Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

    :salams

    Note: amon individuals, not those in positions of power or influence.

    Does it? And if so, in what way?

  • #2
    Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

    Originally posted by srahman33 View Post
    :salams

    Note: amon individuals, not those in positions of power or influence.

    Does it? And if so, in what way?
    not if we look at examples of the past from the pious predecessors and ulema they would not worry about being labelled khawarij

    I can get references but off the top of my head the early ulema were happy enough to label even not saying jazakallahkhair (in terms of showing ingratitude) as kufr

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

      Originally posted by nonameakhi View Post
      not if we look at examples of the past from the pious predecessors and ulema they would not worry about being labelled khawarij

      I can get references but off the top of my head the early ulema were happy enough to label even not saying jazakallahkhair (in terms of showing ingratitude) as kufr
      Oh.

      Yes I would be most grateful for some references bro, particularly for that statement. جزاك اللهُ خيراً‎

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

        Originally posted by srahman33 View Post
        Oh.

        Yes I would be most grateful for some references bro, particularly for that statement. جزاك اللهُ خيراً‎
        just to clarify akhie (in the way imam Bukhari did) obedience is imaan therefore disobedience is kufr. Their is the example of the Prophet saw saying women were more in hellfire because they focused on the bad deed of their husbands rather than the good deedS of their husbands and the sahabah saying should we throw them out and the response that it wasnt the kufr they were thinking of, ie takes you out of the fold of islam

        we know if a man denies quran or says jesus is son of God he is kaafir, but we get caught up in not being able to say that drinking alcohol is kufr whilst it is being drunk, or zina is kufr whilst the act is taking place. (there are hadith in bukhari and muslim narrated for example by Abu Hurayrah ra for this)

        The ulema of the salaf didnt feel compelled to differentiate everything like we have to, they were not labelled takfiri for their statements such as

        Tirmizhi, Jaabir ibn Abdillah said, “Whoever has been given any gift and has money to reward them then do it, but if he didn’t find any then let him say, ‘Jazakhallahu khair’ and the one who does not do so is ungrateful.”

        Ibn Mundhir, Targheeb wa tarheeb, pg 958, “Whoever gives a donation say, “Jazakhallahu Khair” and if he did not, say “Jazakhallahu Khair” anyway, but the one who is not grateful at all then he is kaafir.”

        here they didnt mean it as the kufr that takes you out of the fold of Islam, because for example in Ahmed, 18543, Numan bin Bashir, Muhammad (saw) said, “The one who is ungrateful for something small is ungrateful for a lot, and the one who ungrateful to the people is ungrateful to Allah and to speak about the blessings of Allah on you is shukr and to conceal it is kufr and he will come on the day of judgement while Allah is angry with him and if Allah wishes he may forgive or punish him.”

        point is they didnt feel the need to worry about being called khawarij

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

          The issues above, i.e. zina being called kufr and similar, have already been explained by scholars. Zina itself wasn't even called kufr, it is simply that the believer is not a believer when he is in the act. This does not mean he is automatically a kaafir. The issue relating to spouses, that is kufraanul `asheer and has been called "kufr" in hadith, but it is not kufr in Allah and His Messenger :saw: as we know, for instance, a christian or jew is a kaafir. Scholars have already explained what is meant by these ahadith and other evidences indicate clearly what the nature of that "kufr" is, and it has nothing to do with major kufr.

          You can't take these evidences without having the knowledge background in both the language and context and start speaking on them in this matter, as some ignorant person might get the impression all these people are outside the folds of Islam. Not only that, but to imply that scholars were somehow like this, when they were clearly not.

          Originally posted by nonameakhi View Post
          I can get references but off the top of my head the early ulema were happy enough to label even not saying jazakallahkhair (in terms of showing ingratitude) as kufr
          This too is also misleading because you're using a trait of the language to imply a completely different meaning. Just like the wife being ungrateful is "kufr", so would this then be so. Are you implying what is meant now is that this casts one outside of the folds of Islam, and that scholars somehow believed this...?

          And in answer to the topic, it is harmful. I've met individuals with the takfiri type attitude, they tend to be volatile and arrogant, crossing people off as soon as they say a tiny thing that goes against their mind, not even against Islam itself. But how could they not be like that when they are content with casting off large chunks of the Ummah outside the fold of Islam based on assumption? In most cases, those who hold these positions are themselves afflicted with a sickness in their hearts. It manifests in their actions when you see exactly what they are capable of when they are put in the right situations. They are harmful to the Ummah just as other sinners are, but more so due to ahadith pointing this out as well as history.
          Last edited by علي; 08-09-16, 02:43 AM.
          والمبادرة إلى التكفير إنما تغلب على طباع من يغلب عليهم الجهل - ابن تيمية رحمه الله - بغية المرتاد

          "Rushing towards takfir is an attitude which is dominant over those who are defeated by ignorance." - Ibn Taymiyyah Rahimahullah [Bughyatul Murtaad, page 354]

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

            Originally posted by nonameakhi View Post
            just to clarify akhie (in the way imam Bukhari did) obedience is imaan therefore disobedience is kufr. Their is the example of the Prophet saw saying women were more in hellfire because they focused on the bad deed of their husbands rather than the good deedS of their husbands and the sahabah saying should we throw them out and the response that it wasnt the kufr they were thinking of, ie takes you out of the fold of islam

            we know if a man denies quran or says jesus is son of God he is kaafir, but we get caught up in not being able to say that drinking alcohol is kufr whilst it is being drunk, or zina is kufr whilst the act is taking place. (there are hadith in bukhari and muslim narrated for example by Abu Hurayrah ra for this)

            The ulema of the salaf didnt feel compelled to differentiate everything like we have to, they were not labelled takfiri for their statements such as

            Tirmizhi, Jaabir ibn Abdillah said, “Whoever has been given any gift and has money to reward them then do it, but if he didn’t find any then let him say, ‘Jazakhallahu khair’ and the one who does not do so is ungrateful.”

            Ibn Mundhir, Targheeb wa tarheeb, pg 958, “Whoever gives a donation say, “Jazakhallahu Khair” and if he did not, say “Jazakhallahu Khair” anyway, but the one who is not grateful at all then he is kaafir.”

            here they didnt mean it as the kufr that takes you out of the fold of Islam, because for example in Ahmed, 18543, Numan bin Bashir, Muhammad (saw) said, “The one who is ungrateful for something small is ungrateful for a lot, and the one who ungrateful to the people is ungrateful to Allah and to speak about the blessings of Allah on you is shukr and to conceal it is kufr and he will come on the day of judgement while Allah is angry with him and if Allah wishes he may forgive or punish him.”

            point is they didnt feel the need to worry about being called khawarij
            جزاك اللهُ خيراً‎

            So with regards to obedience being imaan and disobedience being kufr, I agree in the sense that you obey the one you love (which in this case referring to Allah translates to imaan), and therefore disobedience could suggest what you have said. However isn't disobedience of two types though? One is defiantly disobedient, and the other is disobedient out of a weakness of himself. Before I go on with my question though, I want to clarify a matter: does the act of 'kufr' render one a 'kaafir'? Like how for example you said zinah is kufr, so what of the one who commits it? And is this type of kufr you refer to considered major or minor?

            So take two people for example: one commits a major sin (drinking) because he doesn't care for what Allah has commanded and does not fear the hellfire; and then, take one who commits the same sin but only out of desire, though he feels remorse and wishes he could overcome this propensity, AND does not deny its unlawfulness?
            The first example, Allah knows best what he is as it would appear he may subconsciously deny the hellfire if he really can be that defiant, and the denial of hellfire is kufr for sure, but the second example, can he be treated in the same way? I mean may refer to him as a 'fasiq', but would you still consider him a Muslim if he was a consistent sinner in this regard?


            And the other thing I wanted to mention is that we know a person could die having committed such sins and still may be forgiven if Allah chooses to forgive him; but note that he is still subject to Allah's mercy which is only shown to Muslims, as opposed to a complete atheist for example who'll be the dweller of hellfire for always.
            Moreover, the intercession of the Prophet :saw: is for those of his ummah that have committed "major" sins, and this concession is not given to any except Muslims.

            As for the matter of ingratitude = a form of 'kufr', well that is interesting جزاك اللهُ خيراً‎
            But then nearly all Muslims would be guilty of this... Is there any commentary or anything you have?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

              Originally posted by علي View Post
              And in answer to the topic, it is harmful. I've met individuals with the takfiri type attitude, they tend to be volatile and arrogant, crossing people off as soon as they say a tiny thing that goes against their mind, not even against Islam itself. But how could they not be like that when they are content with casting off large chunks of the Ummah outside the fold of Islam based on assumption? In most cases, those who hold these positions are themselves afflicted with a sickness in their hearts. It manifests in their actions when you see exactly what they are capable of when they are put in the right situations. They are harmful to the Ummah just as other sinners are, but more so due to ahadith pointing this out as well as history.
              Yes I agree but I was looking for a clearer example because though I know it to be true I cannot quite think of how and why.

              Because if an individual decided to cross off a whole bunch of people, and another individual did it, and another, and another... Eventually you would just end up with lots of little groups of like-minded Muslims. But they are just individuals and they weild no power; so now then, done one individual in Islamabad affect the Muslims in the wider world? It doesn't.

              If it was an Islamic state then there would be the risk of infighting etc. but today we just have a bunch of Muslim countries and non-Muslim countries and Muslims are spread across these. I can understand if it was a group of Muslims who were also possessors of power/influence, but as for individuals I don't know.

              I guess what I am sort of asking is that, this kind of attitude among Muslims, does it harm the Muslim "ummah" by way of incurring the displeasure of Allah Who then causes the current dire situation to continue, or are the two unrelated? I mean is there some sort of narration referring to something like this.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                It pitches two sides against eachother, and makes them averse to doing what the other does. More-so the accused, because if your bully enjoys something or has some habit or such, you don't want to imitate him. Thereby the accused can become distanced from muslim practices out of anger, hatred etc.
                If the person is a mushrik calling himself muslim then it won't matter what he thinks of the accuser nor what he does, he's already engaged in shirk lol.
                Say what somebody can do instead of the haram if you want to help.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                  Originally posted by srahman33 View Post
                  :salams
                  Note: amon individuals, not those in positions of power or influence.
                  Does it? And if so, in what way?
                  Salam ! Yes, of course, they make sectarian wars between Sunnies themselves and between Sunnies and Shias and between Shias themselves and then all the Ummah become weak and this harms all the Ummah. It is happening in front us as a good example. Do not you see !?

                  Sectarian beliefs should not be mixed with the other important things. Tolerance is very important to keep a country and all the Ummah united. Respect to the people and the will of people is the solution. There is no way out. A mutual respect.

                  The solution is this hadith : Love for Your Brother What You Love for Yourself.

                  Till Mahdi emerges.
                  Last edited by ALAS; 08-09-16, 09:14 AM.
                  Note: I am a shia.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                    does having a modernist/moderate attitude harm the ummah?

                    It all depends what exactly you mean by these terms. You have to be more clear.
                    There are people who do takfir on leaders/governments and anyone who falls into something which takes one out of islam.
                    there are people who takfir just because they disagree with someone
                    and there are people who takfir on sins and literally everyone that isn't them and there 2 friends
                    Then you have those who do takfir even on themselves

                    so who are you talking about because we have all kinds of extremes today in all directions.
                    شَكَوْتُ إلَى وَكِيعٍ سُوءَ حِفْظِي
                    فَأرْشَدَنِي إلَى تَرْكِ المعَاصي
                    وَأخْبَرَنِي بأَنَّ العِلْمَ نُورٌ
                    ونورُ الله لا يهدى لعاصي

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                      If you stay silent about some lesser forms of deviance then that deviance will slowly be accepted and then there will come a greater deviation, which you display a 'takfiri' attitude against but the other deviants which you were silent about, will accept them and it will create a stronger fitnah.

                      However going crazy with the takfir isnt good either...
                      Accept the decree

                      It has happened to a million other people don't expect to be the exception

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                        Originally posted by Rumaysah~ View Post
                        does having a modernist/moderate attitude harm the ummah?

                        It all depends what exactly you mean by these terms. You have to be more clear.
                        There are people who do takfir on leaders/governments and anyone who falls into something which takes one out of islam.
                        there are people who takfir just because they disagree with someone
                        and there are people who takfir on sins and literally everyone that isn't them and there 2 friends
                        Then you have those who do takfir even on themselves

                        so who are you talking about because we have all kinds of extremes today in all directions.
                        Good point about the modernists جزاك اللهُ خيراً‎ and yes for sure they do.

                        As for being specific, well I was talking about the general 'attitude' you may observe among those who rush to this judgment. By this I mean when an individual disagrees with someone upon a matter; it could be anything such as 'does this sin take one out of the folds of Islam' etc. and even though there exists a difference of opinion among scholars, the individual will disregard this and make 'takfir' of the one who does not follow the opinion he follows? - because isn't this business of 'takfir' to be left to the scholars and those of knowledge? Surely individuals who have not taken the time to study Islam properly cannot be given this right?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                          In an Islamic state, there would be consequences for the accused, or the one making takfeer. Currently, either one would suffer from a little social stigma at most so it could be that they don't realise (or don't care) about the seriousness.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                            Originally posted by علي View Post
                            The issues above, i.e. zina being called kufr and similar, have already been explained by scholars. Zina itself wasn't even called kufr, it is simply that the believer is not a believer when he is in the act. This does not mean he is automatically a kaafir. The issue relating to spouses, that is kufraanul `asheer and has been called "kufr" in hadith, but it is not kufr in Allah and His Messenger :saw: as we know, for instance, a christian or jew is a kaafir. Scholars have already explained what is meant by these ahadith and other evidences indicate clearly what the nature of that "kufr" is, and it has nothing to do with major kufr.

                            You can't take these evidences without having the knowledge background in both the language and context and start speaking on them in this matter, as some ignorant person might get the impression all these people are outside the folds of Islam. Not only that, but to imply that scholars were somehow like this, when they were clearly not.



                            This too is also misleading because you're using a trait of the language to imply a completely different meaning. Just like the wife being ungrateful is "kufr", so would this then be so. Are you implying what is meant now is that this casts one outside of the folds of Islam, and that scholars somehow believed this...?

                            And in answer to the topic, it is harmful. I've met individuals with the takfiri type attitude, they tend to be volatile and arrogant, crossing people off as soon as they say a tiny thing that goes against their mind, not even against Islam itself. But how could they not be like that when they are content with casting off large chunks of the Ummah outside the fold of Islam based on assumption? In most cases, those who hold these positions are themselves afflicted with a sickness in their hearts. It manifests in their actions when you see exactly what they are capable of when they are put in the right situations. They are harmful to the Ummah just as other sinners are, but more so due to ahadith pointing this out as well as history.
                            you have just kind of rewritten what i have said during this discussion. and it clearly doesnt argue or state that the people are outside of Islam or that the scholars said it did (or didnt), it simply states that ulema of the salaf were not as worried about being labelled khawarij as people are so intent on doing so today



                            I see more arrogance in those screeching khawarij and saying saying you need x y and z to be able to decipher such and such, whilst all the time interpreting things themselves and labeling people

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Does having a 'takfiri' attitude, among individuals, harm the Muslim 'ummah'?

                              Originally posted by srahman33 View Post
                              جزاك اللهُ خيراً‎

                              So with regards to obedience being imaan and disobedience being kufr, I agree in the sense that you obey the one you love (which in this case referring to Allah translates to imaan), and therefore disobedience could suggest what you have said. However isn't disobedience of two types though? One is defiantly disobedient, and the other is disobedient out of a weakness of himself. Before I go on with my question though, I want to clarify a matter: does the act of 'kufr' render one a 'kaafir'? Like how for example you said zinah is kufr, so what of the one who commits it? And is this type of kufr you refer to considered major or minor?

                              So take two people for example: one commits a major sin (drinking) because he doesn't care for what Allah has commanded and does not fear the hellfire; and then, take one who commits the same sin but only out of desire, though he feels remorse and wishes he could overcome this propensity, AND does not deny its unlawfulness?
                              The first example, Allah knows best what he is as it would appear he may subconsciously deny the hellfire if he really can be that defiant, and the denial of hellfire is kufr for sure, but the second example, can he be treated in the same way? I mean may refer to him as a 'fasiq', but would you still consider him a Muslim if he was a consistent sinner in this regard?


                              And the other thing I wanted to mention is that we know a person could die having committed such sins and still may be forgiven if Allah chooses to forgive him; but note that he is still subject to Allah's mercy which is only shown to Muslims, as opposed to a complete atheist for example who'll be the dweller of hellfire for always.
                              Moreover, the intercession of the Prophet :saw: is for those of his ummah that have committed "major" sins, and this concession is not given to any except Muslims.

                              As for the matter of ingratitude = a form of 'kufr', well that is interesting جزاك اللهُ خيراً‎
                              But then nearly all Muslims would be guilty of this... Is there any commentary or anything you have?
                              Hope this general response answers your questions as i see them being linked

                              Basically we know that all commands for us are decided by Allah swt, so we must look at everything from that perspective

                              Therefore if an action is stated as kufr we accept it as major unless there is evidence for it being lesser

                              This is evidenced from the sahabah ra too. When the wives being in hellfire was told to them there initial response was to say shall we let them go ie they are kaafir. Then the Prophet saw said its not that what you are thinking. so it was lesser

                              It was same in other incidences see alcohol and where teh Prophet saw according to Ibn Majah said anyone who is addicted to alcohol is like he worshipped idols. Thats major right? but then other hadith where He saw said dont curse a guy who drank as he loves Allah swt makes it lesser

                              similarly with zina and stealing. We have the hadith that during the acts a believer is not a believer yet we also have in Sharh Muslim, Muhammad (saw) said, “Any servant who testifies la ilaha ilalah and dies on this will enter jannah,” Abu Dharr said, “Even if he steals and commits fornications?” And Muhammad (saw) replied, “Yes” And he asked twice more and Muhammad (saw) replied, “Even though Abu Dharr does not like this he will still enter jannah''

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X