[mod Edit: Info Deleted]
[mod Edit: Info Deleted]
Last edited by sunniforum.com; 11-06-2008 at 11:50 PM.
I have been to many QMUL events.
In all honesty Im not too keen on them.
Any Info on the teachers/speakers would be appreciated.
Br. Arabic Courses,
You are not allowed to promote such programs on this site. If you post it once more, you will end up in the Jail Khana : )
Also, the only thing you've been doing on this site is posting up such announcements. It would be appropriate if you took part in other threads.
This is the last time that poster will be deleted.
Jazaakallaahu khairan for responding, I was getting the impression that you were deliberately ignoring me? I have sent you email, after email, and I even asked you on the forum itself as to why you were deleting my posts. I asked you if it was a problem with your server, or the actual event and there was no response. Now you have finally responded and I would love to know why? I have been posting up my courses on this forum for the last two years and I was surprised to find it deleted this year? If it were an issue that I have been living in England for the past two years, I would assume that maybe our paths may have crossed, or that somewhere along the way I may have offended you or something, but I have been living in saudi arabic for the past 7 years, only to visit England yearly for a few months, and sometimes even less.
So please, I ask you by Allaah! To explain to me what is wrong with my event? I am not shia, nor am I qaadiyaani, nor am I some modernist who wishes to water down Islaam until there is nothing left other than my name, so what is wrong. I have viewed some of your threads, and I dont see any hatred for the Qur'aan, the Sunnah or the way of our salaf, rather I see respect for both sources of revelation, and for our Imaams who have preceded us, so I really dont see the problem.
All I am asking is an explanation. Thats all I was asking from the beginning in my emails to you before, and I feel that as a Muslim I deserve that. If I have done something wrong then correct me, advise me, and show me the correct way to achieve Allaah's paradise, that’s all I ask.
As for making it a condition before I post up events that I take part in the threads, then I dont see how the two are connected. I would love to take part in your threads, but I have been studying in Madeenah University for the past 7 years and at this very moment I have my final exams. After that I have to prepare for the summer courses that I intend to teach and I know how forums take up most of your time when you start posting, so please forgive me for not taking part.
But in saying that, I think you will agree that posting up beneficial events about Islaam where the general people can attend and gain beneficial Islamic knowledge is taking part? These events are not for me, but for the people on this forum, and I don’t see a difference between posting up knowledge or delivering it at Queen Mary Uni. Both methods are achieving the same goal, so I dont see the problem.
and lastly, I dont see how anyone can judge my course on the fact that it takes place at a specific uni??!!! I have no affiliation with anyone at Queen Mary Uni, nor their ISOC. This is my own event that I booked in my own name.
So, jazaakallaahu khairan for allowing me to advertise my courses all these years before, and I ask Allaah to forgive us all for our shortcomings, to grant us paradise and to shade us all in His shade the day when there is no shade other than His shade.
as for who I am, then I gave a biography of myself on my website. I have posted it here on this thread to answer the above question.
He was raised a Christian in London until he accepted Islaam in his second year at college. Two years later, he was accepted to study at the Islamic University of Madeenah, where he will be completing his degree this academic year, in shaa Allaah.
He successfully completed 3 years in an Arabic language program at Madeenah University, Saudi Arabia with `Excellence`. He then went on to study in the University in the faculty of Islamic law.
He has studied `al-Aajroomiyya`, and `al-Qatar an-Nadaa` in the Prophets Mosque, Madeenah and has Taught `al-Aajroomiyyah` on many occasions and during our last two summer courses. These two books are classical texts that discuss in detail Arabic grammar and is considered very important towards understanding Islaam.
He has also studied other books and subjects outside of University hours in Usool al-Fiqh, Usool al-Tafseer, Takhreej of Hadeeth, arabic morphology, and logic.
In Usool al-Fiqh he completed a book called ‘miftaahul Wusool’ by a maaliki scholar with a Dr. Abdul-Lateef al-Hamad (Phd in Usool al Fiqh). This book was authored with the intent of connecting usool al fiqh to Fiqh by expressing the ways in which differences in usool al fiqh brings about differences in fiqh. Many aspects of these differences come back to the Arabic language and thus giving the one who studies this subject a better ability at explaining the Arabic language.
In Usool al-Tafseer he completed a book called ‘Fusool fee Usool at-Tafseer’ by one of the leading scholars in saudi arabic in the science of tafseer. He studied this book with Dr. Abdullah al-‘Awaaji, a researcher and lecturer at Madeenah University. Because the Qur’aan was revealed in the Arabic language, a major part of tafseer depends upon the Arabic language, and therefore giving the one who studies the usool of tafseer an extra edge in teaching the Arabic language and in relating it to Islaam.
He has also studied in the Islamic University of Madeenah, many sciences including the science of hadeeth, some of Bukhaari, Muslim, and the four other books of Sunnah, i.e. Tirmathy, an-Nasaa`ee, abu Daawood and ibn Maajah. Also from the things that he has studied is Aqeedah, tafseer of Qur`aan, Inheritance, Usool al Fiqh and Fiqh.
He has experience in teaching Arabic at all levels, and endeavours to give the student in future years all the tools needed to fully appreciate Islaam and the Qur’aan.
I am sure you are not a Shi'i or a Qadiyani etc, but can you confirm or deny that you are a "Salafi" on the manhaj opf the late Bin baz, Ibn Uthaymin, al-Albani and their students? One visible trend with some groups (like Tayyibun) who are teaching arabic to the unassuming public is to promote the ulterior agenda to "convert" people to pseudo-Salafism.
Since you and one of the teachers are at Madina Uni - then i am assuming you are a "Salafi"? Hence, will you deny or confirm that in your groups view - Ashari's and Maturidi's are people of bid'a, as are Sufiyya?
If this is the case - i would advise the moderators to prevent these types of groups to advertise here. There is no way we could advertise our aqeeda or even Hanafi fiqh on so called "Salafi" sites without being banned.
Well, I don’t think you are a moderator, and I thank Allaah that you are not as you have made a major mistake. You have accused me of things, just because I study at a particular university. You have drawn a whole picture of me and called for me to be banned based upon that. If only you had asked me before you accused me of anything, you would never have posted your post in that LARGE font of yours.
Did you know that the brother who helped to organise my arabic course last year and the year before that, and one of the brothers who is helping me to organise this years arabic course are both HANAFEES!!!!! The first one even supports jamaa’at tableegh, so will you apologise for your accusation now?
Do you know that I have many books of Hanafe fiqh, and I have been studying Hanafee Fiqh for the last 4 years. I have many books on Hanafee Usool al Fiqh, and intend to study them more when I return to London, so will you apologise for your accusation now?
There are many hanafees in Madeenah Uni, and many of them are Deobundi!!! So will you apologise for your accusation now?
On the side of this forum you will see that I am registered as being HANBALEE, and I am proud to be Hanabalee, so will you apologise for your accusation now?
As for the accusation that I consider the suffiyya to be the people of bid’ah, then if you look at your own website you will find that you do also. Please refer to the link on your site:
So how can you say it and not me?
As for the accusation about the ashaa.irah and the maaturoodiyyah, then I ask you, which one are upon the truth in aqeedah? If you say they are both upon the truth, then that is impossible as they are not the same, the truth is one and you cant combined two opposites (an important rule in the science of LOGIC). If you say that one is upon the truth and the other is not, then you have fallen into what you have accused me of!!
As for me calling myself ‘salafi’, then I don’t as I know that this word has in intended meaning attached to it and also another different well known meaning. I.e. there are two understandings of this word.
The purpose behind this word was to define the way in which a person applies his Islaam, i.e. he follows Islaam according to the understanding of the salaf (which includes the 4 Imaams). Now according to this meaning even you are salafi!!!
However, there is another meaning which is understood from this name that has developed from what has become ‘well known’ about some people who call themselves salafi. Whether this meaning is true of them or not I’m sure many will argue, but my point is that not everyone who claims to follow the way of the salaf actually does so, and not everyone who follows the way of the salaf calls himself a salafi!! I hope you understood that point according to how I intended it (i.e. don’t put words into my mouth as I wrote down exactly what I intended without any hidden meanings). So although you may not call yourself salafi, you may in fact be one if you do what the word entails. As for me, then I abstain from using such a terminology except to those who understand what the word means (i.e. the actually meaning), which I’m sure no sunni Muslim would disagree with. So will you apologise for your accusation now?
If you want to be specific and discuss the problems you ‘think’ I have, then just be open and ask me, here on this forum. Be a man and ask. If you want to ask me if I believe taqleed is permissible then just ask (by the way, it is permissible). I challenge you to be a man and be open with what is on your chest. It is not enough to accuse people with large fonts, just be honest and ask me, and I will answer.
Wa alaikum salam
My goodness. If being a man is being beligerent and showing anger in words - then i'd rather not be a "man" according to your manner and nor did i call for you to be banned - so why misconstrue my words?!
Anyway, my questions were rhetorical - and you failed to answer if you are against the way of al-Albani and Co - or are you really one who advocates them? I won't go on - but you asked a question - and i answer - Ashari's and Maturidi's are both on the Haqq as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami al-Makki mentioned the following some 400 years ago in hisFath al-jawad:
"A mubtadi (innovator) is the person who does not have the faith (aqid'ah) conveyed unanimously by the Ahl as-Sunnah. This unanimity was transmitted by the two great Imam's Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari (d.324/936; Rahimahullah) and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d.333/944; Rahimahullah) and the scholars who followed their path."
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami also said in his book al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya (pg. 205): "Man of bid'ah means one whose beliefs are different from the Ahl as-Sunnah faith. The Ahl as-Sunnah faith, is the faith of Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari, Abu Mansur al-Maturidi and those who followed them. One who brings forth something which is not approved by Islam becomes a man of bid'ah."
Imam Ahmad Shihab ad-Din al Qalyubi (d.1069/1659) wrote on the fourth volume of his marginalia to the book Kanz ar-raghibin:
"One who departs from what Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (Allah's mercy be upon them) reported is not a Sunni. These two Imam's followed the footprints of Rasulullah (Peace be upon him) and his Sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them all)."
Allamah Sayyid Ahmad at-Tahtawi (d. 1231 AH) wrote on the subject of 'Zabayih' in his Hashiya al-Durr al-Mukhtar:
"According to the majority of scholars of tafsir, the ayat, 'They parted into groups in the religion,' referred to the people of bid'ah who would arise in this Ummah. In a Hadith reported by Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), Rasulullah (Peace and blessings be upon him) said to Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), 'The ayat about the partitions into groups in the religion refers to the people of bid'ah and to the followers of their nafs who would arise in this Ummah.' Allah declared in the 153rd ayat of Surah Al-An'am, 'This is My Straight path, so follow it! Follow not other ways, lest you be parted from His way!' (that is, Jews, Christians, and other heretics departed from the right path; you should not part like them!). In the 103rd ayat of Surah Al-Imran, Allah declares, 'And hold fast, all of you together, to the rope of Allah, and do not separate!' (see later for a brief commentary). Some scholars of tafsir said that Allah's rope meant Jama'ah, unity. The command, 'Do not separate', shows that it is so and the Jama'ah are the possessors of fiqh and ilm (knowledge). One who descents from fuqaha (scholars of fiqh) as much as a span falls into heresy, becomes deprived of Allah's help and deserves Hell, because the fuqaha have been on the right path and have held on to the Sunnah of Rasulullah (Peace and blessings be upon him) and on to the path of al-Khulafa ar-Rashideen, the Four Khaliphs (may Allah be pleased with them). As-Sawad al-Azam, that is, the majority of the Muslims, are on the path of fuqaha. Those who depart from their path will burn in the fire of Hell. O believers! Follow the unique group which is protected against Hell! And this group is the one that is called Ahl as-Sunnah Wa'l Jama'ah. For, Allah's help, protection and guidance are for the followers of this group, and His wrath and punishment are for those who dissent from this group. Today, this group of salvation comes together in the Four Madhhabs, namely the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali."
Now if you can then quote me an authority besides Wahhabiyya who say they are not both on the haqq - otherwise your views count for nought!
If you are really a "man" - then tell us all in plain words that you are not a Muqallid of al-Albani, Bin Baz and Ibn Uthaymin - and admit all three of them are mubtadi'in. Some of those from Ahnaf or Deobandiyya in Madina Uni are not fully in tune with the reality of what the 3 named said in their lives against Ashari's especially - and indeed some of them end up being influenced by pseudo-Salafism, while others go there to get a visa to stay in Madina and learn to speak arabic and hold private circles with other Hanafi Shuyukh resident in Madina.
The rest of your hyperbole is not worth my time, but anyway calm down...
This is not what I meant when I said to be specific and be open. I never meant
“Ask me if I think so and so is a scholar”,
but I meant
“Ask me about any particular issue of aqeedah that you feel I have deviated in and then we can discuss”.
Yes, I do believe that ibn al-Uthaimeen, ibn Baaz, al-Albaani are scholars of Islaam, but that does not mean that I accept everything from them like you do with your scholars (I’ll explain this point in a second). If there is anything that they say that opposes the way of the four Imaams, then I openly reject it. But it is now up to you to establish that they oppose any of the four Imaams. It is not correct to judge another Muslim based upon their apparent view of a certain scholar or scholars, as these individual may not know of the mistakes of that scholar. Everyone makes mistakes, and the best of those who make mistakes are those who repent. So if you have something solid, then bring it, and if you don’t, then stop calling people names and causing un-necessary friction. This thread was supposed to be about my weekend course on the Qur’aan, Tafseer, Hadeeth and the science of hadeeth from the classical books of tafseer, usool al tafseer and usool al hadeeth with practical applications on both. That got deleted. I asked why (about a million times) and I’m still waiting for a response. So if you don’t mind, please open up another thread if you want, or better still, come to my free Islamic weekday course, and we can sit down after class and talk. If you think I am upon misguidance, then show me. If you cant, then remain quiet.
So salvation lies with the hanaabilah?? Since when has salvation ever been attached to a persons choice of mathhab in fiqh? Were there not many hanafees who were mu’tazilee? Are there many maalikees in Africa now who say that Allaah is Everything? What about the naqshabandi soofee Naazim qabursi (who is refuted even on this forum) who says that Eesaa is Allaah, isn’t he hanafee?Today, this group of salvation comes together in the Four Madhhabs, namely the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali
So when has a scholar that was born 1000 years after Hijrah become a proof in Islaam? There is an ijmaa that there is no taqleed allowed in issues of aqeedah (refer to Imaam al-ghazaalis al-Mus.tas.faa), so why are you making taqleed of this guy? If his claim is true, bring proof that the scholars who were alive before abu al-Hasan al-Ash.aree were upon his aqeedah, and that the scholars who existed before the maatureediyyah were upon his aqeedah? If you can do that, then I will affirm their belief as I affirm the belief of Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee, and Maalik, and the other Imaams of the salaf. And to show your mistake, you have followed the claim of this scholar that two different aqeedah’s (yes, they do have similarities, but that do have other major differences) are both upon the truth? The truth is what the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه و سلّم brought, and he never brought two different aqeedah’s.Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami al-Makki mentioned the following some 400 years ago in hisFath al-jawad:
And lastly, I’m sure that if you look in the books of the shi’a, you will find the same claim you just quoted
Originally Posted by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami al-MakkiI.e. it is just a claim, but without proof it remains that, a claim. And if that claim is true, then you have just condemned ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdisee to hell because he was not ash.aree nor maatureede.Originally Posted by some shi’ah deviant
Can you quote me an authority from the first three generations that supports the asharees or maatureedees (not to mention that abu al-Hasan al-Ash.aree repented from the belief that is ascribed to him today in his book ‘al-Ibaanah’ and ‘Maqaalaat al Islaamiyyeen’)?Now if you can then quote me an authority besides Wahhabiyya who say they are not both on the haqq - otherwise your views count for nought!
Anyway, like I said, if you want to talk then please do so somewhere else as I am awaiting an official reply from the moderators of this forum, as I’m sure they have the politeness to answer my simple question as to why they deleted my post.
Still waiting for the moderators to explain why they deleted my post about my Qur'aan and Sunnah seminar?? What they actually meant by:
Wa alaikum salam
I don't wish to take up too much time, but anyway, since you wish to discuss aqeeda issues - then i hope you will visit www.************/forums - for proof based discussions. This forum does not have an active indepth section anymore (it has been locked for some months now).
As for your Shuyukh, like Bin Baz and Ibn Uthaymin - then they both openly denounced Ashari's as being out of Ahlus Sunna. They both believed that Allah has 2 literal eyes, has "a real Shin", that He is settled upon the throne (istiqrar alal arsh) etc. See here for some proofs:
Ibn Uthaymin blindly relied on Ibn al Qayyim - when the latter asserted that Allah is SITTING on the throne - based on a forged narration ascribed to Musnad Ahmed!
Ibn Uthaymin is discussed here but i don't expect you to believe in it but may be you will attack the compiler instead? -
As for Bin Baz - the one who gave a fatwa to allow US troops into the Arabian peninsula:
As for al-Albani - the self taught Hadith critique:
These 3 are not reliable scholars for most Sunni's.
You wanted to know if these 3 opposed the 4 Mujtahid Imams. Can you deny that these 3 are on the aqeeda promulgated by Ibn Taymiyya? Ibn Taymiyya belived that Allah has a direction - Proof and refutation of him is soon to be printed:
When did the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) or the Sahaba ever believe that Allah's istiwa is bi-dhatihi like Bin Baz and Ibn Uthaymin assert. The same applies to affirming a "Shin/Saaq" for Allah, istiqrar or julus on the Arsh?! These were not the beliefs of the 4 Imams also. If you also believe in these points - then where is it found in sound nass like the Kitab wal Sunna, let alone the sayings of the 4 Imams?!
Salvation lies in having the same beliefs affirmed from the Qur'an and authentic Sunna transmitted and understood by the real Salafi Imams and their successors from the Khalaf - who are the Asha'ira and Maturidiyya, not the doctrrine of Ibn Taymiyya/Ibn al Qayyim and their followers today. Adhering to a fiqhi Madhhab is one thing and it doesn't mean you have the right aqeeda by default. I've never read that Nazim said what you claimed - so link a reference at least.Originally Posted by arabic_courses
Since when has the views of Ibn Taymiyya/Ibn al Qayyim, Bin Baz, al-Albani, Ibn Uthaymin and their minions become a proof in Islam?! Your logic is very shallow indeed. Who said there is no taqleed allowed in aqeeda? The Ashari's say taqleed is not allowed, but the so called Salafi's of this age make taqleed of their named authorities. Some Maturidi's also allow taqleed in aqeeda for the awam. You've failed to quote any major and reliable Imam saying that both Ashari's and Maturidi's are not on the haqq. Using your logic - would also lead to non Taqleed of the 4 Madhhabs - as the Sahaba obviously knew no such Madhhabs except the Sunna.Originally Posted by arabic+courses
And your calling Shaykh Ibn Hajar al=Haytami - "this guy" - is mere disrespect for one who is considered to be a Hujja to all later Shafi'i scholars.
There is no point quoting the likes of Ibn Taymiyya and his anti-Ash'ari diatribe as he is not reliable in aqeeda. This is Ibn Taymiyya who believed that Allah will seat al-Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) on the arsh next to him literally:
The likes of Bin Baz and ibn Uthaymin are said to have connection to the Hanbali school, but in reality they opposed its fiqh and real aqeeda on a number of issues. One may gauge this here also:
Originally Posted by arabic_courses
I am not interested in what Shi'a claim for their aqeeda. Ashari's and Maturidi's came after the 3 centuries so this point you made is ridiculous:
Using your logic - can you quote anyone from the Salaf who said that the aqeeda of Ibn Taymiyya will be the true creed? Of course not - since the question would be an irrelevant nonsense. It seems like many students at Madina Uni are engrossed by the distortions spread years ago by the likes of Safar al Hawali. He has been exposed here:Originally Posted by arabic_courses
Read this also:
As for Ibn Qudama - then he is from the Hanabila in fiqh - but we disagree with some of his creedal assertions - like his belief that Allah's Kalam consists of Sawt and Harf - this is refuted by Asha'ira and Maturidiyya. But, we don't condemn him to hell - unlike the psedudo-Salafi mobsters who say that Ashari's and Maturidi's are from the deviant sects destined for hell fire! They've said the same about the Tableeghi Jama'at!
Even the pseudo-Salafi's have issues with Ibn Qudama:
Since you are at Madina Uni - then it is on the way of Ibn Abdal Wahhab's teachings. The latter was also a deviant who was refuted by his fellow Hanabila. A good book exposing this by a real Hanbali authority:
I'll stop here - but as i said - you are welcome to post on ************ - for more discussions insha'allah, as this is not promoted here any longer.