The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than ISIS

[ZeeshanParvez]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

The thread has run into 19 Pages.

Has the OP addressed the following quotes?


القول أنا نكفر بالعموم فذلك من بهتان الأعداء الذين يصدون عن هذا الدين ، ونقول : سبحانك هذا بهتان عظيم .

( الدرر السنية 1/100 )

نسبوا إلينا أنواع المفتريات ، فكبرت الفتنة ، وأجلبوا علينا بخيل الشيطان ورجله ، فمنها : إشاعة البهتان بما يستحي العاقل أن يحكيه فضلا عن أن يغتر به ، ومنها : ما ذكرتم أني أكفر جميع الناس إلا من اتبعني ، وأني أزعم أن أنكحتهم غير صحيحة ، فيا عجبا كيف يدخل هذا عقل عاقل ، وهل يقول هذا مسلم ؟

إني أبرأ إلى الله من هذا القول الذي ما يصدر إلا من مختل العقل فاقد الإدراك ، فقاتل الله أهل الأغراض الباطلة .

( الدرر السنية 1/80 ).


أنا أكفر من عرف دين الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام ثم بعد ما عرف سبه ، ونهى الناس عنه ، وعادى من فعله ، فهذا الذي أكفره ، وأكثر الأمة ولله الحمد ليسوا كذلك

( الدرر السنية 1/73 )


Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhaab has clearly stated that he is not making takfiir of everyone. The quotes show that his I only know Laa ilaaha illallaah is not meant to be taken as it has been portrayed here.

In all fairness the OP did mention in his region. So, he was not calling everyone a kaafir. Nor was he claiming that only he knew Tawhiid?

No where near as bad as the Sufis who claim to be the Sultaan of the Awliyah or the Khaatim of the Awliyah.

Have those who follow this thread ever read what their favorite Sufis have written in their letters to others about their own virtues? So, their craziness is acceptable and open to interpretation but not what Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhaab said?

I guess the rebuttal there would be that the Sufis did not go killing people but he did. Right?

[Abu Sulayman]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

The thread has run into 19 Pages.

Has the OP addressed the following quotes

...

Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhaab has clearly stated that he is not making takfiir of everyone. The quotes show that his I only know Laa ilaaha illallaah is not meant to be taken as it has been portrayed here.

Brother, please think logical. Will any Khariji tell you "Yes, I'm an evil Khariji who makes Takfir upon the majority of Muslims and I support their killing"? Of course not.
Just look at Da'ish today: Don't they kill Muslims left and right? Of course they do, but at the same time they'll deny being Khawarij and Takfiris and even act as if they're defending Muslims.
The same is true for MIAW and his early followers:
If you read their words it's full of accusations against pretty much all Muslims of their times (scholars and laymen alike) and if you see their own history books it's full of descriptions of how many Muslims they killed all around the Arabian peninsula and the regions around it, but at they same time they acted as if they were not Khawarij and Mariqin.

Since you can understand Arabic I would recommend you read the following link (it shows many many examples of the Ghuluww of Najdis on a theoretical and practical level):

http://www.aslein.net/showthread.php...3740#post93740

Reading the above should not leave any doubt whatsoever regarding them being very very extreme.

As for the issue you mentioned regarding so called "Sufis":
Listen brother: This is the religion of Allah and whoever says or makes something that is clearly against the teachings of Islam, then it will be rejected from him no matter what he calls himself (no matter whether it's "Sufi", "Salafi", etc.). Hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Real Wahhabis would neither affirm nor reject whether "God" (I'm writing it like this because Allah ta'ala is high above what they claim) is flying or not.
As Wahhabiyyah and Taymiyyun you have to believe that "God" has two real eyes with which he sees, a real face, two real hands with real fingers, a real shin, real feet, real this and real that.

Note that you're not allowed to accept Yad, Wajh and 'Ayn as Sifat which are meanings (Ma'ani) subsisting in the essence of Allah ta'ala (as a group of scholars from the Ahl al-Sunnah did) rather you've to accept them as A'yan (i.e. physical entities which can be literally pointed at). This is of course Kufr according to every single scholar of Ahl al-Sunnah through out all centuries, but heyy they didn't know Tawhid anyways.

Other than this you have to believe that "God" really really descends to the lowest heaven and at the same he's still literally in the upward direction of the throne. This is similar illogical as the belief in trinity, but heyy Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 Ah) said it so it must be true.

Woe to you if you believe in the absolute highness of Allah ta'ala and woe to you if you make Tafwidh (the Madhhab of the Salaf al-salih according to Ash'aris and Atharis) of the Ayat and Ahadith of the Sifat.

Isn't it weird that people with such type of thinking are trying to tell us what Tawhid is and what not?!

You said as "Wahhabi / Taymiyun" we have to believe ..

This is not necessarily true. Athari's / Hanbalee / Ahl al Hadeeth / Salafee Aqidah in general does not delve in to the kayfiyyah of the sifat of Allah , and we believe this is the pure madhhab of the Salaf.

Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) did engage in such theological rhetoric with intentions to promote the dhahir of the attributes which the Salaf affirmed , through the language and paradigm of the mutakalimoon.

His stances are not binding on any Salafee to follow , and in fact , he was criticised by fellow Athari's , and not for opposing the heretical theology of the Asha'ira , but rather , for engaging in ilm al kalam with regards to Allah's sifat.

This is simply the reality , and I personally don't appreciate your sly methods , perhaps you need some maturing to do. Enough with the " !?!?! " , and speak intellectually if you are attempting to give da'wah.

Salafees believe Allah has Two Hands , Two Eyes , and He is Above the Arsh in a manner which befits Him , bi la takyeef.

We are not 'forced' to believe in anything beyond what has been revealed and we do not accept / reject sifat based on burhaan huduth al ajsaam , unlike the innovators who followed a creed separate from what Allah and His Messenger came with ( saws)

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Okay, and why is it then Shirk to believe that the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - can be a mean (Sabab) for Allah's help to come? Is it Shirk to believe that it's possible that the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - supplicates for his Ummah after his death? Is it Shirk to believe that Allah's help may come by the Barakah (blessings) of Rasulallah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam?

If you go to the doctor, because you believe that he may be a mean (Sabab) for Allah's healing to come, have you comitted Shirk?

The people on the day of judgement who explicitly ask the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - for intercession (as it's reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and other sources) have they comitted Shirk for believing that the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - can be a mean for Allah's help to come?

Answer these questions clearly without changing topics please , so we may not deviate from what is important.

1) What abilties do you give to the Prophet Muhammad (saws) after his death ?

I don't care if Allah is ultimately the one who causes something to happen , the questions which need to be answered are as follows ..

1) Can the Prophet hear / see me , when I call him ?

2) Did Allah grant the Prophet any ability what so ever to help us after his death ?

If your answer to 2) is " We muslims believe Allah is the source " , ok but I am sending this message with abilities that Allah granted me. I also have abilities. You are not talking to Allah , you are talking to me , and this is only possible with Allah Ultimately Willing it.

So please address it with clarity , if you are competent of such a task. ( i asked you once earlier and you rejected it , I believe due to taqqiyyah or incompetence )

[aMuslimForLife]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

You said as "Wahhabi / Taymiyun" we have to believe ..

This is not necessarily true. Athari's / Hanbalee / Ahl al Hadeeth / Salafee Aqidah in general does not delve in to the kayfiyyah of the sifat of Allah , and we believe this is the pure madhhab of the Salaf.



)

The position of the muhaditheen is that Tafwid is way of the Salafus Saleh. (Refer to Shuyuk al Islam al Nawawi, Ibn Hajar Asqalani, al Suyuti and others)

The dhahir position of Salafi Dawah is an innovation of the anthropomorphic Hanbali scholars from Khalaf. There is absolutely no proof in the Quran, Sunnah, nor the Statements of the Salafus Saleh for the dhahir position. I have sincerely looked for such proof and have been unable to find it.

I want clear proof, not ambiguous proof.

Quran 3:7 is the clearest and strongest proof for Tafwid. And I have not read a good refutation of it.

According to Shafi and Hanbali scholars, these verses among the Attributes of Allah are among the unclear verses.

Imam Suyuti said, "The verses pertaining to the Divine Attributes are from the unclear (text)... The majority of Ahlus Sunnah, from them the Salaf and traditionists, believe in having faith in them while (at the same time) entrusting their intended meanings to Allah, Exalted; we do not explain them, while at the same time we declare Him transcendent above their literal meanings." (Al Itqan fi Ulum al Quran)

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




Salafi Creed VS Hanbali Creed

Imam Ahmad (d. 241 AH) said, “Allah is not to be described other than in the terms with which He has described Himself, or in which the Messenger of Allah – sallahu alayhi wa salam- has described Him. We do not exceed the Quran and Hadith.” (IbnTaymiyyah Hamawiyya – pg 271-272)(IbnTaymiyya-majmu fatawa – 5:26)


The difference between the creed of the Salaf and Modern Day Salafi creed

I personally do not consider the Salafi creed to be the Aqida of the Salafus Saleh. Thus I do not consider Salafi Aqida to be the Aqida of Imam Ahmad. The reality of the matter is that Salafis are the ones actually guilty of imitating the Christians. Creating a creed unknown to the Salafus Saleh, and then finding ambiguous proof in the Quran, Sunnah and the statements of the Salafus Saleh, to prove their point.

The Salafi (the modern movement or group) creed is essentially Ibn Taymiyyah’s understanding of the creed of Imam Ahmad and the Salafus Salih, while the Hanbali creed is essentially the creed of Imam Ahmad. One can argue that Ibn Taymiyyah was a Hanbali and thus what he said is part of the Hanbali school, as with any school, all their scholars make up the school, not just the founder. Fair enough, Ibn Taymiyyah followed the Hanbali school in matters of creed but he still differed with Imam Ahmad on particular issues. (1)

Despite Imam Ahmad wanting to be conservative in matters of creed, when he said, “How can I say what was not said before?” Ibn Taymiyyah differed with him in this by saying and attributing things to the Salafus Saleh, they never said, like taking the literal meaning or apparent meaning (dhahir) of the ambiguous statements from the Quran and Sunnah. Ibn Taymiyyah said, “Those who followed the Salaf,…, such as A Khattabi, Abu Bakr Al Khatib and others have stated that the way of the Salaf is to take the verses and hadiths of the Attributes upon their literal or apparent meaning (dhahir) and to state at the same time that they neither know their nature, nor conceive of them on human patterns.” (Majmo al Fatawa 33:176) This is the same position that is taught by most if not all Salafi scholars including Ibn Uthaymeen, Bin Baz and the other leading Salafi scholars, that the verses and hadiths are to be taken literally. Ibn Taymiyyah also opposed Imam Ahmad by using Ilm Kalam to refute those whom he disagreed with.

Ibn Rajab Al Hanbali on the creed of Imam Ahmad and the Salafus Salih

Ibn Rajab al Hanbali said, “The correct position in all of this is the position of the Righteous Salaf in their leaving the verses and hadiths concerning the Attributes as they came without explanation, asking how or likening them to creation. There is nothing at all contravening this position that is authentically reported from them, especially Imam Ahmad. Neither is anything reported from them proving that they probed into their meanings or propounded analogies and similitudes for them. This, even though there some who lived close to the time of Ahmad who did do some of this, following the way of Maqqatil, but they are not to be followed in this. Those who should be followed are the Imam of Islam such as ibn al Mubarak, Malik, Thawri, Awza’I, Shafi, Ahmad, Ishaq, Abu ‘Ubaid and their likes.” (Fadhl ‘Ilm al-Salaf ‘ala ‘Ilm al-Khalaf )

It is interesting to note in this statement of Ibn Rajab explaining the creed of the Salaf and in particular the creed of Imam Ahmad, he does not mention that their position concerning the unclear verses (ayat) and hadiths (narrations of the Prophet –sallahualayhiwasalam) related to Allah’s Attributes, that they are to be taken upon the literal meaning (ala dhahiri), but rather they would simply narrate them as they received them, as in the words of the Salaf themselves, “Leave them as they are without asking ‘How?”

The Creed of Imam Ahmad

Imam Ahmad (d. 241 AH) said, “Allah is not to be described other than in the terms with which He has described Himself, or in which the Messenger of Allah – sallahu alayhi wa salam- has described Him. We do not exceed the Quran and hadtih.” (IbnTaymiyyah Hamawiyya – pg 271-272)(IbnTaymiyya-majmu fatawa – 5:26)

Imam Ahmad also said, “We believe and confirm the hadiths of the Attributes without how and without meaning (wa la kayf wa la ma’na.) (Narrated from Hanbal ibn Ishaq through al Khallal by Ibn Qudamah in Dhamm al Tawil.)

The Creed of Those Who came before Imam Ahmad

Imam Shafi (d. 204 AH) was asked about the Divine Attributes. He said, “It is forbidden for the minds to represent Allah. It is forbidden for the imagination to conceive limits for Him. It is forbidden for speculation to presume anything about Him. It is forbidden for souls to think about His Essence. It is forbidden for consciences to deepen reflection about Him. It is forbidden for thoughts to grasp other than what He described Himself with, as conveyed by His Prophet –sallahualayhiwasalam. (Narrated from al Rabi ibnSulayman by IbnQudamah in Dhamm a Tawil g 20-21) Nothing about the literal meaning or apparent meaning…

Imam Shafi also said, “I believe in what comes from Allah in the meaning meant by the Messenger of Allah, sallahu alayhi wa salam.” (Ibn Qudamah in Lam’at al Itiqad) Again nothing about taking them upon their literal meaning or apparent meaning.

Al-Walid ibn Muslim (d. 194H) said, “I asked Malik, al-Awza’i, Laytb ibn Sa’d and Sufyan al-Thawri, may Allah have mercy upon them, concerning the reports related about the Attributes, so they all said, ‘Leave them as they are without asking ‘How?” (Reported by al-Aajurri in Ash-Sha’ri’ah, p. 314, al-Bayhaqi in Al-Asma was-Sifat, p. 453 and also al-I’tiqad, p. 118 and the chain of narration is hasan.) Again nothing about taking them upon their literal meaning. .

Al-Awza’i (d.157H) said, “I asked az-Zuhri and Makhul about the ayat pertaining to the Sifat (Attributes of Allah), so they said, ‘Leave them as they are.” (Reported by al-Laalikaa’ee in SharhUsulul-I’tiqad 3/430 and IbnQudamah al-Maqdisi in Dhammut-Ta‘wil, p. 18 and the chain of narration is hasan.) Again nothing about taking them upon their literal meaning or apparent meaning.

There seems to be a pattern….

In Daf Shubah al Tashbih (2) by Ibn Jawzi al Hanbali, he pleaded with his Hanbali brothers who insisted that the ambiguous verses and hadith are to be taken literally when he said, "Companions! Brothers! You are the People who adhere to the texts and follow them. This was the example of your Imam, the greatest Imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, May Allah Exalthed be He, have mercy on him, who under pain of torture, proclaimed, 'How can I say what was not been said before?' So, take care not to introduce into his madhab what does not belong in it."

And Allah knows best.

(1) This is not uncommon, many times the scholars of a particular school may disagree with the founder. This is another proof that following a madhab isn't blind following. However when a scholar differs with the founder of a school like anything, they may be correct or incorrect. Back to Ibn Taymiyyah. Despite Imam Ahmad staunch condemnation of speculative theology (Ilm al Kalam), Ibn Taymiyyah differed with Imam Ahmad engaged in it. Ibn Taymiyyah was a fervent Mutakallim, or speculative theologian, as one can discover from reading his Majmoo al Fatawa. Some defend him saying, he only engaged in study and language of the speculative theologians in order to refute them, yet this is the exact same argument the Shafis, Hanafis, Malikis use to defend the Asharis and the Maturidis, in that they used Ilm Kalam to refute the Mutazila. And Allah knows best.

(2) Daf Shubah al Tashbih by Ibn Jawzi has been translated into english with the title "The Attributes of God" by Shaykh Abdullah bin Hamid Ali.

[Abu Sulayman]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

You said as "Wahhabi / Taymiyun" we have to believe ..

This is not necessarily true. Athari's / Hanbalee / Ahl al Hadeeth / Salafee Aqidah in general does not delve in to the kayfiyyah of the sifat of Allah , and we believe this is the pure madhhab of the Salaf.

Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) did engage in such theological rhetoric with intentions to promote the dhahir of the attributes which the Salaf affirmed , through the language and paradigm of the mutakalimoon.

His stances are not binding on any Salafee to follow , and in fact , he was criticised by fellow Athari's , and not for opposing the heretical theology of the Asha'ira , but rather , for engaging in ilm al kalam with regards to Allah's sifat.

This is simply the reality , and I personally don't appreciate your sly methods , perhaps you need some maturing to do. Enough with the " !?!?! " , and speak intellectually if you are attempting to give da'wah.

Salafees believe Allah has Two Hands , Two Eyes , and He is Above the Arsh in a manner which befits Him , bi la takyeef.

We are not 'forced' to believe in anything beyond what has been revealed and we do not accept / reject sifat based on burhaan huduth al ajsaam , unlike the innovators who followed a creed separate from what Allah and His Messenger came with ( saws)

Dear brother, first of all: The "Salafi" movement is based upon the 'Aqidah of Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728 AH) and that of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) and is also influenced by Dhahiri anti-madhhabism. This movement has Mashayikh and Du'at and it's them who define their views and not layman such as you who in reality may actually be nearer to normal Sunnis than "Salafis".
Among the famous Mashayikh of them is Ibn 'Uthaymin, whose views regarding the issue of divine attributes is pretty much identical as that of Ibn Taymiyyah.

You shouldn't simply repeat what you've read on different "Salafi" websites, because they contain quite often half-true and even false informations.

You mention "Salafi 'Aqidah" together with Atharis/Hanbalis and that is a mistake, because most Hanabilah have been upon Tafwidh. Even according to Ibn Taymiyyah the majority of the Hanabilah of his time were upon Tafwidh. And Tafwidh is actually the Madhhab of the Salaf al-salih according to them.

The next issue is that you say that you do not delve into the Kayfiyyah: I'm upon the position that Kayfiyyah does not apply to Allah ta'ala at all. Now if you say that it does apply, we just don't know it, my question would be: Do you mean the Haqiqah (reality) of the divine attributes are not known? If that's the case, then we're in agreement in reality. If you however say no what I mean is indeed the modality like "how big god is", "what a form and colour his hands have", then this is disbelief by agreement of the Ahl al-Sunnah (and that is unfortunately what the "Salafi" Mashayikh intend!).

As for your statement regarding Yad, 'Ayn and Wajh (I dislike translating it because of the fear of having antropomorphist ideas): Do you accept them as divine attributes that are meanings (Ma'ani) subsisting in the divine essence (just like 'Ilm and Qudrah for example)? If yes, then a group from among the Ahl al-Sunnah indeed was upon this.
If you however intend to affirm them as physical entities (A'yan) that can be literally pointed at, then this is again disbelief by agreement of the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah (and that is the meaning that "Salafi" Mashayikh intend).

As you see when one goes more into details, then the real difference becomes clear.

As for your statement "sly methods" and to be more "intellectual": I haven't used any sly methods. The things that I say here can be backed up by clear evidences. And I don't use the same style of conversation regarding every person. The reason is that some people are respectful and one should also speak with them likewise, while other have no respect whatsoever and are more imterested in throwing around with accusations and they will be dealt with in a different way.

[Abu Sulayman]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Answer these questions clearly without changing topics please , so we may not deviate from what is important.

1) What abilties do you give to the Prophet Muhammad (saws) after his death ?

I don't care if Allah is ultimately the one who causes something to happen , the questions which need to be answered are as follows ..

1) Can the Prophet hear / see me , when I call him ?

2) Did Allah grant the Prophet any ability what so ever to help us after his death ?

If your answer to 2) is " We muslims believe Allah is the source " , ok but I am sending this message with abilities that Allah granted me. I also have abilities. You are not talking to Allah , you are talking to me , and this is only possible with Allah Ultimately Willing it.

So please address it with clarity , if you are competent of such a task. ( i asked you once earlier and you rejected it , I believe due to taqqiyyah or incompetence )

What I do believe is that the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - supplicates for his Ummah after his death. So this means that he's a mean for Allah's help to come through his supplication and intercession.

As for the issue of hearing: If one is in front of his grave he - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - will hear one and if one is far away then it may reach him through angels. Even if it doesn't reach him from afar, then I believe there is Barakah (blessings) in mentioning the name of Rasulallah, 'alayhi salatu wa sallam. So Allah's help may simply come by the Barakah of our beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.

If Allah ta'ala gives help to the Muslim who does Tawassul, Tashaffu' or Istighathah with the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam -, then this is a Mu'jizah that Allah ta'ala granted to his beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam, even after his death. That is why Imam Ibn al-Salah (d. 643 AH) said the following:

حتى لقد انتدب بعض العلماء لاستقصائها فجمع منها ألف معجزة وعددناه مقصرا إذا فوق ذلكبأضعاف لا تحصى فإنها ليست محصورة على ما وجد منها في عصره – صلى الله عليه وسلم – بل لمتزل تتجدد بعده – صلى الله عليه وسلم – على تعاقب العصور وذلك أن كرامات الأولياء من أمتهوإجابات المتوسلين به في حوائجهم ومغوثاتهم عقيب توسلهم به في شدائدهم براهين له – صلى اللهعليه وسلم – قواطع ومعجزات له سواطع ولا يعدها عد ولا يحصرها حد

In fact, one of the scholars attempted to enumerate these miracles, and counted one thousand; and even then, we consider him to have fallen short, for they are many multiples of that, and are, in fact, innumerable. They are not limited to only those that appeared at his hands during his life (peace and blessings of God be upon him); rather, they are continuously renewed after him (peace and blessings of God be upon him) with the turning of the ages; for the miracles (karamat) of the saints of his nation, and the answers to those who pray for the fulfilment of their needs by seeking intercession through him, and the succour which they find after seeking his intercession, by which they are delivered in the hour of their most dire need. . . all of these are unequivocal proofs of his greatness, and are to be counted as obvious miracles ascribed to him. As such, they have no limit!

Source: “Fatawa Ibn al-Salah” and translation taken from here: “Traditionalism against Scholasticism: The Debate Over “Curriculum” in Damascus Between 1150-1350”

Is everything clear now?

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

What I do believe is that the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - supplicates for his Ummah after his death. So this means that he's a mean for Allah's help to come through his supplication and intercession.

As for the issue of hearing: If one is in front of his grave he - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - will hear one and if one is far away then it may reach him through angels. Even if it doesn't reach him from afar, then I believe there is Barakah (blessings) in mentioning the name of Rasulallah, 'alayhi salatu wa sallam. So Allah's help may simply come by the Barakah of our beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.

If Allah ta'ala gives help to the Muslim who does Tawassul, Tashaffu' or Istighathah with the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam -, then this is a Mu'jizah that Allah ta'ala granted to his beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam, even after his death. That is why Imam Ibn al-Salah (d. 643 AH) said the following:

حتى لقد انتدب بعض العلماء لاستقصائها فجمع منها ألف معجزة وعددناه مقصرا إذا فوق ذلكبأضعاف لا تحصى فإنها ليست محصورة على ما وجد منها في عصره – صلى الله عليه وسلم – بل لمتزل تتجدد بعده – صلى الله عليه وسلم – على تعاقب العصور وذلك أن كرامات الأولياء من أمتهوإجابات المتوسلين به في حوائجهم ومغوثاتهم عقيب توسلهم به في شدائدهم براهين له – صلى اللهعليه وسلم – قواطع ومعجزات له سواطع ولا يعدها عد ولا يحصرها حد

In fact, one of the scholars attempted to enumerate these miracles, and counted one thousand; and even then, we consider him to have fallen short, for they are many multiples of that, and are, in fact, innumerable. They are not limited to only those that appeared at his hands during his life (peace and blessings of God be upon him); rather, they are continuously renewed after him (peace and blessings of God be upon him) with the turning of the ages; for the miracles (karamat) of the saints of his nation, and the answers to those who pray for the fulfilment of their needs by seeking intercession through him, and the succour which they find after seeking his intercession, by which they are delivered in the hour of their most dire need. . . all of these are unequivocal proofs of his greatness, and are to be counted as obvious miracles ascribed to him. As such, they have no limit!

Source: “Fatawa Ibn al-Salah” and translation taken from here: “Traditionalism against Scholasticism: The Debate Over “Curriculum” in Damascus Between 1150-1350”

Is everything clear now?

Yes everything is clear now , Jazak Allah Khair , and thank you for kindly responding.
[MENTION=3349]AbuNajm[/MENTION] [MENTION=118642]abufulaans[/MENTION]

As you can see , the definition of istighatha which this brother intends is not the same as ..

" Calling upon the Prophet (as) , believing the Prophet can certainly hear at all times and in all places - and also responds to your needs himself."

Personally I see this alluding more to tawasul. Not that I believe it is correct to engage in it, but that, and my beliefs are besides the point.

Question : Would you brothers claim , from the Aqidah / Tradition you follow , that this form of istighatha is considered as Shirk Akbar , or just Bid'ah and Haram ?

Thank you.

[AbuNajm]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

The position of the muhaditheen is that Tafwid is way of the Salafus Saleh. (Refer to Shuyuk al Islam al Nawawi, Ibn Hajar Asqalani, al Suyuti and others)

Great. Just give us one quote from each in which they specifically state that "Tafwid" is the correct way to approach every single verse of the Quran dealing with Allah's Attributes.

Then I'll show examples where each of them do not follow that alleged approach.

The dhahir position of Salafi Dawah is an innovation of the anthropomorphic Hanbali scholars from Khalaf. There is absolutely no proof in the Quran, Sunnah, nor the Statements of the Salafus Saleh for the dhahir position. I have sincerely looked for such proof and have been unable to find it.

The easiest way to prove this claim a complete and utter lie, is to show a single non-Hanbali scholar before the advent of the "Salafi Dawah" saying to take the verses and Hadith about Allah's Attributes upon their "Dhahir".

أنبأنا أبو بكر الخطيب قال: " [أما] الكلام في الصفات، فأما ما روي منها في السنن الصحاح، فمذهب السلف إثباتها وإجراؤها على ظواهرها

"Abu Bakr al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi informed us: "[As for] the discourse regarding the Attributes- what was transmitted about them in the authentic Sunan, then the Madh'hab of the Salaf is to affirm them and pass them along upon their apparent meanings [Dhawaahir]..."

Adh-Dhahabi in Kitab al-Arsh, 2/456

Al-Khateeb al-Bagdadi was a famous Shafi'ee Imam from the 5th century Hijri. He was a Faqeeh and Haafiz of Hadith. He could not be described as a "Hanbali anthropomorph of Salafi Dawah", yet there it is in plain Arabic and English.

How "sincere" could your search have been if you were unable to find this very famous quote available in even a basic Google search about the "Dhaahir" meaning of the Attributes?

There are many more quotes confirming this from Ibn Abd al-Barr, al-Khattabi and others from the earlier scholars who were Maliki and Shafi'ee, NOT Hanbali.

قَالَ القَاضِي أَبُو يعلى فِي كتاب إبِْطَال التَّأْوِيل لَا يجوز رد هَذِه الْأَخْبَار وَلَا التشاغل بتأويلها وَالْوَاجِب حملهَا على ظَاهرهَا وَأَنَّهَا صِفَات لله

"It is not permissible to reject these reports nor preoccupy oneself with their Ta'weel. And what is obligatory is to convey them upon their apparent meaning [Dhaahir] and they are the Attributes for Allah..."

Abu Ya'laa in Ibtaal at-Ta'weel

Of course Abu Ya'laa is a Hanbali scholar from the 4th century Hijri and is not a "Salafi anthropomorph".

Here is al-Ghazali mentioning the instability of the Ash'ari creed:

وَذَهَبت طَائِفَة إِلَى الإقتصاد وفتحوا بَاب التَّأْوِيل فِي بعض مَا يتَعَلَّق بِصِفَات الله سُبْحَانَهُ وَتركُوا مَا يتَعَلَّق بِالآخِرَة على ظواهرها وَمنعُوا التَّأْوِيل فِيهِ وهم الأشعرية

"And a group adopted frugality and they opened the gate of Ta'weel regarding SOME of what is related to the Attributes of Allah SWT; AND they left what was related to the Akhirah upon their apparent meanings [Dhawaahir] and forbid Ta'weel regarding it. And they are the Ash'aris..."

Al-Ghazali in Qawaa'id al-Aqaa'id p. 137

So even Ash'aris adopt the Dhaahir meaning of certain matters related to the Ghayb in the Quran and Sunnah. In other cases they make Ta'weel.

You should know- Tafweedh is a fairytale methodology that no one has ever successfully adopted, otherwise they would never speak about the meaning of any matter of the Ghayb except to say "Allah knows best what it means."

Quran 3:7 is the clearest and strongest proof for Tafwid. And I have not read a good refutation of it.

That you would think this verse is proof for Tafweedh demonstrates that you not only know nothing about the language of the Arabs but also that you have no idea what Tafweedh means.

This verse says that there are two types of verses: clear [Muhkamaat] and unclear [Mutashabihaat].

At-Tabari says that the clear verses, which are the bases of the Quran, are those related to the obligations, commands, prohibitions and matters upon which the Deen relies on.

The unclear verses are those which are unclear in their recitation and which differ in meaning.

He then goes on to give the different opinions regarding the meaning of these two terms:

1) Muhkam = verses which are acted upon, i.e. the abrogating and affirmed rulings; Mutashabihah = verses which are not acted upon, i.e. abrogated.

2) Muhkam = verses containing the rulings of Allah in which the Halaal and Haraam are clarified; Mutashabihah = verses which resemble other verses in meaning, even if the wordings differ.

3) Muhkam = verses that only have one possible meaning; Mutashabihah = verses which have various possible explanations.

4) Muhkam = verses containing the rulings of Allah, stories of the nations, their Messengers, and the detailing of that to Muhammad SAWS and his Ummah; Mutashabihah = verses which resemble each other in their wording although they differ in meaning, and those which differ in wording, yet agree in meaning.

5) Muhkam = verses which scholars know, understand and can explain their meaning; Mutashabihah = verses for which none has a way to know their meaning, i.e. when Isa AS will return to earth and the abbreviated letters at the beginning of Suwar.

See Tafsir at-Tabari pgs. 6/173-180

As you can see, one of the earliest and most authoritative Mufassireen does not even mention the Attributes of Allah in explanation of the verse you mentioned is proof of Tafweedh regarding the Attributes.

In explaining the rest of the verse, at-Tabari also mentions the rest of the verse as referring to the Christians who came to the Prophet SAWS to ask about Isa AS. As for their seeking "Fitnah", then this refers to their "Shirk".

Again, a fail on your part to even investigate properly the Tafsir of this Ayah before blindly following the Ash'ari distorters.

According to Shafi and Hanbali scholars, these verses among the Attributes of Allah are among the unclear verses.

I already provided you at-Tabari's explanation of the term "Mutashabihah". In that case, the most common explanation is that the Mutashabihah verses have various meanings and wordings where as the Muhkam have one possible meaning. This explanation contradicts the very basis of Tafweedh, i.e. no meaning at all.

If we take the other explanation of "Mutashabihah", i.e. that it refers to what only Allah knows, then the Attributes match this meaning in regards to their Kayfiyyah, but not their meaning. And this also contradicts the basis of Tafweedh.

For those of us who have studied this topic in depth, we already know that some Hanbalis and Shafi'ee jurists were influenced by the Mutakallimeen and Ash'aris in respect to some of their beliefs.

Ash'aris love to present the quotes of these Ash'ari-influenced jurists in an effort to persuade naive Muslims that expertise in Fiqh has anything to do with Imaamah in Aqeedah.

Imam Suyuti said, "The verses pertaining to the Divine Attributes are from the unclear (text)... The majority of Ahlus Sunnah, from them the Salaf and traditionists, believe in having faith in them while (at the same time) entrusting their intended meanings to Allah, Exalted; we do not explain them, while at the same time we declare Him transcendent above their literal meanings." (Al Itqan fi Ulum al Quran)

I wonder if you even have this book or even read it before.

As-Suyuti goes through all the meanings of the same verse above and refers to all of the opinions of the Mufassireen from the Salaf. Every single one of them referred to either of the 5 opinions at-Tabari mentioned in his Tafseer, in varying levels of detail and terminology.

Then as-Suyuti mentions this statement including Tafweedh without a single reference to any of those Salaf and the qutoes which follow do not mention Tafweedh either.

The only person as-Suyuti mentions as having written a Mufrad backing up this claim is Ibn al-Labban, the Shafi'ee scholar who died in 749AH.

So what Tafsir of the term "Mutashabihah" is as-Suyuti referring to when saying the Sifaat/Attributes are from the "Mutashabihah"?

If it is the last opinion of the 5, i.e. only Allah knows their meaning like the abbreviated letters or exact time of the descent of Isa AS, then how come the Salaf do not adhere to this in all of their Tafseer regarding the Attributes?

Why do some of the Salaf discuss the meaning of verses like: {And He is with you wherever you are...}[57:4]? Imam Ahmad rA, says that this verse means "Allah is with you by means of His knowledge," and he specifies the meaning. This verse deals with the Attribute of Ma'iyyah or the "With-ness" of Allah.

This is in direct violation of the alleged adherence of the Salaf to the type of Tafweedh that Ash'aris claim regarding the Attributes of Allah. There are many more.

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

I'm surprised that you didn't mention something that appears to support your claim of Tafweedh even more than this quote. It comes in the same short chapter where the above quote is mentioned:

ولأن قولهم {آمَنَّا بِهِ} يدل على نوع تفويض وتسليم لشيء لم يقفوا على معناه

"And because their statement: {We believe in it...} demonstrates a type of Tafweedh and surrender to something whose meaning they cannot come to know..."

Those of us who have studied this matter in depth do not get caught up in terminology but rather the intent behind the words.

Does this make Ibn Qudaamah one of the Ash'ari Mufawwidhah because he mentioned that the verses of Attributes are from the "Mutashabihaat" and a "type of Tafweedh"?

Just read his other works like Dhamm at-Ta'weel where Ibn Qudaamah explains what "type of Tafweedh" he refers to as valid:

فَإِن قيل فقد تأولتم آيَات وأخبارا فقلتم فِي قَوْله تَعَالَى {وَهُوَ مَعكُمْ أَيْن مَا كُنْتُم} [الْحَدِيد 4] أَي بِالْعلمِ وَنَحْو هَذَا من الْآيَات وَالْأَخْبَار فيلزمكم مَا لزمنا
قُلْنَا نَحن لم نتأول شَيْئا وَحمل هَذِه اللفظات على هَذِه الْمعَانِي لَيْسَ بِتَأْوِيل لِأَن التَّأْوِيل صرف اللَّفْظ عَن ظَاهره وَهَذِه الْمعَانِي هِيَ الظَّاهِر من هَذِه الْأَلْفَاظ بِدَلِيل أَنه الْمُتَبَادر إِلَى الأفهام مِنْهَا

"Thus if it is said: "Then you have made Ta'weel of the verses and reports when you said about His statement, exalted is He: {And He is with you wherever you are}[al-Hadeed:4], "in other words- with knowledge," and similar to this from the verses and reports."

Then it requires of you what it requires of us; we say: "We did not make Ta'weel of anything. Conveying these words upon this meaning is not "Ta'weel" because Ta'weel is to divert the word from its apparent meaning [Dhaahir], while this meaning is the apparent meaning [Dhaahir] of these words through the proof that it is that which first occurs to the understanding"."

See p. 45 Raqam #93-94As Ibn Qudaamah himself explains, Tafweedh is to defer the meaning to its speaker, whether that is Allah or His Messenger SAWS. And the meaning must necessarily follow its Dhaahir or apparent meaning and not be distorted or altered through diverting the meaning from its Dhaahir to another explanation, whether metaphorical or otherwise.

So this explanation of the "type of Tafweedh" that Ibn Qudaamah adopts shows that it is Tafweedh al-Kayfiyyah and not Tafweedh al-Ma'naa. And that Tafweedh according to Ibn Qudaamah is to relegate the meaning of the Attributes to Allah and knowing the "how-ness" of them is impossible to know while the "meaning" is deferred to their apparent meaning, whether that is metaphorical or literal.

In other words, Ibn Qudaamah was as far from being an Ash'ari Mufawwidhah as can be possible.

...

The rest of your post is just cut & paste.

If you're sincere in your search for the truth regarding Tafweedh, then chew on the above for a while. You will see how the methodology of the Salaf towards Tafweedh is nothing like what the Ash'aris claim. And it is clear your wrong understanding and lack of experience in studying this topic without bias leads you to succumb to a kind of confirmation bias very common among the less adept followers of the pseudo- neo-Ash'aris.

[AbuNajm]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Answer these questions clearly without changing topics please , so we may not deviate from what is important.

1) What abilties do you give to the Prophet Muhammad (saws) after his death ?

Whatever the Hadith grants him SAWS and only specifically what the authentic Hadith grant him SAWS.

I don't care if Allah is ultimately the one who causes something to happen , the questions which need to be answered are as follows ..

1) Can the Prophet hear / see me , when I call him ?

No. And there is no Hadith which suggest this is the case.

2) Did Allah grant the Prophet any ability what so ever to help us after his death ?

Only on the Day of Resurrection.

I know these questions weren't directed at me, however unlike the OP, I have straight-forward answers for questions that speak to the heart of what makes Islam different from every other religion.

[aMuslimForLife]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

The easiest way to prove this claim a complete and utter lie, is to show a single non-Hanbali scholar before the advent of the "Salafi Dawah" saying to take the verses and Hadith about Allah's Attributes upon their "Dhahir".

أنبأنا أبو بكر الخطيب قال: " [أما] الكلام في الصفات، فأما ما روي منها في السنن الصحاح، فمذهب السلف إثباتها وإجراؤها على ظواهرها

"Abu Bakr al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi informed us: "[As for] the discourse regarding the Attributes- what was transmitted about them in the authentic Sunan, then the Madh'hab of the Salaf is to affirm them and pass them along upon their apparent meanings [Dhawaahir]..."

Adh-Dhahabi in Kitab al-Arsh, 2/456

Al-Khateeb al-Bagdadi was a famous Shafi'ee Imam from the 5th century Hijri. He was a Faqeeh and Haafiz of Hadith. He could not be described as a "Hanbali anthropomorph of Salafi Dawah", yet there it is in plain Arabic and English.

How "sincere" could your search have been if you were unable to find this very famous quote available in even a basic Google search about the "Dhaahir" meaning of the Attributes?

There are many more quotes confirming this from Ibn Abd al-Barr, al-Khattabi and others from the earlier scholars who were Maliki and Shafi'ee, NOT Hanbali.

قَالَ القَاضِي أَبُو يعلى فِي كتاب إبِْطَال التَّأْوِيل لَا يجوز رد هَذِه الْأَخْبَار وَلَا التشاغل بتأويلها وَالْوَاجِب حملهَا على ظَاهرهَا وَأَنَّهَا صِفَات لله

"It is not permissible to reject these reports nor preoccupy oneself with their Ta'weel. And what is obligatory is to convey them upon their apparent meaning [Dhaahir] and they are the Attributes for Allah..."

Abu Ya'laa in Ibtaal at-Ta'weel

Of course Abu Ya'laa is a Hanbali scholar from the 4th century Hijri and is not a "Salafi anthropomorph".

There was NO attempt to hide the fact that some Shafi and Maliki scholars did follow opinions of the anthropomorphic Hanbalis in Aqida. When I stated the above, I was saying it in a general sense. Scholars do it all the time.

I was completely aware of the scholars you mentioned for in my post, I quoted Ibn Taymiyyah, who said, “Those who followed the Salaf,…, such as al Khattabi, Abu Bakr Al Khatib and others have stated that the way of the Salaf is to take the verses and hadiths of the Attributes upon their literal or apparent meaning (dhahir) and to state at the same time that they neither know their nature, nor conceive of them on human patterns.” (Majmo al Fatawa 33:176)

Those scholars are from the khalaf, thus my point still remains no one from the Salafus Saleh said to take the unclear texts concerning Allah's Attributes upon its apparent meaning (ala dhahiri) intending thereby the literal meaning (haqiqatan). For example Allah's Yad. Now I am being very specific.

Here is al-Ghazali mentioning the instability of the Ash'ari creed:

وَذَهَبت طَائِفَة إِلَى الإقتصاد وفتحوا بَاب التَّأْوِيل فِي بعض مَا يتَعَلَّق بِصِفَات الله سُبْحَانَهُ وَتركُوا مَا يتَعَلَّق بِالآخِرَة على ظواهرها وَمنعُوا التَّأْوِيل فِيهِ وهم الأشعرية

"And a group adopted frugality and they opened the gate of Ta'weel regarding SOME of what is related to the Attributes of Allah SWT; AND they left what was related to the Akhirah upon their apparent meanings [Dhawaahir] and forbid Ta'weel regarding it. And they are the Ash'aris..."

Al-Ghazali in Qawaa'id al-Aqaa'id p. 137

So even Ash'aris adopt the Dhaahir meaning of certain matters related to the Ghayb in the Quran and Sunnah. In other cases they make Ta'weel.

In most cases, the dhahir (literal-haqiqatan) Asharis reject for Allah, most of Salafis I know reject the actual meaning the Asharis are rejecting as well. In some cases what Asharis call tawil (appropriate or acceptable explanation), Salafis either call it dhahir (contextual meaning) or tawil (incorrect explanation) depending on the verse or hadith being quoted.

Asharis and Salafis utilize different methodology. The wording may be similar but the meanings utilized may be different.

You should know- Tafweedh is a fairytale methodology that no one has ever successfully adopted, otherwise they would never speak about the meaning of any matter of the Ghayb except to say "Allah knows best what it means."

Most of the people I know, use tafwid with great success. The general rule is we implement tafwid, of course there are cases when tawil is appropriate, for various reasons.

In my quote above, when I said the Salafus followed the way of tafwid, I was being general again. It would have been more accurate for me to say, the vast majority of the Salafus Saleh followed tafwid while some implimented tawil. Tafwid and Tawil existed in the time of the Salafus Saleh.

No one is obligated to follow any specific nomenclature with its meanings as the Prophet :saw: did not specifically legislate that. Terminology and nomenclature are an ijithad of the scholars as a means to systematize and codify the Aqida of Ahlus Sunnah in a way to make it easy to understand. Some scholars were better at it than other scholars. One reality remains, is that scholars DO NOT always use the same technical vocabulary. That said, there are many meanings for the word Tawil and dhahir. So much so, that in some cases dhahir and tawil are synonyms.

I don't want to go into a terminology warfare with you. It leads to no where.

And Allah knows best.

[ZeeshanParvez]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

Dear brother, first of all: The "Salafi" movement is based upon the 'Aqidah of Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728 AH) and that of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) and is also influenced by Dhahiri anti-madhhabism. This movement has Mashayikh and Du'at and it's them who define their views and not layman such as you who in reality may actually be nearer to normal Sunnis than "Salafis".
Among the famous Mashayikh of them is Ibn 'Uthaymin, whose views regarding the issue of divine attributes is pretty much identical as that of Ibn Taymiyyah.

You shouldn't simply repeat what you've read on different "Salafi" websites, because they contain quite often half-true and even false informations.

You mention "Salafi 'Aqidah" together with Atharis/Hanbalis and that is a mistake, because most Hanabilah have been upon Tafwidh. Even according to Ibn Taymiyyah the majority of the Hanabilah of his time were upon Tafwidh. And Tafwidh is actually the Madhhab of the Salaf al-salih according to them.

The next issue is that you say that you do not delve into the Kayfiyyah: I'm upon the position that Kayfiyyah does not apply to Allah ta'ala at all. Now if you say that it does apply, we just don't know it, my question would be: Do you mean the Haqiqah (reality) of the divine attributes are not known? If that's the case, then we're in agreement in reality. If you however say no what I mean is indeed the modality like "how big god is", "what a form and colour his hands have", then this is disbelief by agreement of the Ahl al-Sunnah (and that is unfortunately what the "Salafi" Mashayikh intend!).

As for your statement regarding Yad, 'Ayn and Wajh (I dislike translating it because of the fear of having antropomorphist ideas): Do you accept them as divine attributes that are meanings (Ma'ani) subsisting in the divine essence (just like 'Ilm and Qudrah for example)? If yes, then a group from among the Ahl al-Sunnah indeed was upon this.
If you however intend to affirm them as physical entities (A'yan) that can be literally pointed at, then this is again disbelief by agreement of the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah (and that is the meaning that "Salafi" Mashayikh intend).

Since this thread cannot stick to Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhaab and also goes into 'Ashaa'irism, here are my questions to you.



al-Baqillani [paraphrase]

It is obligatory that one knows that the Kalaam al-HaQiiQii is the meaning which resides in the Nafs. Then 'amaaraat [variables, signs, tokens] are made for it which lead one to understand it. At times, these are in the form of speech in accordance to the rules and customs of the people of that language. Allaah has made this apparent in the following:


And We did not send any messenger except [speaking] in the language of his people to state clearly for them, and Allah sends astray [thereby] whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

[Qur'aan 14:4]


He informed [us] that He sent Moses (may Allaah have peace upon him) to Baani 'israa'iil with the language of 'Ibrannii [the language of the Jews]. And the Qadiim Kalaam of Allaah which is established in the Nafs was understood in 'Ibraanii.


Jesus (may Allaah be pleased with him) was sent with the language of suryanni. His nation understood the Qadiim Kalaam of Allaah in their language.


And He sent our Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) with the language of the Arabs and his nation understood the Qadiim Kalaam of Allaah which is established in the Nafs in their language.


The language of the Arabs is different from the language of al-'ibranniyyah, al-suryanniyyah and other languages. But the Qadiim Kalaam which resides in the Nafs is one thing and does not differ or change.


The written language helps one understand the Kalaam which resides in the Nafs. Writing substitutes for articulation.


Writing takes the place of articulation to help understand the Kalaam which is otherwise understood by articulation. However, writing differs based on the rules of the written language and based on how many letters one language has as opposed to another language with some having more letters and others having fewer letters.


The letters of the Injiil and the Taurah are different from one another. Similarly, the letters of the Arabs and their writing differs from others. The letters and writing of those in Hind differs from all the rest.


However, this writing and letters [which differ from one another] help the people of the language to understand the Kalaam which resides in the Nafs just like articulation does. [The Kalaam remains the same and does not change while the writing and its letters differ from people to people].


Hence, the Kalaam al-HaQiiQii is the meaning which is established in the Nafs. The modes by means of which this Kalaam is understood [whether writing or speech] can also be called Kalaam because it helps to understand the Kalaam but cannot be understood to be the HaQiiQii Kalaam itself.


Likewise, signs can also help one understand the HaQiiQii Kalaam which is established in the Nafs and Allaah has made that clear in the following Verse:


He said, "My Lord, make for me a sign." He said, "Your sign is that you will not [be able to] speak to the people for three days except by gesture. And remember your Lord much and exalt [Him with praise] in the evening and the morning."

[Qur'aan 3:41]


Zakariya's order to make Tasbiih and not talk to people and resided in his nafs was understood by means of signs [which he made to the people when they addressed him] to the exclusion of articulation of the tongue.


That which is gained from the above discussion is that reality of speech [Kalaam] in regards to both the Creator and the created is only the meaning which resides in the Nafs and we are provided with thing which help us to understand it either by means of voice and letters or by means of writing to the exclusion of the voice and at times by means of signs without any voice or letters.


The Kalaam which resides in the Nafs is present in the letters and voice [used to convey it] but the speech of the creation is like them, created [i.e. both are created] and the Kalaam of Allaah is not created just like Him [i.e He too is not created].





For the 'Ashaa'irah the Kalaam of Allaah resides in His Essence.

What we have as the Qur'aan consists of letters that are place orders for that Kalaam and help us understand it but are not in actuality the Kalaam itself.

These letters are of the Arabic language. They were created and came into being. They are used to explain the Kalaam which rests in His Nafs and can be called Kalaam but are not the Kalaam in itself because that would lead to the problem of it not being Qadiim had they been uttered.


How is this different from the Jahmiyyah? And is there a single person from among the Companions (may Allaah be pleased with them) who explained the Kalaam of Allaah like this?

More importantly, do you endorse it?

Do you really think the layman thinks like this?

How is this not delving into the modality?

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

What I do believe is that the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - supplicates for his Ummah after his death. So this means that he's a mean for Allah's help to come through his supplication and intercession.

As for the issue of hearing: If one is in front of his grave he - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - will hear one and if one is far away then it may reach him through angels. Even if it doesn't reach him from afar, then I believe there is Barakah (blessings) in mentioning the name of Rasulallah, 'alayhi salatu wa sallam. So Allah's help may simply come by the Barakah of our beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.

If Allah ta'ala gives help to the Muslim who does Tawassul, Tashaffu' or Istighathah with the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam -, then this is a Mu'jizah that Allah ta'ala granted to his beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam, even after his death. That is why Imam Ibn al-Salah (d. 643 AH) said the following:



In fact, one of the scholars attempted to enumerate these miracles, and counted one thousand; and even then, we consider him to have fallen short, for they are many multiples of that, and are, in fact, innumerable. They are not limited to only those that appeared at his hands during his life (peace and blessings of God be upon him); rather, they are continuously renewed after him (peace and blessings of God be upon him) with the turning of the ages; for the miracles (karamat) of the saints of his nation, and the answers to those who pray for the fulfilment of their needs by seeking intercession through him, and the succour which they find after seeking his intercession, by which they are delivered in the hour of their most dire need. . . all of these are unequivocal proofs of his greatness, and are to be counted as obvious miracles ascribed to him. As such, they have no limit!

Fatawa Ibn al-Salah

Is everything clear now?

Yes everything is clear now , Jazak Allah Khair , and thank you for kindly responding.
[MENTION=3349]AbuNajm[/MENTION] [MENTION=118642]abufulaans[/MENTION]

As you can see , the definition of istighatha which this brother intends is not the same as ..

" Calling upon the Prophet (as) , believing the Prophet can certainly hear at all times and in all places - and also responds to your needs himself."

Personally I see this alluding more to tawasul. Not that I believe it is correct to engage in it, but that, and my beliefs are besides the point.

Question : Would you brothers claim , from the Aqidah / Tradition you follow , that this form of istighatha is considered as Shirk Akbar , or just Bid'ah and Haram ?

Thank you.

[MENTION=3349]AbuNajm[/MENTION] can you answer this specific post ? Im concerned about ruling more than anything. From your tradition , is Istighatha through this method and intention Shirk Akbar or just bid'ah and Haram.

And yes , I appreciate your straight answers , may Allah reward you. Please also answer this question with such integrity.

Jazak Allah khair

[AbuNajm]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

" Calling upon the Prophet (as) , believing the Prophet can certainly hear at all times and in all places - and also responds to your needs himself."

Question : Would you brothers claim , from the Aqidah / Tradition you follow , that this form of istighatha is considered as Shirk Akbar , or just Bid'ah and Haram ?

@AbuNajm can you answer this specific post ? Im concerned about ruling more than anything. From your tradition , is Istighatha through this method and intention Shirk Akbar or just bid'ah and Haram.

And yes , I appreciate your straight answers , may Allah reward you. Please also answer this question with such integrity.

Jazak Allah khair

The belief that the Prophet SAWS can hear all things and fulfill the needs of all supplicants himself is without a doubt Shirk Akbar.

Anyone who doubts or does not believe it to be Kufr Akbar is himself a Kaafir, if the proofs have been explained and there are no Manaat remaining.

And most certainly, a person who promotes such a belief, deeming it to be permissible and recommended is a minor Dajjal.

May Allah AWJ protect us from such false beliefs and remove the doubt from our hearts concerning them and their proponents. Ameen.

[AmantuBillahi]

Re: The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than

The belief that the Prophet SAWS can hear all things and fulfill the needs of all supplicants himself is without a doubt Shirk Akbar.

Anyone who doubts or does not believe it to be Kufr Akbar is himself a Kaafir, if the proofs have been explained and there are no Manaat remaining.

And most certainly, a person who promotes such a belief, deeming it to be permissible and recommended is a minor Dajjal.

May Allah AWJ protect us from such false beliefs and remove the doubt from our hearts concerning them and their proponents. Ameen.

Barak Allah fik

But as it pertains to the understanding of Abu Sulayman , which he describes clearly in this post ...

What I do believe is that the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - supplicates for his Ummah after his death. So this means that he's a mean for Allah's help to come through his supplication and intercession.

As for the issue of hearing: If one is in front of his grave he - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - will hear one and if one is far away then it may reach him through angels. Even if it doesn't reach him from afar, then I believe there is Barakah (blessings) in mentioning the name of Rasulallah, 'alayhi salatu wa sallam. So Allah's help may simply come by the Barakah of our beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.

If Allah ta'ala gives help to the Muslim who does Tawassul, Tashaffu' or Istighathah with the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam -, then this is a Mu'jizah that Allah ta'ala granted to his beloved Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam, even after his death. That is why Imam Ibn al-Salah (d. 643 AH) said the following:

حتى لقد انتدب بعض العلماء لاستقصائها فجمع منها ألف معجزة وعددناه مقصرا إذا فوق ذلكبأضعاف لا تحصى فإنها ليست محصورة على ما وجد منها في عصره – صلى الله عليه وسلم – بل لمتزل تتجدد بعده – صلى الله عليه وسلم – على تعاقب العصور وذلك أن كرامات الأولياء من أمتهوإجابات المتوسلين به في حوائجهم ومغوثاتهم عقيب توسلهم به في شدائدهم براهين له – صلى اللهعليه وسلم – قواطع ومعجزات له سواطع ولا يعدها عد ولا يحصرها حد

In fact, one of the scholars attempted to enumerate these miracles, and counted one thousand; and even then, we consider him to have fallen short, for they are many multiples of that, and are, in fact, innumerable. They are not limited to only those that appeared at his hands during his life (peace and blessings of God be upon him); rather, they are continuously renewed after him (peace and blessings of God be upon him) with the turning of the ages; for the miracles (karamat) of the saints of his nation, and the answers to those who pray for the fulfilment of their needs by seeking intercession through him, and the succour which they find after seeking his intercession, by which they are delivered in the hour of their most dire need. . . all of these are unequivocal proofs of his greatness, and are to be counted as obvious miracles ascribed to him. As such, they have no limit!

Source: “Fatawa Ibn al-Salah” and translation taken from here: “Traditionalism against Scholasticism: The Debate Over “Curriculum” in Damascus Between 1150-1350”

Is everything clear now?

What is the Hukm with regards to this post I quoted. Sorry to push you on this , but I don't feel that my question is being answered.

Thank you in advanced.