الشهيرة:

"فهكذا يقال في سائر الصفات لمن سأل عن كيفيتها أن يقال كما قال الإمام مالك، تلك الصفة معلومة، وكيفيتها مجهولة، والإيمان بها واجب، والسؤال عنها بدعة، وقد أخبرنا الله بها ولم يخبرنا بكيفيتها، فيجب علينا الوقوف على ما حد لنا، فأهل الزيغ يتبعون هذه الأمور المشتبهات تعرضا لما لا يعني، وتكلفا لما لا سبيل لهم إلى علمه، لأنه لا يعلمها إلا الله، وأما الراسخون في العلم فيؤمنون بها ويكلون المعنى إلى الله فيسلمون ويسلمون".انتهى


can you translate those arabic quotes please?

[Ibn Umaysh]

As salamu alaikum

There are a lot of pages here and many things indirectly speaking about tafweedh.

However, can someone summarize in one place all the times the scholars actually said they use and approve of the word "TAFWEEDH" rather than the verb form please, so we can establish it is a principle rather than something that was done?

Also, is this term related by the Salaf?

Jazak Allahu khair

[Sunni_Student786]

ttt

[sahih-baba]

to akhi Ibn Islam

there are many Salafis who do dawah with akhlaq, not all but many do, you will also find many who don't sadly.

and you will find that in all.
even in ash'aris, some discuss with adab and some have very bad akhlaq.

I have come across Salafis who have akhlaq and ones who don't in their discussions.
and seen same with ash'aris and sufis.

so it doesn't have to do with ones beliefs, it has to do with one being human, the issue of akhlaq is one of the hardest things, not many have good akhlaq, not just in discussing but in dealing with people in general and the hardest is when dealing with one's family and people he lives with.

I ask Allah to grant us good akhlaq.

amin.
and may allah protect the ummah from all reformist movements. amin.

[ozgurislam]

Asslam u Aliekum,

Shaikh Attiq-ur-Rahman, the grandson of the widely popular Anwer Shah Kashmiri Deobandi Hanafi, has left deobandis and hanafis and became a salafi just recently. If you dont know his grandfather then let's just say it is said: "The proof of deobandis being upon the truth is that Anwar Shah Kashmiri was a Deobandi!"

He (Attiq ur Rahman) has detailed his reasons and explained why he did this in a lecture titled: "Mei Ahlul Hadeeth Kiyu Howa"

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO IT (http://www.ahlulhadeeth.net/php/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownloaddetails&lid=13&ttitle=Mei_Ahlul_Hadeeth_Kiyu_Howa)

If the above does not work then go to:

http://www.ahlulhadeeth.net/php/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=19

and click on the lecture titeled: "Mei Ahlul Hadeeth Kiyu Howa"
Also note that he was in his last year for graduating as a hanafi scholar from Paksitan.

Ibn Abid

You mean his son Anzar Kasmiri became salafi?

[Colonel_Hardstone]

W-Salam,

I have downloaded it & will be listening to this with interest, Insha'Allah...not because of him becoming Ahlul-Hadeeth but for clues to other issues.

So I suppose no one here knows about what has been going on in between Darul-uloom Deoband & Maulana Anzar Shah Kashmiri (Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmir)'s son for the last few years?





Asslam u Aliekum,

Shaikh Attiq-ur-Rahman, the grandson of the widely popular Anwer Shah Kashmiri Deobandi Hanafi, has left deobandis and hanafis and became a salafi just recently. If you dont know his grandfather then let's just say it is said: "The proof of deobandis being upon the truth is that Anwar Shah Kashmiri was a Deobandi!"

He (Attiq ur Rahman) has detailed his reasons and explained why he did this in a lecture titled: "Mei Ahlul Hadeeth Kiyu Howa"

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO IT (http://www.ahlulhadeeth.net/php/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownloaddetails&lid=13&ttitle=Mei_Ahlul_Hadeeth_Kiyu_Howa)

If the above does not work then go to:

http://www.ahlulhadeeth.net/php/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=19

and click on the lecture titeled: "Mei Ahlul Hadeeth Kiyu Howa"
Also note that he was in his last year for graduating as a hanafi scholar from Paksitan.

Ibn Abid

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum,

I have just finished first 30 minutes and my ears are ringing...may I suggest some think cotton buds if someone wants to listen!:lol:

He is saying the following in the 1st 30odd minutes:

1)In studied firstly in Jamia Anwaarul-Qauraan (Maulana Fida-ur-Rahman Darkhawasti's) Madrasa in Karachi and then graduated from Jamia Farooqia (Maulana Saleemullah) in Karachi

2) Then I went back to Azad Kashmir where there are not a lot of Ahlul-Hadeeth; but I met Maulana Muhammad Yunus Athari (who is the student of Maulana Dawood Ghaznavi) who asked me have you graduated? I said yes from Jamia Farooqia Karachi...He asked again and I replied again to which he said, "You should Thank Allah (SWT) that you havn't graduated out of Islam"...I was astonished so I asked what do you mean? He said, "Have you read Hadeeth?" I said yes I did then I added that I have actually done "Daura (yearly cycle)" of Hadeeth...he said what does that mean? I said we spent 7 years learning Fiqh, Grammer, Philosophy, Logic, (subjecxts of Dunya, how to deal with Dunya) etc. and in the last year our teachers told us to do a "Daura" of Hadeeth for Baraka!...I said whats the point of learning Hadeeth when we have learned the essence for 7 years? They replied that its just for Barakah!

So Maulana Muhammad Yunus Athari said that YOU HAVE GRADUATED OUT OF ISLAM!...you spent 8 years on Fiqh (quotes different books of Fiqh) etc. but 1 year on Hadeeth! How can you possibly understand Hadeeth in 1 year?

He asked which book of Hadeeth did you study? I said "Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi etc.." He said, "Tell me 1 Hadeeth with FULL CHAIN OF TRANSMISSION"....I said I have studied Fiqh and can quote Fiqh all day but I don't know a Single Hadeeth with Chain of transmission!"

He said, "What the point of you being a scholar if you don't know a SINGLE HADEETH WITH CHAIN OF TRANMISSION"???You have not acquired any knowledge and wasted your time...Now go & seek knowledge by learning Hadeeth

And it continues but I am going to sleep because my ears are ringing :)

P.S: I have not mistranslated; he dithers back and forth so my running translation reflects the inconsistencies....Even if you don't understand Urdu listen to it & by the tone and manner of the speech you will know what I am talking about!

[AbdulHakam1]

Asslam u Aliekum,

Shaikh Attiq-ur-Rahman, the grandson of the widely popular Anwer Shah Kashmiri Deobandi Hanafi, has left deobandis and hanafis and became a salafi just recently. If you dont know his grandfather then let's just say it is said: "The proof of deobandis being upon the truth is that Anwar Shah Kashmiri was a Deobandi!"

He (Attiq ur Rahman) has detailed his reasons and explained why he did this in a lecture titled: "Mei Ahlul Hadeeth Kiyu Howa"

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO IT (http://www.ahlulhadeeth.net/php/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownloaddetails&lid=13&ttitle=Mei_Ahlul_Hadeeth_Kiyu_Howa)

If the above does not work then go to:

http://www.ahlulhadeeth.net/php/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=19

and click on the lecture titeled: "Mei Ahlul Hadeeth Kiyu Howa"
Also note that he was in his last year for graduating as a hanafi scholar from Paksitan.

Ibn Abid

Its not that surprising...a young Alim student, he is still learning. He didn't finish even the foundation yet. May Allah guide him.

[al-Athareee]

firstly i dont unerstand where is there a benefit and where is there an underlying fact as to whether someone leaves the truth of Islam for the falsehood of asharism/sufism/taqleed or leaves the latter for the former.


The real shock is, if you aware of a scholar in the "saved sect" (salafi)... by the name of Abu Aaliyah, a famous speaker, has a great force, a great say on how the salafi movement in the UK, specically works,

abu ailiyah was always a hizbi takfeeri and was never salafi. does every claiment to a thing entails his claimto be on a level of not being a lie.



As those who dig a bit more, as brother Abul Hasan has, and can enlighten us on the various branches of "salafism" at present.

I don't understand how someone is willing to find something where it is not found


Another caller to this group, Abu Usamah, if i am not mistaken (spelling) has also become a fellow "hanbali"... Alhamdulilah... Allah guides whom He wills.


what kills me is when you people blurt stuff out o your neck and this is a prime example. i know him personally and in a sence we were always hanbali. he is ahlul-hadeeth, he is athari. he is not a muqalid as you ignorantly think he is.


Poor chap [never heard of him], he joined the Salafi cult / Ahl al-Bid'ah.

InshaAllah he will return to Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah - the path of his grandfather Shaykh Anwar Shah Kashmiri.

oh, okay. lets have a looksy as to where is his ahlu-sunnahship

Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri on sifat (attributes) of Allah, and the way of the Salaf in this matter




( واعلم ) أن المشابهات مثل نُزول الله إلى السماء الدنيا ، واستواءه على العرش ، فرأى السلف فيها الإيمان على ظاهره ما ورد إمهاله على ظاهره بلا تأويل وتكييف ، ويفوض أمر الكيفية إلى الله تعالى ، وأما ما نسب إلى بعض السلف مثل ابن عباس أنه يعلم معاني المقطعات القرآنية على تقدير صحته بيان محتملات ، ويتوهم من جامع الفصولين وهو من معتبراتنا النهي عن الترجمة اللغوية أيضاً للمتشابهات ، لكن قريحتي يحكم أن النهي عنه تفسيرها لا ترجمتها تحت الألفاظ من الحقوق واليد والوجه وغيرهما ، وأما مذهب المتكلمين فهو التأويل في المتشابهات موافقاً للشرع ، وقال المتكلمون : إن مذهب السلف التفويض وهو أسلم ، ومذهبنا أي المتكلمين التأويل بالعقل وفاق الشرع وهو أحكم ، ومعناه أن أصل مذهب أهل السنة التفويض ، وأما التأويل فعند الضرورة والمقابلة مع الغير من مخالفي أهل السنة ، والمتكلمون إنما احتاجوا إلى التأويلات عند المناظرة مع معاندي الإسلام ، فما قال بعض الناس من الألفاظ الركيكة في حقهم فبريؤون عنها ، وأما مذهب المبتدعين في المتشابهات فالتأويلات المخالفة للشريعة الغراء الموافقة لعقولهم القاصرة عياذاً بالله ، ومذهب المشبهة أن الله جسم كالأجسام ، ومذاهب أخر لا أذكرها ، وأما تفويض السلف فيحتمل المعنيين :
أحدهما : تفويض الأمر إلى الله وعدم الإنكار على من تأول كيف ما تأول بسبب إقرارهم بعدم العلم .
ثانيهما : تفويض التفصيل والتكييف إلى الله تعالى والإنكار على من تأول برأيه وعقله ومرادهم هو الاحتمال الثاني لا الأول

-------------------------
ودل ماروينا على رغم أنف من قال بأن أبا حنيفة جهمي عياذاً بالله ، فإن أبا حنيفة قائل بما قال السلف الصالحون ، فالحاصل
أن نزول الباري إلى سماء الدنيا نزول حقيقة يحمل على ظاهره ويفوض تفصيله وتكييفه إلى الباري عز برهانه ، وهو مذهب الأئمة الأربعة والسلف الصالحين كما نقله الحافظ في فتح الباري عنه ، وذهب الأشاعرة المتكلمون إلى ما ذهبوا

--------------------------
قوله : ( أمرُّوها كما هي الخ ) أمرُّوها على ظواهرها ، وأما تأويل اليد بالقدرة أو القوة فقال الترمذي : إنه مذهب الجهمية
، ولا يقال : إن اليد واليمين والوجه وغيرها من صفات الباري ويفوض التفصيل إلى الباري فإنه يقتضي أن يكون مثل اليد والوجه زائدة على الذات لأنه صفاته تعالى ليست عين ذات ولا غيرها مفصلة عنها بل زائدة على الذات ، ومقتضى لفظ اليد ومثله ، أن يعبر بلفظ لا لعلها يومئ إلى كونها زائدة على الذات فإنه خروج عن الموضوع ، وعبر البخاري بالنعوت ولغته أي بين حليته ومذهب السلف في مثل هذا أن يحمل على ظاهره ويفوض التكيف إلى الله ولا يطلق لفظ
الصفة ، وفي فتح الباري ص ( 343 ) ، ج ( 13 ) في بحث الاستواء على العرش عن محمد بن الحسن الشيباني رحمه الله عين مذهب السلف ، وفيه : فإنه وصف الرب بصفة لا شيء إلخ أي فإنه وصف الرب بصفة منبئة عن الانفصال عن الذات ، والحال أن الأفعال قائمة به تعالى وليس محلاً للحوادث بلا اختيار منه وبعض تفصيل المسألة مر في باب نزول الله إلى سماء الدنيا .





.

all of the above is taken from his sharh "al Urf ash Shathi" sharh sunan at Tirmithi
العرف الشذي



As for the following, it is from his book "Faid al Bari" sharh sahih al Bukhari



وكذا الاستواء على العرش، والمعية، وقربه تعالى، كلها من باب واحد عندي، لا نُدْرِك كيفياتِها في غير أن نقول بتشبيه أو تجسيم كما يقوله الزائغون، فكما أَنَّ تلك الأشياء كلها على ظاهرها بدونِ تأويل عند الأئمة الأربعة، كذلك هذه المواجهة ووصلةِ المناجاة عندي.

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

وقد اضطرب الناس في معناه، والرَّزِيَّةُ في القرآنَ، والحديثَ يعبِّران عن المغيبات بما في عالمنا، فيجيءُ قليلُ الفَهْم، قليلُ الديانة، كثيرُ الجهل، فَيَحْمِلُهَا على ظواهرها، ثم يؤوِّلها بعين ما في عالمنا، ومن ثَمَّ يقع في الإِلحاد. مع أن أعدلَ الأمورِ إمرارُها على ظواهرها مع عدم التكلُّم في معناها، كما مرَّ عن أئمة الدين رحمهم الله تعالى.


there goes his asharism out the window and his salafiyyah intact.

what else do you have on him being from your ahlul-bida. PLEASE, don't bring errors of which he is excused, bring foundational points as to his upholding such ahlul-bidic notions to be a part of legislation.


Yeah, of late the madakhilah at salafitalk have been making many seemingly pro-taqleed (or at least not anti-taqleed) statements, they've also attacked the indian-subcontinental la-madhhabiyah for attacking the Ahnaaf on issues such as rafa' yadayn etc., where there is ikhtilaaf among the Sunni fuqahaa, when their own `aqaid are not correct.


ask one of thoe haddadis personally what they thinkg of taqleed and a muqalid.

there taqleed is, even though more ignroant and foolish than yours, is on a much different aspect than what your taqleed centers around.

secondly they attack them because fo tyheir ghulaat haddadi manhaj decdeives them to do so thinking the ahlul-hadeeth aimatiummah are not salafi.
there own ghulaat eyes were incapable of realizing that the so called "la madhaabis" attacked raful-yadayn in a scholastic manner while still preserving the muktalif spirit, of which the ghulaat were incapable to understand.


Abu Aliyah's always been one of the more moderate salafis. Like when talking about the 15th of sha'ban I remember him saying that even Ibn taymiyyah recommended nafl ibadah on the night and that there was legitimate difference regarding veneration of the night.

pure idiocy. Why should I except anything else from a people who center there thougths on nothing but idiocy. As if no other salafi ulema recommended the same.


Furthermore, when they talk about making Taqleed, they do not restrict it to the four orthodox Madhabs, but to any "qualified" scholar, even though all chains of authority to make ijtihaad going back to the Prophet (peace be upon him) have only survived through the four orthodox madhabs and the only "usuls" (juristic methodologies for the derivation of law) which were developed by people who were given the authority to do so are to be found in the four orthodox madhabs.


there goes shawkani, ibn hazm, and a load of ulema out he window for you huh. I dont think someone is able to learn and grow upon he path of chosen ignorance. The fact that you decietfully and ignroantly restrict orthodoxy to only be withheld in the four madhahib only is enough of boradcast of your excellent understahding.


Finally, those same Salafis try to judge the strength of the positions of the various madhabs, which were derived through the use of different, yet valid methodologies, through the lense of a single methodology, i.e. a modified Hanbali one. For example, when looking at an issue that the Hanafi madhab has based its ruling on a "Mashur" hadith, the Salafis say that such a ruling is "opposed to the Sunnah" because there may exist some "Ahad" hadiths that would lead oen to a different conclusion, not realizing that in the Hanafi methodology for the derivation of law an "Ahad" hadith cannot be used as a primary evidence when a "Mashur" hadith exists for an issue that says something seemingly contrary to the "Ahad" hadith related to the subject.


and this is a part of your ignorance as to even the historical context of the affairs that formed what you even said.

There was never a problem with Abu Haneefah and his imediate successors to his wasiyyah. The problem arose when the mutazilah came in the seen and nicked alsmot every aspect of our religion, one of them being the "mashur or mutawattir vs the khabru-wahid.

The fact is, they were all ahlul-hadeeth, but his apporach to the ahlul-hadeeth manhaj took more of rai than everyone else making them ahlul-ray. problem arises when no one realizes that. The issue of making a ruling in aqeedah or in fiqh never occured with regard to ahaad ahadeeth at all until after the baatil concept of the mutazili invasion came on the seen.

secondly in the langfuage of the salafi in these matters is that the phrase "opposes the sunnah" entails merely their accepting thart their position is morte superior in terms of authenticity and conformity to the sunnah than the other positions is concerned WHILE keeping in mind that it is from the muktalifi matters of which one is not abandoned for nor are they chasticed for nor the like. it is simply treated is an iktilaaf matter. Those salafis who went outside the norm of this methodology are very few, exist mainly in the states, and are complete idiots and ignorants as to what the salafi dawah entials thus their views and claims are not taken is the sole salafi authority.


I pray that the Salafis see the error in their ways

that reality only happens when Llah wishes to misguide someone for thier choosing the path of perdition


and, at a minimum, at least begin making Taqleed of the Hanbali madhab,

I know salafis in every madhaab. to lap all salafis to follow hanabilah is loonacy.


if no other one since it seems that many of the scholars to which they look up to for their rather unique ideas

"glad tidings to the ghurabaa"


Perhaps that could be a beginning to the end of Salafiyyah

the end of salfiyyah will happen when Allah orders the trumpet to be blown. There is no inshallah for this as it has been attested to by the prophet salallahu alaihi wa sallam. Having the idea that salafiyyah will cease to exist is the same as beleiving the islam will cease to exist, whcih is kufr al-akbaar esopecially after Allah attested to the preservation of his deen till that day. Salafiyyah is the very intent of Allah sent upon the guidance and tongue of his messenger and what has been relayed by the reports of our predecessors. That is islam and that islam is salafiyyah, there is no islam outside of this, only the islam of he shayateen calling to those other paths that our salafi Imaams have reported in the hadeeth regarding the other paths as reported by our salafi imaam Ibn Abbass.


and, through a domino effect, other la-madhabi ideologies

yes if islam is detroyed,m then that pretty much extends to your ahlul-bidah friends as well, but of course the promise of allah will not allow me to think outside of what he already promised, only khalafis would find way to think like this.


The only reason salafism is strong, because the hukumat is with them. The saudi hukumat is salafism. If they allow Hafanfi scholars to talk and prove their point in Arab countris, then the whole Arabia will be Hanafies. Anyway, salafism has to end because Hazrat Mehdi has to appar soon. They have to take bay't in his hands and do his taqleed. What will be their excuse at that time?

your a fol, to have absolutely no idea what is ittibba and what is taqleed shar'i speaking. I dont expect any explanation will help the veil to be lifted even a centimeter.


Its not that surprising...a young Alim student, he is still learning. He didn't finish even the foundation yet. May Allah guide him.

yet you guys call an idiot who went to six or 8 years at any jamiya fulaniyyah as an alim.

as for the shaykh, if he came to the guidance and light of islam, then wal-hamdulillah, but if he turns back on this islam for that which opposed the way of the beleivers, then he would only do so to his own perdition, and may Allah keep him firm on His siraat, the taifatul-mansoorah, the firqatu-naajiya, ahlu-sunnah wal jamah wal ahlul-hadeeth wal athar, or an abridgement of all of that, may Allah keep him upon His way, salafi. Amen

[Abu Suliman]

lol, it seems like he was a poor student

cant recite 1 hadeeth with sanad maybe he did not had ijaza becasue he was so poor.

[At Talib]

Assalamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu,

I sometimes find this forum to be very disturbing and this thread among others especially confirms my feelings. This is not an issue, however, that I would like to expound upon at the moment. I would like to comment, however, that many of you (and I mean no offense by this, only warning) speak about issues about which you have no knowledge nor should be delving in even if you had.

Molvi Attiqur Rahman is not a near relative of Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri, nor is he his grandson. It is always imperative to verify your sources and claims before you present them to others. The Noble Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) once said, "It is enough for a person to be a liar that he relates all that he hears."

I would also like to mention that the claim that Shaykh al-Hadith's nephews became munkir ahadith is one that should be double-checked. A son of Maulana Zafar Ahmad 'Uthmani is known to have done so, but I am not aware, and I would highly doubt (though I may be wrong), that a relative of Shaykh al-Hadith has done the same.

Lastly, let us not discuss issues which are the realm of men of true scholarship (be they muqallid or non-muqallid). I myself do not claim to be one, nor do I know many who I could claim are, but I do know that any ounce of humility and true knowledge of deen would lead one to remain quiet about some of the issues that make up the crux of many of the discussions that take place on this forum.

Please confine your discussions to non-controversial and pro-active issues. I pray that nothing that is mentioned on forums such as these are used against us on the Day of Judgement. Aameen.

Bilal

[jinnzaman]

Are Salafis from ahl us sunnah or ahl ul bid'a?

List the opinions of scholars and their reasons for either of the classifications.

[umer.siddiqui]

Matters Where the Salafis have opposed the Hanābilah
Bismillah, wa Sallalahu wa Sallam 'ala Habibina al-Mustafa, wa ba'd:

This is an issue that many Muslims in the English speaking world (and Arabic for that matter) have little or no exposure to. It is common to hear many brothers and sisters refer to Salafis as followers of the Hanbali tradition in matters of Islamic jurisprudence. For those of us who are non-salafi Hanbalis (many or most of us being former salafis), we know better. The Salafi doctrine in Fiqh, Aqidah, and spirituality is quite far from the Hanbali way. One of the reasons I decided to start this blog is to illustrate this to the English speaking brothers and sisters, both Salafi and non-Salafi.

Let me start by saying that, first of all, the Hanbali Madh'hab is not Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah. Yes, i said it. I do call him Shaykh ul Islam. Despite that however, his views are not the settled upon dominant views of the Hanbilah as a whole.Secondly, there are many opinions held by the salafis that go against the views of Ibn Taymiyah.

In this little series, I will attempt to show how the Salafis oppose the Hanbali Madh'hab in matters related to creed and Fiqh. This work is not my own, I have found this information from other scholars, students, and the occasional discovery while conducting my own readings. Enjoy...

Part One
Dragging garments below the ankles; between Salafis and Hanbalis

It is well known among the Muslims, both students and masses alike, that the Salafis consider it completely Haram for a Muslim man to drag his lower garment below his ankles. This opinion of theirs is so well known, that in many Salafi circles, dragging ones garment is a sign of one laking in Salafiyyah. How many Salafis do you know, that when they meet someone new, the first thing they do after looking at the persons beard, is glance down and see if the person’s garments are raised to an acceptable level?

Is is not strange to hear them say that leaving garments to drag below the ankles is a sign of arrogance, yet it is they who display more arrogance in our communities than many others (except those whom Allah has shown mercy to)? Don’t get me wrong, as a general practice, I also keep my garments, be it an Izār, a Thawb, or pants above my ankles because it is virtuous. In no way would I discourage anyone from following that sunnah, but to make it the main sign of the Dīn to the exclusion of good character and humility is nothing short of stupidity.Here I will illustrate that the Salafis are not in accordance with our Madh’hab, the Madh’hab of Imām Ahmad (ra) on this issue.

Ibn Muflih (ra) said in al-Furū’ (2/60):
“What is most correct (in the Madh’hab) is that it is hated to be below his two ankles without need.”

Imām al-Mardawī (ra) said in his Insāf (1/472):
“It is hated for him to increase (it’s length) to below his two ankles without need according to what is correct of the two narrations (in the Madh’hab).”

Imam Burhān ad-Dīn Ibn Muflih (ra) said in al-Mubdi’ (1/332):
“And hated according to what is most correct (in the Madh’hab): (the garment) being below the ankles without need.”

Imām al-Hajjāwī (ra) said in al-Iqnā’ (1/259):
“It is hated for a man’s garment to be above the middle of his shin and for it to be below his ankles without need.”

Imām Mar’ī al-Karmī (ra) said in al-Ghāyatul Muntaha (1/346):
“And it is hated for his garments to be above his shins and below his ankles without need.”

And surprisingly, Shaykh ul Islām Ibn Taymiyah (ra) did not hold the opinion that it was Harām and remained silent regarding it as being hated (Makrūh). Ibn Muflih al-Maqdisī (ra) said in al-Adāb ash-Shar’iyyah (4/171):
“And Shaykh Taqqiyuddīn (Ibn Taymiyah) chose the view that it was not forbidden and didn’t delve into whether it was hated or not.”


part two: tawwasul between the Salafis and the Hanabilah


Matters Where the Salafis have opposed the Hanābilah
Part two: Are the attributes of Allāh from the Muhkam or Mutashābih?
The Hanbali creed with regard to the attributes is one of textual affirmation, without delving into explaining anything of it or giving it any meaning. We hold the view that the attributes are from the Mutashābih and thus should not be discussed past the general affirmation. Salafis hold the belief that the attributes are from the Muhkam (manifest clear), and thus many Salafis fall into Tashbīh without realising it.


Imām Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisī (ra) said in ar-Rawdah an-Nādhir with the gloss of Ibn Badrān (1/186):
“What is correct is that the Mutashābih are: what has been narrated (textually) regarding the attributes of Allāh the Exalted.”

Ibn Muflih (ra) said in al-Usūl (1/316):
“The Muhkam is: that, the meaning of which is clear, not needing any clarification, and the Mutashābih are the opposite; either due to (the words) sharing (in meaning, Ar. Ishtirāk) or generality (in expression, Ar. Ijmal). A group of our companions (from the Hanābilah) and others (have defined it as): that which the apparent thereof (implies) resemblance (Ar. Tashbīh), such as the attributes of Allāh.”

Imām al-Mardāwī (ra) said in at-Tahbīr Sharh al-Tahrīr (3/1395):
“What is most correct is: The Muhkam is: that, the meaning of which is clear and the Mutashābih are the opposite either due to (the words) sharing (in meaning, Ar. Ishtirāk) or generality (in expression, Ar. Ijmal) or the apparent (implication) of resemblance (Ar. Tashbīh), such as the attributes of Allāh.”

Swearing by other than Allāh

The famous Salafi opinion is that swearing by other than Allāh-without the intention of glorifying the one sworn by-is minor Shirk (ash-Shirk al-Asghar). As far as the Hanbali Madh’hab is concerned, there are two well known opinions. One is that swearing by other than Allāh is hated (Makrūh), and this is a very strong view held by such illustrious Hanābilah as: Imām Ibn Qudamah (ra) in his al-Muqni’, Imām Abūl Khattāb al-Kalwadhānī (ra) in his Hidāyah, Imam as-Sāmirī (ra) in his al-Mustaw’ab. In fact, Imām Ibn Munjā (ra) said: “It is the Madh’hab.”

The second opinion in the Madh’hab, which is considered the Mu’tamad (relied upon position) is that swearing by other than Allāh is forbidden (Harām) and not minor Shirk.

Imam Ibn Muflih al-Maqdisī (ra) said in al-Furū’ (10/437):
“And swearing by other than Allah is forbidden (Ar. Yahrum).”

Imām al-Mardāwī (ra) said in al-Insāf (10/12):
“And it carries the possibility of being forbidden; and that is the Madh’hab.”

Imām Ibn Najjār (ra) said in Muntaha al-Irādāt with its explanation by Imām al-Bahūtī (ra) (6/375):“And it is forbidden to swear by the essence (Ar. Dhāt) or attribute (Ar. Sifah) of other than Allāh.”

Tawassul

Bismillāh, wa Sallallāhu was sallam ‘alā Nabiyina Muhammad:

First of all, we need to understand that Tawassul is an issue of Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) and not one of creed (Aqīdah). The Salafis believe that it is related to creed (refer to al-Majmū’ ath-Thamīn of Shaykh Ibn Uthaymīn (ra) who mentions this).
In definition of Tawassul, we say that it is to ask Allāh (and not someone else) to grant us something in this life or the next, using the Messenger of Allāh (sallallāhu ‘alaihi was sallam) or one of Allāh’s righteous servants as a means for the acceptance of the Du’ā. A person would perform Tawassul by saying in their Du’ā:

“Oh Allāh, I ask you by the rank of your Noble Messenger to save me from the fire of Jahannam and enter me into the Jannah.”

The Salafis believe that this is against Tawhīd and that it is a form of minor Shirk. Some people accuse the Salafis of saying that it is major Shirk, but this is not fair or true (although some among them might say that). Reading the works of Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah (ra), who was a stanch opponent of Tawassul through the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi was sallam), we see that he never said that it is major Shirk. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdil Wahhab (ra) also said in many of his essays and personal letters that he believed that it was an issue of difference between the scholars and that the one who does it, believing that it is recommended is not held in contempt.

Salafis believe that Tawassul through the rank of the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alaihi was sallam) is minor Shirk and innovation. In sha’ Allāh, we will demonstrate that this is not the view held by the Hanbalī Madh’hab.

Imām Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī (ra), in his encyclopaedic work; al-Mughnī,(3/588), in the section concerning visitation of the Prophet’s grave (alā Sāhibih afdalul-Salāti was Salām), he mentioned the famous story of al-Utbī:

al-Utbi said: "As I was sitting by the grave of the Prophet, a Bedouin Arab came and said: "Peace be upon you, O Messenger of Allah! I have heard Allāh saying: "If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come to you and asked Allah's forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allāh indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful" (4:64), so I have come to you asking forgiveness for my sin, seeking your intercession with my Lord. Then he began to recite poetry:

O best of those whose bones are buried in the deep earth,
And from whose fragrance the depthand the height have become sweet,
May I be the ransom for a grave which thou inhabit,
And in which are found purity, bounty and munificence!

Then he left, and I dozed and saw the Prophet in my sleep. He said to me: O Utbī, run after the Bedouin and give him glad tidings that Allāh has forgiven him."

Ibn Qudāmah (ra) commented afterwards:
“It is recommended (Ar. Mustahab) for the one who enters the Masjid to begin with his right foot…(until he said):
Then you go to the grave and say: “ Indeed, I have come to you seeking forgiveness for my sins and seeking intercession through you unto my Lord.”

This is also mentioned in ash-Sharh al-Kabīr.

Imām as-Sāmirī (ra) said in al-Mustaw’ab (3/88):
“There is no harm in Tawassul to Allāh the Exalted in Istisqā’ (prayer for rain) through the Shuyūkh, the ascetics, and the people of knowledge virtue and religion from among the Muslims.”

Imām Taqiuddīn al-Adamī (ra) said in al-Munawwar (190):
“And Tawassul through the righteous is allowed (Ar. Yubāh).”

Imām Ibn Muflih (ra) said in al-Furū’ (3/229):
“And it is allowed to perform Tawassul through a righteous person, and it is said; it is recommended (Ar. Yustahab).”

Imām al-Mardāwī (ra) said in al-Insaf (2/456):
“It is allowed to perform Tawassul through a righteous man according to what is correct in the Madh’hab. And it is said that it is recommended.”

Imām al-Hajjawī (ra) said in al-Iqnā’ with its explanation by Imām al-Bahūtī (ra) (1/546):
“And there is no harm with Tawassul through the righteous (Ar. Lā Ba’s).”

Imām Ibn Najjār (ra) said in Muntahā al-Iradāt with the explanation of Imām al-Bahūtī (2/58):
“And Tawassul through the righteous is permissible (Ar. Ubīha).”

Imām Mar’ī al-Karmī (ra) said in Ghāyatul Muntahā with the explanation of Imām ar-Ruhaybānī (ra) (2/316):
“And likewise, Tawassul through the righteous is permissible.”

These quotes, especially the ones from al-Insāf and al-Furū’ show that Tawassul is permitted in the Hanbalī Madh’hab and is the Mu’tamad (relied upon position). Any opposing minority opinions by other Hanbalī scholars are just that: minority opinions that are not considered the Madh’hab.

Some of the Saudi Salafi scholars who edit the Hanbali Fiqh works, such as Shaykh Abdul Muhsin at-Turkī, have attempted to explain these statements away by saying that what is intended by Tawassul, is seeking the Du’ā of the righteous. This is preposterous. Imām Ibn Qudāmah (ra) mentions the narration of al-Utbī which is a clear form of Tawassul by the rank of the Prophet (sallallāhu alaihi was sallam).

Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah (ra) himself mentions the narration of al-Marwadhī taken from his book of Manāsik (rites of Hajj) that Imam Ahmad wrote to him saying: "Let the one who makes Du’ā use the Prophet (sallallāhu alaihi was sallam) as a Wasīlah (means)." (Qā`idah fit-Tawassul wal-Wasīla (p. 98 and 155))

Imam Ibn al-Jawzī (ra) said in a brief Du’ā in his Tafsīr; Zād al-Masīr (4/253):
“…by the right of the prophet…”

As similar wording is used by Imām Ibn Aqīl al-Hanbalī in his Tadhkirah (in manuscript form).

See also:
Kashhaf al-Qinā’ah (2/68)
al-Mubdi’ (2/204)
al-Furū’ (2/159)
al-Mughnī with ash-Sharh al-Kabīr (3/588)

Wa Allahu ta'ala 'Ala' wa-'Alam

(Unknown Author)

[al-Athareee]

I never experienced such laughter, not until this.

firstly, it is of absolutely no value to completely crumble these weak bigoted points on top of the fact that the actuality of this can be turned around on the "followers" of all the madhaahib and with much more discrepancy between the muqalids and the aimah stances much more so than these incredibly radical ideas produced forth here.

may Allah help you

[saud_o1]

:salam:

Intresting read. :jazak:

Can you post the name of the blog or the site you got this from?

:salam:

[loveProphet]

:ws:

JazakAllah Khair for sharing.

I believe its sidi Faqir's blog.

[iqadeer]

So by the above description, what would you say about Saudi ulema in general? Do they follow the traditional Hanbali approach or the Salafis? I mean their famous shuyookh like Bin Baz and his student ibn uthaymeen. And if they are indeed traditional Hanbalis do they speak out against or oppose these so-called Salafis?

[salman]

So by the above description, what would you say about Saudi ulema in general? Do they follow the traditional Hanbali approach or the Salafis? I mean their famous shuyookh like Bin Baz and his student ibn uthaymeen. And if they are indeed traditional Hanbalis do they speak out against or oppose these so-called Salafis?

salamu `alaykum

In aspects of `aqa'id there is no doubt that they are "Salafi". This is clear from their numerous works and criticisms of Ash`aris and Maturidis.

Wasalam

[jinnzaman]

Any thoughts on the matter?

[Abdullah Ibn Adam]

So have there been traditional scholars who said the salafis were Ahlus Sunnah Wa Al-Jama'ah?

[sahih-baba]

So have there been traditional scholars who said the salafis were Ahlus Sunnah Wa Al-Jama'ah?

yeah. i think imam zayd takes this line.
i suppose outwardly they are and those who don't know better.

but those who deliberately reject ash'ari and maturidi 'aqida and adherance to any of the 4 madhhabs and all the authentic tariqas, i cannot see how they can still be classed as sunnis (even they themselves prefer to be called salafis).:confused:

salafis claim to be salafis but don't follow the salaf.
shi'a claim to love 'ali 'alayhissalam, but don't follow him.

subhanallah, the real shi'a and the real salafis are the sunnis.

[ozgurislam]

oh, okay. lets have a looksy as to where is his ahlu-sunnahship

Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri on sifat (attributes) of Allah, and the way of the Salaf in this matter




( واعلم ) أن المشابهات مثل نُزول الله إلى السماء الدنيا ، واستواءه على العرش ، فرأى السلف فيها الإيمان على ظاهره ما ورد إمهاله على ظاهره بلا تأويل وتكييف ، ويفوض أمر الكيفية إلى الله تعالى ، وأما ما نسب إلى بعض السلف مثل ابن عباس أنه يعلم معاني المقطعات القرآنية على تقدير صحته بيان محتملات ، ويتوهم من جامع الفصولين وهو من معتبراتنا النهي عن الترجمة اللغوية أيضاً للمتشابهات ، لكن قريحتي يحكم أن النهي عنه تفسيرها لا ترجمتها تحت الألفاظ من الحقوق واليد والوجه وغيرهما ، وأما مذهب المتكلمين فهو التأويل في المتشابهات موافقاً للشرع ، وقال المتكلمون : إن مذهب السلف التفويض وهو أسلم ، ومذهبنا أي المتكلمين التأويل بالعقل وفاق الشرع وهو أحكم ، ومعناه أن أصل مذهب أهل السنة التفويض ، وأما التأويل فعند الضرورة والمقابلة مع الغير من مخالفي أهل السنة ، والمتكلمون إنما احتاجوا إلى التأويلات عند المناظرة مع معاندي الإسلام ، فما قال بعض الناس من الألفاظ الركيكة في حقهم فبريؤون عنها ، وأما مذهب المبتدعين في المتشابهات فالتأويلات المخالفة للشريعة الغراء الموافقة لعقولهم القاصرة عياذاً بالله ، ومذهب المشبهة أن الله جسم كالأجسام ، ومذاهب أخر لا أذكرها ، وأما تفويض السلف فيحتمل المعنيين :
أحدهما : تفويض الأمر إلى الله وعدم الإنكار على من تأول كيف ما تأول بسبب إقرارهم بعدم العلم .
ثانيهما : تفويض التفصيل والتكييف إلى الله تعالى والإنكار على من تأول برأيه وعقله ومرادهم هو الاحتمال الثاني لا الأول

-------------------------
ودل ماروينا على رغم أنف من قال بأن أبا حنيفة جهمي عياذاً بالله ، فإن أبا حنيفة قائل بما قال السلف الصالحون ، فالحاصل
أن نزول الباري إلى سماء الدنيا نزول حقيقة يحمل على ظاهره ويفوض تفصيله وتكييفه إلى الباري عز برهانه ، وهو مذهب الأئمة الأربعة والسلف الصالحين كما نقله الحافظ في فتح الباري عنه ، وذهب الأشاعرة المتكلمون إلى ما ذهبوا

--------------------------
قوله : ( أمرُّوها كما هي الخ ) أمرُّوها على ظواهرها ، وأما تأويل اليد بالقدرة أو القوة فقال الترمذي : إنه مذهب الجهمية
، ولا يقال : إن اليد واليمين والوجه وغيرها من صفات الباري ويفوض التفصيل إلى الباري فإنه يقتضي أن يكون مثل اليد والوجه زائدة على الذات لأنه صفاته تعالى ليست عين ذات ولا غيرها مفصلة عنها بل زائدة على الذات ، ومقتضى لفظ اليد ومثله ، أن يعبر بلفظ لا لعلها يومئ إلى كونها زائدة على الذات فإنه خروج عن الموضوع ، وعبر البخاري بالنعوت ولغته أي بين حليته ومذهب السلف في مثل هذا أن يحمل على ظاهره ويفوض التكيف إلى الله ولا يطلق لفظ
الصفة ، وفي فتح الباري ص ( 343 ) ، ج ( 13 ) في بحث الاستواء على العرش عن محمد بن الحسن الشيباني رحمه الله عين مذهب السلف ، وفيه : فإنه وصف الرب بصفة لا شيء إلخ أي فإنه وصف الرب بصفة منبئة عن الانفصال عن الذات ، والحال أن الأفعال قائمة به تعالى وليس محلاً للحوادث بلا اختيار منه وبعض تفصيل المسألة مر في باب نزول الله إلى سماء الدنيا .





.

all of the above is taken from his sharh "al Urf ash Shathi" sharh sunan at Tirmithi
العرف الشذي



As for the following, it is from his book "Faid al Bari" sharh sahih al Bukhari



وكذا الاستواء على العرش، والمعية، وقربه تعالى، كلها من باب واحد عندي، لا نُدْرِك كيفياتِها في غير أن نقول بتشبيه أو تجسيم كما يقوله الزائغون، فكما أَنَّ تلك الأشياء كلها على ظاهرها بدونِ تأويل عند الأئمة الأربعة، كذلك هذه المواجهة ووصلةِ المناجاة عندي.

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

وقد اضطرب الناس في معناه، والرَّزِيَّةُ في القرآنَ، والحديثَ يعبِّران عن المغيبات بما في عالمنا، فيجيءُ قليلُ الفَهْم، قليلُ الديانة، كثيرُ الجهل، فَيَحْمِلُهَا على ظواهرها، ثم يؤوِّلها بعين ما في عالمنا، ومن ثَمَّ يقع في الإِلحاد. مع أن أعدلَ الأمورِ إمرارُها على ظواهرها مع عدم التكلُّم في معناها، كما مرَّ عن أئمة الدين رحمهم الله تعالى.


there goes his asharism out the window and his salafiyyah intact.



And you just blindly believe that?

"al Urf ash Shathi" sharh sunan at Tirmithi

and

"Fayd al Bari" sharh sahih al Bukhari

Are not the actual scribings of Allamah Kasmiri but merely notes collected together by some of students, and not his own authorship.

As for the article;

It is a strange mixture of self contradicting statements. Some of it true, some of it verifiable lies about Abu Hanifa, and some of it is kufr. I do not think that Allamah Kasmiri actually said all of those things.

Furthermore Al Kawthari praised Allamah Kasmiri, if Allamah Kashmiri actually believed all that drivel, then Al Kawthari would have been the first to attack him.

Furthermore, I have read that Hazrat Badar Alam (rahimullah) draws widely from Hazrat Kashmiri's knowledge in his monumental Hadith work 'Fayd Al-Bari' sharah of Sahih Al-Bukhari. I would highly recommend Tarjuman-us-Sunnah by Hazrat Badar Alam, who was one of Shaykh Kashmiri's admired students.

To find the truth about the thinking of Allamah Kashmiri one must research other works;

The student that benefited most from the teachings of Allamah Kashmiri was Allama Shabir Ahmad Usmani, So one can have a look in his Fathul Mulhim which is a commantary of Sahih Muslim.

Mawlana Syed Ahmad Reda Saheb Bijnauri says: “During my sixteen years in the Majlise Ilmi of Dhabeel (where Allamah Kashmiri for many years), I arrived at the conclusion that it was Allama Shabir Ahmad Uthmani who had benefited from the knowledge and virtues of Hadrat Mawlana Kashmiri. Mawlana Shabir Ahmad Uthmani would turn towards Shah Saheb in all academic difficulties and questions and would study and research day and night. He has extensively drawn from Hadrat Shah Saheb in his commentary of the Noble Quran (Tafseer-e-Usmaani) and his celebrated work Fat’h al-Mulhim (commentary of Saheeh Muslim)” (Anwarul Bari, v.2, p.234).

Also looking into the Maarif us Sunan which is a commantary of Tirmizi by Allamah Yusuf Binnori would be also very beneficial as Allamah Binnori often quotes opinions of his teacher Allamah Kashmiri.


One can also look in Rashid Ahmad Gangohi''s (who was a great deobandi hadith master) sharh books to see the real aqidah of the Deobandies ;

sharh of Sahih Bukhari ; '' Lami’ Ad Durari''
sharh of Sahih Muslim ; ''al-Hallul Mufhim li Sahih-i Muslim''
sharh of Tirmizi ; ''al-Kawkabud Durri ala Djami at-Tirmizi''
sharh of Nasai ; ''al-Fayzu’s-Semi ala Sunen-i Nasai''


So maybe one of the brothers here can do this and show the falsehood of the article above?

Was salaam

[celt islam]

Al-Albani Unveiled
An Exposition of His Errors
and other important issues

Compiled by Sayf ad-Din Ahmed ibn Muhammad

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
PREFACE
All praise be to Allahu ta'ala. Peace and blessings be on His final Messenger, Sayyidina Muhammad. Auspicious salutations be on his pure Ahl al-Bayt (people of the Prophet's House) and on all his just and devoted Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all); and last but not least praise be upon the glorious pious predecessors (Salaf as-Salihin) and their successors who are the Ahl-as-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah (People of the Sunnah and Community) of the four existing schools of Sacred Law (Fiqh).

O you who believe! What you are about to read is of dire importance to the believer who accepts the authority of the Noble Hadith, second only to the Holy Qur'an al-Karim. I here present to the open minded believer an exposition of the mistakes and contradictions of probably the foremost Hadith Shaykh of the 'Salafiyya' sect, by the name of Shaykh Muhammad Nasiruddeen al-Albani. I was asked by some brothers on the status and rank of al-Albani, and fearing the declaration of Allah's Messenger (Peace be upon him):

"He who is asked something he knows and conceals it will have a bridle of fire put on him on the Day of Resurrection" (Sunan Abu Dawood, 3/3650, English ed'n);
I decided to compile this short work. Let me stress at the outset, this work was primarily compiled to correct some notions held by al-Albani and secondarily the "Salafi" sect; hence the last part of this work has been entitled: "and Other Important issues."
This short piece of work has been edited and abridged from the four volume set which emphatically and clearly outlines al-Albani's mistakes, contradictions, slanders and even lies in the honourable and sacred Islamic Science of Hadith (Uloom al Hadith), by the well known scholar, Al-Shaykh Hasan ibn Ali al-Saqqaf (may Allah reward him for his effort) of Amman, Jordan; from his work entitled: "Tanaqadat al-Albani al-Wadihat" (The Clear Contradictions of al-Albani).

Shaykh Saqqaf is a contemporary Shafi'i scholar of Hadith and Fiqh. His Shaykh's include Hashim Majdhub of Damascus in Shafi'i Fiqh, Muti' Hammami in estate division, Muhammad Hulayyil of Amman in Arabic Grammar, and he has been given written authorization (Ijaza) in the field of Hadith from one of the greatest Hadith scholars of our time - Shaykh Abdullah Muhammad al-Ghimari (may the Mercy of Allah be upon him) of Tangiers, Morocco [born 1910 C.E; died Feb. 1413/1993 C.E]; an ex-Professor of Hadith at Al-Azhar University, author of nearly 150 works, his late brother: Ahmad ibn Muhammad (Allah's mercy be upon him) was a great Hafiz of Hadith, (see later for the definition of Hafiz of Hadith). Shaykh Ghimari has declared in one of his published Fatwa's that al-Albani is an innovator (mubtadi) in Islam, (al-Albani has criticised Shaykh Ghimari's classifications of Hadith in some of his works; but then contradicted himself in others - see the quotes from Shaykh Saqqaf later). Shaykh Saqqaf presently teaches a circle of students in Amman and has published over forty five books and treatises on Hadith, tenets of faith (Aqeeda), Fiqh and heresiology.

So as to enlighten the reader who is unaware of al-Albani's status, the following is a short biography as given in the inside back cover of the English translation of al-Albani's booklet by the title 'Adaab uz Zufaaf' (The Etiquettes of Marriage and Wedding) as published by his followers in England (viz.: "Jami'at Ihyaa Minhaj al Sunnah") :-

"Muhammad Naasir-ud-Deen Al-Albani was born in the city of Ashkodera, capital of Albania in 1914 CE. While he was young his parents migrated with him to Damascus, Syria. From an early age he became fascinated by the science of Hadith and thereafter spent his time devoted to seeking knowledge. In later life he was given Professorship of Hadith at the Islamic University of Madinah. He is well known to students and scholars for his knowledge and writings. He has many well known students and has visited places through out the Middle East and Europe. He was forced to migrate from Syria to Jordan. He has been of enormous service to the Prophetic Hadith, taking great pains to check and sort out the authentic from the weak and fabricated narrations. He has produced many pamphlets and books, some of them running into many volumes - on topics of great importance to the Muslims - and has fully checked many of the famous books of Hadith - the Sunan of Tirmidhi, Abu Dawood, An-Nasai and Ibn Majah, along with Suyooti's huge "Jami-us-Sagheer" and "Mishkat-ul Masabih". He is the foremost scholar of Hadith and related sciences of this age."

It is this last statement which is highly far-fetched, and it is the predominantly imaginary belief of his misguided followers in certain parts of the world. Since only Allah knows who is the "foremost scholar of Hadith and related sciences of this age." I say this because there are others who may well be the 'foremost scholar'. One thing that may be noticed from the above biography, is that al-Albani does not seem to have been given any authorization (ijaza) in Hadith from any recognised scholar of Hadith. I have read other biographies and asked some of his supporters in England to give me the name of al-Albani's Hadith Shaykh; but to no avail. It seems that al-Albani "taught" himself the science of Hadith by spending many hours in the famous library of Damascus - al-Maktabatuz Zahiriyyah. In the biography written in the preface of the English edition of his work - "Sifah salah an-Nabee", it was also stated that he was: "influenced by articles in 'al-Manaar' magazine." The last named magazine was edited by the notorious freemason - Muhammad Rashid Ridah (d.1935 CE)!

Al-Albani has not made a handful of forgivable errors, but rather well over 1200, which are only forgivable if he himself admits and corrects his mistakes by repenting in front of the People of Knowledge, as well as the sincere believers who may have been relying on his 'classifications of Hadith'. The selected contradictions from "Tanaqadat al-Albani al-Wadihat" have been derived for sake of brevity from volume's one and two only, and whenever the symbol * is indicated, this corresponds to the original reference to the Arabic edition. The reader should also remember that whenever anything appears in brackets, then these are usually my words and not that of Shaykh Saqqaf. It should also be said that Volume 1 of the original contains 250 ahadith, in which al-Albani has said Sahih (an authentic Hadith) in one of his books and then contradicted himself by saying Daeef (a weak Hadith) in another of his books, or similar mistakes and contradictions. Volume 2 contains 652 Ahadith of the same description as the above, or similar contradictions in individual rijal (biography of a Hadith narrator) of the Sanad (the chain of transmission of a specific Hadith) of the Hadiths in question. In some instances (e.g. Vol.2, pp. 63-64), Shaykh Saqqaf shows how a Hadith narrator is 'trustworthy' when al-Albani wants to use a Hadith to prove something, but becomes 'untrustworthy' when in a Hadith used by the person al-Albani is arguing against; an extremely embarrassing mistake for anyone of any scholarly integrity. These books by Shaykh Saqqaf have already done much to pull the rug from under 'Salafiyyism' in Jordan and even in 'Saudi' Arabia, where the first volume alone has seen no less than SIX reprints in a single year alone! These books are extremely hot property that any 'Salafi' (or anti-Salafi) who reads Arabic will want to buy. I ask you, how many times does an inept student of Hadith like al-Albani have to contradict himself before he ceases to be of authority? Can you find even ten such contradictions in the works of the traditional memorizers of Hadith (Huffaz), those who had memorized at least 100,000 Ahadith with their sanad's? The great scholars like Abu Hanifah, Malik, Shafi'i, Ibn Hanbal, Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhi, Ibn Maja, al-Nasai, Daraqutni, Hakim, Asqalani and so on . . . . Allah's mercy be upon them. The discerning believer should know that al-Albani has not in his memory anywhere near a 100,000 Ahadith in his memory, in fact as far as we know there is no one who is a Hafiz of Hadith today! If there is, we say please come forward and prove it, and only Allah knows best!

During the course of examining various Hadiths, Shaykh Saqqaf compared them to the written opinion of al-Albani. Eventually Shaykh Saqqaf began a compilation of al-Albani's mistakes. He came across contradictions, supposition, inadequate research and the blatant perversion of sayings quoted from the great scholars of Islam. He was especially worried by the fact that many students and members of the youth who do not have enough or no knowledge are simply not bothering to investigate the Hadiths classified by al-Albani, are being misled into blind ignorance; even though these very people are the one's calling staunchly and vociferously for the complete abandonment of taqleed (usually translated as "blind following" by the opponents, but in reality it is the following of qualified and verified scholarship of a Mujtahid Mutlaq [an absolutely independent scholar of the highest calibre] like the Imam's Abu Hanifah, Malik, Shafi'i, Ibn Hanbal (Allah's mercy be upon them) and the like, as well as the scholars who adhered to and promulgated a particular school of fiqh [Madhhab] for the greater part of Islam's history; taqleed in simple language is the following of one of the four existing schools of fiqh). These people seem to contradict themselves, as well as displaying hypocrisy when they go around making it a priority to attack the followers of the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i or Hanbali schools of Sacred Law; even though they themselves are practising taqleed of an individual(s)!

Bearing in mind the Hadith reported by Abu Sa'eed al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) from the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him):

"Whoever sees an evil, he must prevent it with his hand, and if he has no power for this action, then he should prevent it with his tongue, and if he cannot do this, then he should at least consider it a vice in his heart, and this is a very low level of one's Iman (faith)." [see Sahih Muslim, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Nasai - as recorded in Targheeb Wa'l-Tarheeb by Al-Hafiz Mundhiri, d. 1258 C.E; Rahimahumullah],

and even more explicitly from Imam al-Darimi (Rahimahullah) who reported Ziyad Ibn Hudair (Rahimahullah) saying:

"Umar (Allah be pleased with him) said to me: Do you know what can destroy Islam?" I said: "No." He said: "It is destroyed by the mistakes of scholars, the argument of the hypocrites about the book (of Allah), and the opinions of the misguided leaders." (see Mishkatul Masabih, 1/269, Trans. A.H. Siddiqui).

We took the liberty to forewarn and guide the many sincere believers who are turning to their faith from blundering into miscomprehension and wrong by translating selectively from Shaykh Saqqaf's books.

In order to safe keep today's youth from falling into heresy, Shaykh Saqqaf has embarked upon a quest to expose such a person who considers himself to be among the great scholars of Hadith like, Imam's al-Bukhari and Muslim (Rahimahumullah), to the extent that one of his deluded followers considered him to be in the rank of the Amir al-Mu'minin fil Hadith, Shaykh al-Islam al-Hafiz Ahmad Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (the Shafi'i Imam who authored the most famous commentary of Sahih al-Bukhari and many other books, d. 852/1449 C.E; Rahimahullah).

As for Shaykh Saqqaf, the respected reader may get the impression that he has an uncompromising demeanour in some of his comments made straight after he exposes an error of al-Albani. I make no apology for his style of exposition, since many Allah fearing scholars have been uncompromising in the past when it comes to enjoining the Good and Forbidding the Evil as has been prescribed in the Qur'an and Sunnah (e.g. in the refutations against the heretical sects like the Khawarij, Mu'tazila, Shi'ah . . . . ), so long as it forewarns the general masses from accepting the falsities of the heretics and other like minded "scholars". May be Shaykh Saqqaf considers al-Albani to be an innovator, just as his late teacher - Shaykh Ghimari (Rahimahullah) considered him to be. There are many Hadith which command us to detest the Heretics. For example, Ibrahim ibn Maisara reported Allah's Messenger (Peace be upon him) as saying:

"He who showed respect to an innovator he in fact aided in the demolishing of Islam." (Bayhaqi - see Mishkatul Masabih, 1/189, English ed'n).


I hope the esteemed reader will read this short piece of work with vigilance and an open mind, especially those who have been loyal readers and supporters of al-Albani's books and decrees. I sincerely hope that this work will be of great benefit to all who read it and pray that Allah accept it as a good deed done purely for His pleasure. I would also like to thank all those brothers who assisted me in the compilation of this work, especially to the brother who supplied me with Shaykh Saqqaf's books.

May Allah forgive us for any shortcomings and errors. Amin.

[al-Athareee]

I guess there isn othing more to say other than thanks for clarifying that.

[Sunni_Student786]

Jazakallah.

I myself discovered much of what you have written above during my "Salafitic" days.

[godilali]

:salam:

Intresting read. :jazak:

Can you post the name of the blog or the site you got this from?

:salam:

It was written by Abu Junaydah al Hanbali, on his blog "al-insaf," but he subsequently removed the blog and seems to have disappeared from the web.

[AbuHafiza]

I never experienced such laughter, not until this.

firstly, it is of absolutely no value to completely crumble these weak bigoted points on top of the fact that the actuality of this can be turned around on the "followers" of all the madhaahib and with much more discrepancy between the muqalids and the aimah stances much more so than these incredibly radical ideas produced forth here.

may Allah help you

Assalamu alaikum brother Atharee

If what you have said above was true, could you explain these?


Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah (ra) himself mentions the narration of al-Marwadhī taken from his book of Manāsik (rites of Hajj) that Imam Ahmad wrote to him saying: "Let the one who makes Du’ā use the Prophet (sallallāhu alaihi was sallam) as a Wasīlah (means)." (Qā`idah fit-Tawassul wal-Wasīla (p. 98 and 155))

Imam Ibn al-Jawzī (ra) said in a brief Du’ā in his Tafsīr; Zād al-Masīr (4/253):
“…by the right of the prophet…”

[al-Athareee]

If what you have said above was true, could you explain these?


Quote:
Originally Posted by umer.siddique
Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah (ra) himself mentions the narration of al-Marwadhī taken from his book of Manāsik (rites of Hajj) that Imam Ahmad wrote to him saying: "Let the one who makes Du’ā use the Prophet (sallallāhu alaihi was sallam) as a Wasīlah (means)." (Qā`idah fit-Tawassul wal-Wasīla (p. 98 and 155))

Imam Ibn al-Jawzī (ra) said in a brief Du’ā in his Tafsīr; Zād al-Masīr (4/253):
“…by the right of the prophet…”


that was among the fiqhi muktalif matter of which not even all o he other madhaahib are agreed upon on in this subject.

secondlly, if we were to look at the issue of waseelah by Ahmad, then justy like the supposed Ibn taymiyyah's "Sufiship" then Ahmads intent on this has to be looked at from what he viewed "waseela' to be. That my friend is something you will not except, im sure of it.

asalamu alaikum

[Salafi]

yeah. i think imam zayd takes this line.
i suppose outwardly they are and those who don't know better.

but those who deliberately reject ash'ari and maturidi 'aqida and adherance to any of the 4 madhhabs and all the authentic tariqas, i cannot see how they can still be classed as sunnis (even they themselves prefer to be called salafis).:confused:

salafis claim to be salafis but don't follow the salaf.
shi'a claim to love 'ali 'alayhissalam, but don't follow him.

subhanallah, the real shi'a and the real salafis are the sunnis.

subhanAllah.

how do u say this?

u think that what salafiyyah say about sifati issues or maddhahib is equally wrong as the evil aqiad of tahreef in quran, kufr of shaikhain ra and imamah?

may Allah forgive u.

[sahih-baba]

subhanAllah.

how do u say this?

u think that what salafiyyah say about sifati issues or maddhahib is equally wrong as the evil aqiad of tahreef in quran, kufr of shaikhain ra and imamah?

may Allah forgive u.

the 2 are not equally as wrong.
but the 2 are wrong, the "shi'a" being more so.

the shi'a are ahl al-bid'a, and you guys are khalafi, who do taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, hence wahhabi ;)

i love you all, provided you keep your beliefs and ideas to yourself.:cheesygri

[abuhajira]

subhanAllah.

how do u say this?

u think that what salafiyyah say about sifati issues or maddhahib is equally wrong as the evil aqiad of tahreef in quran, kufr of shaikhain ra and imamah?

may Allah forgive u.

:salam:

I dont think by making the comparison brother meant that one is the other. I think he merely pointed out one similarity in both.

:ws:

[basiry]

yeah. i think imam zayd takes this line.
i suppose outwardly they are and those who don't know better.

but those who deliberately reject ash'ari and maturidi 'aqida and adherance to any of the 4 madhhabs and all the authentic tariqas, i cannot see how they can still be classed as sunnis (even they themselves prefer to be called salafis).:confused:

salafis claim to be salafis but don't follow the salaf.
shi'a claim to love 'ali 'alayhissalam, but don't follow him.

subhanallah, the real shi'a and the real salafis are the sunnis.

what you say,it makes realy sense,the salafi are so qick to critise the great imaams.

[Musleemah]

what you say,it makes realy sense,the salafi are so qick to critise the great imaams.

that is a false statement

just because some ignorant Salafis speak disrespectfully of one of the 4 Imams does not make ALL the Salafis like that.
Salafi scholars grealy respect the 4 Imams, whom are from the righteous Salaf.
the ones who speak badly about them are ignorants who need to be educated and if they don't change then they need to be disciplined.

[al-Athareee]

what you say,it makes realy sense,the salafi are so qick to critise the great imaams

do you mean like your innovators calling haafidh ad-Darimee a mujassim, or you innovating shayateen calling sHAYKHUL-iSLAM iMAAMUL-aIMAH iBNUL-kHUTHAIMAH A MUSHABIH, or how about their attempt to tajseemify Ahmad in secret, or charge Abdullah with shirk. What about Imaam Ibn qutaybah, or daraqutni, or Abu Bakr al-Isma'eeli, or Ishaaq, or Ibn Abi Haatim, or for that matter Abu Haatim, or Abu Zurah. Heck lets bring in Ibn Abi Zayd, Ibn Abdul-barr, Abdul-Qadir Jilaanee, Shaykhjul-Islam al-harawee al-Ansari, or shaykhul-islam himself. What about his student ibnul-qayyim and the list gets larger and larger.

asharis claim to be salafi but dont follow the salaf. That is why I take to somewhat of laughter and at the same time pure irony that Abu bakr Ibn al-Arabi would say "this is te madhaab of the salaf, but this way (meaning the way mutakalimoon) is more sounder" despite his many statments that are the primer of the salafi aqeedah and its rejection to asharism.


the shi'a are ahl al-bid'a, and you guys are khalafi, who do taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, hence wahhabi

there is nothing from Ibn abdul-Wahhab to do taqleed with. If the entirety of his dawah was qaalallah or qaala rasul, how is the acceptance of what we are suppose to follow equal the taqleed of the one conveying.

but anyways to get back to he topic.

bring one statement from anby o he aimah that beleives that the one who follows the saalaaf are those who fall outside the fold of ahlu-sunnah.

you will find it and you will never find it, well except for the mubtadi reviler of the sahabah the shaytan of iblees himself Kawthari az-Zandiq, and of course the errornous and invalid inquisition of Zahawee. Yet you will find a multiplicity of aimah in the categation of asharis to be from ahlul-bida which weven Imaam as-Safarini has clearly expouned upon after the ashris deliberate and hypocritical attempt to use his general statement of ahlu-sunnah and apply it to "ashari, maturidi, atharis, since he clearly said elsewhere that firqatu-najiyyah, taifatul-mansoorah are solely the atharis and all atharis are all salafis with absolutely no variance, on top of his clarification that it was a mistake made by some ulema who said the three.


have un trying to find 'claasical" aimah labelling the people of sunnah to be people of bida and mubtadia

[Salafi]

the 2 are not equally as wrong.
but the 2 are wrong, the "shi'a" being more so.

the shi'a are ahl al-bid'a, and you guys are khalafi, who do taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, hence wahhabi ;)

i love you all, provided you keep your beliefs and ideas to yourself.:cheesygri

lol..

if the advice is good and general then one who is advicing should also act accordingly. (refering to: who do taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, hence wahhabi)

and atleast i dont need the love of a bidai. lol

[IlyasLahoz]

have un trying to find 'claasical" aimah labelling the people of sunnah to be people of bida and mubtadia

The rest of your misguided rant not withstanding, I believe what people mean when they say that salafis criticize the great imams are things like:
-Imam Fulan didn't know a lot about hadith or;
-Imam Ibn Fulan misunderstood that verse or;
-Imam Fulan said x, but the strongest ruling is y, based on the evidence

and other such stupidity.

[sahih-baba]

lol..

if the advice is good and general then one who is advicing should also act accordingly. (refering to: who do taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, hence wahhabi)

and atleast i dont need the love of a bidai. lol

bid'a shirk kufr blah blah blah :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Salafi]

The rest of your misguided rant not withstanding, I believe what people mean when they say that salafis criticize the great imams are things like:
-Imam Fulan didn't know a lot about hadith or;
-Imam Ibn Fulan misunderstood that verse or;
-Imam Fulan said x, but the strongest ruling is y, based on the evidence

and other such stupidity.

yeah saying that Imam fulan didn't know a lot about hadeeth or he misunderstood that verse is equivalent to accusing darmee for tajseem and ibn khuthaima for tashbeeh ? leave ibnul jawzi, ibn taymiyyah and ibnul qayyim

subhanAllah

its like a murderer saying " you are not praying nawafil".

[al-Athareee]

The rest of your misguided rant not withstanding, I believe what people mean when they say that salafis criticize the great imams are things like:
-Imam Fulan didn't know a lot about hadith or;
-Imam Ibn Fulan misunderstood that verse or;
-Imam Fulan said x, but the strongest ruling is y, based on the evidence

and other such stupidity.

this is pure idiocy

Somhoe you delte the fact that aimah are fallible. when it is said fulan didnt know athar or misunderstood that athar or that fulan said but htis is tronger then

1. it is due to the fact that there is a predecessor to that statement
2. the reality logically concludes to what is stated which natually is adopted by us
3. that there is such a reality that an imaam forgot,misudnerstood, wasnt' aware of.

wheoever denies this reality is nothing short of a fool as if the aimah are beyond having these limitations. The fact that we fault with Ibn Taymiyyah in some cases is a pure example of our "balanced' position towards the scholars as opposed to the irrationally overpraise or irratianally condemnation of any one o them adopted by illogical asharis.

The fact that you view affirming something that is a normality to human beings like ulema to be 'a dispraise" of the aimah demonstrates the fallacious loonacy of your scandolous mindset.

And what even excapes logic and reason even moe is your overiding of mubtadi innovators labeling the imaams out rivght mujasim, mushabih, hashawiyyah, mushrik and all of the **** the coems from the demonic minds of oyur satanic innovators may Allah destory them and their muqallids who make taqleed of them in aqeedah AMEEEN

[Salafi]

this is pure idiocy

Somhoe you delte the fact that aimah are fallible. when it is said fulan didnt know athar or misunderstood that athar or that fulan said but htis is tronger then

1. it is due to the fact that there is a predecessor to that statement
2. the reality logically concludes to what is stated which natually is adopted by us
3. that there is such a reality that an imaam forgot,misudnerstood, wasnt' aware of.

wheoever denies this reality is nothing short of a fool as if the aimah are beyond having these limitations. The fact that we fault with Ibn Taymiyyah in some cases is a pure example of our "balanced' position towards the scholars as opposed to the irrationally overpraise or irratianally condemnation of any one o them adopted by illogical asharis.

The fact that you view affirming something that is a normality to human beings like ulema to be 'a dispraise" of the aimah demonstrates the fallacious loonacy of your scandolous mindset.

And what even excapes logic and reason even moe is your overiding of mubtadi innovators labeling the imaams out rivght mujasim, mushabih, hashawiyyah, mushrik and all of the **** the coems from the demonic minds of oyur satanic innovators may Allah destory them and their muqallids who make taqleed of them in aqeedah AMEEEN

lol.....cool down, 'we' shouldn't behaive like this atleast this forum.

[al-Athareee]

Our behavior islamically is to be metetd out with the the way our salaf behaved towards them, with utter and vileness and vehemence full stop.

Beleve me we can never be like they were, wallahi we are masakeen compared to how they would have encountered the neo aristolian offspring of the jahmi successors, the asharis

asalamu alaikum

[faqir]

neo aristolian offspring of the jahmi successors, the asharis

:lol:

tell meeee O Hanbaleeee , did Imaaaaaaam Ahmad consider Jahmeeees kaaaaaafir?

[abuhajira]

yeah saying that Imam fulan didn't know a lot about hadeeth or he misunderstood that verse is equivalent to accusing darmee for tajseem and ibn khuthaima for tashbeeh ? leave ibnul jawzi, ibn taymiyyah and ibnul qayyim

subhanAllah

its like a murderer saying " you are not praying nawafil".

:salam:

brother, who is the murderer here? and even if the murderer makes a claim of someone not praying nafl, what is its significance? my little mind is finding it hard to comprehend this analogy! can you elaborate.

1. IS one who says such and such view is mujasami , a murderer??
2. by saying "you are not praying nawafil" you have trivialised the claim. Is having a mujasami aqeeda equivillant to not praying nawafil??

I am merely pointing out the error of this analogy and do not intend any disrespect.

:ws:

[Salafi]

:salam:

brother, who is the murderer here? and even if the murderer makes a claim of someone not praying nafl, what is its significance? my little mind is finding it hard to comprehend this analogy! can you elaborate.

1. IS one who says such and such view is mujasami , a murderer??
2. by saying "you are not praying nawafil" you have trivialised the claim. Is having a mujasami aqeeda equivillant to not praying nawafil??

I am merely pointing out the error of this analogy and do not intend any disrespect.

:ws:

lol..AlexLahoz would understand this analogy.

[IlyasLahoz]

Our behavior islamically is to be metetd out with the the way our salaf behaved towards them, with utter and vileness and vehemence full stop.

Beleve me we can never be like they were, wallahi we are masakeen compared to how they would have encountered the neo aristolian offspring of the jahmi successors, the asharis

asalamu alaikum

All I said was that it's disrespectful for awaam like us to talk about their errors as if we're on their level. (though in reality most of what you call errors are difference of interpretive methodology)

And yes they were just humans, but to illustrate-
Suppose that some 13 year old girl decided, based on what she's heard, to point out your mother's mistakes in raising you, or your father's mistakes in being the man of the house.
Surely, they're just humans and surely they, like all of us, have made mistakes. But that little girl pointing them out, in fact her even thinking that she knows what is or isn't a mistake in the adult world, is pure stupidity, hubris and immaturity on her part.

Also, ibn Taymiyyah did encounter the Ash'aris and his position toward the end of his life was "We do not anathematise anyone who guards his wudu, as the Prophet :saw: said, ‘Only a believer guards his wudu.’ "

[Salafi]

And yes they were just humans, but to illustrate-
Suppose that some 13 year old girl decided, based on what she's heard, to point out your mother's mistakes in raising you, or your father's mistakes in being the man of the house.
Surely, they're just humans and surely they, like all of us, have made mistakes. But that little girl pointing them out, in fact her even thinking that she knows what is or isn't a mistake in the adult world, is pure stupidity, hubris and immaturity on her part.

if his great grand father, grand father or his uncle would point out the mistake of his father and he acts as if a 13 year old girl pointed out his father's mistake then one can decide that he is a foolish muta'seb muqallid which i think he is not.

lol....

[an-nepalee]

:lol:

tell meeee O Hanbaleeee , did Imaaaaaaam Ahmad consider Jahmeeees kaaaaaafir?

he considered some of their beliefs to be outright kufr, as did many ahl hadith.

[AbuHafiza]

And what even excapes logic and reason even moe is your overiding of mubtadi innovators labeling the imaams out rivght mujasim, mushabih, hashawiyyah, mushrik and all of the **** the coems from the demonic minds of oyur satanic innovators may Allah destory them and their muqallids who make taqleed of them in aqeedah AMEEEN

As far as I can see it just became labeling game. On this quote itself the ones complaining of being labeled as this that and the other are labeling the other side in the context of "labeling is bad thing". Brother athareee, did you read your own post?

[Skilly]

The sufis and asharis, mutazalites e.t.c follow deviancy. That is what set them apart, it is their ideas that they believe, propagate and what they practice, that are divergent from Islam. No matter if they take up those label or not.

They are Ahl ul Bid'a?

Some even commit open shirk.

[IlyasLahoz]

The sufis and asharis, mutazalites e.t.c follow deviancy. That is what set them apart, it is their ideas that they believe, propagate and what they practice, that are divergent from Islam. No matter if they take up those label or not.

They are Ahl ul Bid'a?

Some even commit open shirk.

You guys are funny.

May Allah forgive your mistakes and not hold you accountable for these words.

[Skilly]

You guys are funny.

May Allah forgive your mistakes and not hold you accountable for these words.

You guys?

I am one person.

What did I say wrong?

[JayshAllah]

The traditionalists and Salafis need to unite like Voltron. Or like Mega Zord.

[JayshAllah]

yeah. i think imam zayd takes this line.
i suppose outwardly they are and those who don't know better.

but those who deliberately reject ash'ari and maturidi 'aqida and adherance to any of the 4 madhhabs and all the authentic tariqas, i cannot see how they can still be classed as sunnis (even they themselves prefer to be called salafis).:confused:

I think the first two lines you said are very nice.

However, the last four lines make no sense to me. It seems that you are being a bit reactionary. Basically, if the Salafis hurt your feelings, then suddenly you boot them out of Ahlus Sunnah? This reminds me of the Shia who say that anyone who opposes the Shia is suddenly Nasibi. Or the Israelis who say that anyone who opposes Israeli is an anti-Semitic.

I *agree* with you that Salafis should be softer towards those who have Ashari or Maturidi Aqeedah. (I myself think the Ashari Aqeedah makes the most logical sense.) *However*, you should simply say that you DISAGREE with them when they are highly critical, but it is absolutely no basis for kicking someone out of Ahlus Sunnah. Do you just boot people out arbitrarily because they hurt your feelings?



(even they themselves prefer to be called salafis)

Please run a search on Islam -QA....look up the words "Ahl al-Sunnah." You will find that the Salafis always call themselves with this name. Therefore, you are wrong to insinuate that they do not like to be called as part of Sunnism. It is only certain traditionalists who boot Salafis out of Sunnism, and they do this out of anger and hurt feelings.

When can we as a nation grow out of being cry babies? Wah wah, the Salafis hurt my feelings; ok fine, they are now Ahlul Bidah!

[mustajab]

Can someone define Ahl us Sunnah by quoting the opinions of the Salaf and Khalaf.

Or can someone provide a link to some work on the internet defining it.

[jinnzaman]

Can someone define Ahl us Sunnah by quoting the opinions of the Salaf and Khalaf.

Or can someone provide a link to some work on the internet defining it.

http://z14.invisionfree.com/Shield_of_Islam/index.php?showforum=124

[Hamoudeh]

Someone needs to translate Shaykh al-Bouti's book about Salafiyya is a Blessed Historical Period!

How long is it? If it's not very long it wouldn't be that hard to translate.

Anyways where can I get it (in Arabic obviously) I don't see it on Shaykh al-Bouti's website.


that's pretty long.(270pp) most major university libraries will have it in their islamic studies-in-arabic section. Its call number is BP166.1.B847 in the library of congress system, if that helps. this site carries it: http://www.fikr.net/cgi-bin/_showcard.cgi?id=319 ( http://www.fikr.net/cgi-bin/e_qsearch.cgi?searchtext=Buti&searchtype=auth&step=30 ). But unfortunately I haven't been able to find an easy supplier for westerners, so look for big libraries.

We are working on it, to be released this year:

http://www.sunnipubs.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=10&category_id=2&manufacturer_id=0&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=26

We are still in need of much funding for this book, help us out brothers and sisters insha'allah.


A perhaps more relevant and much shorter book(under 100 pp) by Shaykh Buti, may he be rewarded, is Al-lamadhhabiyya akhtar bid`a tuhaddidu al shari`a al islamiyya, which insha`Allah I am in the process of trying to translate, so please make du`a. In libraries it's right next to the previous at BP166.1.B84 . It's this book: http://www.bouti.com/bouti_e_book11.htm .

I assume it did'n't go through, as we obtained permission from Dar al-Farabi and Shaykh Bouti and have recently finished its translation. The book is currently being revised, and expected to be released next month insha'allah.

http://www.sunnipubs.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=8&category_id=2&manufacturer_id=0&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=26

Please contact us through our website for future cooporation, insha'allah. Jazzakumallah khayr.


Another I haven't found is by Muhammad Zahid al Kawthari: Al-Lamadhhabiyya Qantaratu al-Ladiniyya (Anti-Madhhabism is the Archway of Atheism). But it would be interesting.

We are considering this work for next year, insha'allah; as a follow up to Shaykh Bouti's work.

Wassalam

[sahih-baba]

listen pal, i have not met in real life 1 salafi, who hurts my feelings.
alhmd lillah.
some unfortunately have met characters who behave like thugs and throw tantrums.
normally, khalafi thugs -even muslimat!!!- come to life on the internet, where they release their poison.

now, all the shi'i i have met have perfect adab...they are ahl al-bid'a.

get my point?

with you khalafis, it is not very clear.
but one thing is for sure, this wahhabism/khalafism(disguised as salafism) is nothing but stupidity.

hope i didn't hurt your feelings. it's nothing personal.
it's just the stupidity you are on, which i hate.;)

wassalam



I think the first two lines you said are very nice.

However, the last four lines make no sense to me. It seems that you are being a bit reactionary. Basically, if the Salafis hurt your feelings, then suddenly you boot them out of Ahlus Sunnah? This reminds me of the Shia who say that anyone who opposes the Shia is suddenly Nasibi. Or the Israelis who say that anyone who opposes Israeli is an anti-Semitic.

I *agree* with you that Salafis should be softer towards those who have Ashari or Maturidi Aqeedah. (I myself think the Ashari Aqeedah makes the most logical sense.) *However*, you should simply say that you DISAGREE with them when they are highly critical, but it is absolutely no basis for kicking someone out of Ahlus Sunnah. Do you just boot people out arbitrarily because they hurt your feelings?

Please run a search on Islam -QA....look up the words "Ahl al-Sunnah." You will find that the Salafis always call themselves with this name. Therefore, you are wrong to insinuate that they do not like to be called as part of Sunnism. It is only certain traditionalists who boot Salafis out of Sunnism, and they do this out of anger and hurt feelings.

When can we as a nation grow out of being cry babies? Wah wah, the Salafis hurt my feelings; ok fine, they are now Ahlul Bidah!

[Salafi]

listen pal, i have not met in real life 1 salafi, who hurts my feelings.
alhmd lillah.
some unfortunately have met characters who behave like thugs and throw tantrums.
normally, khalafi thugs -even muslimat!!!- come to life on the internet, where they release their poison.

now, all the shi'i i have met have perfect adab...they are ahl al-bid'a.

get my point?

with you khalafis, it is not very clear.
but one thing is for sure, this wahhabism/khalafism(disguised as salafism) is nothing but stupidity.

hope i didn't hurt your feelings. it's nothing personal.
it's just the stupidity you are on, which i hate.;)

wassalam

i remember he said in one of his posts that he is not a salafi....so be happy and save ur venom for us.i know why u said such a thing about rawafidh. we ahve seen urs...lol

[mustajab]

http://z14.invisionfree.com/Shield_of_Islam/index.php?showforum=124


:jazak:

[jinnzaman]

SubhanaAllah! I've always tried to give my Salafi brethren the benefit of doubt and tried to be a moderate peacemaker between us and them. However, I've begun to realize that no overture of tolerance and unity will change some of them.

Recently, there was a discussion on Islamic Awakening forum over how Iran/Iraq became Shia. One of the brothers on the forum insinuated that it was due to following a madhab.

Read the discussion and witness their overzealousness:
http://forums.*********************/showthread.php?t=3998

May Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) grant us all hidaya and assist in making us people of justice.

Ameen.

[Ansari_UK]

May Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) grant us all hidaya and assist in making us people of justice.

Ameen.

Ameen brother. It is amazing how people beleive what they want to beleive. Crazy....

[loveProphet]

Lol
SubhanAllah!

[Colonel_Hardstone]

:rolleyes:

Someone should STOP Sheikh Salman al-Oadah from issuing Fatwaas like this

Question: Some scholars say that taqlîd of one of the four schools of thought is obligatory. I find their argument valid as they say it is not possible for a common man to make ijtihâd by himself. This makes the religion easy for the common man. I would be very grateful if you could shed more light on this subject.

Answered by Sheikh Salman al-Oadah

You have the right to follow a certain school of thought such as the Malikî, Shafi`î, Hanafî, Hanbalî, Zâhirî, or Awza`î school. But neither you nor anyone else may follow one school in an issue where it is clearly established that the evidence points to the contrary.

Allah created us to worship Him and follow His Messenger (peace be upon him). Allah says: “Obey Allah and obey the Messenger”

We, as servants, will be asked on the Day of Judgment “What was the answer you gave to the Messengers?” [Sûrah al-Qasas: 65].

We are commanded to follow the revelation sent to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Allah says: “Follow (O men) the revelation given unto you from your Lord.” [Sûrah al-A`râf : 3]

The founders of all the schools of law used to tell their students not follow them in this or that but to take from the same source they have taken from and to follow the evidence. Those prominent Imams all had famous sayings related from them in this regard.

Therefore, whoever came to know a true Sunnah with certainty is forbidden to disregard it in deference to the saying of the scholar whom he chooses to follow.

Ibn `Abd al-Barr related the consensus of the scholars on this point.

This is a clear matter. However, for a common person who cannot distinguish between texts and evidences. it is perfectly alright for him to copy a scholar whom he trusts, and fear Allah as much as possible.

http://www.***************/show_detail_section.cfm?q_id=326&main_cat_id=16



SubhanaAllah! I've always tried to give my Salafi brethren the benefit of doubt and tried to be a moderate peacemaker between us and them. However, I've begun to realize that no overture of tolerance and unity will change some of them.

Recently, there was a discussion on Islamic Awakening forum over how Iran/Iraq became Shia. One of the brothers on the forum insinuated that it was due to following a madhab.

Read the discussion and witness their overzealousness:
http://forums.*********************/showthread.php?t=3998

May Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) grant us all hidaya and assist in making us people of justice.

Ameen.

[jinnzaman]

This is ajeeb.

I am completely disgusted at how they've taken such a tragic historical event and manipulated it for their own ideological agenda.

SubhanaAllah.

May Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) instill softness within our hearts for our fellow believers and remove the hardness of sectarianism. Ameen.

[lotusi111]

Selamu Aleyikum brother jinnzaman!

I went through the discussion you had in the other forum and I would like to say that you did a fantastic job in responding to the guy who was contradicting himself from the beginning to the end.

Allah knows best

[Ansari]

It reminds me of a discussion regarding the salafi's and hanafi's in India. Blaming each other that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed started first out as a hanafi/ghayr muqallid.

But the fact remains that many salafi''s went on to become qadiani's and whole villages of salafi's converted to qadianism.

[Pr1nce]

Salafis and tolerance - now thats a paradox lol

[OneLife]

Salafis and tolerance - now thats a paradox lol

It's not a paradox, many are ok, some aren't. If you live in the US, chances are most of your friends or people who you know are Muslim are Salafis anyways.

[JayshAllah]

Not all Salafis are the same. It's most E-Salafis that are aggressive like this. Notice how tolerant University of Medinah is, even condemning one of its students who wrote a book against the Maturidis. University of Medinah is Salafi and yet all sorts of people study there, including many Non-Salafis...even Shaikh Hamza Yousuf's students.

The problem is that the bad apples are the ones who dominate the internet.

[Pr1nce]

It's not a paradox, many are ok, some aren't. If you live in the US, chances are most of your friends or people who you know are Muslim are Salafis anyways.
Thats your subjective opinion akhi, of which you are entitled to

[JayshAllah]

Honestly, many of you traditionalists here seem super harsh, stubborn, and intolerant.

[Hamood]

Honestly, many of you traditionalists here seem super harsh, stubborn, and intolerant.

... good point. I agree. There is a need to stop backbiting the Salafis no matter what they say. The laypeople should give way to the Ulama and the students of knowledge who are in position to enagage (reply, refute, etc.) them. All this senseless emotional bashing -- not necassarily referring to this thread -- only brings out the worst and the brother has correctly pointed that out.

[mospike]

The Internet seems to be the home of Fanatics on both sides, thus one can easily make a resolution to clear ones heart and look to the future and then not too long thereafter you come upon a site with many Heretics and Evil things being said, which immediately scrapes out the old wounds and you back at square one.

[sahih-baba]

Honestly, many of you traditionalists here seem super harsh, stubborn, and intolerant.

to khalafism and other novelties of the last 200 years, yes! :cheesygri

...come on jaysh it's better to follow the salaf, rather than just claim it, like the shi'a claim the love 'ali.

we are the real salafis and the real shi'a, so join us!

[jinnzaman]

I think the biggest issue is that the author kept focusing on khudabandah who lived after Shah Ismail. It was Shah Ismail that began converting Iran to Shiasm.


Ajeeb!

[tazkiyyah]

There seem to be 2 khuda-bandahs

one of the 14th century and one later

It requires somebody familiar with shi'i /safavid history to adress this.
Perhaps contacting vali hossein nasr would help...he works for the cfr lol

Anyways..Shaykh Ibn Taymeeyah's tahqeeq does have some weight as he did study a lot of books sidi.

Its an area most ppl know little about.

Though i differ with abuz's views...his lack of adab is astonishing.and even more astonishing is that many uk salafis seem to look up to him...?!

Arabic is important and historical knowledge to suceed in such debates.

[tazkiyyah]

AbuZ seemed to indicate that fanatical following of a madhab led to this problem.
Perhaps if Khuda-bandah wanted to have a temporary affair with a woman, he couldnt do it in sunni islam-so would that mean to please his nafs he could convert to shi'ism so he could engage in temporary marriages?

This following of the nafs which abuZ praises, is hardly a daleel for why one shouldnt follow a madhab

[Salafi]

It reminds me of a discussion regarding the salafi's and hanafi's in India. Blaming each other that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed started first out as a hanafi/ghayr muqallid.

But the fact remains that many salafi''s went on to become qadiani's and whole villages of salafi's converted to qadianism.

its sad that the blaming is still going on.

dajl of this dajjal was progressive. first he was a scholar, then he claimed that he is a prophet and then he became maseeh. so ulema of all scholl of thoughts were not against him from the begining. this initial behaviour towards caused a lot fitnah.

its evident from almuhannad ala al mufannad of khalil ahmed saharnpuri (which was endorsed by all the elders of deobandiayya). if u know arabic or urdu goto the following link and read answer to the q#26.

http://www.tauheed-sunnat.com/a/download-file-754.html

wassalam

[jinnzaman]

AbuZ seemed to indicate that fanatical following of a madhab led to this problem.
Perhaps if Khuda-bandah wanted to have a temporary affair with a woman, he couldnt do it in sunni islam-so would that mean to please his nafs he could convert to shi'ism so he could engage in temporary marriages?

This following of the nafs which abuZ praises, is hardly a daleel for why one shouldnt follow a madhab

Precisely.

Well, there's khudandeh the Safavid ruler and there might be another Khudabandeh, but which one is Abu Zubair referring to? Either the Khudabandeh he's referring to is the one who was a Safavid ruler or he was another Khudabandeh who existed prior to the time of the Safavid rulers. Either way, he is not responsible for instituting Shiasm as a state religion and oppressing Ahl us Sunnah. He is not the primary reason or cause why Iran became Shia, but merely a secondary or 'but for' cause in a longer chain of causation. Thus, the claim that Khudabandeh is responsible for ALL Of Iran becoming Shia is too tenuous of a link for such a heinous deed to be attributed to him.

Furthermore, as you deftly pointed out, even if this one man was resonsible for ALL of Iran becoming Shia, assuming for the sake of argument that this is true, it still doesn't explain how a madhab was responsible for doing so; if anything, it was the lack of following a madhab and requesting daleel to placate one's nafs that lead him to leave the fold of Ahl us Sunnah.

[tazkiyyah]

In fact the land of the most "fanatical" hanafis is Pakistan-
and i don't see them becoming shi'i in a hurry!

[o0an0n]

I've actually been told that some salafis say that following a madhab is correct :confused:.

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum Akhi,

Jazakullah Khairun for the compliment


وانا احبک فی اللہِ ایضاً

:lol:


In fact the land of the most "fanatical" hanafis is Pakistan-
and i don't see them becoming shi'i in a hurry!

[sahih-baba]

I've actually been told that some salafis say that following a madhab is correct :confused:.

akhi, follow madhhab! it's correct....but don't be blind!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[jinnzaman]

In fact the land of the most "fanatical" hanafis is Pakistan-
and i don't see them becoming shi'i in a hurry!

:rolleyes:

If they didn't bash mantiq, maybe they would realize how ludicrous their argument is.

We need someone to write a book called "Al Tahafut as-Salafiyyah"

[o0an0n]

akhi, follow madhhab! it's correct....but don't be blind!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

:lol:, ye maybe that would be the more accurate response :p.

[lotusi111]

Not all Salafis are the same. It's most E-Salafis that are aggressive like this. Notice how tolerant University of Medinah is, even condemning one of its students who wrote a book against the Maturidis. University of Medinah is Salafi and yet all sorts of people study there, including many Non-Salafis...even Shaikh Hamza Yousuf's students.

The problem is that the bad apples are the ones who dominate the internet.

thats absolutely not true.

there are bad apples in every nation or movement. The salafis seem to have loads of them. if they dominate the internet, there is a correlation in terms of proportional generalization to the actual population.

p.s. these apples are not just present in the internet they are present in every domain, from my experience.

[lotusi111]

I've actually been told that some salafis say that following a madhab is correct :confused:.

that is a classical sectarian trick, and they don't mean what they say. they only want you to progressively join their circles in a "smooth" way.

wa salam.

[JayshAllah]

thats absolutely not true.

there are bad apples in every nation or movement. The salafis seem to have loads of them. if they dominate the internet, there is a correlation in terms of proportional generalization to the actual population.

p.s. these apples are not just present in the internet they are present in every domain, from my experience.

Fine, and then this must mean that traditionalists are intolerant back-biters and slanderers...because this is what I see on this very website in which traditionalists are obsessed with salafis and dissing them. All you guys do is diss Salafis, and your only excuse is that "they started it, waah waah waah :cry: :cry: :cry: "

Anyways, I am not Salafi or traditionalist. I am still just learning about the various groups and I'm not knowledgeable enough to make a decision at this stage in time. But from what I've seen--as a semi-neutral person--nobody is as intolerant as the Sunni Forum posters who it seems are obssessed with dissing Salafis. SO many threads against Salafis. Therefore, you may all justify this by saying that it's because the Salafis hurt your feelings waah waah waah, but seriously, you guys need to start practising the tolerance you preach, or at least the tolerance that you claim that the Salafis lack.

I've met a lot of intolerant Salafis, but nowhere near the intolerant muqallids right here on Sunni Forum. Most of you deny that Salafis are even Sunnis, even though Salafis always say that they are. How funny it is that you guys say BARELWIS are Sunni and not SALAFIS! (I believe *both* Salafis and Barelwis are Sunnis.) In fact, you people love SHIA more than Salafis. Such soft fatwas on Shia on Sunni Path, but rabidly salivating fatwas against Salafis.

Why is this? It's because your feelings are hurt, waah waah waah.

Fine, Salafis are jerks. But why are you guys becoming jerks in return? Grow up.

In any case, I think most of you are too extremist to give up your hatred of Salafis...so much so that you insist on the fact that they are not Ahlus Sunnah. Why then do you expect any tolerance from them when you say such things?

[Saad]

In fact, you people love SHIA more than Salafis. Such soft fatwas on Shia on Sunni Path, but rabidly salivating fatwas against Salafis.

I have to agree, and this is disturbing, so much love for Rafidah and enemies of Umhat ul Mumineen and Sahabas.

[JayshAllah]

.

I have to agree, and this is disturbing, so much love for Rafidah and enemies of Umhat ul Mumineen and Sahabas.

It is very strange that the Sunni Forum posters are harsh with the Salafis and soft with the Shia!!!

Which is a bigger deal: not following a Madhab or denying the finality of Prophethood!??!?!?!?

[Saad]

It is very strange that the Sunni Forum posters are harsh with the Salafis and soft with the Shia!!!

Which is a bigger deal: not following a Madhab or denying the finality of Prophethood!??!?!?!?

Yea I feel you brother, if you make a thread about Shias, stating their beliefs from their books and websites, these people jump you, but on the other hand they are busy debating if Shaikh Ibn Taymiya was a Muslim or a Kaafir. They dont hesistate to attack Shaikh Ibn Taymiya but try to defend Khomeni Lanatullah (who declared Hazrat Umer r.a a kafir and munafiq in his books).

[al-Athareee]

tell meeee O Hanbaleeee , did Imaaaaaaam Ahmad consider Jahmeeees kaaaaaafir?


yyyeeeeeeeeeeeessss


All I said was that it's disrespectful for awaam like us to talk about their errors as if we're on their level.

agreed. however This does not tie in with, and unfortunately it does, with regurgitating what ahlul-ulm have already affirmed and the mere affirmation of that does not entail what you just named by which only minds who have been given the tiral of taqleed could ever numb their minds to do



though in reality most of what you call errors are difference of interpretive methodology

and that right there lies the problem. Who directed us to a fake reality that there can be such thing as "interpretative methodology" or some kind of istinbaat (holly shi watch out faqir there is a double a) when it comes to aqeedah.


Also, ibn Taymiyyah did encounter the Ash'aris and his position toward the end of his life was "We do not anathematise anyone who guards his wudu, as the Prophet said, ‘Only a believer guards his wudu.’ "


jahmiyyah use to make wudhu. rafidha made whudo. We all know what Shafiee and his likes already issued regarding them. It is sad when people do not udnerstand how to apply certain statements made by the authorities among our way andthis is a pure example of that.


As far as I can see it just became labeling game. On this quote itself the ones complaining of being labeled as this that and the other are labeling the other side in the context of "labeling is bad thing". Brother athareee, did you read your own post?

are you that stupid

read the context of why that post was even formed. One of your idiots was the "Complainer" (of which you accuse me of doing) of saying that salafis defame respected scholars. I was just logically showing the galactice difference between the action of
1. affirming and adopting what ahlul-ilm said regarding somebody about such a one having errors of which we are to be cautious of, of which comprises of the salafi akhlaaf regarding them vs

2. the complete maligning and ignoramous labeling of the best of those form the later salaf and those who followed them of whom the entire ummah are agreed without dispute as having aqeedah saleem and the labeling of these thiqaat hujjah fi deen as mujassim and what have you which comprises of the ashari way

hence the fool who even brought the subject out in the first place only showed a reality that was a complete opposite of what he tried to accomplish.


The traditionalists and Salafis need to unite like Voltron. Or like Mega Zord.

= salafis and salafis need to unite.

Rather what was intended is innovators and salafis need to unite of whihc the reply back would be what he salalahu alai wasalam said "the ummah will not unite upon baatil"



However, the last four lines make no sense to me. It seems that you are being a bit reactionary. Basically, if the Salafis hurt your feelings, then suddenly you boot them out of Ahlus Sunnah? This reminds me of the Shia who say that anyone who opposes the Shia is suddenly Nasibi. Or the Israelis who say that anyone who opposes Israeli is an anti-Semitic.


you just highlighted the lumumba manhaj of which I had warned him of that. as it was prophecised the truthful will not be beleived and the liar will be beleived.


I *agree* with you that Salafis should be softer towards those who have Ashari or Maturidi Aqeedah

the fact that salafis are not fullfulling the right of Allah in slaying every heretic zanadiqa enemies of His in the main land is proof enough of the tammayyu of the salafis of that land for not fullfilling the right of Allah upon His creation. how soft do you wish salafis to be, to the point of allowing iblees to take over the religion. We won't be able to do that even by prophetic ordainment sicne we always were and will always continue to be those who "repel the falsehood of the liars and repel the distorions of the ignorants"


(I myself think the Ashari Aqeedah makes the most logical sense.)

so what if I said that your logic has left you. How is that being "harsh". People need to be man enough to even take the very basic of critcism. I dont get mad when certain fools label me or that his other heretic liars charged aimah like the hafidh of the world ad-Darimee as mujassim. I could care less of their satanic voices. Yet Im "punished" for no other reason but calling a reality that hassan al-banna as jaahil, of which even on of those bigots affirms somewhat himself

I treat people the way they are. I dont treat lumumba or others who exert some type of effort in some adaab on par with zombie idiots.

[Salafi]

Yea I feel you brother, if you make a thread about Shias, stating their beliefs from their books and websites, these people jump you, but on the other hand they are busy debating if Shaikh Ibn Taymiya was a Muslim or a Kaafir. They dont hesistate to attack Shaikh Ibn Taymiya but try to defend Khomeni Lanatullah (who declared Hazrat Umer r.a a kafir and munafiq in his books).

may Allah bless u.

[AbuHafiza]

are you that stupid

read the context of why that post was even formed. One of your idiots was the "Complainer" (of which you accuse me of doing) of saying that salafis defame respected scholars. I was just logically showing the galactice difference between the action of
1. affirming and adopting what ahlul-ilm said regarding somebody about such a one having errors of which we are to be cautious of, of which comprises of the salafi akhlaaf regarding them vs

2. the complete maligning and ignoramous labeling of the best of those form the later salaf and those who followed them of whom the entire ummah are agreed without dispute as having aqeedah saleem and the labeling of these thiqaat hujjah fi deen as mujassim and what have you which comprises of the ashari way

hence the fool who even brought the subject out in the first place only showed a reality that was a complete opposite of what he tried to accomplish.



Assalamu alaikum
Brother atharee, first of all, calm down. Am I that stupid? What do you mean by that? I dont think that we even know each other or you know any of my beliefs and thoughts, so I would have to ask you to show some respect.

Your ahlaq shows your imaan. I know you will say "well, look at so and so person" and stuff, but where someone is being disrecpectful shouldnt mean that you should follow them. I dont even know how I made you angry, all I did was to remind you that NOONE should disrespect the scolars and label people with somehting they are not. And please, have a little adab if you are trying to prove your point.
Wallahu a'lam

Fi amanillah

[ahmedqman]

I don't think you understand the nature of why Sunnis emphasize dealing with Salafis rather that Shi'is.

First of all, the Shi'is don't define themselves as Sunni in terms of general orthodox basics (i.e. beliving in the four caliphs and so on). Thus, there's no need to emphasize these differences. It's harder to prove them wrong through sources because they have their own set of sources, so you have to show them to be methodologically inconsistent.

The Salafis CLAIM to be Sunni, the true Sunnis. They hold to the khulafa-ar-rashiduun like we do, but they claim that traditionalists are not really representing Sunnis accurately. The Traditionalist perspectives is that they're kind of a Sunni sect that has implemented 'stealth bid'ah' and it's infiltrated our leadership and so on in the Muslim world.

Many of the islamic awakening salafis also accept the charismatic leadership of a good portion of the Muslim nations, something we cannot accept.

In a sense, the reason why traditionalists are more preoccupied with Sunnis is because they have redefined what it means to be Sunni (from the traditionalist perspective) in order to support their ideological goals and reasoning. It's seen as a "corruption within" that needs to be dealt with.

The distinction between Shi'is and Sunnis is clear. There's not a lot of ambiguity. The only controversial thing is how we should theoretically deal with it (such as dealing with questions like 'are they kaafir or not'). In dealing with those questions, it's more about politics and issues of 'group takfir' and so on, since Shi'as have been subject to lot of political violence due to their minority status with the last century or so (Iran being the exception to this minority status). And no, don't bring up "oh they do it to us too", because i will figuratively bite your head off because it still doesn't address the issue of whether this political violence is proper or not

A traditionalist would rather take out the 'stealth bid'ah' based on incoherent methodology (but heck, they bash logic too, so how can we define something as incoherent when they abandon logic altogether at times) that has appeared within our ranks. Once that's done with, then we can deal with shi'as.

[Salafi]

the fact that salafis are not fullfulling the right of Allah in slaying every heretic zanadiqa enemies of His in the main land is proof enough of the tammayyu of the salafis of that land for not fullfilling the right of Allah upon His creation. how soft do you wish salafis to be, to the point of allowing iblees to take over the religion. We won't be able to do that even by prophetic ordainment sicne we always were and will always continue to be those who "repel the falsehood of the liars and repel the distorions of the ignorants".

it is said that ibn qudamah almaqdisi rahimahullah was never exploited by a debater. he never lost smile on his face.

and everythings needs not to be said, specially everywhere. may Allah preserve u and bless u.

wasslam

[jinnzaman]

excellent post sidi ahmed.

:)

I would also add that many of us feel like we're intellectual mujahideen and that we soemtimes feel like we'll solve all of the problems of the Ummah by making one excellent post. We must recognize that nothing can happen without the will of Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) and the victory of Allah will come on His terms, not our own.

The Sahabah (radhi allahu anhum) were pragmatic people dealing with real life problems, not theoretical proofs.

We should focus on self-correction and fulfilling the rights that Allah has over us as our primary goal. Our secondary goal is to concern ourselves with the rights of humans and matters of social justice. All other things are merely tertiary goals.

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

It is very strange that the Sunni Forum posters are harsh with the Salafis and soft with the Shia!!!

I've never been soft with the Shias here or elsewhere. There is a whole thread devoted to Sunni/Shia debates here, and the debates were not soft on either side.

If there is a difference between the Sunniforum treatment of Salafis and the Sunniforum treatment of Shias, it is probably because Salafi propagandists are much harsher than the Shias (in my experience).

Allah knows best.

:ws:

[Sad ibn Abu Waqqas]

Fine, and then this must mean that traditionalists are intolerant back-biters and slanderers...because this is what I see on this very website in which traditionalists are obsessed with salafis and dissing them. All you guys do is diss Salafis, and your only excuse is that "they started it

Actually, they did start it, so they have no business whining when they get criticized. Their harshness permits a harsh response from us.

I don't know what you have in mind when you talk about "backbiting" of Salafis. But please bear in mind that backbiting is permissible when it is intended to fulfill a legitimate interest in Sacred Law. If people are saying that Salafis are confused, wrongheaded, lacking in understanding, unreliable etc., with the intention of warning people against them, then that is acceptable backbiting. Muslims have always warned against groups that could mislead people. That is a duty, and it is not the impermissible backbiting condemned in Islam.

The only really harsh and intolerant Muslims I have met in real life are Tablighis and Salafis.

:ws:

[Noor ul Islam]

The only really harsh and intolerant Muslims I have met in real life are Tablighis and Salafis.

:ws:

AssalaamuAlaikum
Excuse me brother, but this is not true. Tablighis are suject to criticism in Pakistan as they are more tolerant than needed vis-avis other sects.Wassalaam

[Colonel_Hardstone]

W-Salam Sister,

With the utmost respect and I have a lot of freinds who are Tableghees in UK, Pakistan, US and elsewhere!

They are a bit harsh and this is the opinon of the likes of Maulana Abrarul-Haq Hardoi (RA), Mufti Rasheed Ahmed Ludhiyanwi (RA) & others.

In UK they also DON'T participate "fully" in other activities (including Khatme-Nabuwwat)...There is some friction in UK between Tableeghees & other Deobandi groups because of this, particularly amongst youngsters who tell Tableeghees that if you don't want to come to talks of our Shuyukh (Shaykh Riyadhul Haq & Shaykh Saleem Dhorat etc.) then why do you expect us to come to your Ijtemaas?

I am not siding with anyone but there is some complacency/conflict between the different wings of Deobandees in UK (more so then in US/Canada/South Africa and elsewhere, actually in opinion this is JUST in UK!)...I know the reasons but I don't want to divulge them in an open forum!

I am giving my independent opinion but I am sure that I will get shot down for this!



AssalaamuAlaikum
Excuse me brother, but this is not true. Tablighis are suject to criticism in Pakistan as they are more tolerant than needed vis-avis other sects.Wassalaam

[Salafi]

The only really harsh and intolerant Muslims I have met in real life are Tablighis and Salafis.

:ws:

subhanAllah
if they are intolerent than who is tolerent .or he is sleeping.....lol

[Noor ul Islam]

W-Salam Sister,

With the utmost respect and I have a lot of freinds who are Tableghees in UK, Pakistan, US and elsewhere!

They are a bit harsh and this is the opinon of the likes of Maulana Abrarul-Haq Hardoi (RA), Mufti Rasheed Ahmed Ludhiyanwi (RA) & others.

In UK they also DON'T participate "fully" in other activities (including Khatme-Nabuwwat)...There is some friction in UK between Tableeghees & other Deobandi groups because of this, particularly amongst youngsters who tell Tableeghees that if you don't want to come to talks of our Shuyukh (Shaykh Riyadhul Haq & Shaykh Saleem Dhorat etc.) then why do you expect us to come to your Ijtemaas?

I am not siding with anyone but there is some complacency/conflict between the different wings of Deobandees in UK (more so then in US/Canada/South Africa and elsewhere, actually in opinion this is JUST in UK!)...I know the reasons but I don't want to divulge them in an open forum!

I am giving my independent opinion but I am sure that I will get shot down for this!

AssalaamuAlaikum
I can only talk about the Pakistani TAblighis. About the U.K i cannot comment as I am not aware of the situation over there. Anyways not attending the lectures of certain scholars doesnot earn them the title of intolerant. If there is some hidden story then I am sorry I am not aware of that particular aspect. Wassalaam

[tazkiyyah]

I don't think they are intolerant really.

They tend to attend mainly their own functions, but I suppose they are so busy in the effort requirements, that its difficult to find time
to attend other talks .

there's a lot of inter-muslim politics...its not generally good.
Our aim is to please Allah(jALLA shaanahu)

try and leave these things

[Hamood]

It's a trap.

[Sunni_Student786]

Salafi intolerance and harshness still far outweighs that of "traditional" Islam, however, "Traditionalists" are catching up to their Salafi brethren in both of those categories at a very rapid clip, unfortunately.

[sahih-baba]

salam
it's ok to be intolerant to falsehood :-D
to me that means not lending an ear to any of the following:

hizb at-tahrir, omar bakri and co., ikhwanis, (pseudo-)salafis, shi'a, pseudo-sufis and apologists to the west.

mind you, my intolerance doesn't mean i do not greet them or smile at them.
it just means when they start yapping about their agenda, i remain silent, show my boredom or change the topic :-D

wassalam

[Ultra-Muslim]

the fact that salafis are not fullfulling the right of Allah in slaying every heretic zanadiqa enemies of His in the main land is proof enough of the tammayyu of the salafis of that land for not fullfilling the right of Allah upon His creation. how soft do you wish salafis to be, to the point of allowing iblees to take over the religion. We won't be able to do that even by prophetic ordainment sicne we always were and will always continue to be those who "repel the falsehood of the liars and repel the distorions of the ignorants"

Essentially, that means you wish to slay 90% of the Umma, because the majority of the Ummah is NOT Salafi, but rather more-or-less traditional Sunni.

Are you suggesting that 90% of the Ummah is lawful to be killed as "heretic zanadiqa"?

And if you suppose that is the case, since the "Ummah will not unite on batil", doesn't that essentially exclude you from haqq and put you squarely in the category of batil, since YOU are the 10%?

Maybe, I should put it simply:

If 90% of the Ummah is traditional Sunni and the Ummah won't unite on batil, then that means, groups that accuse the 90% of zandaqa, are in fact themselves zanadiqa, ie, the Wahhabis, and the Twelver Shiite rafida.

Ponder this.

[tilmeedh]

The most important question is: are we ahlul-atham or not?
I say just let the salafis be. Let them do what they want - we need to focus on ourselves.




ويدخل فيه أيضاً الخوض في حكاية البدع والمذاهب الفاسدة وحكاية ما جرى من قتال الصحابة على وجه يوهم الطعن في بعضهم‏.‏
وكل ذلك باطل والخوض فيه خوض في الباطل نسأل الله حسن العون بلطفه وكرمه‏.

[Sunni_Student786]

...
mind you, my intolerance doesn't mean i do not greet them or smile at them.
it just means when they start yapping about their agenda, i remain silent, show my boredom or change the topic :-D

wassalam

Brother, if that were the extend of all of our "intolerance" to Salafiyyah, we'd be in a much better situation than we are now now that their ideological and methodological errors have been exposed and communicated quite effectively to the masses over the course of the last decade.

Our concern should be less with labels and more with beliefs.

[Ultra-Muslim]

The most important question is: are we ahlul-atham or not?
I say just let the salafis be. Let them do what they want - we need to focus on ourselves.

As usual Sayyid Taha, you are right, a7sant. Btw, long time no speak eh? Good to hear from you!

:cheesygri
-Salaam

[tilmeedh]

As usual Sayyid Taha, you are right, a7sant. Btw, long time no speak eh? Good to hear from you!

:cheesygri
-SalaamAnd from you, Sidi!
A long time indeed!

[Saraah]

The traditionalists and Salafis need to unite like Voltron. Or like Mega Zord.

:salam:

I don't know, what is that supposed to mean?


Can someone define Ahl us Sunnah by quoting the opinions of the Salaf and Khalaf.

Or can someone provide a link to some work on the internet defining it.

I am sorry for ignorance on my part, but what is a Khalaf?

I was searching and I came upon this with information on the Aqeedah of Ahlul-Sunnah wal Jama'ah (http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2521)

It doesn't look much different. I think they are Sunnis anyway, and many of the 'salafi' scholars attribute, or take from a madhab as well. Like Sk. Bin Bazz (rh) he was a follower of the Habali madhab right?

I was still searching about this and found another Article on that website in which I think the writer placed thier views pretty well...

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showpost.php?p=16809&postcount=11

well anyway, clarifications would be appreciated.

thanks.

[sahih-baba]

:salam:

I don't know, what is that supposed to mean?



I am sorry for ignorance on my part, but what is a Khalaf?

I was searching and I came upon this with information on the Aqeedah of Ahlul-Sunnah wal Jama'ah (http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2521)

It doesn't look much different. I think they are Sunnis anyway, and many of the 'salafi' scholars attribute, or take from a madhab as well. Like Sk. Bin Bazz (rh) he was a follower of the Habali madhab right?

I was still searching about this and found another Article on that website in which I think the writer placed thier views pretty well...

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showpost.php?p=16809&postcount=11

well anyway, clarifications would be appreciated.

thanks.

salam

the salaf are the 1st 3 generations of muslims which starts with the prophet's (sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam) generation and ends with the mujtahid imams' generation.

those who came after that -including us- are the KHALAF.

the salafis claim to follow the salaf, but they are from the khalaf and make taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, ibn taymiyya and more recently al-albani who are all from the khalaf.

they are not strictly hanbali in fiqh and their "ijtihad" is wrong sometimes.
their 'aqida is not traditional sunni 'aqida, that is, ash'ari or maturidi.

their 'aqida is based on literal interpretation of the quran.
for example they believe allah has a hand, eyes etc but they say it is not like our features. traditional sunnis call this anthropomorphism - giving allah human attributes.

traditional sunnis either say that the hands/eyes of allah are metaphorical or they remain silent and take the verses as they are.

these so-called salafis claim that traditional sunnis are denying the ayat.

all this fitna has arisen because of taqlid of ibn taymiyya whose 'aqida was wrong for which he was imprisoned. the majority of sunni 'ulama disagree with ibn taymiyya's 'aqidah

the sites you are browsing are not to be taken seriously.
wassalam

[loveProphet]

salam

the salaf are the 1st 3 generations of muslims which starts with the prophet's (sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam) generation and ends with the mujtahid imams' generation.

those who came after that -including us- are the KHALAF.

the salafis claim to follow the salaf, but they are from the khalaf and make taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, ibn taymiyya and more recently al-albani who are all from the khalaf.

they are not strictly hanbali in fiqh and their "ijtihad" is wrong sometimes.
their 'aqida is not traditional sunni 'aqida, that is, ash'ari or maturidi.

their 'aqida is based on literal interpretation of the quran.
for example they believe allah has a hand, eyes etc but they say it is not like our features. traditional sunnis call this anthropomorphism - giving allah human attributes.

traditional sunnis either say that the hands/eyes of allah are metaphorical or they remain silent and take the verses as they are.

these so-called salafis claim that traditional sunnis are denying the ayat.

all this fitna has arisen because of taqlid of ibn taymiyya whose 'aqida was wrong for which he was imprisoned. the majority of sunni 'ulama disagree with ibn taymiyya's 'aqidah

the sites you are browsing are not to be taken seriously.
wassalam
:ws:

Correct sidi.
But also remember, the "salafis" reject Qiyas and the Ijma(consensus of the Muslim community) and have numerous times gone against the Ijma'.
Plus they accuse us of doing bid'a and shirk and of kufr and some of them call us kafirs and mushriks...

:ws:

[Salafi]

:ws:

Correct sidi.
But also remember, the "salafis" reject Qiyas and the Ijma(consensus of the Muslim community) and have numerous times gone against the Ijma'.
Plus they accuse us of doing bid'a and shirk and of kufr and some of them call us kafirs and mushriks...

:ws:

absolutely wrong. (the highlighted text.)

its not the usool of salafiyyah. even those who follow Imam dawood aldhahiri rahimahuallah dont reject ijma'. they only reject qiyas.

[Skilly]

salam

the salaf are the 1st 3 generations of muslims which starts with the prophet's (sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam) generation and ends with the mujtahid imams' generation.

those who came after that -including us- are the KHALAF.

the salafis claim to follow the salaf, but they are from the khalaf and make taqlid of ibn 'abdilwahhab, ibn taymiyya and more recently al-albani who are all from the khalaf.

Assalamu alaikum.

I hope one is not spreading disinformation intentionally. IF it was un-intentionally, may Allah(swt) forgive you.



they are not strictly hanbali in fiqh and their "ijtihad" is wrong sometimes.
their 'aqida is not traditional sunni 'aqida, that is, ash'ari or maturidi.

How could traditional sunni aqida be ashari, maturidi.

If anyone has studied their word you will see the influence of greek philosophy in ashari works, and maturidi is a close variant of that.
Ashari started of as a speculative theology and took of some of their ideas and argument to counter the Mutazilite greek influence school and thus where also influenced by them. So no they are not purely free from foreign influence in their creed.

One needs to study it to see the degree of Aristoteleon philosophy on the Asharis and the maturidis.



their 'aqida is based on literal interpretation of the quran.
for example they believe allah has a hand, eyes etc but they say it is not like our features. traditional sunnis call this anthropomorphism - giving allah human attributes.

That is another disfiguration of the truth. The atharis/salafis, whatever name one to give them based their aqidah on the salaf which was to take the dahir meaning.
Most importantly they affirm what Allah(swt) & rasool has affirmed i.e. name and attribute , and negating what AllahS(wt) and rasool negated of ALlah(Swt).
They believe that their is nothing like unto Allah(swt) including his name and attribute.


traditional sunnis either say that the hands/eyes of allah are metaphorical or they remain silent and take the verses as they are.

Not they do not. The sects Mutazilite and the asharis do.


these so-called salafis claim that traditional sunnis are denying the ayat.

all this fitna has arisen because of taqlid of ibn taymiyya whose 'aqida was wrong for which he was imprisoned. the majority of sunni 'ulama disagree with ibn taymiyya's 'aqidah

wassalam

This did not start from ibn Taymiyya, unless you wan't someone to starts bringing proof. You and I are very well aware of that.

And his aqeedah was wrong?

Quote:

"After all this, it comes as no surprise that those who argued with ibn Taymiyyah about the contents of his books found that indeed his beliefs where exactly those held by the Salaf of this Ummah. Ibn Katheer writes that when the scholars of his time gathered for a sitting with ibn Taymiyyah to discuss his work al-Aqeedah al-Hamawiyyah that ibn Taymiyyah's replies to their accusations were not able to be rebutted (al-Bidaayah wan Nihaayah, 14/5). And likewise he mentioned that when the scholars sat to argue with him regarding his Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah the argument ended with them accepting all that was contained in the book (Vol. 14 of al-Bidaayah under the heading 'Aqd al-Majaalis ath-Thalaatha'). ."

I do not know why the sufi's have to pass themself as the majority, and hide behind the phrase traditional sunni.

Those who call themself salaf (not all like to go by that name) are all fall under sunni, Muslim.

[Skilly]

Response to the Book of Falsehood 'Al-Albaanee unveiled' and about Saqqaaf - Second Edition
by Brother Abû Rumaysah




The Background

This article is based around an extremely abreviated translation of 'al-Anwaar al-Kaashifah' of Shaykh Ali Hasan, his refutation of 'at-Tanaaqudaat' of Saqqaaf, prepared by brother Dawood Burbank. In this article I have added many more examples of the lies and concoctions of Hasan Ali as-Saqqaaf not only against Shaykh al-Albaanee but against other scholars as well, on top of this adding more detail to various points that brother Dawood, may Allaah reward him, only translated briefly. Furthermore I have replied to all of the 'counter refutations' by Saqqaaf to Shaykh Ali that reached me via the means of his followers in this country.
To date Hasan Saqqaaf still persists in his lies and has refused to retract them, instead he continues to add lies on top of more lies and we pray that Allaah grants him the tawfeeq to repent for his slander and hatred of Ahlus Sunnah before he dies.

I have stated more than once in the article that any reader who still has doubt in what we write, then let him recourse to the work 'at-Tanaaqudaat' of Hasan Saqqaaf and compare his claims to the written words of al-Albaanee and by the Grace of Allaah the truth will become clear to him. The point of this article is not to show that al-Albaanee is error free or even contradiction free for by the grace of Allaah, He has given Shaykh al-Albaanee the quality of readily accepting and correcting himself when his errors are shown to him. Throughout the works of al-Albaanee we find that he corrects himself, asks others to correct him and supplicates for them when they do so. On many occasions we find him, during the course of replying to attacks directed against him by his opponents, accepting some of their points as genuine and correcting himself.

Many of the students of Shaykh al-Albaanee have, with his permission, outlined his mistakes within their own works or in separate volumes devoted to this, examples of this lie with Shaykh Mashur Salmaan and Abu Ishaaq al-Huwaynee.

Therefore in conclusion, the purpose of replying to Hasan Saqqaaf is not because he has written a work outlining the mistakes of al-Albaanee. The purpose in replying is because of his filling the book with lies, slanders and concoctions, his incredibly rude and arrogant attitude, his total blindness to justice and his ignorance of the Science of Hadeeth.

I ask Allaah to guide us all to the straight Path and that He forgive any of my mistakes for they are from myself and Shaytaan.



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

Introduction

Truly all praise belongs to Allaah, we praise Him, we seek His aid and we seek his forgiveness. And we seek refuge with Allaah from the evils of our souls and from our wicked actions. He whom Allaah guides then no-one can misguide him, and he whom Allaah misguides then no-one can guide.
I bear witness that there is no true god except Allaah, and I bear witness that Muhammad (SAW) is His Slave and Messenger. [1]

Allaah says (translation of the meaning of):

"Why do you mix truth with falsehood, and conceal the truth knowingly?" [Family of Imraan (3):71]


And the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam said,

"Truly it is from the signs of the hour that knowledge will be sought from the small ones" (i.e the people of innovation, those on other than the path of the companions.) [2]


He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam also said,

"He who defends his brother in his absence, Allaah will defend him in this world and in the Hereafter." [ 3]


Throughout history it has always been the case that the great pillars of Ahlus Sunnah have been slandered, abused and hated by the people of misguidance and innovation. Thus fulfilling the truth of the hadeeth of the Messenger, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam,

"There will always remain a group of my nation, manifest upon the truth. They will not be harmed by those that oppose them until the affair of Allaah comes about and they are like that." [4]


So of old Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee (RH) was accused of being a Raafidee Shee'a. Ibn Khuzaimah, Abu Ya'la, ibn Taymiyyah and others were accused of being mujassima and had lies heaped around them. And in this day and age the shaykh and muhaddith Muhammad Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaanee has had a similar attack launched against him by those that would obstruct the call to the sunnah of the Best of Creation, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, and would do all that they can to make their innovations widespread in the world. And we seek refuge with Allaah from them and their innovations.

Amongst these individuals is the Jordanian writer Hasan Ali as-Saqqaaf who wrote a three volume treatise entitled 'Tanaaqudaat al-Albaanee' (The Self-Contradictions of al-Albaanee) based upon which a work in the English Language was written entitled 'al-Albani Unveiled'

Unfortunately both of these books have conveyed many lies and distortions, and through these means have confused and misguided many people. Because of this we felt it our duty, as sincere advice to the Muslims, to produce this treatise outlining the lies of the liars and warning from the deviations that have polluted the pure sunnah of the Messenger, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam.

We know that when the supporters of Hasan Saqqaaf in this country see the following treatise many accusations of 'lies', 'mistranslation' and 'distortions' will fly about. Due to this reason we have included, at the end, all the Arabic sections in the works of al-Albaanee that we have translated from so that any person who doubts what follows may recourse to an Arabic speaking person and verify all that we have translated.

And we ask Allaah that he guide us to the truth, and make us firm in following the footsteps of our righteous predecessors.


Footnotes
{1} From the Khutbah al-Haajah (Speech of Need) which the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, would often start his lectures and khutbas by, as is related in Saheeh Muslim and others.
{2} Related by at-Tabaraanee in 'al-Kabeer' from the relation of Abu Umayyah. See 'Saheeh al-Jaami' (no. 2207). The commentary (in brackets) is from the words of Abdullaah bin Mubaarak related by ibn Mandah in 'al-Ma'rifah' (2/220/1) with a good sanad. The hadeeth is also related as mawqoof as the saying of ibn Mas'ud (RA) by al-Harawee in 'Dham al-Kalaam' (2/137). See 'as-Saheehah' (no.695) for detailed documentation.

{3} Related by al-Bayhaqi from the relation of Anas (RA), and it is hasan. See 'Saheeh al-Jaami' (no. 6575), and 'as-Saheehah' (no.1217) for detailed documentation.

{4} Related by Muslim, Abu Daawood, Tirmidhee and others from the narration of Thawbaan (RA) and it is saheeh.

[sufisticated]

skilly - perhaps you didn't see this article, by a salafi scholar:

Abd al-Qadir ibn `Abd al-`Aziz states in al-Jami` fi Talab al-`Ilm
al-Sharif (p. 786):

Shaykh al-Albani is known to have involved himself most with the
documentation of hadiths in our time. I have talked about him in the
discussion of doctrine where I mentioned the corruption of his saying
with regards to belief. I shall talk about him again in the chapter on
Fiqh to point out the aberrant derivations of legal matters which made
him fall into big incongruities. For now, I shall mention some remarks
on his work in documentation:

1. Truly this person is discredited in the matter of his honesty
(`adala), and this is due to his distortion (tahrif) of some of what
he narrated from the Salaf to support a corrupt view of his. I
mentioned in the chapter on doctrine two examples in which he
distorted the words of the commentator of the Tahawiyya and attributed
to him what he did not say. He attributed to the commentator the
statement "Any sin, whatever the sin may be, is practical disbelief
(kufr `amali) and not doctrinal disbelief (kufr i`tiqadi)." The
commentator never said this as can be ascertained from referring to
the original commentary. Likewise, he (al-Albani) distorted the words
of the commentator and attributed to him the statement "Incumbent upon
us is to make ijtihad in seeking forgiveness (tawba) and education
(tarbiya) and in making the action better." In the original commentary
the word tawba is found but not tarbiya. He made it fundamental,
accordingly, that it is not obligatory to come out against the rulers
but the obligation is [only] to get involved in tarbiya. I have
refuted this insinuation in my book al-`Umdatu fi-I`dadi al-`Uddati
lil-Jihadi fi Sabilillah. I tried to deem this act of al-Albani a
misprint. However, as one eminent person said to me, if it had been
one, he would not have built fundamentals upon this distortion.
Instead, he intentionally changed the saying of the commentator of the
Tahawiyya and based his corrupt opinions upon it, deriving a proof
from the wording he had changed. This is not allowed for him. It is as
Ibn Hazm, Allah have mercy on him, said "Know that attributing to
someone, whether a disbeliever, or an innovator, or a person who is
mistaken, something he did not say, is lying about him, and lying is
not allowed for any one." [Ibn Hazm, al-Fisal (5:33).] I say: We
belong to Allah and to Him is our return as to what the people
involved with the Prophetic Hadith have descended to, in our time,
when they are the first of all people to know the danger of lying and
the ruling concerning him who commits it.

2. After reading his hadith documentations and his documentation of
the sayings of the Salaf and the books of the Sunna, I have
ascertained that he holds certain [aberrant] views. Among them, his
arbitrariness (ta`assuf) in authenticating and disauthenticating
hadiths. Also among them, his attributing dubiousness to many of the
Huffaz of the Salaf in several places when the only dubiousness is
only from his own side. His discrepancies and contradictions in his
documentations, sometimes in one and the same hadith. Also among them,
his skimpiness in the biographical documentation of some narrators
concerning whom he relies on one or two sources in contexts requiring
nothing less than thorough research (istiqsa'). This is all besides
his maligning and defaming (ghamz wa-lamz) of the great scholars of
the Salaf and others beside them, regarding whom it is obligatory to
hold one's tongue upon the common folk, let alone the people of
knowledge. I gathered examples for each of these [aberrant] views,
then I came across the book of Hasan ibn `Ali al-Saqqaf, Tanaqudat al-
Albani al-Wadihat fima Waqa`a fi Tashih al-Ahadithi wa-Tad`ifiha min
Akhta'in wa-Ghalatat) in two volumes [three volumes as of 2007], where
the author gathered more than a thousand mistakes and contradictions
of al-Albani, in addition to the views I mentioned and more, so anyone
can refer to it.

These mistakes and contradictions in addition to being discredited
with regard to his honesty make one distrust the documentations of al-
Albani and reliance on his books questionable. Al-Bukhari, Allah have
mercy on him, said: "I left ten thousand hadiths of a person who was
questionable and I have left its like or even more for others than him
who are questionable in my view" [In Ibn Hajar, Hadyu al-Sari (p. 481
)]. And Allah guides whomsoever He wishes to the straight path.

[Ultra-Muslim]

its not the usool of salafiyyah. even those who follow Imam dawood aldhahiri rahimahuallah dont reject ijma'. they only reject qiyas.

Cool. You follow Al-Dhahiri, we will follow Abu Hanifa, 3la Allah maqamahu. We'll see who was mistaken. ;)

You know, just in general, there is a slight notion of absurdity in people of the khalaf calling themselves "Salafiyyah" while screaming "Don't follow the khalaf!!".

If the khalaf are wrong, bad, batil, zanadiqa, etc, ad nauseum, where did you get your religion from? Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab was from...

THE KHALAF!

How does it make sense for someone from the khalaf to declare all other Muslims as kuffar, zanadiqa, while pointing at the generations earlier than himself (!) as khalaf, and not to be followed?

Where did he, this khalaf, get his din? Did it fall out of the sky, and smash him on the head, informing him of the haqq unbeknownst to the rest of the Ummah that they, and ALL their ancestors were mistaken?

You have made of Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab a prophet, and may Allah give us refuge from such arrogance, and kufr!

Stop. Think. Be humble.

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Out of curiosity!

So in issues where there is no clear Nass from Qur'aan, Hadeeth or Ijma what should one do?

What is it called?




Assalamu alaikum.

I hope one is not spreading disinformation intentionally. IF it was un-intentionally, may Allah(swt) forgive you.




How could traditional sunni aqida be ashari, maturidi.

If anyone has studied their word you will see the influence of greek philosophy in ashari works, and maturidi is a close variant of that.
Ashari started of as a speculative theology and took of some of their ideas and argument to counter the Mutazilite greek influence school and thus where also influenced by them. So no they are not purely free from foreign influence in their creed.

One needs to study it to see the degree of Aristoteleon philosophy on the Asharis and the maturidis.




That is another disfiguration of the truth. The atharis/salafis, whatever name one to give them based their aqidah on the salaf which was to take the dahir meaning.
Most importantly they affirm what Allah(swt) & rasool has affirmed i.e. name and attribute , and negating what AllahS(wt) and rasool negated of ALlah(Swt).
They believe that their is nothing like unto Allah(swt) including his name and attribute.



Not they do not. The sects Mutazilite and the asharis do.



This did not start from ibn Taymiyya, unless you wan't someone to starts bringing proof. You and I are very well aware of that.

And his aqeedah was wrong?

Quote:

"After all this, it comes as no surprise that those who argued with ibn Taymiyyah about the contents of his books found that indeed his beliefs where exactly those held by the Salaf of this Ummah. Ibn Katheer writes that when the scholars of his time gathered for a sitting with ibn Taymiyyah to discuss his work al-Aqeedah al-Hamawiyyah that ibn Taymiyyah's replies to their accusations were not able to be rebutted (al-Bidaayah wan Nihaayah, 14/5). And likewise he mentioned that when the scholars sat to argue with him regarding his Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah the argument ended with them accepting all that was contained in the book (Vol. 14 of al-Bidaayah under the heading 'Aqd al-Majaalis ath-Thalaatha'). ."

I do not know why the sufi's have to pass themself as the majority, and hide behind the phrase traditional sunni.

Those who call themself salaf (not all like to go by that name) are all fall under sunni, Muslim.

[Ultra-Muslim]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Out of curiosity!

So in issues where there is no clear Nass from Qur'aan, Hadeeth or Ijma what should one do?

What is it called?

Spin around in a circle, and wait for Allah to drop it on your head, from the heavens.

But under no circumstance are you to perform qiyas! It is haaaaaaaaaraaaaaaaaaam, performed only by Soooofiiiiii zanadiqa.

Thus was the Gospel according to St. Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab, and the Saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallaaaaaaaaaaaafieeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeyyyyaaaagghhh.

:cheesygri

[Skilly]

I gathered examples for each of these [aberrant] views,
then I came across the book of Hasan ibn `Ali al-Saqqaf, Tanaqudat al-
Albani al-Wadihat fima Waqa`a fi Tashih al-Ahadithi wa-Tad`ifiha min
Akhta'in wa-Ghalatat) in two volumes [three volumes as of 2007], where
the author gathered more than a thousand mistakes and contradictions
of al-Albani, in addition to the views I mentioned and more, so anyone
can refer to it.

He found Al-Albani to be a liar?
He ask people to refer to saqaaf books?

Bro, instead of posting another article similar to a OP. Concentrate on pointing out wheter he is a liar.

Saqaaf ignorance, distortation and lies whom Abd Qadir seems to praise highly.
Not quite suprising.


As Allah says in the Holy Quran in surah Isra, chapter 70, verse 81,
"when truth is hurled against falsehood, falsehood perishes for falsehood is by it's nature bound to perish".

Here is a whole 57 page refutation to your ignorant/evil talk you keep spreading.

http://www.**********/articles/manhaj/innovation/asharees/bookoffalsehood.pdf

I hope no Sufi's don't delete this Link.

EDIT:
Oh, not suprising, the links are censored. I wonder why?

[Salafi]

Cool. You follow Al-Dhahiri, we will follow Abu Hanifa, 3la Allah maqamahu. We'll see who was mistaken. ;) .................................................. .................................................. ................

You have made of Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab a prophet, and may Allah give us refuge from such arrogance, and kufr!

Stop. Think. Be humble.

we dont follow al-dhahiri.

so the joker became a 'takfiri'.......lol

and the moderators are sleeping.........lol

[masum2u]

Assalamu 'alaykum

The article that is posted on this thread is actually taken from a book that underlines not only several crucial mistakes made by Shaykh al Al Bani but also other mistakes our salafi brethren make.

The book can be found here, its quite interesting as it gives the evidence for us the laymen to go and do our own research to find out the truth:

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/albintro.htm

I am not here to debate on anything, so keep me out. If you have any sincere questions, i can take them up to the respected Shaykh who has written the book and get answers.

Wassalaam

[abuhajira]

:salam:

@silky.. one radd.. then radd ala radd.. What do you think will be the result?

It is only expectable that someone will come up with a refutation of any critic of salafi's Imam Al 'Asr.


EDIT:
Oh, not suprising, the links are censored. I wonder why?

Read the rules! :) Thus will end your wonderings :P


Saqaaf ignorance, distortation and lies whom Abd Qadir seems to praise highly.
Not quite suprising.

Hmm I wonder what any Salafi who blindly makes taqleed of Sheikh Albani Saheb would say about anyone who exposes mistakes of Sheikh Albani :? Perhaps, that he who has attributed such and such mistake to him is a lier, ignorant and has distorted his words. Brother These are expectable statements. You have referred to a whole 57 page refutation, as if number of pages add any significance to the material within? A word of Haqq is more severer than oceans of Falsehood. So you need not mention the number of pages.. just explain away any confusions.

:Ws:

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum,

I am a laymen with basic knowledge of Arabic & even I can read:

1) The Qaul of Imam Tirmidhi (RA) about the actions of Salaf (RA) that some "tied their hands below the Navel while others above"

2) Al-Mughni which states the one of the opinions of Imam Ahmed (RA) about placing the hand below the Navel!

while Al-Albani says that EVERYTHING besides the Chest is weak!

3) I can clearly see the Hadeeth about placing the hands on the chest in S’ahih-Ibn-Khuzamah & see in the Shar'h and guage the authenticity of it!

You have to deaf, dumb, blind, bigoted and the blindest follower of the world not to see the inconsistencies!

[sufisticated]

:salam:

let's face it.

no scholars are infallible. of coourse, it is possible they may make mistakes, but not necessary.

the lovers of Albani are the biggest proponents of taqlid, without even realising it.

the above is just proof.

:ws:

[Ultra-Muslim]

we dont follow al-dhahiri.

so the joker became a 'takfiri'.......lol

and the moderators are sleeping.........lol

Actually, I didn't say anyone was a kafir, and there was no 'joking' about it! But, the meaning of my statement is that certain parties, without realizing it, have made of Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab, and of the notions of "Salafiyah" into an idol. How?

When you make something beyond question, beyond reproach, you have made it an idol. The sheer vehemence with which you hold you arguements, indicates this. What happened to ikhtilaf? What happened to "my opponent is wrong, and my opinion is right, but there is the chance that my opponent is right, and I may be wrong."?

And again, if the khalaf are wrong, bad, batil, zanadiqa, etc, ad nauseum, where did you get your religion from?

Where did he, this khalaf, get his din? Did it fall out of the sky, and smash him on the head, informing him of the haqq unbeknownst to the rest of the Ummah that they, and ALL their ancestors were mistaken? Truly, this is not a joke. You say don't follow the khalaf. Presumably, you intend for us to believe either A) Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab was from among the Salaf or B) Al-Wa7y, The Revelation, come down to him. If it is neither of those two, then he was a khalaf, whom you are telling us, vehemently, not to follow.

How does that make any sense?

Here you are, barging around talking about how "soft" the Salafiyyah are, because (HAHAHA!) they aren't "slaying" their opponents!

Who are their opponents? For the most part, the true Sunnis! How absurd!

You are complaining about the moderators "sleeping"?

A few posts ago, you were thirsting for our blood, and now you whine because someone criticized St. Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab?

For God's sake, 7is 3la nafsak!

[AbuHafiza]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Out of curiosity!

So in issues where there is no clear Nass from Qur'aan, Hadeeth or Ijma what should one do?

What is it called?


I also would like to hear an answer from brother Salafi to this question

[sahih-baba]

looks like we have we have jumped on that merry-go-round of salafi debates again.
let's leave these brothers to their so called salafism.
don't know what they want here - nobody is going to buy it.

salam!

[Salafi]

Actually, I didn't say anyone was a kafir, and there was no 'joking' about it! But, the meaning of my statement is that certain parties, without realizing it, have made of Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab, and of the notions of "Salafiyah" into an idol. How?

When you make something beyond question, beyond reproach, you have made it an idol. The sheer vehemence with which you hold you arguements, indicates this. What happened to ikhtilaf? What happened to "my opponent is wrong, and my opinion is right, but there is the chance that my opponent is right, and I may be wrong."?

And again, if the khalaf are wrong, bad, batil, zanadiqa, etc, ad nauseum, where did you get your religion from?

Where did he, this khalaf, get his din? Did it fall out of the sky, and smash him on the head, informing him of the haqq unbeknownst to the rest of the Ummah that they, and ALL their ancestors were mistaken? Truly, this is not a joke. You say don't follow the khalaf. Presumably, you intend for us to believe either A) Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab was from among the Salaf or B) Al-Wa7y, The Revelation, come down to him. If it is neither of those two, then he was a khalaf, whom you are telling us, vehemently, not to follow.

How does that make any sense?

Here you are, barging around talking about how "soft" the Salafiyyah are, because (HAHAHA!) they aren't "slaying" their opponents!

Who are their opponents? For the most part, the true Sunnis! How absurd!

You are complaining about the moderators "sleeping"?

A few posts ago, you were thirsting for our blood, and now you whine because someone criticized St. Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab?

For God's sake, 7is 3la nafsak!

first u said " You have made of Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab a prophet, and may Allah give us refuge from such arrogance, and kufr! ".

the takfir is preceded by its cause. if this is not takfir then wallahi nobody on earth knows what is takfeer.

in ur last post u used "without realizing it" but did the same indirectly.

i never said "batil, zanadiqa".

atharee was temporarily banned just because he said "hasan al-banna al-jahili". http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=185416&postcount=20 .i dont know if he is permanently banned or not.

[AbuHafiza]

salafi, is it "ignoring the questions" day?

[Salafi]

I also would like to hear an answer from brother Salafi to this question

asslamo alaikum warah matullah

i have already said that we dont reject qiyas or ijma'.

there is a difference of usool regarding what should follow in case of conflicting sahih/weak ahadeeth ? a detailed analysis of hadeeth or qiyas.

wasslam

[Saad]

QUESTION

The Ash`aris and Maturidis, who form what we refer to as Ahl al Sunnah, state regarding the mutashabihat, that both the ma`ana and kayf are unknown to us.

In contrast to this the modern day Salafi sect, who find their roots with Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya and others, state that the ma`ana is known haqiqatan and only the kayf is unknown. Thus, they reject tafwidh and consider it the method of innovators, as Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin mentions in his works.

Is saying that the ma`ana is thabit haqiqatan wa `ala dhahir not tajsim? Or door to tajsim, which is against the way of Ahl al Sunnah and our Deobandi `ulema? Was Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah’s `aqida in these regards against the Ahl al Sunnah, for example he would say “Allah istiwa `ala al arsh haqiqatan”.

Some of the `ulema such as Imam Ibn Hajar Haytami, Imam Subki, and Imam Zahid al Kawthari were very opposed to many of the views of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya and his `aqida. What is your view?

ANSWER


The view of the majority is as you mention that such verses that speak of Allah taala becoming established on His throne and the hadith that states Allah descends to the lowest heaven are accepted as established. That is when Allah taala says, for example, that He “descends,” he does so but we do not know what this means in any way. Rather, such texts are from the Mutashabihat (knowledge of which is with Allah taala) and as such cannot be explained .

Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah went a little further, and whereas the majority refrained from stating what the literal meaning of (for example) descending means in relation to Allah taala, Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah said that in fact it means Allah taala literally (Haqiqiatan) descends.

This view would not however lead to Tajsim or Tashbih, because he also added this descending is not like the descending of the creation. This is similar to Allah ’s attribute of Knowledge; we establish this attribute or Allah taala, however humans also have knowledge. We do not say that we do not know what it means by Allah taala possessing knowledge. Rather we affirm His attribute of knowledge, knowing it is nothing like our limited knowledge.

Similarly, Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah would say, we should do regarding the other attributes of descending etc. in order to be closer to how Allah taala has described Himself.

From this explanation one can see that he is not guilty of Tashbih or Tajsim. The story of him, during a speech he was giving, saying “Allah taala desends like this,” and then proceeding to descend off the Minbar are fabricated and baseless propaganda against him. Having said this, the view of the majority is still the safest.


Wallahu Aalam bis-sawab

Mufti Mohammed Sajjad

[Saad]

The Claims of Shaikh ibn Batuta:

Amongst the contemporaries of ibn Taymiyyah who accused him of tajseem was the travelling historian, ibn Batuta who said, "I was present in Damascus on Friday where he (ibn Taymiyyah) was admonishing and reminding the people from the minbar (pulpit) of the congregational mosque. During his speech he said: Indeed Allaah descends to the lowest heaven of the world just as I am descending now. He then descended one step of the minbar…" [‘al-Rihlah’ (1/110) of ibn Batuta.]

1. This contradicts the madhab of Shaikh ibn Taymiyyah concerning the Attributes of Allaah - the Most High - being built upon the saying of Allaah, ‘there is nothing like Him, He is the Hearing and the Seeing’.

2. Ibn Taymiyyah says in ‘at-Tadmuriyyah’ (pg. 20), "It is a must to affirm that which Allaah affirms for himself, whilst negating any likeness to Him with His creation…Whosoever says: His Knowledge is like my knowledge, His Power is like my power, or Love like my love, or Pleasure like my pleasure, or Hand like my hand, or Ascending like my ascending, or His Nuzool (descent) is like my descent, then he has resembled and likened Allaah to the creation. Rather it is a must to affirm (Allaah’s Attributes) without resemblance, and to negate (what Allaah negates for Himself), without ta`teel (divesting Allaah of His Attributes)."

3. Likewise he said in ‘Majmoo` al-Fataawaa’ (5/262), "whosoever considers the Attributes to be like the attributes of the creation - such that Istawaa of Allaah is like the ascending of the creation, or His Nuzool is like the descending of the creation, or other than that - then he is a deviated innovator." And he repeats this principle over and over again in his works.

4. It is not possible that ibn Batuta witnessed ibn Taymiyyah deliver this speech, since ibn Batuta clearly states in his ‘Rihla’ (1/102) that he entered Damascus on the 9th of Ramadhaan in the year 728H. However Shaykh al-Islaam was - before, during and after that time - in prison. Ibn Katheer states in ‘al-Bidaayah wan Nihaayah’ (14/135) that ibn Taymiyyah was imprisoned on the 6th of Sha’baan in the year 728H and remained there until his death on the 20th of Dhul Qa’dah 728H [These dates are endorsed in ‘al-A`laam al-Uliyyah’ (pg.84) of al-Bazzaar, and ‘Sahdharaat adh-Dhahab’ (6/80) of ibn al-Amaad.]

5. Ibn Batuta, may Allaah have mercy upon him, did not write the book ‘Rihla’ with his own hand, rather it was collected by Muhammad bin Jazee al-Kalbee who writes in the introduction to ‘Rihla’, "and I have quoted the meaning of the words of Shaykh Abu Abdullaah (ibn Batuta) with words that give the meaning that he intended…."

6. Ibn Batuta started his journey on the 2nd of Rajab 725H and completed it on the 3rd of Dhul Hijjah 756H and he did not write anything down, rather after this journey he dictated to al-Kalbee the events of his journey from memory. Hence the door is open for mistakes, and it is highly likely that ibn Batuta did not witness what he claimed to have witnessed, but merely conveyed the accusations that were in vogue at that time against Shaykh from his enemies.

7. Ibn Batuta himself was opposed to ibn Taymiyyah, for he states in ‘Rihla’ (1/309), ‘and from the great Hanbalee Legal Jurists of Damascus was ibn Taymiyyah, except that he was lacking in his intellect.’ Hence it would have been easy for him to take on board the accusations without verifying them.

8. Ibn Taymiyyah was not the khateeb of the aforementioned masjid, rather it was Qaadee al-Qazwaynee. Ibn Batuta himself says in his ‘Rihla’ (1/107), "and at the time of my entering it (Damascus) their Imaam was Qaadee Jalaal ad-Deen Muhammad bin Abd ar-Rahmaan al-Qazwaynee from the great legal jurists, and he was the khateeb of the masjid…."

9. - Ibn Taymiyyah did not used to give admonitions and reminders to the people from the minbar, rather he used to sit upon a chair. Al-Haafidh adh-Dhahabee said, "and he became very famous and well-known, and he started giving tafseer of the Might Book from his memory, on the days of Jumu`ah, sitting upon a chair." And ibn Batuta states in his ‘Rihla’ (1/108), "it was the habit of the scholars of hadeeth to read books of hadeeth on a raised chair." And a raised chair in the Arabic language is called, ‘minbar’. [‘Lisaan al-Arb’ (5/189)]

10. This is why ibn Hajr mentioned in his ‘Durar al-Kaaminah’, "and he used to speak on the minbar in the way of the explainers of fiqh and hadeeth, and he used to mention in an hour, what another was unable to mention in many sittings, as if the sciences were displayed in front of his eyes" Meaning by this that he sat on a chair as done by the scholars of hadeeth.

[Rumi_ahl_al_ketab]

I am sorry to disagree my brother.
If you do not practice the teachings of Islam (tolerance and acceptance of other people of the book, non-violence, Sadaqah,etc) and instead try to make Islam a belief system about attacking Jews, Christians and any Muslim without a beard, you are not "100% genuine."
They call us Kafir, but we refrain from calling them back.
Why?
Because Allah (SWT) is to judge who is a Kafir, not us.

I will say this- it is these people who give us a bad name. These people are the reason that Americans distrust us and I do not blame them.

[Salafi]

They call us Kafir, but we refrain from calling them back.
Why?
Because Allah (SWT) is to judge who is a Kafir, not us.

I will say this- it is these people who give us a bad name. These people are the reason that Americans distrust us and I do not blame them.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=189189&postcount=47
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=189548&postcount=51

america and britain caused 'israel'. in 1967 we lost alquds. where were salafis?

[ozgurislam]

QUESTION

The Ash`aris and Maturidis, who form what we refer to as Ahl al Sunnah, state regarding the mutashabihat, that both the ma`ana and kayf are unknown to us.

In contrast to this the modern day Salafi sect, who find their roots with Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya and others, state that the ma`ana is known haqiqatan and only the kayf is unknown. Thus, they reject tafwidh and consider it the method of innovators, as Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin mentions in his works.

Is saying that the ma`ana is thabit haqiqatan wa `ala dhahir not tajsim? Or door to tajsim, which is against the way of Ahl al Sunnah and our Deobandi `ulema? Was Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah’s `aqida in these regards against the Ahl al Sunnah, for example he would say “Allah istiwa `ala al arsh haqiqatan”.

Some of the `ulema such as Imam Ibn Hajar Haytami, Imam Subki, and Imam Zahid al Kawthari were very opposed to many of the views of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya and his `aqida. What is your view?

ANSWER


The view of the majority is as you mention that such verses that speak of Allah taala becoming established on His throne and the hadith that states Allah descends to the lowest heaven are accepted as established. That is when Allah taala says, for example, that He “descends,” he does so but we do not know what this means in any way. Rather, such texts are from the Mutashabihat (knowledge of which is with Allah taala) and as such cannot be explained .

Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah went a little further, and whereas the majority refrained from stating what the literal meaning of (for example) descending means in relation to Allah taala, Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah said that in fact it means Allah taala literally (Haqiqiatan) descends.

This view would not however lead to Tajsim or Tashbih, because he also added this descending is not like the descending of the creation. This is similar to Allah ’s attribute of Knowledge; we establish this attribute or Allah taala, however humans also have knowledge. We do not say that we do not know what it means by Allah taala possessing knowledge. Rather we affirm His attribute of knowledge, knowing it is nothing like our limited knowledge.

Similarly, Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah would say, we should do regarding the other attributes of descending etc. in order to be closer to how Allah taala has described Himself.

From this explanation one can see that he is not guilty of Tashbih or Tajsim. The story of him, during a speech he was giving, saying “Allah taala desends like this,” and then proceeding to descend off the Minbar are fabricated and baseless propaganda against him. Having said this, the view of the majority is still the safest.


Wallahu Aalam bis-sawab

Mufti Mohammed Sajjad


Good fatwa where you got it from? If im right the Mutfi concludes that both are correct views?

[Saad]

Good fatwa where you got it from? If im right the Mutfi concludes that both are correct views?

http://www.as-suffa.org/

Alot of good material on that site.

[zero2hero]

Has anyone heard of Wahafis ?



Just tryin to lighten the mood :)

[Saad]

The Accusation that Shaikh ibn Taymiyyah held Allaah to be a body, of composite parts having organs.


Shaikh As-Saqqaaf says, after previously quoting an-Nawawees ruling of unbelief on the one who ascribes to Allaah a jism (body):

"Entering into this category is al-Harraanee (i.e. ibn Taymiyyah)…who has affirmed tajseem (Allaah having a body) in many of his books. So from this is his saying in ‘at-Ta`sees’ (1/101): ‘and there is not in the Book of Allaah, nor in the Sunnah of His Messenger, nor a statement from any of the Salaf of this ummah and it’s Imaams that He is not a jism, and that His Attributes are not bodily, consisting of organs…’ I say: By Allaah who originated the heavens and the Earth - your saying is ignorance and misguidance. Is not Allaah - the Most High’s - saying, "there is nothing like Him" sufficient in negating tajseem and it’s reality, O al-Harraanee?!! And what about the Imaams of the Ummah and the Salaf - O al-Harraanee - and their censure of tashbeeh…." [‘Daf Shubah at-Tashbeeh’ (pp 245-246) with it’s footnotes by Saqqaaf. ]

The previously stated words are not from the writings of ibn Taymiyyah in which he is clarifying his own views, or even stating them. Rather he is quoting the saying of the People of Kalaam (innovated speech and rhetorics). However as-Saqqaaf has conveniently omitted the beginning of the quotation from Shaykh ibn Taymiyyah, where he clearly stated: Qaaloo (they said)!!

Shaykh ibn Taymiyyah said, in the course of this topic, ‘indeed the term al-Jism (body), al-Arad (organs), al-Mutahayyiz (extent) are newly invented terminoligies. We have mentioned many a time before that the Salaf and the Imaams have not spoken about such things - neither by way of negation, nor by way of affirmation. Rather they declared those who spoke about such matter to be innovators, and went to great lengths to censure them.’

This is what has repeatedly been affirmed by Shaykh - may Allaah have mercy on him - in many of his books, such as: ‘Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool’ (pp. 69-76), ‘Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa’ (3/306-310, 13/304-305), ‘Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah’ (2/134-135, 192, 198-200, 527). Indeed in ‘Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool’ Shaykh has labelled ascribing Allaah with the term jism, by saying, ‘an innovation in the Sharee`ah, a corruption of the language, and a contradiction to the [sound] intellect. Rather it is repudiated by the Sharee`ah, the language and the [sound] intellect.’

And from them: Shaykh al-Islaam mentions the intended meaning of ascribing Allaah with the term jism, by saying: ‘whosoever alleges that the Lord is a jism - with the meaning that he accepts division, separation and partition (for Allaah) - then he is the most disbelieving of people and the most ignorant. Indeed, his statement is more evil than the one who says that Allaah has a son - with them meaning that a part of Him split and thus became His son.’" [ ‘al-Asaalah’ magazine (no.4 pp.54-55), see also his ‘Rudood wat Ta’qubaat’ (pp 21-23) ]

Dr. Sa`eed Ramadaan al-Bootee who says, "and we are amazed when we see the extremists declaring ibn Taymiyyah, may Allaah have mercy upon him, of being an unbeliever. And also at them saying that he was one who held Allaah to be a body (mujassid), and I have studied long and hard as to where I could find a statement or a word from ibn Taymiyyah that he wrote or said which would indicate his holding Allaah to be a body as was quoted from him by as-Subki and others, and I have not found anything from him like this. All I found was him saying in his legal rulings, ‘Indeed Allaah has a Hand as He said, and has risen over the Throne as He said, and He has an Eye as He said’"

And he adds to this, " I referred to the last work written by Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`aree, ‘al-Ibaanah’, and I found him saying exactly what ibn Taymiyyah said [on the issue of the Names and Attributes of Allah]…" [‘Nadwa Ittjaahaat al-Fiqr al-Islaamee’ (pp 264-265) of al-Bootee.]

[mospike]

Shukran for bringing clarity to my minds

May Allah have mercy on Sheikh Al Islam Ibn Taymiyya (ra)

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Ameen.

We affirm his knowledge and rank; we also acknowledge that there were matters where he deviated from Ijmah & leave the rest to Allah (SWT) to judge.

I was listening to the PODCAST that was put on this forum buy Br Ansari_UK & noticed that Hajj Abdassamad Clarke suffixes Rahimullah Ta'ala after Shaykh Ibn-e-Taymiyah's (RA) name and this is the position of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal Jamaah.


Shukran for bringing clarity to my minds

May Allah have mercy on Sheikh Al Islam Ibn Taymiyya (ra)

[Musleemah]

brother Nabil

you want to know about Salafis (who are labeled as Wahhabis by their haters) ?

Read their books, and listen to their lectures.
Do not get info about them through forums especially this forum, which is a non Salafi forum, so don't expect them to praise Salafis, or kitab at Tawhid.

since you read kitab at Tawhid already, it is good to listen to sh. Yasir al Qadhis explanation, to have more understanding of it.
also read other books by sh. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and judge for yourself if he has deviated or not , do not judge the shaikh or any other scholar by what other people say about him, judge him by his own teachings.

that is my advice to you.

and anyone else who wants to know the beliefs of Salafis.
read the books, and listen to the lectures.

[Saad]

Asslamo Allaikum,

Ameen.

We affirm his knowledge and rank; we also acknowledge that there were matters where he deviated from Ijmah & leave the rest to Allah (SWT) to judge.
.

Yes our scholars do differ with Shiakh ibn Taymiyyah (r.h) on fiqhi matter where he went outside the Ijma but I think its wrong when people accuse him of being a *Mujassama*.

[Sword Of Allah]

brother Nabil

you want to know about Salafis (who are labeled as Wahhabis by their Lovers) ?

Read their books, and listen to their lectures.


and anyone else who wants to know the beliefs of Salafis.
read the books, and listen to the lectures.

Asalamo `alaykum wa rahmatullah,

In my opinion thats the worst advice that has been given so far on this forum. If you want to learn about what the wahabiyoon & "(s)Thalafi"s are then i suggest you read abdul hakim murad works. There are other sites about them like www.livingislam.org where Shaykh Gibril Fouad Haddad (Hafidahullah) has written extensive material exposing this cult. Anyways if you want my advice...stay away from this wahabi diseption. Take care.

Was-Salam.

[Musleemah]

of course you would think it is the "worst" advice, because you worry that he will "deviate", so he must read about them in the works of their "enemies".

now if it came to Sufims and sufis, would you tell him to read about them in the books of Salafi scholars?
I don't think you would like that and would advise him to learn about sufism and sufis through Sufi shaikhs , am I correct ?

[masum2u]

Assalamu 'Alaykum

Here's some good articles written by top sunni scholars exposing the Salafi's/Wahhabi's:

Proptenstant Islam (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/pislam.htm) by Muhammad Al-Abbasi

Who or what is a Salafi? (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/salafi.htm)
Is their approach valid? By Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller

The problem of Anti-Madhabism (http://www.sunnah.org/fiqh/usul/antimadhhabism.htm) - by Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad

The Fatwa of Shaykh Murabtal Haaj concerning the issue of Taqlid of the Four Mujtahid Imams (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/mhfatwa.htm). Translated by Shaykh Hamze Yusuf

Who are the Ahl al-Sunnah? (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/ahlsunna.htm)
By Shaykh Ahmed ibn Muhammad

Reforming Classical Texts (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq3.htm)
How widespread is tampering of texts by the Salafis. By Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller

Why Does One Have to Follow a Madhhab?
Debate Between Muhammad Sa'id al-Buti
and a Leading Salafi Teacher (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/buti.htm)
Translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1995

Hope these stuff help about clarifying who the Salafi's are, you can find more articles by Shaykh G.F. Haddad on this site:
http://www.livingislam.org/tgfh.html

A little tip to brother Nabil though.......in the Kitab al Tawhid, there are 3 principles of Tawhid, and they are:
1) Tawheed Ar Rububiyya
2) Tawheed Al Uluhiyya
3) Tawheed Al Asmaa was-Siffat
Please do your own research and see where these ''terms'' came from, if you find them anywhere in the Qur'an and Sunnah, let me know insha'Allah.

Wassalaam

[Musleemah]

and as for Gibril Haddad, he is not trustworthy when it comes to his attacks on Salafis, I already made some threads in this forum showing some of his false accusations against some Salafi shaikhs.

[Musleemah]

Assalamu 'Alaykum

Here's some good articles written by top sunni scholars exposing the Salafi's/Wahhabi's:

Proptenstant Islam (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/pislam.htm) by Muhammad Al-Abbasi

Who or what is a Salafi? (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/salafi.htm)
Is their approach valid? By Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller

The problem of Anti-Madhabism (http://www.sunnah.org/fiqh/usul/antimadhhabism.htm) - by Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad

The Fatwa of Shaykh Murabtal Haaj concerning the issue of Taqlid of the Four Mujtahid Imams (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/mhfatwa.htm). Translated by Shaykh Hamze Yusuf

Who are the Ahl al-Sunnah? (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/ahlsunna.htm)
By Shaykh Ahmed ibn Muhammad

Reforming Classical Texts (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq3.htm)
How widespread is tampering of texts by the Salafis. By Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller

Why Does One Have to Follow a Madhhab?
Debate Between Muhammad Sa'id al-Buti
and a Leading Salafi Teacher (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/buti.htm)
Translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1995

Hope these stuff help about clarifying who the Salafi's are, you can find more articles by Shaykh G.F. Haddad on this site:
http://www.livingislam.org/tgfh.html



all of those are not Salafis, they are Salafi haters.

why would a person want to learn about a group of people through their enemies?
if one wants to know about a person they read his works and not what "others" say about the person.

or maybe I shoudl tell him to read about sufis in the works of people whom sufis consider their enemies?
I dont' think you would like that.




A little tip to brother Nabil though.......in the Kitab al Tawhid, there are 3 principles of Tawhid, and they are:
1) Tawheed Ar Rububiyya
2) Tawheed Al Uluhiyya
3) Tawheed Al Asmaa was-Siffat
Please do your own research and see where these ''terms'' came from, if you find them anywhere in the Qur'an and Sunnah, let me know insha'Allah.

Wassalaam

oh really?
how about the terms, hadith sahih, da'eef, mutawatir, ahad ..etc.

where is it in Quran and Sunnah?
and how about some terms found in usool al fiqh, are they found in Quran and Sunnah?
no
these are terms used by scholars in different sciences to make understanding of issues in deen clearer, the contents are found in Quran and Sunnah, but the terms are man made, so nothing is added to religion, same with dividing tawhid into 3 categories, it has to do with science of tawhid and aqeedah.

Allah being only creator and sustainer of the universe is found in Quran and Sunnah, = tawhid ar-Rububiyyah.
Allah being the only one worthy of worship, is found in Quran and Sunnah = uloohiyyah
Allah's names and attributes and their rulings are found in Quran and Sunnah = tawhid asma wa sifat.

and you should go check tafsir of Imam at Tabari (d. 310 A.H.) you will find those terms in there, and in other books of past scholars, and this division was also mentioned in book of Imam as Sunnah Ibn Battal al Ukburi rahimahu Allah (d. 387 A.H.) in his book al Ibanah, so it was known since the 300 A.H.

not something "created" by Ibn Taimiyyah rahimahu Allah.

[masum2u]

I think Shaykh G.F. Haddad has got himself a title as ''Nasir al Sunnah'' from the great Shaykh and descendant of the Prophet (PBUH) Shaykh Muhammad al Yaqoubi.

He is doing good by refuting all the salafi's/wahhabi's of our time and of the past, may Allah(swt) reward him and enable him to work for Islam even more. It is the ignorant ones that do not really pay heed to what these scholars have ''all the fuss about''. it is not only Shaykh G.F. Haddad but a lot of scholars who have problems with the Salafi's. And anyhow, what are the Salafi's worried about, the only reason the scholars of Sunni islam refute them, is due to the fact of how much love they have for the Ummah of Rasulullah (PBUH).

[masum2u]

all of those are not Salafis, they are Salafi haters.

why would a person want to learn about a group of people through their enemies?
if one wants to know about a person they read his works and not what "others" say about the person.

or maybe I shoudl tell him to read about sufis in the works of people whom sufis consider their enemies?
I dont' think you would like that.





oh really?
how about the terms, hadith sahih, da'eef, mutawatir, ahad ..etc.

where is it in Quran and Sunnah?
and how about some terms found in usool al fiqh, are they found in Quran and Sunnah?
no
these are terms used by scholars in different sciences to make understanding of issues in deen clearer, the contents are found in Quran and Sunnah, but the terms are man made, so nothing is added to religion, same with dividing tawhid into 3 categories, it has to do with science of tawhid and aqeedah.

Allah being only creator and sustainer of the universe is found in Quran and Sunnah, = tawhid ar-Rububiyyah.
Allah being the only one worthy of worship, is found in Quran and Sunnah = uloohiyyah
Allah's names and attributes and their rulings are found in Quran and Sunnah = tawhid asma wa sifat.

and you should go check tafsir of Imam at Tabari (d. 310 A.H.) you will find those terms in there, and in other books of past scholars, and this division was also mentioned in book of Imam as Sunnah Ibn Battal al Ukburi rahimahu Allah (d. 387 A.H.) in his book al Ibanah, so it was known since the 300 A.H.

not something "created" by Ibn Taimiyyah rahimahu Allah.

I think its good to have both perspectives before jumping the gun do you not agree?

Well, as far as Sufi's are concerned, you WOULD i guess post up some works by deviants (the lowly minorities of this Ummah) to the layperson and show a twisted version of Sufism to them. I would agree with you that dancing around with a pint or two of wine is Haram, and also about the Saint who doesnt pray, or even the naked pir who doesnt like clothing himself because he thinks all the people in his village are cats and dogs, and suddenly wears his clothes as soon as he hears there's is a big Shaykh coming to his village....or the dodgy pir who likes touching up women or even the pir that likes to go and pray towards a grave...yes i would definately understand that.....that is not sufism....to learn about Sufi's...you go and study under a Sufi....a real one who can teach you the sciences of Tasawwuf, which in other terms is Tazkiyatul Nafs.

The terms you have specified have been done in the time of the Salafs by the righteous scholars. Not 150 years ago in a area called Najd, by a unqualified self-taught person (no disrespect intended) I think it is best to sit at the feets of scholars who learn the traditional way and have Ijaza (certificatin) which goes back all the way back to the Salafs, and learn your deen from them, not read a few books and call yourself a scholar and start cussing down even the good Sufi's, the Awliyah of Allah and then start refuting those who do Tawassul. I really wonder sometime why Dar as Salaam Publishers never published the FULL Tafsir ibn Kathir..... word for word ...why the ''Abdridged'' version of it??....hmmm....i'm sure many people can find lots of things in there which back up people who do Tawassul!!
More info: http://asunnifaqir.blogspot.com/

As far as dividing Tawhid into 3 Categories an Innovaton or not. However whether it is a good innovation or a bad innovation, thats upto the scholars. If you think that its a good innovation then you would have to agree with Bid'at Hasanah:
http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/bida.htm

The scholars don't like Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab's works, because he presents Islam in a literal form, didn't follow a Madhab (even warned people not to), and other stuff...i'm sure if you go neutral just for a day and ask a traditional muslim scholar all the q's about Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab's works, i'm sure you would learn a lump-sum. I mean, i wouldn't mind getting you one their e-mail addresses.

I don't think i have mentoned anything like: Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah(rahimahullah) created these, so this has to be that, and that leads to this.

[Skilly]

Well here is my advice to anyone new to Islam.

What I noticed since I got into finding about Islam, is that some of the charges levelled by sufis are based on pure ignorance.

They even go out to attack the Allah(swt) and the messenger of the prophet. Most of the decent shiekh they attack, their work are full of Quran and Hadith,

and lack of fantasic tales, vulcan mind meld with shiekh spock, dancing around the pole and shouting hu hu hu, and sometime even grave worshipping.

Mind you not all sufi's do that, their bidah differs among each other, and their shirk differ amongst each other (groups).

This people are wacked.

EDIT:
I heard a tale about this story: One of a great sufi shiekh (before he was realised to be one) can tell a pesons personal life my looking at the sole of their shoe.

I agree with sis Musleemah on this.

Those who are called Wahhabi(mind you they dont call themself that) or those who are called salafi. If you wan't to find about their teaching go directly to the source. Like an intelligent man.

I am sure you are an intelligent man, well I hope so.

[Nawawi619]

Well here is my advice to anyone new to Islam.

What I noticed since I got into finding about Islam, is that some of the charges levelled by sufis are based on pure ignorance.

They even go out to attack the Allah(swt) and the messenger of the prophet. Most of the decent shiekh they attack, their work are full of Quran and Hadith,

and lack of fantasic tales, vulcan mind meld with shiekh spock, dancing around the pole and shouting hu hu hu, and sometime even grave worshipping.

Mind you not all sufi's do that, their bidah differs among each other, and their shirk differ amongst each other (groups).

This people are wacked.

I heard a tale about this story: One of a great sufi shiekh can tell a pesons personal life my looking at the sole of their shoe.

I agree with sis Musleemah on this.

Those who are called Wahhabi(mind you they dont call themself that) or those who are called salafi. If you wan't to find about their teaching go directly to the source. Like an intelligent man.

I am sure you are an intelligent man, well I hope so.


As Salamu Alaykum

I wouldn't make blanket assumptions about sufis and for that matter, scholars who have criticized the salafi and wahhabi movement. The literature is ripe with books (since the inception of the Wahhabi movement and then later the Salafi movement ) that have refuted these groups from scholars across the board from the four madhahib in different regions.

I would also advise you before you make claims on what "sufis do" you should also, as you advise new muslims, to go to the books of the sufis. As well as consult the classical literature from various giants in the deen (like Imam Ghazali, Imam Nawawi, Imam al Junayd, Imam Abdul Wahhab Shar'ani, etc) who have validated and wrote treatises on what sufism actually is (as opposed to what Wahhabis and Salafis think sufis do).

Spreading folktales about sufism without any proof (from the classical works of sufism) is ignorance. So far all Salafis and Wahhabis have done have put out the same propaganda (sufis worship graves, dance around, drink, dont pray, etc etc). It's really tiring especially when they state their proofs its from their own books and not the texts of the sufis (i.e. Risala of Qushayri, Ahmad Zarruq's books, Ihya Ulum ud Din of Imam Ghazali, etc etc).

One should refrain from things that can take one into dangerous waters (accusing people of shirk , bidah, and worse, kufr).


Wa Llahu Ta'Ala Alim wa Hasbunallahu wa ni'ma l-Wakil

[Skilly]

As Salamu Alaykum

I wouldn't make blanket assumptions about sufis and for that matter, scholars who have criticized the salafi and wahhabi movement. The literature is ripe with books (since the inception of the Wahhabi movement and then later the Salafi movement ) that have refuted these groups from scholars across the board from the four madhahib in different regions.



I would also advise you before you make claims on what "sufis do" you should also, as you advise new muslims, to go to the books of the sufis.

Than we really agree on that matter.


As well as consult the classical literature from various giants in the deen (like Imam Ghazali, Imam Nawawi, Imam al Junayd, Imam Abdul Wahhab Shar'ani, etc) who have validated and wrote treatises on what sufism actually is (as opposed to what Wahhabis and Salafis think sufis do).

I will do, and I actually did downloaded Imam Ghazali works.


Spreading folktales about sufism without any proof (from the classical works of sufism) is ignorance. So far all Salafis and Wahhabis have done have put out the same propaganda (sufis worship graves, dance around, drink, dont pray, etc etc). It's really tiring especially when they state their proofs its from their own books and not the texts of the sufis (i.e. Risala of Qushayri, Ahmad Zarruq's books, Ihya Ulum ud Din of Imam Ghazali, etc etc).

I never said drink, or not pray.

As for the rest one can easily find it.

I did clarify that they differ amongst themself and not all sufi are categorized as such.


One should refrain from things that can take one into dangerous waters (accusing people of shirk , bidah, and worse, kufr).

Wa Llahu Ta'Ala Alim wa Hasbunallahu wa ni'ma l-Wakil

Shirk, bidah exist amongst the muslim, or do you wan't to deny that also.

Of course one should not accuse without proof and I don't deny that.

You should really have a talk with you sufi propagators here. Who do nothing but attack.

[loveProphet]

The Accusation that Shaikh ibn Taymiyyah held Allaah to be a body, of composite parts having organs.


Shaikh As-Saqqaaf says, after previously quoting an-Nawawees ruling of unbelief on the one who ascribes to Allaah a jism (body):

"Entering into this category is al-Harraanee (i.e. ibn Taymiyyah)…who has affirmed tajseem (Allaah having a body) in many of his books. So from this is his saying in ‘at-Ta`sees’ (1/101): ‘and there is not in the Book of Allaah, nor in the Sunnah of His Messenger, nor a statement from any of the Salaf of this ummah and it’s Imaams that He is not a jism, and that His Attributes are not bodily, consisting of organs…’ I say: By Allaah who originated the heavens and the Earth - your saying is ignorance and misguidance. Is not Allaah - the Most High’s - saying, "there is nothing like Him" sufficient in negating tajseem and it’s reality, O al-Harraanee?!! And what about the Imaams of the Ummah and the Salaf - O al-Harraanee - and their censure of tashbeeh…." [‘Daf Shubah at-Tashbeeh’ (pp 245-246) with it’s footnotes by Saqqaaf. ]

The previously stated words are not from the writings of ibn Taymiyyah in which he is clarifying his own views, or even stating them. Rather he is quoting the saying of the People of Kalaam (innovated speech and rhetorics). However as-Saqqaaf has conveniently omitted the beginning of the quotation from Shaykh ibn Taymiyyah, where he clearly stated: Qaaloo (they said)!!

Shaykh ibn Taymiyyah said, in the course of this topic, ‘indeed the term al-Jism (body), al-Arad (organs), al-Mutahayyiz (extent) are newly invented terminoligies. We have mentioned many a time before that the Salaf and the Imaams have not spoken about such things - neither by way of negation, nor by way of affirmation. Rather they declared those who spoke about such matter to be innovators, and went to great lengths to censure them.’

This is what has repeatedly been affirmed by Shaykh - may Allaah have mercy on him - in many of his books, such as: ‘Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool’ (pp. 69-76), ‘Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa’ (3/306-310, 13/304-305), ‘Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah’ (2/134-135, 192, 198-200, 527). Indeed in ‘Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool’ Shaykh has labelled ascribing Allaah with the term jism, by saying, ‘an innovation in the Sharee`ah, a corruption of the language, and a contradiction to the [sound] intellect. Rather it is repudiated by the Sharee`ah, the language and the [sound] intellect.’

And from them: Shaykh al-Islaam mentions the intended meaning of ascribing Allaah with the term jism, by saying: ‘whosoever alleges that the Lord is a jism - with the meaning that he accepts division, separation and partition (for Allaah) - then he is the most disbelieving of people and the most ignorant. Indeed, his statement is more evil than the one who says that Allaah has a son - with them meaning that a part of Him split and thus became His son.’" [ ‘al-Asaalah’ magazine (no.4 pp.54-55), see also his ‘Rudood wat Ta’qubaat’ (pp 21-23) ]

Dr. Sa`eed Ramadaan al-Bootee who says, "and we are amazed when we see the extremists declaring ibn Taymiyyah, may Allaah have mercy upon him, of being an unbeliever. And also at them saying that he was one who held Allaah to be a body (mujassid), and I have studied long and hard as to where I could find a statement or a word from ibn Taymiyyah that he wrote or said which would indicate his holding Allaah to be a body as was quoted from him by as-Subki and others, and I have not found anything from him like this. All I found was him saying in his legal rulings, ‘Indeed Allaah has a Hand as He said, and has risen over the Throne as He said, and He has an Eye as He said’"

And he adds to this, " I referred to the last work written by Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`aree, ‘al-Ibaanah’, and I found him saying exactly what ibn Taymiyyah said [on the issue of the Names and Attributes of Allah]…" [‘Nadwa Ittjaahaat al-Fiqr al-Islaamee’ (pp 264-265) of al-Bootee.]
I believe that this has been a copy n paste from "salafi" websites?

The double-vowels gives it all...

[Musleemah]

Some of those so called "refutations", are actually twisting of statements by Salafi scholars, or taking their statements out of context.

and some are mis-translated.

and many of those "refutations" have been refuted by Salafis.

[JayshAllah]

I believe that this has been a copy n paste from "salafi" websites?

The double-vowels gives it all...

Honestly, the double-vowel thing really helps. Within seconds, you can tell whose site it is, lol. Having said that, I find it really makes searching for questions on Salafi sites very difficult, since I never know how to spell words when I search for them.

[JayshAllah]

The Ash`aris and Maturidis, who form what we refer to as Ahl al Sunnah,

Well, that's only how some within the Ahl al-Kalam define Ahl al-Sunnah. ;) Never met a Salafi in my life who didn't say he belonged to Ahl al-Sunnah.



Thus, they reject tafwidh and consider it the method of innovators, as Shaykh Ibn Uthaymin mentions in his works.

The Salafis believe in Tafweedh. They say "bila kayf" which is Tafweedh.


This view would not however lead to Tajsim or Tashbih, because he also added this descending is not like the descending of the creation.

So this is the exact view of the Salafis as well. So what then is the issue? Why should Ahl al-Kalam accuse the Salafis of Tajsim or Tashbih then?

[Salafi]

A little tip to brother Nabil though.......in the Kitab al Tawhid, there are 3 principles of Tawhid, and they are:
1) Tawheed Ar Rububiyya
2) Tawheed Al Uluhiyya
3) Tawheed Al Asmaa was-Siffat
Please do your own research and see where these ''terms'' came from, if you find them anywhere in the Qur'an and Sunnah, let me know insha'Allah.

Wassalaam

walaikum assalam

one important point to note is that its only a classification by the later scholars, like mutawatir ahadeeth and ikhbarul ahad, but in its root or implication or hukm there is no innovation.

on the other hand we find that people do not take ikhbarul ahad as aqaid or as faraidh (i.e they differentiate between faraidh and wajibat), which cannot be proved from quran or sunnah. absolutely unknown in the time of sahaba.

wassalam

[JayshAllah]

those who are called salafi. If you wan't to find about their teaching go directly to the source. Like an intelligent man.


I agree with you. I was very confused about the Salafi movement for a very very very long time. But recently--very very recently in fact--my misgivings towards them were washed away when I spent a lot of time reading their own explanations/refutations/etc. I cleared up a lot of confusion I had with regards to their views about Aqeedah and now I actually agree with them. I agree with them on everything now, and now people could say I am Salafi officially. What did it for me was to read their own websites and explanations. I'd give you some really good articles that helped me out, but I think that the Sunni Forum people wouldn't allow it. Anyways, just keep an open mind always Insha-Allah, and get your information about them FROM the Salafis themselves, not from this website!

[Salafi]

regarding aqaid, shaikh 'Ali altamimi said that one should read one classical book of aqeedah first like lu'maitul aetiqad of ibn qudamah or aqeedah alwasitiyyah of ibn taymiyyah or books like kitabut tawheed of Muhammad bin abdul wahhab rahimahu Allah then he/she should read quran and the books of hadeeth like kitabul eeman of Saheeh Muslim or kitabut tawheed of saheeh bukhari. so that he may not stuck in differences only.

his lectures on lu'maitul aetiqad, aqeedah alwasitiyyah and aqeedah alhumawiyyah are also very helpful.

[Ninjas kik high]

Any one new to islam
now becommin a muslim once Allah SWT has given us the hidaya is the
easy part .
its after that , that it scary
sometimes it seems like there are a whole bunch of vultures out there and
after a bit ur head starts spinning
every bodys screamin there right ...hmmm who to beleive ..yup been there
so after much confusin and alot of migraines as if uni wasnt bas enuff/' i just decided to get all evidences and start reading ..follow strictly to the sunnah and Quran and read read read cos its a scary rd out there ... u cant just follow the yello brik rd
u got one chance so get it right !
any way the main thing is i am NOW a MUSLIM alhumdulilah:lol:

[Saad]

I believe that this has been a copy n paste from "salafi" websites?

The double-vowels gives it all...

Salam =)

We should worry about the content/material, not where it is from.

[Musleemah]

because the Ash'aris defintion of tashbih and tajsim is different than that of the righteous Salaf.
to them saying that Allah has a hand not like the creations' hands is not negating tashbih, to them it is still tashbih and tajsim because you are affirming a hand, an attribute found in creation.
but the funny thing is that they affirm some attributes found in creation and don't consider it tashbih, like sight and hearing .

if one affirms an essence for Allah (dhat), that is not like that of the creation (who also have a dhat), why can't they do the same for the rest of the attributes?

[abuhajira]

:salam:

doesnt dhat in makhlooq defined tahdeed. like Yadun in makhlooq is a finite object that cannot be extended from its hudood nor shrunken. while hearing is an infinite characteristic. Quwat us Sama'a may differ from dhat to dhat or even within the same dhat over time. ?? :|

:ws:

[masum2u]

walaikum assalam

one important point to note is that its only a classification by the later scholars, like mutawatir ahadeeth and ikhbarul ahad, but in its root or implication or hukm there is no innovation.

on the other hand we find that people do not take ikhbarul ahad as aqaid or as faraidh (i.e they differentiate between faraidh and wajibat), which cannot be proved from quran or sunnah. absolutely unknown in the time of sahaba.

wassalam

Assalamu 'alaykum

The latter scholars? Do you mean to say, someone like Shaykh al Islam Ibn Hajar al Asqalani (who is a 'Ashari) and in your Aqeeda, a deviant? Or what about Shaykh al Islam Ibn Hajar al Haythami? Or What about Imam Ad Dhahabi not to mention Imam Nawawi? (May Allah have Mercy upon them all)

bro why are you confusing yourself? The deen is simple, your the ones making it hard for everyone here. You just admitted that Bid'ah hasanah IS allowed, and the Sahaba did this, and so did the ''latter scholars''. The ''writing'' of the Qur'an in a form of a Mushaf is a Bid'a Hasanah (Good Innovation). Using a computer to learn the deen online (such as Sunnipath Academy) is Bid'a Hasanah. To discuss on this forum about Deeni issues is also Bid'a Hasanah!!! From now on, you can start calling anything and everything...bid'a, bid'a, bid'a, bid'a.

As for the differentiation between Faraid and Wajibat....just sleep on it. Scholars have left us jewels of knowledge behind so that we may ponder and understand the Deen in a more easier way....plus this type of classification is also Bid'a Hasanah :). Best thing to do, is don't go too deep, you might eat your brains out....go read Ta'leemul Haqq...much better...easily put...what is Sunnah, Fard, Nawafil, Wajib, etc etc.

I had a little question though...what is Ikhbarul Ahad? or do you mean to say the 3 types of Ahad chains:
1) Mashoor
2) Azeez
3) Ghareeb

Wassalaam

[masum2u]

Some of those so called "refutations", are actually twisting of statements by Salafi scholars, or taking their statements out of context.

and some are mis-translated.

and many of those "refutations" have been refuted by Salafis.

i'm sure people here can see both perspectives. I mean, its a free country, right?

[masum2u]

regarding aqaid, shaikh 'Ali altamimi said that one should read one classical book of aqeedah first like lu'maitul aetiqad of ibn qudamah or aqeedah alwasitiyyah of ibn taymiyyah or books like kitabut tawheed of Muhammad bin abdul wahhab rahimahu Allah then he/she should read quran and the books of hadeeth like kitabul eeman of Saheeh Muslim or kitabut tawheed of saheeh bukhari. so that he may not stuck in differences only.

his lectures on lu'maitul aetiqad, aqeedah alwasitiyyah and aqeedah alhumawiyyah are also very helpful.

ummm...interesting you mention classical books of aqeeda...don't you think Aqeeda at Tahawiyya is more classical than al Wasitiyya (respectively) or any other ''complete'' works in Aqaid?

[Al=Fateh]

:salam:

doesnt dhat in makhlooq defined tahdeed. like Yadun in makhlooq is a finite object that cannot be extended from its hudood nor shrunken. while hearing is an infinite characteristic. Quwat us Sama'a may differ from dhat to dhat or even within the same dhat over time. ?? :|

:ws:

they fail to see that ...

and if they attribute everything said literally in the Quran, Allah would not only have a face, hand , a foot, and a leg, but he is also light, but they consider that to be Mutashabih.... so they refrain from it and make ta'weel on it, as well as on the term "we" they make the ta'weel for it by saying its a royalty status.

[abuhajira]

Honestly, the double-vowel thing really helps. Within seconds, you can tell whose site it is, lol. Having said that, I find it really makes searching for questions on Salafi sites very difficult, since I never know how to spell words when I search for them.

:salam:

I think the double voweling is a better way since it helps the typist to correctly give the sound of the original word. Many time we go too far in anglosizing :)

:ws:

[Musleemah]

why did you mention Imam adh Dhahabi rahimahu Allah?
He was not an Ash'ari, he was far from being Ash'ari, he was a Salafi\athari.

[Musleemah]

:salam:

doesnt dhat in makhlooq defined tahdeed. like Yadun in makhlooq is a finite object that cannot be extended from its hudood nor shrunken. while hearing is an infinite characteristic. Quwat us Sama'a may differ from dhat to dhat or even within the same dhat over time. ?? :|

:ws:

yes, same' (hearing) differs from dhat to dhat, so does the hand, the hand of a bear is not like the hand of human, their might be some similarities but there are differences also.
also the hand of humans are not like the hand of jinn, in hadith it describes it as being hairy and kind of like the hand of a dog.
same with eyes, the eyes of a fly is not like the eyes of a human, very different, also the eyes of other creaturess.
and so on.

so it depends on the "dhat", an attribute in one creature can be similar to anothers if the dhat is similar, but if the dhat of one is totally different than the dhat of another, then their attributes, even if sharing same name and general meaning, can not be the exact same or even similar.

Allah's dhat is totally different, with no similarity with that of the creations', so the attributes of Allah would not be at all like the attributes of the creations' even if it shares the name and general meaning.

Allah's attributes existed with Him, which was before the creation, and Allah created the creation, and gave them some attributes that are like His in name but not in kayfiyyah, like Allah gave humans and other creaturs hearing, but their hearing is very limited, same with yad, He gave them a yad that is a limb, flush, skin ..etc. that is fit with their dhat and bodies, not like His, except in name and general meaning.

so who are we to come and say Allah doesn't have an attribute that He gave Himself in the Quran and Sunnah because it is found in creation?
Allah is the one who created this creation which we use an excuse to negate an attribute of Allah , or change its apparent meaning.
some ayat are so clear like the one stating Allah creating Adam with His hands, where is the evidence from Quran or Sunnah that it does not mean hands? and means something else?
one can only make ta'wil to a word if their is evidence for that ta'wil, I see no evidence in the ayah itslef or somewhere else that it would mean anything other than hand that is befitting of Allah, totally different than the creations.

[Musleemah]

they fail to see that ...

and if they attribute everything said literally in the Quran, Allah would not only have a face, hand , a foot, and a leg, but he is also light, but they consider that to be Mutashabih.... so they refrain from it and make ta'weel on it, as well as on the term "we" they make the ta'weel for it by saying its a royalty status.

I can tell from your post that you do not know what the definition of ta'weel is.
Before you discuss topics like these, you should at least have knowledge in the terms used in in, like ta'weel, kayfiyyah, , ta'teel, dhahir, haqiqi, majazi ..etc.

[abuhajira]

:salam:

Jazak Allah..now i know what you are saying..

:ws:

[JayshAllah]

I can tell from your post that you do not know what the definition of ta'weel is.
Before you discuss topics like these, you should at least have knowledge in the terms used in in, like ta'weel, kayfiyyah, , ta'teel, dhahir, haqiqi, majazi ..etc.

I did not know what the definition of Dhahir was, and this is one of the MAIN reasons I rejected Salafis.

I used to think that Dhahir means "literal", because this is the definition used by Asharis and even by many Salafis.

Then, I learned that Dhahir means "apparent." This changed my entire view of things entirely.

Dhahir can--based on the sentence/context--be either:

1) literal
2) metaphorical

For example, it says in the Quran that Allah "is with you". The Dhahir of this is NOT that Allah is LITERALLY with you, but rather the Dhahir is that Allah is there for you (i.e. to help you, etc)...

Dhahir refers to the APPARENT meaning/definition. It refers to the MOST obvious and apparent definition of the word as used in the Arabic language.

So if you say "let me give you a hand", the Dhahir of this is not that I cut off my hand and give it to you. Rather, it is understood that the Dhahir (apparent) is that it is a metaphorical reference whereby hand refers to assistance.

The meaning of Taweel means to deny the most apparent and obvious definition, and to instead interpret it in a less obvious and less apparent way.

Ibn Qudama says in Rawdhat al-Nadhir (2/25 with Ibn Badran’s comments):

القسم الثاني الظاهر وهو ما يسبق إلى الفهم منه عند الإطلاق معنى مع تجويز غيره وإن شئت قلت ما احتمل معنيين هو في أحدهما أظهر

‘The second type: al-Dhahir, and that is the meaning that comes first to the mind when uttered, while other meanings might also be possible. If you wish, you may say: That which has two possible meanings, one of them more obvious than the other’

Ibn Badran al-Dimashqi al-Hanbali says in his Madkhal (p. 187, al-Turki’s edition):

اعلم أن اللفظ إما أن يحتمل معنى واحدا فقط أو يحتمل أكثر من معنى واحد والأول النص والثاني إما أن يترجح في أحد معنييه أو معانيه وهو الظاهر

‘Know, that the word may either only have one meaning, or more than one meaning. The first type is called al-Nass. The second type is the obvious of the two or more meanings, and that is the dhahir.’

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

So it's important to define words properly, which is really our handicap since we don't speak Arabic. At least I don't. I was a huge fan of Taweel when I thought it just meant taking the metaphorical meaning, but then when I learned that it just means taking the lesser understood and lesser obvious definition of the word, then I was like "hey, that's not right."

[Salafi]

Assalamu 'alaykum

The latter scholars? Do you mean to say, someone like Shaykh al Islam Ibn Hajar al Asqalani (who is a 'Ashari) and in your Aqeeda, a deviant? Or what about Shaykh al Islam Ibn Hajar al Haythami? Or What about Imam Ad Dhahabi not to mention Imam Nawawi? (May Allah have Mercy upon them all)

bro why are you confusing yourself? The deen is simple, your the ones making it hard for everyone here. You just admitted that Bid'ah hasanah IS allowed, and the Sahaba did this, and so did the ''latter scholars''. The ''writing'' of the Qur'an in a form of a Mushaf is a Bid'a Hasanah (Good Innovation). Using a computer to learn the deen online (such as Sunnipath Academy) is Bid'a Hasanah. To discuss on this forum about Deeni issues is also Bid'a Hasanah!!! From now on, you can start calling anything and everything...bid'a, bid'a, bid'a, bid'a.

As for the differentiation between Faraid and Wajibat....just sleep on it. Scholars have left us jewels of knowledge behind so that we may ponder and understand the Deen in a more easier way....plus this type of classification is also Bid'a Hasanah :). Best thing to do, is don't go too deep, you might eat your brains out....go read Ta'leemul Haqq...much better...easily put...what is Sunnah, Fard, Nawafil, Wajib, etc etc.

I had a little question though...what is Ikhbarul Ahad? or do you mean to say the 3 types of Ahad chains:
1) Mashoor
2) Azeez
3) Ghareeb

Wassalaam

my post was quite clear. i was talking about the classification of the matters regarding "tawheed". and the "later scholars" who did this.

dont start the Bid'a Hasanah debate. we wont be able conclude anything. and see the post #51, its New Muslims section.

you didn't comment on the ikhbarul ahad and aqaid issue.

abu haneefah rahimahu Allah differenciate between fard and wajib. none of the other three of a'immah arb'a do this. its implication can be found in the sajdah alsahw. if one misses a wajib, like fateha he can do sajdah alsahw and correct his prayer. but if he misses a fard then he cant do this he need to repeat his prayer.

[Ibn Umaysh]

As salaamu alaikum,

From whatI have learned, and Allah Ta'ala knows best,

Tafweedh as understood by Salafis and Ash'aris is different. Tafweedh for them is after confirming an outward literal meaning, so they make tafweedh on the qualities of object (the literal interpretation of the word), where the Asharis say that tafweedh is on the word itself and what it implies and its true meaning.

So one basically says "hand" and consigns its description to Allah, while the other says "yad" and consigns its real meaning to Allah. The Salafis say affirming an attribute means to acknowledge its literal meaning as reality, and nullifying it is to say its actuality is other than what is literally being implied, while Asharis say to affirm the attribute is to acknowledge and believe that the Arabic word was said and not to give a speculative meaning to it (from other than a transmitted source), and to nullify it could either be to deny any attribute at all, or to speculate a meaning and to insist that it is the interpetation, ignoring all other possiblities and thus ending the sense of restrain one should have on the possible meaning of the word.

When I say meaning as well, some can even do a literal translation, I should say the import of what the literal meaning implies. So I can still translate wajh as face, but what it implies may not be the same as when you normally hear the word wajh.


yes, same' (hearing) differs from dhat to dhat, so does the hand, the hand of a bear is not like the hand of human, their might be some similarities but there are differences also.
also the hand of humans are not like the hand of jinn, in hadith it describes it as being hairy and kind of like the hand of a dog.
same with eyes, the eyes of a fly is not like the eyes of a human, very different, also the eyes of other creaturess.
and so on.

so it depends on the "dhat", an attribute in one creature can be similar to anothers if the dhat is similar, but if the dhat of one is totally different than the dhat of another, then their attributes, even if sharing same name and general meaning, can not be the exact same or even similar.

Keep in mind that you cannot compare Same' and Yad to the same thing; one is conveying perception while the other is conveying a phsyical material existence. So we cannot confused the two.

As for what is mentioned above,

There is a problem with this: for example, the foot of an ant and the foot of an elephant. They totally different in their qualities. If you take if to the molecular level and spacially, they are the same.

Now, realize that the only way one can still relate to each of those two things as "feet" is because of a common characteristic that allows us to name the object that name and conjure in our minds an understanding of what we are talking about. A foot is a limb that touches the ground and has fingers and helps on move.

So if someone has an orange, and calls another fruit an orange as well, some similar thing has to be present for an OBJECT (which is judged based on physical properties SOLELY) to be understood as deserving that name. If you call an apple, an orange, it would be confusing but perhaps then you will extend the definition of an orange to being a fruit. Right here, it tells us that an orange in itself has certain qualities that allow us to call it an orange and differentiate it with what is not an orange.

Now what if I was to call an object, an orange, but completely removed all apparent similarities to it. Then I said it was a unique orange. You would say, what basis do you have to call it an orange? I would say, no similarity, yet it is an orange in its own right.

Then you would say, no you have merely ascribed a new meaning to the word "orange", and now placed this object under of its now multiple meanings. And that is not an orange at all, as we know it. That is naming something completely new, but even calling it an orange would be misleading.

So when you take away all the qualities of an orange from an object, you in essence nullify the attribute. You remove all recognition and definition of what the word means. This is why insisting on the literal interpretation and the using the word, you contradict yourself since you say essentially that yad is a "real hand" without any single resemblance to the definition of that real hand, in which case only the name is similar not even the broadest actuality.

So you actually, on one hand, say that not giving the meaning to the word and not affirming the literal means we are saying that the our way makes the Qur'an not make sense and that it was revealed to be understood; we say that by ascribing a literal meaning, you still remove all possibility of relating to the word (rightfully so), but in the end, you are left just as unclear, if not more, and so this is actually solved by not taking it literally- there is still a possibility of understanding the word according to any transmitted report by the Salaf and actually comes closer to putting a relevent meaning to what is said.

Then you might say, yes, but Allah said He has a hand.

I would say, no He didn't. He used the word yad and didn't explicitly say how to take the word.

You might say, but the rule is to interpret the Qur'an on the literal meaning as much as you can, and since there is not similarity to creation, we have cancelled the need to go outside of a literal translation.

And I would say, you're right about the rule to interpret Qur'an literally as far as possible, except there are times when the literal meaning is not implied in the Qur'an, rather another one.

You might say, yes but the attributes can still be taken literally.

I would say, anything that implies spatial/physical existence cannot, because of the reasons above, that you would actually be giving hand an entirely new thing, one that in no way fits the definition of a hand. Thus is is a contradiciton to say there is nothing like Him, and then describe Him with what creatures have, since without an similarity, the actuality of what you interpret ceases to be the literal meaning of the word, whereas if you still insist that it is the literal meaning, we will then say you have violated that Nothing is Like Him because you haven't then understood what a hand really means.

Aside from this, remember that to take the literal meaning on every word was NEVER explicitly stated- all this wouldn't be disagreed about if there was just one hint, from the Qur'an or Sunnah, that these attributes whose title resembles a physical thing, is unequivocally to be taken on the literal meaning.

The transmissions on variations of words that can be taken as implying a literal meaning, have also been able to be explained completely making sense without the literal meaning, and because they are able to be interpreted in both ways, it does not form a proof by finding more and more transmissions that seem to imply the outward, because none of them state the rule you are speaking about.

So you might ask, but they neither state the rule you are speaking about. However, what I am saying has some precedence because there are at least some existing transmissions that maybe one, qati' taweel was made, which if you accept once, immediately busts the conception that all words used for attributes who regular meaning is a phsyical one, must be taken on the literal. Once that "rule" is busted, we have a very good reason to give credibility to the claim that all of those words can stand to be interpreted some other way (other that the obvious claim above). This is a second point to strengthen what I said above, although the above I think stands alone.

Then, you might come with some transmissions from Salaf seemingly supporting an unequivocally literal stance, and later scholars approving it. I would have to say, those are very suspect since the ones propogating them are usually the most vehement in upholding literal translation, many of those transmissions in various books by the older scholars have many weaknesses which renders them unreliable, which also shows that an deliberate attempt to prove a belief which is not clear is being used, and also, neutral scholars didn't necessarily bring those transmissions up as proof, which leads us to suspect most transmissions that come from those scholars that seem to assert the literal.

Also, the fact that there seem to be clear ayahs saying for example that Adam was created with "His two hands", doesn't clearly say at all that those were literal. Our rule for not interpreting physical-seeming attributes literally is coming from the Qu'ran itself - laysa kamithlihi shai and "Is He who creates like he who does not create?", I would like to see the rule where the attributes are interpreted literally, when at least on instance of taweel has used by the Salaf which goes against establishing that rule.

And finally, from what I have gathered, since the rule in language is that a literal and allegorical meaning, or any two meanings, cannot be together in the same instance on the same specific word, many times some tafaseer (see Tabari for example) will suggest scholars' alternate meaning to the word, and they make perfect sense and even fit the entire meaning of the sentence. It becomes clear why that certain word-attribute was used in that context, it actually enhances the message despite not always clearly defining the word. With the literal meaning taken, you lose that pefect fit, the message the ayah conveys can actually be reduced because the literalists will be focusing more on claiming that Allah Ta'ala intended on establishing the word is a literal attribute rather than looking at the entire context and sending a message. And their argument could have been accepted by me if we saw one clear area which outlined that rule (to interpret phsyicaly-sounding words on the literal) as well as said that Allah Ta'ala really has those literal attributes.

But the fact is, that was not done. And the majority of the Muslims also did not convey this; a small group did who believed very strongly that they were right. The Salaf themselves refrained from argument about this, on the whole it seems, and did not go towards either. But by no means can you say all the Salaf always have similar positions, because the fact that Imam Abu Haneefa and his colleagues were called Murjii, or that there was a debate, an honest search, on whether the Qur'an was created or not (and I can be correct if I am wrong, this is what I have read), shows that all of these things weren't necessarily so obvious nor was there a blanket understanding that either side claims.

In the end, this is why there is safety in understanding how the scholars of the ages have passed this information and what the majority have agreed upon. Otherwise, skipping 1000 years to the Salaf without context or proper understanding of interpretation because impossible for us, each side using them to buttress their belief. This is WHY there is safety in what the ummah concurs upon.

This is why I feel that the Ash'ari Maturidi, Athari positions are more correct.

This is according to what I reasoned from I learned from the teachings and statements of older scholars (the orange example is my own), I can be correct or wrong.

[loveProphet]

why did you mention Imam adh Dhahabi rahimahu Allah?
He was not an Ash'ari, he was far from being Ash'ari, he was a Salafi\athari.
He was Athari but definitely not "salafi":

Naseehah adh-Dhahabi(RA) (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2889)

and

"salafis" and Imam Dhahabi on Istiwa (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=126289&postcount=5)

and

Tafwid of the wahhabis and Imam Dhahabi(RH) (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=126654&postcount=13)

and again

bi dhātihi and wahhabis and Imam Dhahabi (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=127273&postcount=9)

and another

Tafwid of Imam Dhahabi and what the wahhabis do (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=127521&postcount=25)

and

bi dhatihi quotes (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14486&highlight=Dhahabi)

and

Imam Dhahabi(RA) and his pseudo-salafi detractors (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6401&highlight=Dhahabi)

More can be found by searching the forum

Wa Salaam

[abuhajira]

:salam:


Ibn Qudama says in Rawdhat al-Nadhir (2/25 with Ibn Badran’s comments):

القسم الثاني الظاهر وهو ما يسبق إلى الفهم منه عند الإطلاق معنى مع تجويز غيره وإن شئت قلت ما احتمل معنيين هو في أحدهما أظهر

‘The second type: al-Dhahir, and that is the meaning that comes first to the mind when uttered, while other meanings might also be possible. If you wish, you may say: That which has two possible meanings, one of them more obvious than the other’

Ibn Badran al-Dimashqi al-Hanbali says in his Madkhal (p. 187, al-Turki’s edition):

اعلم أن اللفظ إما أن يحتمل معنى واحدا فقط أو يحتمل أكثر من معنى واحد والأول النص والثاني إما أن يترجح في أحد معنييه أو معانيه وهو الظاهر

‘Know, that the word may either only have one meaning, or more than one meaning. The first type is called al-Nass. The second type is the obvious of the two or more meanings, and that is the dhahir.’

Have you done these translations? The part in the bold catches my eye. In "هو في أحدهما أظهر" We do not get the meaning of obviousness. Ad-dhar means which is more apparent, rather in the term Dhahir it would mean that came to the understanding Bilaa Ta'ammul. Where as the word obvious signifies one that is Assah or Ma Yanbaghi Li-anna huwa ma Dhahara bil Lafzi.

Can you explain this further...

:ws:

[masum2u]

my post was quite clear. i was talking about the classification of the matters regarding "tawheed". and the "later scholars" who did this.

dont start the Bid'a Hasanah debate. we wont be able conclude anything. and see the post #51, its New Muslims section.

you didn't comment on the ikhbarul ahad and aqaid issue.

abu haneefah rahimahu Allah differenciate between fard and wajib. none of the other three of a'immah arb'a do this. its implication can be found in the sajdah alsahw. if one misses a wajib, like fateha he can do sajdah alsahw and correct his prayer. but if he misses a fard then he cant do this he need to repeat his prayer.

i see, so it was tawheed.....ummm...forgive me for my not seeing. So things like Mutawatir and Ahad are used for Tawheed nowadays as well...ma'sha allah the more the complications....

So, why the later scholars bro? why not the Salaf as Saliheen? Why can we not be happy with Surah Ikhlas, is that Surah not teaching us Tawhid? Is it not keeping us simple muslims? Do we have to go to making the Tawheed Silsilah when we have this beautiful Surah of the Qur'an in front of us?

and about Imam Abu Hanifa (Rahimahullah) and the Wajibat and faraid, i do not possess sufficient knowledge to talk anything about them, plus you are confusing yourself even more and confusing others, Take these q's to the authorities of the Hanafi Madhab, like to a hanafi shaykh for example, i'm sure you'll get the answer from there. And even so, the A'imma possessed much more knowledge than you and i, or any scholar that had lived after the time of the Salafs!!

[Skilly]

I agree with you. I was very confused about the Salafi movement for a very very very long time. But recently--very very recently in fact--my misgivings towards them were washed away when I spent a lot of time reading their own explanations/refutations/etc. I cleared up a lot of confusion I had with regards to their views about Aqeedah and now I actually agree with them. I agree with them on everything now, and now people could say I am Salafi officially. What did it for me was to read their own websites and explanations. I'd give you some really good articles that helped me out, but I think that the Sunni Forum people wouldn't allow it. Anyways, just keep an open mind always Insha-Allah, and get your information about them FROM the Salafis themselves, not from this website!

My advice will be stick with Just trying to be a muslim. Sometime we get to caught up my labels. I mean their is nohing wrong saying I am following the salaf, or even if you wan't to use the term salafi to differentiate from one who has deviancy.
I guess I am trying to say we should have the correct mentality.

SunniForum would not allow it. I remember we had some newbies to islam, and I posted some biginners list on Islam. Nothing about sectarian, but they even had them blocked of for some reason. I mean who blocks of Yusuf Estes site?

[Colonel_Hardstone]

Asslamo Allaikum Brother,

I know that there are Forums who BAN the post when the Name of Shaykh Hamza Yusuf or Shaykh Keller is mentioned but you can mention *PORN* without a problem

:lol:

I am neither a moderator here nor have any say in the policy but these guys at least give Salafees a chance to say their 2-pennies worth!:cheesygri


My advice will be stick with Just trying to be a muslim. Sometime we get to caught up my labels. I mean their is nohing wrong saying I am following the salaf, or even if you wan't to use the term salafi to differentiate from one who has deviancy.
I guess I am trying to say we should have the correct mentality.

SunniForum would not allow it. I remember we had some newbies to islam, and I posted some biginners list on Islam. Nothing about sectarian, but they even had them blocked of for some reason. I mean who blocks of Yusuf Estes site?

[loveProphet]

:ws:

Man there needs to be a translation of this...

[Salafi]

Keep in mind that you cannot compare Same' and Yad to the same thing; one is conveying perception while the other is conveying a phsyical material existence. So we cannot confused the two.


what about the 'existence'?



....... But by no means can you say all the Salaf always have similar positions, because the fact that Imam Abu Haneefa and his colleagues were called Murjii, or that there was a debate, an honest search, on whether the Qur'an was created or not (and I can be correct if I am wrong, this is what I have read), shows that all of these things weren't necessarily so obvious nor was there a blanket understanding that either side claims.

plz elaborate.

[Salafi]

I agree with you. I was very confused about the Salafi movement for a very very very long time. But recently--very very recently in fact--my misgivings towards them were washed away when I spent a lot of time reading their own explanations/refutations/etc. I cleared up a lot of confusion I had with regards to their views about Aqeedah and now I actually agree with them. I agree with them on everything now, and now people could say I am Salafi officially. What did it for me was to read their own websites and explanations. I'd give you some really good articles that helped me out, but I think that the Sunni Forum people wouldn't allow it. Anyways, just keep an open mind always Insha-Allah, and get your information about them FROM the Salafis themselves, not from this website!

مبروك ألف مبروك

[Ninjas kik high]

like i said ... im learnin thanks for all the info
very imformative ...

[Jamaluddine]

Brothers and sisters, Assalamu alaikum wr wb,

Sister Musleemah,
Jazakillahu Khairan for your regular cotributions with words of wisdom that we all need so much!, and also for you patience and politeness when dealing with some 'less-than-educated' brothers here.

Brother Skilly,
Jazakallahu khairan for your enthusiasm and Daawah.

Brother Jayshallah,
Alhamdulillah, welcome back to (what I truly believe is) the correct path. Allah SWT knows that you had me worried for a loooooong time, but nothing works like Duaa!
Just remember one thing: We take and leave from everybody other than Prophet Muhammad SAWS, so don't follow anyone blindly, trust your judgement!


i'm sure people here can see both perspectives. I mean, its a free country, right?
The highlighting is by myself.

With due respect, this whole thread is about the brothers and sister (mentioned above), and others, trying to uphold this principle of freedom of choice by asking everyone else to keep off brother Nabil and let him read Kitabut-Tawheed! Or am I wrong?!
So, shouldn't you be saying this to other people (see early posts of this thread)?

Wassalam
Jamaluddine

[AbdulQahhar]

To everybody here:

Yet another of those ridiculous threads where folks are lightning the fire of hatred, not even knowing it...

Maybe you should focus more on more important matters in this dunya, i.e. what do you do daily for Allah :taala:? Not your Salah, you do it for your own self, not Sawm, you do it for you own self, not your Hajj, you do it for yourself as well, etc.

What did you do for Allah :taala:??

May Allah :taala: bless you to do something for Him :taala:, and may Allah :taala: reward you for the things you might have done for Him :taala: alone. Amin.

[Musleemah]

As salaamu alaikum,



From whatI have learned, and Allah Ta'ala knows best,

Tafweedh as understood by Salafis and Ash'aris is different. Tafweedh for them is after confirming an outward literal meaning, so they make tafweedh on the qualities of object (the literal interpretation of the word), where the Asharis say that tafweedh is on the word itself and what it implies and its true meaning.

wa alaykum assalam


our tafwid is tafwid "al kayf" or " al kayfiyyah", meaning "how" the attribute is, its description.
But we confirm the apparent general meaning of it, like for example the yad of Allah, we believe it is a hand not just an ambigous word that we don't know the meaning of at all, and the general meaning we confirm for it is that it is an attribute of the essence (dhat), that Allah folds, grasps ..etc. (what is mentioned in Quran and Sunnah about the yad\hand of Allah).
As for how that hand is, the details and description of it that Allah didn't tell us in Quran or Sunnah, then we consign it to Allah, and do not speak about it or even ask about it.



So one basically says "hand" and consigns its description to Allah, while the other says "yad" and consigns its real meaning to Allah.

the underlined is correct.
as for the other part, what do you exactly mean by "real meaning", what I know is that Ash'aris that do tafwid to meaning consign the whole meaning to Allah, to them the word is ambigous, they only believe in the letters, while not knowing the meaning of the word.



The Salafis say affirming an attribute means to acknowledge its literal meaning as reality, and nullifying it is to say its actuality is other than what is literally being implied, while Asharis say to affirm the attribute is to acknowledge and believe that the Arabic word was said and not to give a speculative meaning to it (from other than a transmitted source), and to nullify it could either be to deny any attribute at all, or to speculate a meaning and to insist that it is the interpetation, ignoring all other possiblities and thus ending the sense of restrain one should have on the possible meaning of the word.

like I explained above and gave an example of the yad\hand.
only the general meaning, not the "how".



When I say meaning as well, some can even do a literal translation, I should say the import of what the literal meaning implies. So I can still translate wajh as face, but what it implies may not be the same as when you normally hear the word wajh.

I didnt' understand that, can you explain it more.
thanks



Keep in mind that you cannot compare Same' and Yad to the same thing; one is conveying perception while the other is conveying a phsyical material existence. So we cannot confused the two.

can we stay away from philisophical explanations and arguments, I can't understand that stuff, I prefer text and simple logic.



As for what is mentioned above,
There is a problem with this: for example, the foot of an ant and the foot of an elephant. They totally different in their qualities. If you take if to the molecular level and spacially, they are the same.

Now, realize that the only way one can still relate to each of those two things as "feet" is because of a common characteristic that allows us to name the object that name and conjure in our minds an understanding of what we are talking about. A foot is a limb that touches the ground and has fingers and helps on move.

It is a limb when it comes to creatures like humans and animals, because they are made of bodies with parts\limbs, so they are similar in their essence in it being a body with parts\limbs.
So the "limb" is not something shared by everything that has a foot, but only with essences that are composed of parts\limbs that fall apart.
If the essence is not composed of parts\limbs, then the foot would not be a limb.


But Allah 'azza wa jal's essence is completely different than that of the creation, it is not composed of limbs, so His attributes would not be limbs.




Now what if I was to call an object, an orange, but completely removed all apparent similarities to it. Then I said it was a unique orange. You would say, what basis do you have to call it an orange? I would say, no similarity, yet it is an orange in its own right.

Then you would say, no you have merely ascribed a new meaning to the word "orange", and now placed this object under of its now multiple meanings. And that is not an orange at all, as we know it. That is naming something completely new, but even calling it an orange would be misleading.

So when you take away all the qualities of an orange from an object, you in essence nullify the attribute. You remove all recognition and definition of what the word means. This is why insisting on the literal interpretation and the using the word, you contradict yourself since you say essentially that yad is a "real hand" without any single resemblance to the definition of that real hand, in which case only the name is similar not even the broadest actuality.

So you actually, on one hand, say that not giving the meaning to the word and not affirming the literal means we are saying that the our way makes the Qur'an not make sense and that it was revealed to be understood; we say that by ascribing a literal meaning, you still remove all possibility of relating to the word (rightfully so), but in the end, you are left just as unclear, if not more, and so this is actually solved by not taking it literally- there is still a possibility of understanding the word according to any transmitted report by the Salaf and actually comes closer to putting a relevent meaning to what is said.

That is not correct brother,

The general meaning we confirm for yad of Allah, has in it similarities with the attribute of yad\hand that we know (similarity in meaning not the how), and it is all found in Quran and Sunnah:
1_ being an attribute of the essence.
2_ it folds, grasps ..etc. (actions metioned in texts)
3_ has fingers (like mentioned in hadith, but we confirm it like we do hands, one that is befitting of Allah not likening it to creation, and consigns its description\how to Allah)

and whatever other attributes Allah has told us about His attribute al yad\hand.
but being a "limb" is not one what we confirm for it, for it was not affirmed by Allah or His messenger, and Allah's dhat is not parts\limbs that fall apart like in creation.
His dhat is completely different, so His attribute would also be in its description different.




Then you might say, yes, but Allah said He has a hand.

I would say, no He didn't. He used the word yad and didn't explicitly say how to take the word.

You might say, but the rule is to interpret the Qur'an on the literal meaning as much as you can, and since there is not similarity to creation, we have cancelled the need to go outside of a literal translation.

And I would say, you're right about the rule to interpret Qur'an literally as far as possible, except there are times when the literal meaning is not implied in the Qur'an, rather another one.

firstly, it is the DHAHIR meaning of the texts (Quran & Sunnah) not the "literal". dhahir means the apparent meaning not necessarly the literal\haqiqi meaning.
If you know Arabic, just check what it means in books of usool.
or the post by the brother in this topic, I think the one before this one.


2nd: what do you mean by "didn't explicitly say how to take the word" ?
Allah said that Quran is clear "kitab mubeen".
and the Quran was sent as a guidance, so what guidance is there in words that are ambigous to us?
what benefit are they for us when we have no idea what they mean?
Quran, Allah's words, is hikmah (wisdom) what wisdom is there in having words that have no meaning to us at all?

Also, the Sunnah is an explainer of the Quran, Allah sent it to the Messenger to explain to us the Quran, so why do you also make the attributes in the Sunnah ambigous too?
something that explains something can not be ambigous itself, because it is supposed to explain what is not understood or ambigous.
and in Sunnah the hand of Allah is mentioned very clearly, in more than one hadith.

Now I would like to tell me, is "yaday" in the following ayah also ambigous?
we can't know its meaning?
not clear?

Allah's saying " Qala ya Iblis ma mana'ak an tasjuda lima khalaqtu bi-yaday" (38:75)
(translated literally)(Allâh) said: "O Iblîs (Satan)! What prevents you from prostrating yourself to one whom I have created with Both My Hands.

and there is an athar by Ibn Umar radiyallahu anhu that Allah created 4 with His hand, one of them is Adam alayhi assalam.
so are we also going to do tafwid of meaning to the athar by the sahabah??
their words are also ambigous?





Aside from this, remember that to take the literal meaning on every word was NEVER explicitly stated- all this wouldn't be disagreed about if there was just one hint, from the Qur'an or Sunnah, that these attributes whose title resembles a physical thing, is unequivocally to be taken on the literal meaning.

againt, the dhahir meaning, remember the Quran was sent to all mankind, laymen and people with knowledge, it is in Arabic, not some other language, and it is sent as guidance to mankind, it is "clear", so the words would not be something ambigous or confusing, or the words meaning something other than what is dhahir, unless their something in the context that indicates it meaning other than the dhahir, and in the ayah about Allah creating Adam with His hands, has no indication that it means other than the dhahir, which is attribute of the hand.




So you might ask, but they neither state the rule you are speaking about. However, what I am saying has some precedence because there are at least some existing transmissions that maybe one, qati' taweel was made, which if you accept once, immediately busts the conception that all words used for attributes who regular meaning is a phsyical one, must be taken on the literal. Once that "rule" is busted, we have a very good reason to give credibility to the claim that all of those words can stand to be interpreted some other way (other that the obvious claim above). This is a second point to strengthen what I said above, although the above I think stands alone.


where are the transmissions that say that "yad" in ayah (38:75) means something different than "hand" ?



Then, you might come with some transmissions from Salaf seemingly supporting an unequivocally literal stance, and later scholars approving it. I would have to say, those are very suspect since the ones propogating them are usually the most vehement in upholding literal translation, many of those transmissions in various books by the older scholars have many weaknesses which renders them unreliable, which also shows that an deliberate attempt to prove a belief which is not clear is being used

How about Imam Abu Ja'far at Tabari who was a shafi'i (d. 310), in his tafsir, he says in his tafsir of ayah (38:75 - above) : Allah the exalted mentions by that Him creating Adam with with his two hands (biyadayh).
and Imam at Tirmithi (d. 270 A.H) rahimahu Allah in his jami' , when speaking about attributes in hadith speaking about Allah's hand, he explains how yad does not mean power like jahmis say, and that confirming "hearing, sight and hand" is not tashbih unless one says hearing like a hearing, hand like a hand ..etc.
but confirming it without saying "like or similar to" is not tashbih.
and he quoted imam ishaaq bin rahwayh who was a contemporary of Imam Ahmad rahimahu Allah saying that about tashbih and confirming sifat.

Now, if he was speaking about affirming the word itself with tafwid of the meaning, he wouldn't have mentioned the example of yad with sight and hearing, since you believe that salaf confirmed the meaning of the sight and hearing, but made tafwid of the yad.



Also, the fact that there seem to be clear ayahs saying for example that Adam was created with "His two hands", doesn't clearly say at all that those were literal.

is there evidence in that ayah that it does not mean literally hand??



Our rule for not interpreting physical-seeming attributes literally is coming from the Qu'ran itself - laysa kamithlihi shai and "Is He who creates like he who does not create?"


that is because you looked at that ayah first, so you negated then confirmed, so based on it you negated everything that you "believe" or in your "limited mind" sounded like "tashbih or tajsim", you didn't base it on text, but on logic and your limited mind.
As for us, we confirmed then negated, meaning we confirmed every single attribute in Quran and Sunnah, then negated tashbih to it.

Now tell me, if Allah didn't have any attributes that are shared in creation, by name and general meaning, would there have been benefit in saying "laysa kamithlihi shay' "?

Allah told us this, because some of Allah's attributes are found in creation, which share only the name and general meaning, so Allah is telling us that these attributes that you find in you and in rest of creation which I confirmed for myself in my book are not like that of yours.
or else, if there weren't, then people wouldn't be able to make any tashbih anyways, because none of the attributes would have the same name or general meaning as in creation.

And if Allah didn't have those attributes, which in their dhahir meaning are similar to creation, why would Allah mention them in Quran?
Why wouldnt' Allah say exactly what they are?
Quran was sent as guidance and clear, not to confuse people, and misguide them.
So Allah would not say something in Quran that would lead to confusion and misguidance, let alone something that implies kufr (tashbih).




And finally, from what I have gathered, since the rule in language is that a literal and allegorical meaning, or any two meanings, cannot be together in the same instance on the same specific word, many times some tafaseer (see Tabari for example) will suggest scholars' alternate meaning to the word, and they make perfect sense and even fit the entire meaning of the sentence. It becomes clear why that certain word-attribute was used in that context, it actually enhances the message despite not always clearly defining the word. With the literal meaning taken, you lose that pefect fit, the message the ayah conveys can actually be reduced because the literalists will be focusing more on claiming that Allah Ta'ala intended on establishing the word is a literal attribute rather than looking at the entire context and sending a message. And their argument could have been accepted by me if we saw one clear area which outlined that rule (to interpret phsyicaly-sounding words on the literal) as well as said that Allah Ta'ala really has those literal attributes.

If you change the word to "apparent\dhahir" instead of "literal" then the issue should be clearified to you.


I think this is enough, since the post is too long.

and by the way, I would like to tell you that Imam Ibn Hajar al asqalani rahimahu Allah in his book fath al Bari, refuted the belief that the Salaf did tafwid of meaning, that they didn't know the meaning of the attributes.

[Musleemah]

:salam:



Have you done these translations? The part in the bold catches my eye. In "هو في أحدهما أظهر" We do not get the meaning of obviousness. Ad-dhar means which is more apparent, rather in the term Dhahir it would mean that came to the understanding Bilaa Ta'ammul. Where as the word obvious signifies one that is Assah or Ma Yanbaghi Li-anna huwa ma Dhahara bil Lafzi.

Can you explain this further...

:ws:

obvious in English means clear.
the clearer meaning, which would be like apparent meaning.

well to me it seems like that, I don't know about you.
but one can use apparent since it is more closer, instead of obvious, I guess.

Allahu a'lam.

[JayshAllah]

My advice will be stick with Just trying to be a muslim. Sometime we get to caught up my labels. I mean their is nohing wrong saying I am following the salaf, or even if you wan't to use the term salafi to differentiate from one who has deviancy.
I guess I am trying to say we should have the correct mentality.


Oh, I agree with you 110%. I do not think we should even say we are Salafi, except when it is a necessity in order only to differentiate ourselves from other groups who are also Muslim. Using such a term to describe oneself should be avoided, except due to necessity when practicality dictates that we must use the word to discuss our views in relation to another group who also is Muslim.

But otherwise, we should only say we are Muslims.

[JayshAllah]

Ash'aris that do tafwid to meaning consign the whole meaning to Allah, to them the word is ambigous, they only believe in the letters

Why wouldn't Allah just use variables then like XYZ to describe Himself?

[Ninjas kik high]

As-salamu'alaykum,

There is a lot of discourse on this issue hear I see.

Who are these groups? Ive not been given a straight answer because nobody I talk to can agree on what the beliefs of these groups are.

Do they depart from tauheed? and if so what are the details.

wassalam,

Nabil...

salam alaykum ... when i became a muslim i thought it wud be just that
Sabhanallah , how beautifull is islam how perfect it is .
the problem i then found was so many different sects and names this is the confusin part .
then to ask yourself why ...
wat a shame when islam is all ready given to us plain and clear cut , that so many people have made it so difficult at times , becos of the clear cut so to speak , you then have to find out what is what and who is what ... that my dear brothers and sisters was and is the hard part ...:cry:

[Musleemah]

He was Athari but definitely not "salafi":

Naseehah adh-Dhahabi(RA) (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2889)

and

"salafis" and Imam Dhahabi on Istiwa (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=126289&postcount=5)

and

Tafwid of the wahhabis and Imam Dhahabi(RH) (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=126654&postcount=13)

and again

bi dhātihi and wahhabis and Imam Dhahabi (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=127273&postcount=9)

and another

Tafwid of Imam Dhahabi and what the wahhabis do (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=127521&postcount=25)

and

bi dhatihi quotes (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14486&highlight=Dhahabi)

and

Imam Dhahabi(RA) and his pseudo-salafi detractors (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6401&highlight=Dhahabi)

More can be found by searching the forum

Wa Salaam

Picking and choosing what one likes from the statements of Imam adh-Dhahabi rahimahu Allah.

Imam adh Dhahabi rahimahu Allah confirms the dhahir meaning of sifat in his book al uluw, he explains about their being 2 dhahirs. (check the first link posted here below)
He also mentions a similar statement about dhahir meaning in his book siyar a'lam an Nubala', which explains what he meant by saying "tafwid ma'nah", meaning the detailed meaning = kayfiyyah.

for their is a general meaning and a detailed one, now if he made complete tafwid of the meaning like Asha'ris do, he wouldn't have confirmed the dhahir meaning in another part of his book, and in his book al uluw, one looks at different statements of his to understand what he really means, one statement explains the other. and his statements about the dhahir explain what he means by "al ma'na" in his statement "tafwid ma'naha".

as for his statements regarding bi-dhatihi, I asked Abul Hasan about one of them, and he ignored it and kept on yelling at me and threatening a ban.
and I showed how he believed in it, but didn't like to use the phrase here (evidence from the Imam's own words):

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=180038&highlight=dhahabi#post180038


He also says in his book al uluw, that the attributes are not majaz, and that if it was taken by majaz then it wouldn't be attributes, and that one doesnt' do ta'wil to them, here is his statment in Arabic:
قلت وكان أيضا يسعه السكوت عن صفة حقيقة فإننا إذا أثبتنا نعوت الباري وقلنا تمر كما جاءت
فقد آمنا بأنها صفات فإذا قلنا بعد ذلك صفة حقيقة وليست بمجاز كان هذا كلاما ركيكا نبطيا مغلثا للنفوس فليهدر مع أن هذه العبارة وردت عن جماعة ومقصودهم بها أن هذه الصفات تمر ولا يتعرض لها بتحريف ولا تأويل كما يتعرض لمجاز الكلام والله أعلم
وقد أغنى الله تعالى عن العبارات المبتدعة فإن النصوص في الصفات واضحة ولو كانت الصفات ترد إلى المجاز لبطل أن يكون صفات لله وإنما الصفة تابعة للموصوف
[ جزء 1 - صفحة 240 ]
فهو موجود حقيقة لا مجازا وصفاته ليست مجازا فإذا كان لا مثل له ولا نظير لزم أن تكون لا مثل لها


as for the "claimed" naseeha of his, it falsely attributed to him, check here (http://www.alsoufia.org/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1768) (for ones who know Arabic).

[Musleemah]

Oh, I agree with you 110%. I do not think we should even say we are Salafi, except when it is a necessity in order only to differentiate ourselves from other groups who are also Muslim. Using such a term to describe oneself should be avoided, except due to necessity when practicality dictates that we must use the word to discuss our views in relation to another group who also is Muslim.

But otherwise, we should only say we are Muslims.

That is my opinion too.

[Musleemah]

I didn't get your question brother

[AbdulQahhar]

That is my opinion too.

Agreed. In the end I want to die as a real Muslim, not as something like "a 3rd sect of the 16th subsect of Islamic university bla-bla by grand shaikh bla-bla from 37th branch of blue-blooded very respectful Muslim family from Arab peninsula, bla bla bla...."


Ridiculous, purely ridiculous.

[Skilly]

salam alaykum ... when i became a muslim i thought it wud be just that
Sabhanallah , how beautifull is islam how perfect it is .
the problem i then found was so many different sects and names this is the confusin part .
then to ask yourself why ...
wat a shame when islam is all ready given to us plain and clear cut , that so many people have made it so difficult at times , becos of the clear cut so to speak , you then have to find out what is what and who is what ... that my dear brothers and sisters was and is the hard part ...:cry:

Agreed. Islam is simple and clear. People are not.

When I studied Islam a realised that too. So many names and that. Just stick to being a muslim. Seeking the truth. It will take time to learn. Well it was for me.

[Ninjas kik high]

ISNT THIS THE QUESTION to be or not to be ..
u noe i read then i read .
i read this book and that book
people are goin to tell u ur wrong one way or the other
thats what i have noticed
everyone beleives there rite
So its up to you ..and me to find out wat is
yup
wasalam

[Saad]

Here under are some of the texts mentioned in Arfu Shazi by Imam Kashmiri r.h:

( واعلم ) أن المشابهات مثل نُزول الله إلى السماء الدنيا ، واستواءه على العرش ، فرأى السلف فيها الإيمان على ظاهره ما ورد إمهاله على ظاهره بلا تأويل وتكييف ، ويفوض أمر الكيفية إلى الله تعالى ، وأما ما نسب إلى بعض السلف مثل ابن عباس أنه يعلم معاني المقطعات القرآنية على تقدير صحته بيان محتملات ، ويتوهم من جامع الفصولين وهو من معتبراتنا النهي عن الترجمة اللغوية أيضاً للمتشابهات ، لكن قريحتي يحكم أن النهي عنه تفسيرها لا ترجمتها تحت الألفاظ من الحقوق واليد والوجه وغيرهما ، وأما مذهب المتكلمين فهو التأويل في المتشابهات موافقاً للشرع ، وقال المتكلمون : إن مذهب السلف التفويض وهو أسلم ، ومذهبنا أي المتكلمين التأويل بالعقل وفاق الشرع وهو أحكم ، ومعناه أن أصل مذهب أهل السنة التفويض ، وأما التأويل فعند الضرورة والمقابلة مع الغير من مخالفي أهل السنة ، والمتكلمون إنما احتاجوا إلى التأويلات عند المناظرة مع معاندي الإسلام ، فما قال بعض الناس من الألفاظ الركيكة في حقهم فبريؤون عنها ، وأما مذهب المبتدعين في المتشابهات فالتأويلات المخالفة للشريعة الغراء الموافقة لعقولهم القاصرة عياذاً بالله ، ومذهب المشبهة أن الله جسم كالأجسام ، ومذاهب أخر لا أذكرها ، وأما تفويض السلف فيحتمل المعنيين :

أحدهما : تفويض الأمر إلى الله وعدم الإنكار على من تأول كيف ما تأول بسبب إقرارهم بعدم العلم .

ثانيهما : تفويض التفصيل والتكييف إلى الله تعالى والإنكار على من تأول برأيه وعقله ومرادهم هو الاحتمال الثاني لا الأول.

( أمرُّوها كما هي الخ ) أمرُّوها على ظواهرها ، وأما تأويل اليد بالقدرة أو القوة فقال الترمذي : إنه مذهب الجهمية ، ولا يقال : إن اليد واليمين والوجه وغيرها من صفات الباري ويفوض التفصيل إلى الuباري فإنه يقتضي أن يكون مثل اليد والوجه زائدة على الذات لأنه صفاته تعالى ليست عين ذات ولا غيرها مفصلة عنها بل زائدة على الذات ، ومقتضى لفظ اليد ومثله ، أن يعبر بلفظ لا لعلها يومئ إلى كونها زائدة على الذات فإنه خروج عن الموضوع ، وعبر البخاري بالنعوت ولغته أي بين حليته ومذهب السلف في مثل هذا أن يحمل على ظاهره ويفوض التكيف إلى الله ولا يطلق لفظ

Can someone translate?

[loveProphet]

These stuff are gems... should have them on marifah(the quotes in this thread):)

[Musleemah]

Hereunder are some of the texts mentioned in Arfu Shazi by Imam Kashmiri r.h:

( واعلم ) أن المشابهات مثل نُزول الله إلى السماء الدنيا ، واستواءه على العرش ، فرأى السلف فيها الإيمان على ظاهره ما ورد إمهاله على ظاهره بلا تأويل وتكييف ، ويفوض أمر الكيفية إلى الله تعالى ، وأما ما نسب إلى بعض السلف مثل ابن عباس أنه يعلم معاني المقطعات القرآنية على تقدير صحته بيان محتملات ، ويتوهم من جامع الفصولين وهو من معتبراتنا النهي عن الترجمة اللغوية أيضاً للمتشابهات ، لكن قريحتي يحكم أن النهي عنه تفسيرها لا ترجمتها تحت الألفاظ من الحقوق واليد والوجه وغيرهما ، وأما مذهب المتكلمين فهو التأويل في المتشابهات موافقاً للشرع ، وقال المتكلمون : إن مذهب السلف التفويض وهو أسلم ، ومذهبنا أي المتكلمين التأويل بالعقل وفاق الشرع وهو أحكم ، ومعناه أن أصل مذهب أهل السنة التفويض ، وأما التأويل فعند الضرورة والمقابلة مع الغير من مخالفي أهل السنة ، والمتكلمون إنما احتاجوا إلى التأويلات عند المناظرة مع معاندي الإسلام ، فما قال بعض الناس من الألفاظ الركيكة في حقهم فبريؤون عنها ، وأما مذهب المبتدعين في المتشابهات فالتأويلات المخالفة للشريعة الغراء الموافقة لعقولهم القاصرة عياذاً بالله ، ومذهب المشبهة أن الله جسم كالأجسام ، ومذاهب أخر لا أذكرها ، وأما تفويض السلف فيحتمل المعنيين :

أحدهما : تفويض الأمر إلى الله وعدم الإنكار على من تأول كيف ما تأول بسبب إقرارهم بعدم العلم .

ثانيهما : تفويض التفصيل والتكييف إلى الله تعالى والإنكار على من تأول برأيه وعقله ومرادهم هو الاحتمال الثاني لا الأول.

( أمرُّوها كما هي الخ ) أمرُّوها على ظواهرها ، وأما تأويل اليد بالقدرة أو القوة فقال الترمذي : إنه مذهب الجهمية ، ولا يقال : إن اليد واليمين والوجه وغيرها من صفات الباري ويفوض التفصيل إلى الuباري فإنه يقتضي أن يكون مثل اليد والوجه زائدة على الذات لأنه صفاته تعالى ليست عين ذات ولا غيرها مفصلة عنها بل زائدة على الذات ، ومقتضى لفظ اليد ومثله ، أن يعبر بلفظ لا لعلها يومئ إلى كونها زائدة على الذات فإنه خروج عن الموضوع ، وعبر البخاري بالنعوت ولغته أي بين حليته ومذهب السلف في مثل هذا أن يحمل على ظاهره ويفوض التكيف إلى الله ولا يطلق لفظ

Can someone translate?

I translated the middle part and a summary of the last part here:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22039
post # 3


maybe someone else can translated the first part, it just takes a lot of time for me to translate.