Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
    ...I would like to note something here:
    "Salafis" will usually claim that the intention of classical scholars who recommended doing Tashaffu' / Istishfa’ with our beloved Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - did not include asking directly for intercession from the Prophet, sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam.
    This claim of theirs is wrong with ABSOLUTE certainity...
    Is it better to make to ask for intercession (directly or otherwise) or is it better to make dua normally?

    Comment


    • __________

      In the above post (#914) it has been shown that asking for intercession from our beloved Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - was something that the classical scholars regarded as good and correct.

      Now let‘s see what Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab and his ignorant followers said regarding this issue:

      من جعل بينه وبين الله وسائط يدعوهم ويسالهم الشفاعة ويتوكل عليهم كفر اجماعا

      Whosoever puts intermediaries (Wasa`it) between himself and Allah, [while] supplicating to them and asking them for intercession and putting his trust upon them, has disbelieved by consensus.“

      Source: "Nawaqidh al-Islam"

      A similar statement can be found in a number of Hanbali Fiqh books, but Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab added the statement "asking them for intercession" and thereby trying to change the meaning of their statement and acted as if the mere asking for intercession from the Prophets - peace be upon them - is already Shirk akbar and that it puts one out of Islam (he mentions it as the second Naqidh from among his ten Nawaqidh).
      What should be also noted is that he ignored the difference between ”and“ and ”or“ when looking at the statements of previous Hanbalis.

      What they actually intended were polytheists who believed that angels (and/or other created beings/things) were divine beings and that one should worship them to attain one’s needs. They believed that these beings could intercede without the permission of God and even against his will and without his knowledge, because according to the polytheists these beings were also divine and had also at least some attributes of Lordship.

      To take statements that are made regarding polytheists out of their context and to apply them to Muslims, is what Khawarij love to do and Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab is guilty of that without any doubt whatsoever.



      To see that he indeed was intending the issue of seeking intercession from the Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - (i.e. something supported by the scholars of all 4 Madhahib!), let‘s see what his own son ’Abdullah said in a letter to the people of Makkah al-mukarramah:

      This is how the letter is named in "al-Durar al-Saniyyah": "رسالة الشيخ عبد الله آل الشيخ عندما دخلوا مكة، وبيان ما يطلبون من الناس ويقاتلونهم عليه" / "The letter of the Shaykh ’Abdullah Al al-Shaykh when they entered into Makkah, and a clarification what they demand from the people and WHY THEY ARE FIGHTING THEM"

      Just think about the naming of the letter! (Remember the post in the beginning of this thread, where the Najdis openly regarded the people of Makkah as polytheists and made open Takfir upon anyone who does not make Takfir upon them!)

      Let‘s see what what he mentions inside the letter. He mentions someone and then goes on to say:

      ويسأل عن مسألة الشفاعة التي جرد السيف بسببها

      "He was asking regarding the issue of intercession, BECAUSE OF WHICH THE SWORD WAS DRAWN."
      -end of qoute-

      Let‘s resume, because later it gets even clearer:

      فإن قال قائل منفر عن قبول الحق والإذعان له: يلزم من تقريركم وقطعكم، في أن من قال: يا رسول الله، أسألك الشفاعة، أنه مشرك مهدر الدم، أن يقال بكفر غالب الأمة، ولا سيما المتأخرين، لتصريح علمائهم المعتبرين أن ذلك مندوب، وشنوا الغارة على من خالف في ذلك! قلت: لا يلزم، لأن لازم المذهب ليس بمذهب، كما هو مقرر، ومثل ذلك لا يلزم أن نكون مجسمة، وإن قلنا بجهة العلو، كما ورد الحديث بذلك. ونحن نقول فيمن مات: تلك أمة قد خلت، ولا نكفر إلا من بلغته دعوتنا للحق، ووضحت له المحجة، وقامت عليه الحجة، وأصر مستكبرا معاندا، كغالب من نقاتلهم اليوم، يصرون على ذلك الإشراك، ويمتنعون من فعل
      الواجبات، ويتظاهرون بأفعال الكبائر والمحرمات ; وغير الغالب إنما نقاتله لمناصرته من هذه حاله

      "If someone - intending to keep running away from accepting and following the truth - where to say:
      'It becomes necessary from your confirmation that if someone says »O Messenger of Allah, I ask you for your intercession!«, that he becomes a polytheist who‘s blood is allowed [to be spilled], that one has to say that the vast majority of the Ummah has disbelieved; especially the later ones, for their accepted scholars regarded it as recommended and attacked the one saying otherwise.'
      I say: This does not become necessary, because of »Lazm al-Madhhab laysa bi Madhhab«, just as it is confirmed. Just like it does not make it necessary for us to be Mujassimah, even though we [confirm] the direction of upwardness / elevation (Jihat al-Uluww) [for God] as the Hadith has mentioned it.
      And we say regarding those who have died [before us]: This was a nation that passed away. We do not perform Takfir except upon those whom our call to truth has reached and who understood the correct way and upon whom the proof was established; and most of the people we fight today are of this type. They stubbornly and arrogantly insist upon THIS COMMITTING OF POLYTHEISM (he intends the seeking of intercession from the Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - mentioned above!!!) and do not perform their [religious] duties and they openly commit big sins and forbidden actions.
      As for the rest we fight, that is because they support those whose situation is like this.
      "
      -end of qoute-


      We learn several things here:
      - The major reason why Najdis faught against basically all other Muslims was the issue of seeking intercession
      - The son of Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab confirms that asking for intercession from the Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - has been regarded as recommended by previous scholars and he still regards it as Shirk akbar (he mentions the exact wording that Imam Ibn Humam (d. 861 AH) recommended!)
      - He says that they do not make Takfir upon the people before (because the Wahhabi call had not reached them; this includes scholars!), but rather only upon the people of their own time, because they do not accept the Wahhabi position regarding seeking intercession
      ​​​​​​- As for his claims at the end with not performing Wajibat and comitting Kaba`ir: This is a typical generalization and lie, which the Khawarij of every time have repeated.



      Conclusion:
      The Najdis were fighting the Muslims for a position, which hundreds upon hundreds of previous major scholars from all Muslim lands held.
      They openly said that they were fighting the people (Muslims!), because they regarded these people as apostate polytheists and disbelievers.

      __________



      As a reminder (go to page one and read post #15):

      The orginal Wahhabi movement: "Whoever does not make Takfir upon the people of Makkah is a disbeliever!"
      Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 13-09-18, 08:25 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post

        Is it better to make to ask for intercession (directly or otherwise) or is it better to make dua normally?
        The 'fiqh of intercession' is fascinating.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
          In the above post (#914) it has been shown that asking for intercession from our beloved Prophet - sallallahu ’alayhi wa sallam - was something that the classical scholars regarded as good and correct.

          Now let‘s see what Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab and his ignorant followers said regarding this issue:

          Whosoever puts intermediaries (Wasa`it) between himself and Allah, [while] supplicating to them and asking them for intercession and putting his trust upon them, has disbelieved by consensus.“

          Source: "Nawaqidh al-Islam"
          It's post #945 [not #914] and the scholars mentioned are not "classical" scholars.

          Like the many Ash'ari apologists before you, you attempt to distort Islamic history and theology in order to justify your own misguidance.

          The phrase: يَسْتَشْفِعُ بِكَ إِلَى رَبِّكِ is only mentioned by al-Mawsili in reference to visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS and even then, he mentions addressing Abu Bakr and Umar RA.

          At least in the case of this context, a distinction exists between the belief that the Prophet SAWS can hear every address from every slave anywhere in the world and the belief that the Prophet SAWS [and all humans] can hear from inside the grave those near it.

          And al-Mawsili [683 AH] is the the earliest Hanafi scholar to mention this statement in a book classified as "Fiqh" under the chapter of "the sacrificial animal for Hajj" and the sub-heading of the explanation for "visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS". At best, this mention of the wording in question is a discretionary suggestion of what one might say while visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS in that time, when the grave was still accessible. It is not called "Mustahabb", or "Mandub" or referenced as an action from the Quran and Sunnah.

          In fact, among the only books in the category of "Fiqh" among the Hanafis in which there exists chapters of "intercession" is in al-Jamal al-Malati's abridgement of at-Tahawi's Mushkil al-Athar, 2/356. In that chapter entitled: Regarding the Intercession of the Awliyaa', al-Malati mentions only the intercession on the day of Resurrection. This would have been the perfect place to mention the jurisprudence of intercession in the Dunyaa if it in fact existed as a legal matter.

          Ash-Sharanbalali also mentions the intercession of the Prophet SAWS and addressing him SAWS directly in his explanation of al-Idaah called Maraqi al-Falaah p. 283. Again, this was a discretionary suggestion under a sub-heading of "visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS".

          It is after this time, when mention is made of this discretionary suggestion of what to say near the grave of the Prophet SAWS in the explanations of Mutuun.

          Book of Fiqh are not authorities on Aqeedah, especially when the matters are not couched in Ahkaam or legal rulings but rather discretionary suggestions. These types of discretionary suggestions also take place in other areas of Fiqh and in other schools. They are never meant to establish legal rulings.

          Is there an ongoing dispute between scholars regarding the matter of the dead hearing near their graves? Yes.

          Should this matter be confused with the issue of whether dead "saints" or others can hear anyone calling them from anywhere? No.

          Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and others declare Takfeer on those who "call upon" other than Allah and use them as "intermediaries" and "interceders" in general. They do not make Takfeer of those who use formulaic addresses upon visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS like the one mentioned by al-Mawsili. It is dishonest to conflate the two distinct matters from a Fiqh standpoint and an Aqeedah standpoint.

          Comment


          • Salam,

            why is it that I get the statement "Invalid server response. Please try again." so often?
            I wanted to post a response to the above post, but it always shows the mentioned statement.
            Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 17-09-18, 09:01 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by AbuNajm View Post

              It's post #945 [not #914] and the scholars mentioned are not "classical" scholars.

              Like the many Ash'ari apologists before you, you attempt to distort Islamic history and theology in order to justify your own misguidance.

              The phrase: يَسْتَشْفِعُ بِكَ إِلَى رَبِّكِ is only mentioned by al-Mawsili in reference to visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS and even then, he mentions addressing Abu Bakr and Umar RA.

              At least in the case of this context, a distinction exists between the belief that the Prophet SAWS can hear every address from every slave anywhere in the world and the belief that the Prophet SAWS [and all humans] can hear from inside the grave those near it.

              And al-Mawsili [683 AH] is the the earliest Hanafi scholar to mention this statement in a book classified as "Fiqh" under the chapter of "the sacrificial animal for Hajj" and the sub-heading of the explanation for "visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS". At best, this mention of the wording in question is a discretionary suggestion of what one might say while visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS in that time, when the grave was still accessible. It is not called "Mustahabb", or "Mandub" or referenced as an action from the Quran and Sunnah.

              In fact, among the only books in the category of "Fiqh" among the Hanafis in which there exists chapters of "intercession" is in al-Jamal al-Malati's abridgement of at-Tahawi's Mushkil al-Athar, 2/356. In that chapter entitled: Regarding the Intercession of the Awliyaa', al-Malati mentions only the intercession on the day of Resurrection. This would have been the perfect place to mention the jurisprudence of intercession in the Dunyaa if it in fact existed as a legal matter.

              Ash-Sharanbalali also mentions the intercession of the Prophet SAWS and addressing him SAWS directly in his explanation of al-Idaah called Maraqi al-Falaah p. 283. Again, this was a discretionary suggestion under a sub-heading of "visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS".

              It is after this time, when mention is made of this discretionary suggestion of what to say near the grave of the Prophet SAWS in the explanations of Mutuun.

              Book of Fiqh are not authorities on Aqeedah, especially when the matters are not couched in Ahkaam or legal rulings but rather discretionary suggestions. These types of discretionary suggestions also take place in other areas of Fiqh and in other schools. They are never meant to establish legal rulings.

              Is there an ongoing dispute between scholars regarding the matter of the dead hearing near their graves? Yes.

              Should this matter be confused with the issue of whether dead "saints" or others can hear anyone calling them from anywhere? No.

              Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and others declare Takfeer on those who "call upon" other than Allah and use them as "intermediaries" and "interceders" in general. They do not make Takfeer of those who use formulaic addresses upon visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS like the one mentioned by al-Mawsili. It is dishonest to conflate the two distinct matters from a Fiqh standpoint and an Aqeedah standpoint.
              On my mobile phone and my laptop it's #914.
              As for your claim that they're not "classical": Scholars like Imam al-Mawsili (d. 683 AH) and Imam Ibn Humam (d. 861 AH) are both MAJOR and ACCEPTED scholars of the Hanafiyyah. This is a matter of fact and there is no room whatsoever to doubt that.

              What is quite ironic here is that while you made the above claim, your "Salafi" brothers expect us to regard Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab as a great scholar, while he was an ignorant, satanic and criminal person, who lacked real and deep understanding of the religion.

              _____


              The issue is the other way around. It is you, who's trying to distort.
              And by the way: The issue of taking the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - as a means to one's Lord and to seek his intercession is something supported by the Qur`an al-karim, the Sunnah, the Athar and the scholars of all 4 Madhahib (and this includes anti-Ash'ari ones!) and this won't change no matter how you deny it.

              The one who turned this into a huge issue was Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH): He was a quite knowledgable Hanbali scholar, but he was influenced by the statements of the Mujassimah of the past and ironically also by the Falasifah (like by Ibn Rushd al-Hafid (d. 595 AH)). At some point of his life he had a change in his mind and started to differ from the Madhhab of his Mashayikh and started to have different views in the Usul al-Fiqh and Usul al-Din from them (see his own statement: "ولكن " هذه المسألة " و " مسألة الزيارة " وغيرهما حدث من المتأخرين فيها شبه . وأنا وغيري كنا على " مذهب الآباء " في ذلك نقول في " الأصلين " بقول أهل البدع ; فلما تبين لنا ما جاء به الرسول دار الأمر بين أن نتبع ما أنزل الله أو نتبع ما وجدنا عليه آباءنا فكان الواجب هو اتباع الرسول", Source: Majmu' al-Fatawa).
              The "Salafi" Shaykh Salih bin 'Abd al-'Aziz mentioned that Ibn Taymiyyah was around 30 years old when he started to change ("شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية نشأ على غير مذهب السلف ، نشأ مبتدعاً ،لم يكن على طريقة السلف الصالح بل نشأ على غير طريقة السلف الصالح ، ومشايخه لم يكونوا على طريقة السلف الصالح ، يعني أكثر مشايخه إلا نُدَّر منهم .هذه ذكرها عن نفسه قال في موضع في الفتاوى (وأما أنا فقد كنت في الأصلين على غير طريقة السلف الصالح) هذه موجودة النص في الفتاوى ، شيخ الإسلام إنما هداه الله جل وعلا لذلك متأخراً يعني بعد سنة تسعين ، ستمائة وتسعين ، يعني وعمره جاوز الثلاثين أو هو حول الثلاثين ، لم ينشأ على العقيدة الصحيحة ، ولذلك رأى الغربة ، وأكثر مشايخه من الحنابلة على طريقة السلف لكنهم في الصفات يفوضون ، في الصفات عندهم يفهمون مذهب أحمد أنه التفويض .وهذا باطل .فشيخ الإسلام كان يواجه أشياء عظيمة في زمنه رحمه الله تعالى وأجزل له المثوبة وجزاه عنا خير الجزاء").
              The issues where he changed included things like rejecting Tafwidh (while his Hanbali Mashayikh were Mufawwidhah!!) and acting as if God has tangible attributes (Sifat 'Ayniyyah Dhatiyyah) and that God is subject to changes (Hulul al-Hawadith fil Dhat al-Ilahiyyah). He argued that whatever exists subsiting in itself - no matter whether created or creator - must be spatially confinded (mutahayyiz) and this is not just Tajsim in itself, but also the thinking of materialists! Other than that he rejected the visitation of the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - and taking him as a mean to one's Lord and to seek his intercession. He also claimed that the world is eternal in it's kind, that 3 Talaq in one sitting count as one, that the speech of God is mudath and ghayr makhluq at the same time and other things.

              Is it a good idea to take his words regarding this issue and to try to force it upon everyone else?
              Why is it that it's easy for me to bring one scholarly statement after the other supporting seeking intercession, while you're only able to bring us Ibn Taymiyyah and those who followed him regarding this issue?
              The answer: Because it's a matter of fact that the absolute majority of the scholars of the past regarded it as correct to take the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - as means to one's Lord and to seek his intercession.

              _____


              Look, don't try to act as if the scholars of Islam where fools and only Ibn Taymiyyah and his followers understood Islam.
              Do you want me to mention earlier scholars? Do you want me to mention scholars who supported Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighathah before and after Ibn Taymiyyah? Or do you want qoutes regarding seeking aid from afar? All of this can be found in books of scholars before and after Ibn Taymiyyah,

              And: This issue is a matter of Fiqh! It is your Ibn Taymiyyah who tried to turn this into a huge matter. He didn't succeed. Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab came much later and was successful in turning it into such a huge matter, that his followers started mass-killing hundreds upon hundreds of Muslims (something that Ibn Taymiyyah would never ever have supported!!).
              So please, don't try to act as if your statements are Musallamat in any way or form!

              _____


              You forgot to mention that the majority of the scholars of the past said that that the dead do hear.
              BUT: Prophets - peace be upon them- are not dead! Don't put the Prophets - peace be upon them - into the same category like the rest of the humans! They have been blessed by Allah ta'ala and are alive in their graves even after their Dunyawi death. And do NOT put the Master of the first and the last - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - into the same category with other people, for he is the best of creation and he was blessed with so many Mu'jizat that no one can count and this goes on even after his death. His rank and station with his Lord does not go away with his death and that is why Tawassul with him is allowed in EVERY situation!

              Trying to act as if Prophets and non-Prophets are the same is an ugly and satanic Bid'ah that the Wahhabiyyah are guilty of!

              _____


              The Muslims who call the names of Anbiya` and Awliya` do so because they want them to supplicate for them and because they know that their Mu'jizat and Karamat do not stop with their death and they know their rank with Allah ta'ala. They do not believe that they're all-hearing and all-seeing, but rather that they are informed regarding the call by the permission of Allah ta'ala,

              _____


              Well that is not true. I've already brought the qoute from the son of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab ('Abdullah), who regarded the exact wording that Imam Ibn Humam supported as Shirk akbar and as a reason to spill blood (as long as one has heard about the Wahhabi call)!!!
              AND: Whether Tawassul, Tashaffu' or Istighathah is done from near or afar, it is not a reason for Takfir! All of that is supported by the scholars!
              What is not supported is to call on the Anbiya` and Awliya` in the same way one calls upon Allah. But even if someone does that out of ignorance, then his beliefs and intention play a role whether Takfir is done or not!

              The Sayyid and Shaykh 'Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad al-Mashhur (d. 1320 AH) has a very good statement regarding this in his Bughyat al-Mustarshidin under the chapter "al-Tawassul bi Ahl al-Fadhl wal Radd 'ala Ahl al-Bida'..." (he also qoutes the Shaykh Muhammad bin Sulayman al-Kurdi (d. 1194 AH), who's from the Mashayikh of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab).
              The statement summarizes the issue quite well. (I'll qoute it inshallah with its translation.)
              Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 17-09-18, 09:12 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                Salam,

                why is it that I get the statement "Invalid server response. Please try again." so often?
                I wanted to post a response to the above post, but it always shows the mentioned statement.
                I get this error if I quote a long post. Solution is to cut the quote to smaller size.

                Comment


                • If intercession, as mentioned in this thread, is all valid and above board, it should be relatively easy to discuss, yet...

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Pakisaurus View Post

                    I get this error if I quote a long post. Solution is to cut the quote to smaller size.
                    Okay, thank you.
                    _____

                    To Abu 'Abdullaah:
                    The problem is whether you accept the authority of the scholars or not?
                    When they mention Ayat, Ahadith and Athar regarding this issue and when the Hadith scholars of the past authenticate these narrations and when the jurists use these religious texts in order to support seeking intercession, will you take heed of their words?

                    Or will you simply say "this is weak, no one from the Salaf did it, it goes against the Qur`an, etc.", even though it is authentic and the Salaf did it and in accordance with the Qur`an and the Sunnah,

                    And another important point: No matter whether you regard it as allowed or not, is it a reason to kill other Muslims? (NO!)
                    Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 17-09-18, 09:36 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

                      Okay, thank you.
                      _____

                      To Abu 'Abdullaah:
                      The problem is whether you accept the authority of the scholars or not?
                      When they mention Ayat, Ahadith and Athar regarding this issue and when the Hadith scholars of the past authenticate these narrations and when the jurists use these religious texts in order to support seeking intercession, will you take heed of their words?

                      Or will you simply say "this is weak, no one from the Salaf did it, it goes against the Qur`an, etc.", even though it is authentic and the Salaf did it and in accordance with the Qur`an and the Sunnah,
                      If intercession is a thing then I want to know how to do it. We can skip all the academics and go straight to the practical application.

                      For example, if I wanted to use intercession to make a dua for rain, how would I go about it?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post

                        If intercession is a thing then I want to know how to do it. We can skip all the academics and go straight to the practical application.

                        For example, if I wanted to use intercession to make a dua for rain, how would I go about it?
                        That's just it, Akhil-Fadl. There are manuals for spelling out "how" to do things which are legally required or recommended. They are called books of Fiqh.

                        "Intercession" is not a chapter in any book of Fiqh for any of the 4 schools of Ahl as-Sunnah before the late 6th century Hijree. At most it is a sub-heading in explanations of books of Fiqh that is ONLY directly associated with visiting the grave of the Prophet, peace be upon him. And even then, the only thing you'll find are formulaic addresses which are in the form of discretionary suggestions loosely based on rare interpretations of a single verse of the Quran and a few Ahadith.

                        What's telling about how these rare interpretations of Quran and Ahadith are brought to bear in the matter of intercession is that the authoritative Tafaseer and authoritative works explaining the Ahadith [Shuruuh], do not contain these rare interpretations used to justify intercession.

                        "Intercession" is not something discussed as a recommended or required legal matter in the books of Fiqh, but rather as a matter of etiquette in a specific circumstance. And even then, most scholars do not suggest it nor is it discussed in most works of Fiqh, especially before a certain age, i.e. cerca 600-700AH.

                        After the influence of the Ashaa'irah became widespread post 700AH, then more and more works of Fatawa, sub-heading in works of Fiqh, and works of Aqeedah began to include intercession, again, as a discretionary suggestion and in very formulaic forms of address. Only the most extreme Ashaa'irah and Sufis made it a point of requirement in Aqeedah and a matter of contention with Ahl as-Sunnah.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by AbuNajm View Post

                          That's just it, Akhil-Fadl. There are manuals for spelling out "how" to do things which are legally required or recommended. They are called books of Fiqh...
                          Which reminds me, we didn't get very far in this thread: https://www.ummah.com/forum/forum/is...fiqh-of-taweez

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post

                            Which reminds me, we didn't get very far in this thread: https://www.ummah.com/forum/forum/is...fiqh-of-taweez
                            Again, something discretionary without a sound legal basis which partisans of one side or the other make a focal point for their mutual hatred of one another.

                            As partisans of the Shari'ah alone, we rarely find a fruitful discussion on Islamic law in a public forum. And now with the forum not allowing Arabic script in posts, looks like it's English-only discussions for the time being. This is a +1 for the copy & pasters.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by AbuNajm View Post

                              Again, something discretionary without a sound legal basis which partisans of one side or the other make a focal point for their mutual hatred of one another.

                              As partisans of the Shari'ah alone, we rarely find a fruitful discussion on Islamic law in a public forum. And now with the forum not allowing Arabic script in posts, looks like it's English-only discussions for the time being. This is a +1 for the copy & pasters.
                              How so?

                              باب: لا يستشفع بالله على خلقه
                              عن جُبير بن مطعم رضي الله عنه قال: " جاء أعرابي إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال: يا رسول الله نُهِكت الأنفس، وجاع العيال، وهلكت الأموال، فاستسق لنا ربك، فإنا نستشفع بالله عليك، وبك على الله. فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: سبحان الله! سبحان الله! فما زال
                              ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ـــــــــــــ
                              قوله: "باب لا يستشفع بالله على خلقه".
                              وذكر الحديت1 وسياق أبي داود في سننه أتم مما ذكره المصنف -رحمه الله- ولفظه:
                              "عن جبير بن محمد بن جبير بن مطعم عن أبيه عن جده قال: " أتى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أعرابي فقال: يا رسول الله، جهدت الأنفس، وضاعت العيال، ونهكت الأموال، وهلكت الأنعام، فاستسق الله لنا، فإنا نستشفع بك على الله، ونستشفع بالله عليك، قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: ويحك، أتدري ما تقول؟ وسبح رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فما زال يسبح حتى عرف ذلك في وجوه أصحابه، ثم قال: ويحك، إنه لا يستشفع بالله على
                              ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــ
                              1 يعني أن المصنف ساق حديث جبير بن مطعم ناسبا له إلى أبي داود ولكنه اختصره.

                              ص -502- الاستواء بالعلو كما فسره الصحابة والتابعون والأئمة، خلافا للمعطلة والجهمية والمعتزلة ومن أخذ عنهم، كالأشاعرة ونحوهم ممن ألحد في أسماء الله وصفاته، وصرفها عن المعنى الذي وضعت له، ودلت عليه من إثبات صفات الله –تعالى- التي دلت على كماله جل وعلا، كما عليه السلف الصالح والأئمة ومن تبعهم ممن تمسك


                              Watch those eyes

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                                The Muslims who call the names of Anbiya` and Awliya` do so because they want them to supplicate for them and because they know that their Mu'jizat and Karamat do not stop with their death and they know their rank with Allah ta'ala. They do not believe that they're all-hearing and all-seeing, but rather that they are informed regarding the call by the permission of Allah ta'ala,
                                Why don't you call upon Isaa (peace be upon him)? He was a Prophet and better than all Awliya. His Mu'jizat and Karamat did not stop either.

                                Or do you call upon him?

                                Watch those eyes

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X