Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Yasir Qadhi on Istigatha

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by TheHaqq View Post

    The acts we do for Allah are the same we do for even the creation... the only difference is the belief
    I don't agree with that statement completely as certain acts like salah etc are only for Allah they can never be for anyone else.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by aMuslimForLife View Post

      It is too bad this translation is out of circulation.
      Assalamu alaykum,

      If you ever happen to find the translation, could you perhaps post it insha'Allah? There are some people I'd like to share the book with who are not well versed in Arabic. I haven't been able to find any English translation. Jazakum Allahu khayran.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by AdoonkaAlle View Post

        I don't agree with that statement completely as certain acts like salah etc are only for Allah they can never be for anyone else.
        That's because of the intention and belief behind the act...not the act itself.

        One can stand and do sujood (though haraam) for another creature and it's not ibaadah or shirk....even statements like guide me to the truth said to another creature are not shirk because it is obvious what the person intends.

        Point is Salah is only a concept because we made it such, it has certain connotations which make it ibaadah....there is no such thing as reading Salah for other than Allah (purely as an act) unless certain conditions are met.....and in such a case it may be haraam or shirk depending upon the intention.

        Comment


        • #49
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzZAh-dwdIU

          Check him out too!!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Forerunner View Post
            The Current Yasir Qadhi refuted the young Yasir Qadhi and not the other way around. I’m convinced by the arguments brought forth by the current Yasir Qadhi.
            My Blog ---> Reflections of the Traveler http://baraka.wordpress.com

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by TheHaqq View Post

              That's because of the intention and belief behind the act...not the act itself.

              One can stand and do sujood (though haraam) for another creature and it's not ibaadah or shirk....even statements like guide me to the truth said to another creature are not shirk because it is obvious what the person intends.

              Point is Salah is only a concept because we made it such, it has certain connotations which make it ibaadah....there is no such thing as reading Salah for other than Allah (purely as an act) unless certain conditions are met.....and in such a case it may be haraam or shirk depending upon the intention.

              Even the act itself devoid of any belief it's never done for people , when have you ever seen this ? salah comprises more than sujood, i'm referring to all the physical aspects of it like ruku etc. As a whole without the belief the act of salah isn't done for people . Asking for guidance, giving charity, helping each other etc these are common acts that people do for each other but salah in and of itself is different.

              The physical act of salah is exceptional since it's not a normative act that is carried out for people while acts like charity etc are. That's why i didn't agree with you ,as not all acts are the same even when we disregard the difference in belief.


              Comment


              • #52
                As salam alykum

                Originally posted by aMuslimForLife View Post

                I’m convinced by the arguments brought forth by the
                So, this is the Deen? Philosophy? A muslim? Where is Quran? What did the mushrikoon used to do? Weren't they also the believer in Allah and associated other than Allah? is there any distinction made in Qur'an between asking a dead person or asking a dead to ask Allah? Dua is worship.

                Originally posted by aMuslimForLife View Post

                current Yasir Qadhi.
                The one who said there is a "hole in standard narrative of Qur'an"? these are the person we take knowledge from, they aren't scholar. and then we feel sad on the situation of our Ummah. if you want to take knowledge go to real scholars otherwise keep finding people who will convince you for something which you want to be the religion of Allah.

                Watch this video for better understanding here.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Forerunner View Post
                  Watch this video for better understanding here.
                  The above is NOT the classical position on this issue.

                  There is a thread on this, where a lot of classic scholars are quoted:

                  Seeking intercession with the Prophet (s): Its ruling according to classical scholars


                  You can find the relevant posts here:

                  Table of contents (16-11-2020):


                  - OP: Summary of its ruling by 'Allama 'Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad al-Mashhur (d. 1320 AH) and 'Allama Muhammad bin Sulayman al-Kurdi (d. 1194 AH)

                  - Some proofs from the Qur`an al-karim and the Sunna regarding the permissibility of seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ

                  - MIAW's son admitting that the main reason why they killed Muslims was the issue of seeking intercession, which the classical scholars allowed!
                  - Is the simple asking for intercession condemned in the Qur`an as polytheism? (part 1)
                  - Is the simple asking for intercession condemned in the Qur`an as polytheism? (part 2)

                  - Imam Malik's (d. 179 AH) response to al-Mansur (d. 158 AH): Rather face him and seek his intercession!

                  - Imam 'Abdullah bin al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH), Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 241 AH), Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) and other scholars from the Salaf and Khalaf ACTED UPON the Hadith "O slaves of Allah! Help me!"
                  - One of the supporting routes of the narration "O slaves of Allah! Help me!"

                  - Imam Ibn Abi Dunya (d. 281 AH): The Salaf acted upon the Hadith of the blind man and performed Tawassul!

                  - Imam al-Mawardi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 450 AH) recommends visitation of the blessed grave and seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam al-Ghazali [al-Shafi'i] (d. 505 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam Ibn al-Salah [al-Shafi'i] (d. 643 AH) regards the fullfillment of one’s needs when one performs Tawassul with the Prophet ﷺ among the miracles (Mu'jizat) that Allah granted to our Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam al-Nawawi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 676 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ and mentions that this is the position of his Shafi'i colleagues in general!
                  - Imam Kamal al-Din Ibn al-Zamlakani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 727 AH) seeks intercession with the Prophet ﷺ in poetry
                  - Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki [al-Shafi'i] (d. 756 AH): The permissibility and goodness of performing Tawassul, Istighatha and Tashaffu' with the best of creation ﷺ
                  - Scholarly support for the work Shifa` al-Siqam of Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756 AH)
                  - Imam Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 852 AH) asking the Prophet ﷺ for intercession in his poetry (+ his comment on the Tawassul of 'Umar through al-'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them)
                  - Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni [al-Shafi'i] (d. 829 AH) on seeking aid with the Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam al-Samhudi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 911 AH) on Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha
                  - Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya al-Ansari [al-Shafi'i] (d. 926 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam al-Qastallani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 923 AH) on Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha (+ his own experience)
                  - Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami [al-Shafi'i] (d. 974 AH) regarding Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha with the Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam Shihab al-Din al-Ramli [al-Shafi'i] (d. 957 AH) and his son Imam Shams al-Din al-Ramli [al-Shafi'i] (d. 1004 AH) regarding the seeking of aid with the Prophet ﷺ by saying "Ya Rasulullah!"

                  - Imam Ibn 'Aqil [al-Hanbali] (d. 513 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani [al-Hanbali] (d. 561 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ
                  - Imam Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi [al-Hanbali] (d. 620 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ (+ recommendation to act on the Hadith of bling man when in need)
                  - Imam Yahya bin Yusuf al-Sarsari [al-Hanbali] (d. 656 AH) seeks intercession with the Prophet ﷺ in his poetry

                  - Imam 'Abdullah bin Mahmud bin Mawdud al-Mawsili [al-Hanafi] (d. 683 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ

                  - Imam Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) ADMITTING that the Hadith of the blind man was acted upon by the Salaf al-salih and that Imam Ahmad (d. 241 AH) permitted Tawassul!
                  - Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) exact position on Tawassul and Tashaffu'
                  - Who was the [leader of] state and who were the scholars who stood against Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) abnormal Fatawa?
                  - Imam al-Jazari [al-Shafi'i] (d. 711 AH) and Imam al-Tufi [al-Hanbali] (d. 716 AH): On seeking aid with the best of creation ﷺ and responding to Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) objections

                  - Famous incident that proves silent consensus (Ijma' sukuti) among the Sahabat al-kiram - radhiallahu 'anhum ajma'in - on the issue of Tawassul bil Dhat
                  (+ supporting evidences) (+ correction of mistranslation)


                  - A good series of short lectures / videos regarding Tawassul and connected issues


                  To be continued insha`Allah...


                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

                    What clearly makes the theology of the pagan Arabs Shirk was their intentional worship of the idols as gods alongside Allah. There are also a number of references which seem to indicate that they did believe their gods had independent powers in contrast with Allah. This conception of their framework appears to make more sense because it is consistent with other pagan traditions and provides justification for why they would continue worshipping them.
                    I have spent the past week giving thought to this issue and came to realize that making a strong distinction between Rububiyyah and Uluhiyyah as well as attributing Tawhid al-Rububiyyah to the pagan Arabs is a far greater problem than I previously understood. What I don't understand is how Yasir Qadhi is so critical of MIAW's construction of the beliefs of the Mushrikeen when it seems like Ibn Taymiyyah was the first to advocate this framework. I'm also unsure as to why Ibn Taymiyyah made the distinction between Rububiyyah and Uluhiyyah if it wasn't to point out that Muslims were guilty of committing Shirk in this aspect like the Mushrikeen of Quraysh.

                    Anyway, it looks like I disagree with Ibn Taymiyyah's approach on this issue. WaAllahu Alam.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by AdoonkaAlle View Post
                      However the usage of the word god/ilah isn't limited only to the above case, as Allah uses the word ilah to refer to the desire/whims of people. In this case the ilah is a person's own selfish desire, ego etc and there is no element of attributing qualities of rububiyyah etc It is an ilah in the sense that its dictates are accepted and obeyed to such extent that that which it declares to be permitted or prohibited is treated as such, and it is deemed to have an inherent right to make us do or not do certain things. Basically a person's own desire has the only right to decide what's right or wrong for him and there's no higher authority than it.

                      Other than this concept of ilah that doesn't involve attribution of qualities of lordship, all the other types do involve affirmation of some qualities of lordship to the god(s) that one worships.
                      Doesn't this example of the Nafs being taken as an "Ilah" put a wedge in the theory regarding the necessary linkage between Uluhiyyah and Rububiyyah? How is it possible for this anomaly to exist without opening the doors for other things to be taken as "Ilah" without qualifying them with any essential attributes of Lordship?

                      Perhaps a way to explain this is by claiming that the Nafs is elevated to the status of an Ilah when it replaces Allah's right to ultimate obedience which is connected to Lordship?

                      Abu Sulayman

                      How do the Ash'aris explain the Shirk in 45:23?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

                        Doesn't this example of the Nafs being taken as an "Ilah" put a wedge in the theory regarding the necessary linkage between Uluhiyyah and Rububiyyah? How is it possible for this anomaly to exist without opening the doors for other things to be taken as "Ilah" without qualifying them with any essential attributes of Lordship?

                        Perhaps a way to explain this is by claiming that the Nafs is elevated to the status of an Ilah when it replaces Allah's right to ultimate obedience which is connected to Lordship?

                        Abu Sulayman

                        How do the Ash'aris explain the Shirk in 45:23?
                        You basically answered your objection yourself. If one gives oneself the right to decide what is right and what is wrong in absolute terms, then one has attributed to it what is the sole right of our Lord subhanahu wa ta'ala.

                        An additional point would be that there is more than just one interpretation for this Aya mentioned by the scholars of Tafsir.
                        One of these explanations here is that there are people who have taken as their religion that which their desires dictate upon them such that they will worship false deities because of their whims and desires.
                        An example that the scholars of Tafsir mentioned is that these idol worshipers would worship a stone and then they would leave it for the worship of another stone, if it appeared to them to be more beautiful.
                        ​​​

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Forerunner View Post
                          As salam alykum

                          So, this is the Deen? Philosophy? A muslim? Where is Quran? What did the mushrikoon used to do? Weren't they also the believer in Allah and associated other than Allah? is there any distinction made in Qur'an between asking a dead person or asking a dead to ask Allah? Dua is worship.
                          The philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab VS Deen



                          The Philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab is that there are three categories of Tawhid.

                          1. Tawhid of Lordship.
                          2. Tawhid of Worship.
                          3. Tawhid of the Names and Attributes of Allah.

                          The above is a theory, and philosophy, it is the philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab. It is an innovation (bidah) in religious knowledge because there is no hadith, in which the Prophet, (SAW), divided tawhid into three categories. It was with this philosophical concept of three tawhids that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab and his followers, made the Ummah of Muslims at his time muskhrikoon (polytheists.).


                          The Messenger of Allah said, "I am not afraid that you would associate anything with Allah (shirk) after me, but I am afraid that you may be (allured) by the world". (Muslim)

                          And the Wahabis killed thousands of Muslims because of the philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab. Yes, they are Muslim killers. The Wahabis preferred the philosophy over the Hadith. They preferred philosophy over deen. Some of the followers of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab, will argue, well, not everything from Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab is bad, I mean, look at the Three Principles by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab. Traces of that innovation is in that book.

                          Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab said, "Hijrah is migrating from the land of shirk to the land of Islam. Hijrah from the land of shirk to the land of Islam is an obligation upon this ummah and it continues until the Last Hour...." (the Three Principles)

                          If you reflect on this statement and what it entails. This book was written for the People of Mecca and Medinah, Muslims. He was calling Mecca and Medinah the land of shirk, and he was calling Nadj, the land of Islam.

                          The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "Shaytaan has lost all hope in anyone praying to idols in the Arabian Peninsula, but there are small sins amongst them.' ((Muslim). Shirk will no longer be an issue in the Hijaz.

                          The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "Madinah is like the kiln of the stove, burning out whatever filth is in it and putting in its place the goodness of Madinah." (Muslim). Yet, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab equated it to the land of shirk. You see Madinah is purifying.

                          The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "At the gates of Madinah stand guarding angels. Neither pestilence nor the False Messiah shall enter the city." (Muslim). Yet, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab equated it to the land of shirk.

                          And the Messenger of Allah, (saw) warned us about Nadj.

                          The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the head of Satan." (Bukhari)

                          So based on what I've presented. I am picking hadiths, over the philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab and his followers. The side of the head of Satan will come Nadj.

                          Plus Salafis, Wahabis have an anthropomorphic Aqida. Their scholars openly admit tashbih.

                          The Philosophy of Ibn Uthaymeen and Ibn Taymiyyah on Tashbih

                          Ibn Uthaymeen said, “To negate Tashbih (resemblance) in its entirety is not correct, because there are no two things among entities or attributes, except that they share something together between them. This commonality is a type of resemblance. If you, therefore, negate Tashbih absolutely, you are (by that) negating everything wherein there is a form of resemblance between the Creator and the creature. For example, existence: Both the Creator and the creature primarily share this together.” (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 1 pg 144)

                          Ibn Taymiyyah said, “One may say that there must be a guideline in this area by which it can be known what is permissible for Allah and impermissible for Him in affirmation and negation. Relying upon mere negation of resemblance (tashbih) or an unrestricted affirmation without resemblance is unsound. That is because there are no two things except that they have a shared portion (qadr mushtarak) between them as well as that which sets them apart.” [Risala al Tadmuriyya li Ibn Taymiyyah]

                          Yes, the Salafis are Al Mushabbihah (Anthropomorphist). And the Mushabbihah are not from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

                          Imam al Tahawi said, “We ask Allah for a firm foundation in faith, that He seal our lives with it, and that He protect and preserve us from any heresies, variant and baseless opinions, and corrupt doctrines, such as the Anthropomorphism (al mushabbihah), Rationalists (al Mutazilah), Pantheists (al Jahmiyyah), Determinist (al jabriyyah), Dualists (al qadariyyah) and any other deviant sects that oppose the Sunnah and the majority of Muslim scholars (Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah) and that ally themselves with misguidance. We completely absolved from them. For us, they are astray and ruined. Ultimately, protection and success is from Allah alone.” (Aqida al Tahawi)

                          The Salafus Salih opposed Tashbih

                          Tashbih is to liken Allah to His creation.

                          Imam Tahawi said, “Imaginations cannot attain Him; comprehensions cannot perceive Him. Creatures do not bear any similarity (tashbih) to Him.” (Aqida Tahawi)

                          Ishaq ibn Ibrahim ar-Raahawaih said: tashbih is if it is said: “Hand like my hand, or similar to my hand”, or it is said: “Hearing like my Hearing, or similar to my hearing”, then this is tashbih. But if what is being said is what Allah has said: Hand, Hearing, Seeing and it is not asked how, nor is it said: “Like my hearing, or similar to my hearing” – then it is not tashbih. Allah, the Most Blessed, Most High, said in His Book: [ b]There is none like unto Him, and He is the all-Hearing, the all-Seeing (42:11). (Sunan al Tirmidhi)

                          And Allah knows best.


                          Last edited by aMuslimForLife; 24-02-21, 06:32 AM.
                          My Blog ---> Reflections of the Traveler http://baraka.wordpress.com

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by aMuslimForLife View Post

                            Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab
                            i really don't want to make a debate thing, and i know if I'll reply it will cost me so much that I will regret whenever I'll remember it.

                            I dont know why you are showing me Abd Al Wahhab. I haven't even read his book, which you quoted. And what I said is in the dustbin. I'll look just upon them for now. (with my weak understanding)


                            The above is a theory, and philosophy, it is the philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab.
                            Hehe, Actually not.​​
                            If you know what Philosophy mean. 💀

                            ​​​​​
                            It is an innovation (bidah) in religious knowledge because there is no hadith, in which the Prophet, (SAW), divided tawhid into three categories.
                            ​​​​​​
                            ??
                            When a philosopher wanted to behave like an stupid.

                            And the Wahabis killed thousands of Muslims because of the philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab. Yes, they are Muslim killers.
                            Allahu’Alam why

                            Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab said, "Hijrah is migrating from the land of shirk to the land of Islam. Hijrah from the land of shirk to the land of Islam is an obligation upon this ummah and it continues until the Last Hour...." (the Three Principles)
                            If you reflect on this statement and what it entails. This book was written for the People of Mecca and Medinah, Muslims. He was calling Mecca and Medinah the land of shirk, and he was calling Nadj, the land of Islam.
                            ???? How does it equate. Help me.

                            The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "Madinah is like the kiln of the stove, burning out whatever filth is in it and putting in its place the goodness of Madinah." (Muslim). Yet, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab equated it to the land of shirk. You see Madinah is purifying.
                            ​​​​​​
                            Land is doing shirk?

                            And the Messenger of Allah, (saw) warned us about Nadj. [...]
                            So based on what I've presented. I am picking hadiths, over the philosophy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab and his followers. The side of the head of Satan will come Nadj.
                            I'm not replying to it it's so stupid.


                            ________________________

                            Plus Salafis, Wahabis have an anthropomorphic Aqida. Their scholars openly admit tashbih.
                            NOO!

                            Ibn Uthaymeen said, “To negate Tashbih (resemblance) in its entirety is not correct, because there are no two things among entities or attributes, except that they share something together between them.
                            (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 1 pg 144)
                            ​​​​​​
                            This is so stupid. SubHanAllah.

                            “ENTIRETY" "ABSOLUTELY"

                            listen what shaykh before slandering him. Or let me quote it for you.

                            There is in His saying:
                            {There is nothing like Him }
                            a clear refutation against those who claim that Allah, Glorious and Exalted is He, has a likeness.
                            ​​​​
                            (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 1 pg 147)

                            That is, the Attributes of Allah, Glorious and Exalted is He, are not the same as the attributes of the creatures; without Tahnf, nor Ta'til, nor Takyif, nor Tamthil.

                            (Ibid. 143)

                            Here he is explaining Anthropomorphic views of people, and you are attributing it too him, (how?):

                            Shaykh:

                            As for the people of the Tamthil of the Mushabbihah, they affirm the Attributes for Allah, and they say that it is obligatory for us to affirm the Attributes for Allah because He affirmed them for Himself. But, they also say they (the Attributes) are like the attributes of the creatures. These people exaggerate in affirmation, while the people of ​​​​​Ta'til exaggerate in negating. So these people say that it isobligatory that Face be affirmed for Allah, and this Face is like the best face of the children of Adam.

                            They say that it is because Allah has addressed us with what we can perceive and understand. He says:
                            {And the Face o f your Lord full o f Majesty and Honor will abide forever .} (Ar-Rahmdn 55:27)
                            We do not perceive nor understand anything from the Face
                            (mentioned) except what we see, and the best of all faces
                            which we can see is that of human being.

                            So according to their claim, it (the Face) — and refuge is
                            sought from Allah — is like the most handsome young
                            man!! And they claim that this is sensible!!

                            ​​​​​
                            The People of the Sunnah and the jama'ah say: We will not
                            exaggerate, neither in affirmation nor in negation. We affirm without likening; due to His statement, Exalted is He:
                            {Nothing is like unto Him, He is the All-Hearing, the
                            All-Seeing.}
                            (Ash-Shura 42:11)

                            (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 2 pg 96)
                            Use aql:

                            If you therefore negate Tashbih absolutely, you are (by that) negating everything. For example, existence: Both the Creator and the creature share this together.”

                            (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 1 pg 147)

                            They are Indic Religion (which is based on Philosophy) says God is formless.

                            Ibn Taymiyyah said, “One may say that there must be a guideline in this area by which it can be known what is permissible for Allah and impermissible for Him in affirmation and negation. Relying upon mere negation of resemblance (tashbih) or an unrestricted affirmation without resemblance is unsound. That is because there are no two things except that they have a shared portion (qadr mushtarak) between them as well as that which sets them apart.” [Risala al Tadmuriyya li Ibn Taymiyyah]
                            Waohh not again. Just read the those again, they were the explaination of Wasittiyah which is written by Ibn Taymiyyah. You cant negate Everything nor you can exaggerate. No one is saying He is as same as ourselves. Ibn Tayimmah starts with clarify these anthropomorphism.

                            Yes, the Salafis are Al Mushabbihah (Anthropomorphist). And the Mushabbihah are not from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah.
                            NO.

                            Imam al Tahawi said, “We ask Allah for a firm foundation in faith, that He seal our lives with it, and that He protect and preserve us from any heresies, variant and baseless opinions, and corrupt doctrines, such as the Anthropomorphism (al mushabbihah), Rationalists (al Mutazilah), Pantheists (al Jahmiyyah), Determinist (al jabriyyah), Dualists (al qadariyyah) and any other deviant sects that oppose the Sunnah and the majority of Muslim scholars (Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah) and that ally themselves with misguidance. We completely absolved from them. For us, they are astray and ruined. Ultimately, protection and success is from Allah alone.” (Aqida al Tahawi)
                            Yep, ibn Taymiyyah taught the same.

                            They (Ahl Al-Sunnah Wal Jamaah} are in the middle regarding the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him, the Exalted, between the people of negation (al-Jahmīyah) and the people of anthropomorphism (al-Mushabbihah). They are in the middle regarding the actions of Allah, between the fatalists (al- Jabrīyah) and those who deny providence (al-Qadarīyah).

                            (Wasittiyah )

                            Tashbih is to liken Allah to His creation.
                            For He, glory be to Him, has no likeness, no comparison, and no partner.

                            (ibn Taymiyyah, Wasittiyah)


                            Imam Tahawi said, “Imaginations cannot attain Him; comprehensions cannot perceive Him. Creatures do not bear any similarity (tashbih) to Him.” (Aqida Tahawi)
                            ْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْ ْْْْْْْْْْْْْْ
                            No imagination can fully conceive of Him. No understanding can fully comprehend Him.
                            He does not resemble any created being.

                            (Aqīdah Tahawi, Tawheed)

                            The Salafus Salih opposed Tashbih

                            Ishaq ibn Ibrahim ar-Raahawaih said: is if it is said: “Hand like my hand, or similar to my hand”, or it is said: “Hearing like my Hearing, or similar to my hearing”, then this is. But if what is being said is what Allah has said: Hand, Hearing, Seeing and it is not asked how, nor is it said: “Like my hearing, or similar to my hearing” – then it is not. Allah, the Most Blessed, Most High, said in His Book: [ b]There is none like unto Him, and He is the all-Hearing, the all-Seeing (42:11). (Sunan al Tirmidhi)
                            SUBHANALLAH, TRUE. See.

                            But, funny thing, the site (asharis.com) you used to copy paste this quote of salaf, has already answered on this anthropomorphic allegation on Ahl Al Sunnah wal Jamaah. Like in 7 or 8 parts.
                            Indeed, He guide those whom He wills.

                            I didn't presented anything from the hadith, or salaf or scholars, I just tried to give you some aql, like you did by giving me quotes, JazaakAllahu Khyran.

                            And insha'Allah if I remember I'll reply one abd al wahhab, after reading him book.

                            ​​​​​assalamu alykum.

                            And Allah knows best.
                            ​​​​​​
                            Indeed.
                            Last edited by Forerunner; 24-02-21, 10:41 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Forerunner View Post

                              i really don't want to make a debate thing, and i know if I'll reply it will cost me so much that I will regret whenever I'll remember it.

                              I dont know why you are showing me Abd Al Wahhab. I haven't even read his book, which you quoted. And what I said is in the dustbin. I'll look just upon them for now. (with my weak understanding)



                              Hehe, Actually not.​​
                              If you know what Philosophy mean. 💀


                              ??
                              When a philosopher wanted to behave like an stupid.


                              Allahu’Alam why



                              ???? How does it equate. Help me.



                              Land is doing shirk?



                              I'm not replying to it it's so stupid.


                              ________________________
                              It is obvious that English is not your first language. You have reading comprehension issues. So I am not going to explain myself again.

                              NOO!



                              This is so stupid. SubHanAllah.

                              “ENTIRETY" "ABSOLUTELY"

                              listen what shaykh before slandering him. Or let me quote it for you.

                              There is in His saying:
                              {There is nothing like Him }
                              a clear refutation against those who claim that Allah, Glorious and Exalted is He, has a likeness.
                              ​​​​
                              (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 1 pg 147)

                              That is, the Attributes of Allah, Glorious and Exalted is He, are not the same as the attributes of the creatures; without Tahnf, nor Ta'til, nor Takyif, nor Tamthil.

                              (Ibid. 143)

                              Here he is explaining Anthropomorphic views of people, and you are attributing it too him, (how?):


                              Use aql:

                              If you therefore negate Tashbih absolutely, you are (by that) negating everything. For example, existence: Both the Creator and the creature share this together.”

                              (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 1 pg 147)

                              They are Indic Religion (which is based on Philosophy) says God is formless.



                              Waohh not again. Just read the those again, they were the explaination of Wasittiyah which is written by Ibn Taymiyyah. You cant negate Everything nor you can exaggerate. No one is saying He is as same as ourselves. Ibn Tayimmah starts with clarify these anthropomorphism.



                              NO.



                              Yep, ibn Taymiyyah taught the same.

                              They (Ahl Al-Sunnah Wal Jamaah} are in the middle regarding the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him, the Exalted, between the people of negation (al-Jahmīyah) and the people of anthropomorphism (al-Mushabbihah). They are in the middle regarding the actions of Allah, between the fatalists (al- Jabrīyah) and those who deny providence (al-Qadarīyah).

                              (Wasittiyah )



                              For He, glory be to Him, has no likeness, no comparison, and no partner.

                              (ibn Taymiyyah, Wasittiyah)


                              ْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْْ ْْْْْْْْْْْْْْ
                              No imagination can fully conceive of Him. No understanding can fully comprehend Him.
                              He does not resemble any created being.

                              (Aqīdah Tahawi, Tawheed)



                              SUBHANALLAH, TRUE. See.

                              But, funny thing, the site (asharis.com) you used to copy paste this quote of salaf, has already answered on this anthropomorphic allegation on Ahl Al Sunnah wal Jamaah. Like in 7 or 8 parts.
                              Indeed, He guide those whom He wills.

                              I didn't presented anything from the hadith, or salaf or scholars, I just tried to give you some aql, like you did by giving me quotes, JazaakAllahu Khyran.

                              And insha'Allah if I remember I'll reply one abd al wahhab, after reading him book.

                              ​​​​​assalamu alykum.



                              Indeed.
                              Ibn Taymiyyah said, “One may say that there must be a guideline in this area by which it can be known what is permissible for Allah and impermissible for Him in affirmation and negation. Relying upon mere negation of resemblance (tashbih) or an unrestricted affirmation without resemblance is unsound. That is because there are no two things except that they have a shared portion (qadr mushtarak) between them as well as that which sets them apart.” [Risala al Tadmuriyya li Ibn Taymiyyah]

                              Ibn Uthaymeen said, “To negate Tashbih (resemblance) in its entirety is not correct, because there are no two things among entities or attributes, except that they share something together between them. This commonality is a type of resemblance. If you, therefore, negate Tashbih absolutely, you are (by that) negating everything wherein there is a form of resemblance between the Creator and the creature. For example, existence: Both the Creator and the creature primarily share this together.” (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah Vol 1 pg 144)


                              Simply put these two statements do not represent the Aqida of the Salaf. In these two statements, they are affirming tashbih. And the Salaf opposed tashbih.

                              So both Ibn Uthaymeen and ibn Taymiyyah are incorrect.

                              I will follow Imam Tahawi.

                              Imam Tahawi said, “Imaginations cannot attain Him; comprehensions cannot perceive Him. Creatures do not bear any similarity (tashbih) to Him.” (Aqida Tahawi)

                              Imam Ibn Qudamah said, "All of what has been brought in the Quran or authentically related by the Chosen One, peace and blessings be upon him, regarding the Attributes of the Most Merciful is compulsory to believe. Whatever has been related must be met with submission, acceptance, while abandoning investigation into by way of rejection (radd) , interpretation (tawil), likening the expressions to creation (tashbih), or giving likeness to the Creator as we would the creation (tamthil)." (Lumat al Itiqad)

                              Imam Nuaym b Hammad, the Shaykh of Al Bukhari, may Allah have mercy upon them said, "Whoever draws a resemblance between Allah and His creation has disbelieved, and whosoever denies what Allah has described Himself with has also disbelieved - there is no similarity (tashbih) or likeness (tamthil) in that with which Allah or His Messenger have described Him." [Sharh Risala al Tadmuriyya]

                              When I read the above three statements.

                              And then I read, this from Ibn Uthaymeen. " If you say, 'What is the image of Allah in which Adam is created?' We reply, "Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, has a Face, an Eye, Hand and Foot, the Mighty and Sublime, but it is not imperative that these be like that of humans. While there is a form of similarity (al Shabih - tashbih), but it is not likening (Mumathala), as there is a similarity between the first group to enter Paradise and the moon but without being the same." (Ibn Uthaymeen -Sharh Aqida Wasatiyyah)

                              Ibn Uthaymeen is incorrect.

                              He is affirming tashbih for Allah. Ibn Uthaymeen is incorrect. He is wrong. His beliefs are false (batil).

                              The Salaf negated Tashbih and Tamthil. Ibn Uthaymeen is only negating Tamthil, while affirming Tashbih.

                              You see the difference???

                              It is not slander if he only admits Tashbih. The Salaf did not do that. Bring me a quote where Salaf openly affirms tashbih in the way that Ibn Uthaymeen has. It is not obligatory for me to follow Ibn Uthaymeen. Ibn Uthaymeen is not perfect, he is not protected from errors.

                              Just because you agree with him, doesn't me I have too.





                              My Blog ---> Reflections of the Traveler http://baraka.wordpress.com

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by AdoonkaAlle View Post


                                Even the act itself devoid of any belief it's never done for people , when have you ever seen this ? salah comprises more than sujood, i'm referring to all the physical aspects of it like ruku etc. As a whole without the belief the act of salah isn't done for people . Asking for guidance, giving charity, helping each other etc these are common acts that people do for each other but salah in and of itself is different.

                                The physical act of salah is exceptional since it's not a normative act that is carried out for people while acts like charity etc are. That's why i didn't agree with you ,as not all acts are the same even when we disregard the difference in belief.

                                So here is my point, even if some fool did sujood and ruku in an organised manner for another creature and then called it Salah, it would not automatically be major shirk.

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X