Salafi_Online Posted September 17, 2004 Sister Rahima, is it from the manhaj of the Salaf, to quote from Ahlul Bi'dah, wheter its an ayat or Hadith? you said i would do it as long as it does not contradict the Q&S.... sound nice, mashallah, but is there prove that we can quote Ahlul Bi'ah My stands is that, first, there is no need for you to quote them, for whatever they have in good, its with the people of knowledge Second you are promoting their names and their books ! you openly claimed on following the way of salaf in this forum, thus you give the people the false idea that its ok to quote and read the books of the innovators, people will simply read their books because they saw you quoting them, plus your known to be someone who has knowledge and people respect you! now imagine for a moment they do not have the capacity to distinguish between batil and Haqq? and they fall into that which is Baatil, would you not be held responsible? you would have lead them astray! Didnt the messenger of Allah, Reprehand Umar(ra) for reading the Bible? doesnt the bible have some truth in it? and this is UMar we are talkign about, let alone us! Ibnul Qayyim narrated in his book at-turuqul-Hakimiyyah(p.282) about burning of the books of the deviant and their destruction, that al-marwadhee said to Imam Ahmed,†I borrowed a book and in are few evil things; do you think I should tear it up or burn it? So Imam Ahmed said,â€Yes Burn it “ if you have adiila from the salaf about quoting and promoting the names and books of the Ahlul Bid'ah, because they simply contained ayats or hadith, then by all means please show me so that i can be guided aright and follow the way of the salaf in that which i am ignorant of! http://www.troid.org/articles/manhaj/innovation/whatisinnovation/refutationandcriticism.pdf i couldnt copy and paste any of this because its in PDF format, but read for yourself what Imam imam of the salaf and Ibn Taymiyah had to say about Ahlul Bid'ah specially about reading and quoting their works wether its in argreement with Q&S or not! In response to your dalil by ibn Taymiyah, i would like a reference for it, i have many quotes by ibn taymiyah contradicting that statement, please read the following book by him! ENJOINING RIGHT AND FORBIDDING WRONG BY: IBN TAIMIYA http://www.java-man.com/Pages/Books/alhisba.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rahima Posted September 21, 2004 The categories of al-walaa’ wal-baraa’ (allegiance and association, enmity and dissociation): 1.The people we should love purely with no intention of been an enemy to them: These are the believers: the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses, and the righteous. Also included are the mothers of the believers, the saxaaba, following two generations and the salaf-us-saalix. 2.The people we should hate and take as enemies with no love and support and respect for them: These are the kuffaar, the pagans, the hypocrites and apostates. 3.The people who we should love for their particular (good) deeds and hate for their other (evil) deeds. This category of people we love and hate at the same time. These are Muslims who make sins and do not practice Islaam well. We love them for the Imaan they have but hate them for the sins which are less than disbelief, kufr and shirk. Because we love them, we should find a way to advise and warn them against the evil which they do. We can punish them for the evil that they do that affects the society, so that the people of the society are protected from this evil. Also, we punish them in order to give them a chance for repentance. But we should not purely hate them or reject them like the khawaarij, who consider people pagans if they commit an act of disobedience to Allah, major or minor. Nor should we completely love them and treat them as sincere believers as the Murji’ah do. Rather we should take a position towards this category of people in between these two (i.e. khawaarij and murji’ah). This is the way of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaaca. http://www.calgaryislam.com/imembers/Sections+index-req-printpage-artid-105.html Pages 27-32 Therefore, the three categories of al-walaa’ wal-baraa’ are: -Those we have complete unity/allegiance with and love for. -Those who we hate completely and have no unity/dissociation with. -Those who we love for some aspects, hate for others, however because they are still Muslims we do not reject them and hence still have unity with. So my brother, I ask you, under which category do Muslims who commit an act of innovation fall under? I’m pretty sure we would both agree that it is the last of the three. You seem to be misunderstanding that there is a difference between disunity (complete, as I stated) and shunning a Muslim. As stated, boycotting is for the purpose of the greater good and can take forms such as not speaking to their person; however they still pray with the Muslims and still remain with the jamaaca (and hence are united with the Muslims). Even the saxaaba used this; an example which comes to mind is the incident between Abdullah ibn Umar ibn Al-khattab and his son Bilaal. Bilaal had forbid the female relatives of his from going to the masjid. Abdullah his father commanded him to not prohibit them from entering the house of Allah and let them go for he heard the messenger of Allah s.c.w instruct the believing men to not forbid the female believers from attending the masjid. Bilaal, then replied that he would still forbid them and from that day onwards his father never spoke to him again. Does this mean that the Muslims completely disunited with Bilaal, no of course not! That’s just ridiculous. Anyway, I do believe that this point also explains that it is correct for me to quote from Hassan al-Banna for it is a point which he was very correct on. Simply because I quote that, it does not mean that I agree with every point he makes. When the point is complicated, then it is for the scholars to distinguish, however what was so complicated about that quote. I do believe that many Muslims would be able to comprehend the truth behind such a statement. It isn’t brain surgery akhi. This is the same for anyone else aside from the messenger of Allah s.c.w. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rahima Posted September 21, 2004 Question : When is it prescribed to boycott innovators (followers of bid’ah)? When is it prescribed to hate for the sake of Allaah? Is it prescribed to boycott them in this day and age? Answer : Praise be to Allaah. The believer should analyze the situation in the light of faith and sharee’ah, and ignore his whims and desires. If his shunning and keeping away from the innovator will not result in a greater evil, then it is prescribed, and at the very least it is Sunnah. Similarly, shunning those who openly commit sin is at the very least Sunnah. But if not shunning them will be more effective because one thinks that calling these innovators, guiding them to the Sunnah and teaching them what Allaah has enjoined upon them will be more effective in guiding them, then he should not hasten to shun them, but he should hate them for the sake of Allaah just as he hates the kaafirs and sinners. But his hatred for the kuffaar should be greater, whilst also calling them to Allaah and striving to guide them, acting in accordance with all the shar’i evidence. So he should hate the innovator in accordance with the degree of his innovation, so long as it does not imply kufr, and he should hate the sinner in accordance with the degree of his sin, but he should also love him for the sake of Allaah in accordance with the degree of his Islam and faith. From this we know that shunning depends on the situation. Note that it states shunning for positive purposes, not to completely disunite from the fellow Muslim. Conclusion: the most correct approach is to look at the shar’i interests involved, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) shunned some people and not others, depending on the objectives of Islam. He shunned Ka’b ibn Maalik and his two companions (may Allaah be pleased with them) when they stayed behind from the campaign of Tabook with no excuse. He shunned them for fifty days, until they repented and Allaah accepted their repentance. But he did not shun ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ubayy ibn Salool and a group of those who were accused of hypocrisy, for shar’i reasons. The believer looks at what is in the best interests (of Islam). This does not contradict the idea of hating the kaafirs, innovators and sinners for the sake of Allaah and loving the Muslims for the sake of Allaah. Attention must be paid to what is in the general interest; if shunning is better then they should be shunned, but if the objectives of Islam dictate that ongoing da’wah efforts should be made rather than shunning, then that is what should be done, following the teaching of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). And Allaah is the Source of strength. Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutanawwi’ah li Samaahat al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him), 9/423. (www.islam-qa.com) Note that it states shunning for positive purposes, not to completely disunite from the fellow Muslim. Question : can we call people who do shirk and bid'ah muslims? Answer : This question involves two issues, bid’ah (innovation) and shirk (polytheism, association of others with Allaah). A. Bid’ah. This issue may be divided into three topics: 1. Definition of bid’ah 2. Categories of bid’ah 3. Rulings on one who commits bid’ah – does that make him a kaafir or not? 2. Categories of bid’ah Bid’ah may be divided into two categories: (i) bid’ah which constitutes kufr (ii)bid’ah which does not constitute kufr If you ask, what is the definition of bid’ah which constitutes kufr and that which does not constitute kufr? The answer is: Shaykh Haafiz al-Hukami (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “The kind of bid’ah which constitutes kufr is when one denies a matter on which there is scholarly consensus, which widely-known, and which no Muslim can have any excuse for not knowing, such as denying something that is obligatory, making something obligatory that is not obligatory, or making something haraam halaal, or making something halaal haraam; or believing some notion about Allaah, His Messenger and His Book when they are far above that, whether in terms of denial of affirmation – because that means disbelieving in the Qur’aan and in the message with which Allaah sent His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Examples include the bid’ah of the Jahamiyyah, who denied the attributes of Allaah; or the notion that the Qur’aan was created; or the notion that some of the attributes of Allaah were created; or the bid’ah of the Qadariyyah who denied the knowledge and actions of Allaah; or the bid’ah of the Mujassimah who likened Allaah to His creation… etc. The second category, bid’ah which does not constitute kufr, is defined as that which does not imply rejection of the Qur’aan or of anything with which Allaah sent His Messengers. Examples include the Marwaani bid’ahs (which were denounced by the greatest Sahaabah who did not approve of them, although they did not denounce them as kaafirs or refuse to give them bay’ah because of that), such as delaying some of the prayers until the end of the due times, doing the Eid khutbah before the Eid prayer, delivering the khutbah whilst sitting down on Fridays, etc. (Ma’aarij al-Qubool, 2/503-504) 3- The ruling on one who commits bid’ah – is he regarded as a kaafir or not? The answer is that it depends. If the bid’ah constitutes kufr, then the person is one of the following two types: (i)Either it is known that his intention is to destroy the foundations of Islam and make the Muslims doubt it. Such a person is definitely a kaafir; indeed, he is a stranger to Islam and is one of the enemies of the faith. (ii) Or he is deceived and confused; he cannot be denounced as a kaafir until proof is established against him, fair and square. If the bid’ah does not constitute kufr, then he should not be denounced as a kaafir. Rather, he remains a Muslim, but he has done a gravely evil action. If you ask, how should we deal with those who commit bid’ah? The answer is: Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “In both cases, we have to call these people – who claim to be Muslim but who commit acts of bid’ah which may constitute kufr or may be less than that – to the truth, by explaining the truth without being hostile or condemning what they are doing. But once we know that they are too arrogant to accept the truth – for Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning), ‘And insult not those whom they (disbelievers) worship besides Allaah, lest they insult Allaah wrongfully without knowledge.’ [al-An’aam 6:108] – if we find out that they are stubborn and arrogant, then we should point out their falsehood, because then pointing out their falsehood becomes an obligation upon us. With regard to boycotting them, that depends upon the bid’ah. If it is a bid’ah which constitutes kufr, then it is obligatory to boycott the person who does it. If it is of a lesser degree than that, then it is essential to examine the situation further. If something may be achieved by boycotting the person, then we do it; if no purpose will be served by it, or if it will only make him more disobedient and arrogant, then we should avoid doing that, because whatever serves no purpose, it is better not to do it. And also in principle it is haraam to boycott a believer, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘It is not permissible for a man to forsake [not speak to] his brother for more than three [days].’†(Adapted from Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, vol. 2, p. 293) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rahima Posted September 21, 2004 how this is relevant to the discussion? Sarcasm is well noted akhi. What did you mean by or “Maybe your referring to Salma & Safar and there likes?!?â€. I do believe that there is an element of belittlement of these shuyuukh here, like their opinion (assuming that it was theirs that I was noting) is not worthy enough to be considered. if you have adiila from the salaf about quoting and promoting the names and books of the Ahlul Bid'ah, because they simply contained ayats or hadith, then by all means please show me so that i can be guided aright and follow the way of the salaf in that which i am ignorant of! I don’t believe I was promoting. Do you know what promoting is akhi? I can quote Einstein when he states that no intelligent mind can deny the existence of God, but does this also mean that i am promoting the fact that he did not recognise Islam as the chosen religion of Allah? Of course not brother. When i quote an individual it does not mean that i agree with them on all things and surely i am not promoting them in any way, all it means is that i agree with that particular statement. In response to your dalil by ibn Taymiyah, i would like a reference for it, i have many quotes by ibn taymiyah contradicting that statement, please read the following book by him! Al-Fataawa, 11/280-290. http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=47431&dgn=4 So, let’s get back to our point here, since complete disunity is against the teaching of Islam and you claim to be a student of Islam, how can you justify the secession of Somaliland? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salafi_Online Posted September 21, 2004 Rahima are the quotes from the salaf not sufficient? They are clear as day light my sister, now lets see if can point out few thing from your Post! I think you completely misunderstood my points, its important sister that you differentiate between a person who follows into innovation, and does an act of innovation then this person as the mayshaykh have nicely put it must not be boycotted, rather we hate that which they practice and we spend time with them advising them ect…, what I’m referring to is someone who calls to innovation and after being advised by the people of knowledge(for how ever long) refuses to cease! Then the scholars label him an innovator. As you can see you Post has nothing to do with the innovators but those who fell into innovation like the common folks ! So Alwala wa Bara is not intended for them, and for those who are innovators, we still make salah with them, however this does not mean after Salah we give them sit with them, and as for the wala wa baara issue ill be back running out time inshallah, it needs few clarification! also the bin baaz fatwa, also can you please give me prove about that bilal and Umar hadith you forgot to reference it! The general, common-folk are not to be boycotted in totality, but they are to be mixed with and advised and taught (for those who are capable, since amongst the conditions of da'wah is knowledge and understanding), using hikmah and ilm, for if it were not for this Salafiyyah would not spread. The general, common folk who are upon some of the innovations and who are the followers of an Innovator, like some of the Soofees, or the ignorant Raafidah, or some of those who might be affiliated with the Jamaa'aat upon ignorance, then many of them desire nothing but goodness and they seek Paradise, so they should not be boycotted and left completely, they have been deceived by those whom they follow, but they themselves do not know any better. So boycotting should not be made general and absolute in this way amongst all the people in general, a form of cutting onseself off completely, this is a mistake, otherwise many people will miss out in arriving at the truth and entering into Salafiyyah. Thus da'wah efforts should be made and increased to invite and call these people with knowledge and wisdom and patience. Shaykh Rabee`: All praise is due to Allaah and may Salaat and Salaam be upon Allaah's Messenger, upon his family, his companions and whoever followed his guidance, to proceed: Then its known regarding [the viewpoint of] Ahl us-Sunnah that the one who falls into a nullifier [of Islaam (mukaffir)] is not to be declared an unbeliever until the proof is established upon him. As for the one who falls into innovation then [he is] of [various] types: The first: The people of innovation such as the Rawaafid, the Khawaarij, the Jahmiyyah, the Qadariyyah, the Mu`tazilah, the Soofiyyah, the Qubooriyyah, the Murji'ah and whoever is put alongside them [from the contemporaries] such as the Ikhwaan and Tableegh and their likes. So regarding them, the Salaf did not specify establishment of the proof [upon them] as a condition for judging them with innovation. Hence, it is said about the Raafidee, "Innovator" and about the Khaarijee it is said, "Innovator" and so on, regardless of whether the proof has been established upon them or not. The second: The one who is from Ahl us-Sunnah and fell into a manifest innovation such as the saying of the creation of the Qur'aan, or [the innovation of] al-Qadr, or the view of the Khawaarij and other than that, so this one is declared Innovator and the action of the Salaf [towards the Innovators] is applied to him. what are the actions of the salaf( i alrady showed you their actions) The third: Whoever is from Ahl us-Sunnah and is known with adhereing to the truth, and he falls into a subtle, hidden innovation (bid`ah khafiyyah). Even if such a one has passed away then it is not permissible to declare him an Innovator, rather he is mentioned with goodness, and if he is alive, then is advised and the truth is made clear to him, and haste is not to be shown in declaring him Innovator. If he persists [upon what he fell into] then he is declared an Innovator. Written by Rabee` bin Haadee `Umayr al-Madkhalee on 24th Ramadaan 1424H Questioner: Our Shaykh (hafidhakumulLaah), we hear a lot from your excellence the usage [of the term] "at-tamayyu`", we hope (i.e. seek) an explanation of this usage from you, and what is your view regarding the one who rejects this [terminological] usage. Shaykh Rabee` bin Haadee: This is not [terminological] usage, this is a temporary word (i.e. a passing remark upon a particular trait) that is said, but what is desired by it is a [group of] peoples who came to the `usool of Islaam, melting them, softening them, and belittling their importance, rather, they wage war against them , may Allaah bless you. And they describe - meaning [describe] the Salafee manhaj, and standing (firmly) in the face of Ahl ul-Bida`, and defending the Sunnah - they describe it as shiddah (harshness), they describe that as shiddah, and they describe that as ghuluww (extremism), and they lied and fabricated a lie. By Allaah, besides whom there is none worthy of worship (in truth), shiddah (harshness, severity) is not found amongst the masaakeen Salafees now. And certainly, no matter how harsh the Salafees are in facing and standing against the falsehood, and innovations, they do not reach one hundredth of what the Salaf were upon of harshness against Ahl ul-Bida` to the degree that they (the Salaf) used to kill them, and expel them (from the land), and boycott them, and beat them, and humiliate them. [And as for us] the Salafees, they have nothing [of what was with the Salaf of harshness], masaakeen. Posted on Sahab.Net: http://www.sahab.net/sahab/showthread.php?threadid=298711 From the cassette: "Is al-Jarh wat-Ta`deel Specific to the Narrators of Hadeeth". sorry ran out of time to address your other points, fawzan and binz on the innovators boycotting them! continue... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rahima Posted September 22, 2004 I think you completely misunderstood my points, …..So Alwala wa Bara is not intended for them, and for those who are innovators, we still make salah with them, however this does not mean after Salah we give them sit with them, and as for the wala wa baara issue ill be back running out time inshallah, it needs few clarification! also the bin baaz fatwa, Well yeah brother. I have not misunderstood you. This is basically the point I am making . How can you then say that you disunite with any Muslim (even if they are an innovator)? Do you realize that in the Islamic context there is a difference between disunity and to boycott/shun the fellow Muslim for reasons which may be of benefit? Also, all human beings fall into one of the three categories of Al-walaa’ wal-baraa’, including such an innovator, therefore it is relevant. So I ask you, which of these does the Muslim who is an innovator fall into, irrespective of what he/she is, the fact of the matter is the innovation does not constitute kufr, therefore, they do not fall into category 2 which is: 2.The people we should hate and take as enemies with no love and support and respect for them: These are the kuffaar, the pagans, the hypocrites and apostates. And since they don’t fall into this, then they fall into either of the other two, which means because they are Muslims we still have unity with them. are the quotes from the salaf not sufficient? No, rather what is not sufficient is your understanding of the situation akhi. You have to put all things into perspective and context. I do believe that the ibn Taymiyyah quote (which you somehow believed to be a contradiction to his other statements) is a testimony to this Anyway, let’s not waste time. Are you saying that we have complete disunity (considering that Islam teaches that this is only with the non-Muslim) with any Muslim who commits any sin so long as it does not fall under the banner of kufr? If so, how can you have disunity with someone who you stand up in front of Allah with for prayer? Anyway, inshallah I shall ask Dr. Saleh with respect to all these issues. Inshallah you will be satisfied with his response. Till then, we shall wait. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salafi_Online Posted September 22, 2004 Salamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa baarakatu In response to Bin Baaz’s Fatwah “Question : When is it prescribed to boycott innovators (followers of bid’ah)? When is it prescribed to hate for the sake of Allaah? Is it prescribed to boycott them in this day and age?†its imperative we have the Arabic version of the fatwah, it can be clearly seen the questioner is enquiring about those who follow innovation…the translator placed ( followers of bid’ah) its of no surprise the shaykh would says the following , those who follow innovation and those who call to innovation do not have similar status! “So he should hate the innovator in accordance with the degree of his innovation, so long as it does not imply kufr, and he should hate the sinner in accordance with the degree of his sin, but he should also love him for the sake of Allaah in accordance with the degree of his Islam and faith†this can only apply to those who follow bi’ah, since what an innovators inventes has no degrees, rather the messenger of Allah(Sallalu Alayhi wa Salam) said, " Every innovation is misguidance and every misguidance is in fire " meaning no matter what the innovator invents, if he does not repent from his innovation, he will enter the fire, regardless of how many good deeds he has earned! They are all in the fire; and this is only after when the people of knowledge have advised him, and refuses to accept their advice! he(saw) also said, "Whoever innovates or accommodates an innovator then upon him is the curse of Allaah, His Angels and the whole of mankind." Reported by Bukhaaree (12/41) and Muslim (9/140) thus it does not makes sense that we hate an innovator for the degree of his invention, this obsolutely defies the hadith,†that All innovation is misguidances, and all in the fire†regardless of what he inventes! Thus like the translator put it, I shall for now assume he is referring to those who follow innovation, and not those who have invented these innovation, and after been warned and refuse to desist or repent from their misguidance, rather they are adamant on spreading it! In response to fawzan The shaykhs said the following, “Because we love them, we should find a way to advise and warn them against the evil which they do. We can punish them for the evil that they do that affects the society, so that the people of the society are protected from this evil. Also, we punish them in order to give them a chance for repentance†one again few things need to be mentioned here, (1) when we advised them and they refused then what? (2) What are these punishments? (3) How do we protect them from society? The Noble shaykh answers these questions Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan was asked, “Are the jama’aat to be associated with or are they to be abandoned?†He replied, “When the intent behind mixing with them is to call them to adhere to the Book and the Sunnah and to leave the error, for the one who has knowledge and insight, then this is something good. And this is from calling to Allaah. As for when this mixing is for the sake of friendliness with them and companionship with them, without calling them, and without clarifying, then this is not permissible. It is not permissible for a person that he should mix with those who oppose them except from an angle within which there is a Sharee’ah benefit, from calling them to the correct Islaam, and explanation of the truth to them so that they may return. As Ibn Mas’ood went to the Innovators who were in the mosque and who stood over them and rejected their bid’ah. And also Ibn ‘Abbaas (radiallaahu anhumaa) who went to the Khawaarij and debated with them and repelled their doubts and then amongst them were those who returned (to the truth). Hence, mixing with them is from this angle, then this is desired. And if they then persist upon their falsehood it is obligatory to leave them and shun them, and to make jihad against them for the sake of Allaah â€. (Al-Ajwibah al-Mufeedah p.12). Next point I do believe that the ibn Taymiyyah quote (which you somehow believed to be a contradiction to his other statements) is a testimony to this I still have not come across the reference on this quote, I visited the webpage and zilch, it does not state the shaykh who answered the question, who is the fatwah attributed to? if it Bin Baaz, then this is an error since he was said the following concerning the Tableegh and ikhwanies! His Excellency, Shaykh ‘Abdul ‘Azeez Ibn Baaz (Rahima-ullaah) was asked: Question: May Allaah grant you the best (of His favours). In the hadeeth of the Prophet , relating to the splitting of the Ummah, he says: ((…and my Ummah shall split into 72 sects…)). So, is the Jamaa’ah at-Tableegh, with what they have in terms of shirk and innovations; and also the Jamaa’ah al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen, with what they have in terms of partisanship and revolting/rebelling against the leaders and lack of obedience; from the 72 sects? So, he (the Shaykh) responded, may Allaah forgive him and bestow upon him His immense mercy: They are from the 72 (sects). Whoever opposes the ‘aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah enters the fold of the 72 (sects). The meaning of the Prophet’s statement ((My Ummah)) is: the Ummah of Ijaabah, i.e. the Ummah of response; those who responded to the Prophet’s call and revealed their allegiance to him. And the meaning of 73 sects: the victorious sect which adhered to him and was upright in their religion and 72 of those sects – amongst them the kuffaar, the sinners and various innovators. So, the questioners asked: Are these two groups (Jamaa’ah at-Tableegh and Jamaa’ah al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen) from amongst the 72 sects? He responded: Yes, they are from the amongst the 72 sects, along with the Murji’ah and other than them; the Murji’ah and the Khawaarij – some of the people of knowledge regard the Khawaarij from amongst the kuffaar, out of the fold of Islaam although amongst the 72 sects. [Taken from the recording of the Shaykh’s lessons in Sharh al-Muntaqaa in Ta’if approximately 2 years or less before his death]. So sister Rahima isnt Hasan Al Baana not the founder the Ikhwan Musleem? New point If so, how can you have disunity with someone who you stand up in front of Allah with for prayer?†Sister, who are the worst beings? I say the Munafeeqeen, Allah’s messenger( sallalu Alayhi wa salam) and HUdayfah were the only ones who knewwho the hypocrites were, didn’t they not pray alongside the munafeeq, in addition after the death of the messenger of Allah(sallalu Alayhi wa salam) and HUdayfah was still alive, didn’t he pray with them? so how can you define this a unity, there is no being worst then a munafiq! Sarcasm is well noted akhi. What did you mean by or “Maybe your referring to Salma & Safar and there likes?!?â€. I do believe that there is an element of belittlement of these shuyuukh here, like their opinion (assuming that it was theirs that I was noting) is not worthy enough to be considered.†Im in no need of Sarcasm Ukhti, my position concerning these individuals known, their speech is of no worth as far as im concerned! I hold the position of Albani, for they are the neo-Khawarij of our time, Uthaymin who said we differ with them in terms of Aqeeda, since they make takfir of the general mass due to major sins akin to the Khawarij! I don’t believe I was promoting. Do you know what promoting is akhi? I can quote Einstein when he states that no intelligent mind can deny the existence of God, but does this also mean that i am promoting the fact that he did not recognise Islam as the chosen religion of Allah? Of course not brother. When i quote an individual it does not mean that i agree with them on all things and surely i am not promoting them in any way, all it means is that i agree with that particular statement.†Serious sister, how can you compare the two, how many muslim acquire their deen from Eistein? And how many muslim acquire their deen from Hasan? Every muslim knows Eistein is a kafir and they would never go to him for slamic knowledge, however Hasan is well known Da’ee, he wrote books on islam, calls the people to islam. So lets say you see a nice quote from him and you post it here, with his name and book title, keeping in mind that you do not agree with all his points, now imagine, Mr’ X†who has been a member of this forum for a long time and has come to know of you as someone with knowledge; then one day he happens to be in a Islamic shop, behold he finds that same book you quoted from by Hasan AL Banaa. He says to himselve, “wow that was a nice quote i really like that, plus Rahima must of got a great deal of knowledge from him, plus she must like him†so he purchases it not knowing the calamities it contains, or nicely put “these points you don’t agree with†so in reality you have promoted his book, without informing the public his errors and what the scholars have said about his works! now sister i have tried very hard to respond to the points you have raised, its imperative you address mine, you said: No, rather what is not sufficient is your understanding of the situation akhi. You have to put all things into perspective and context. ok Ukhti please do not dismiss my points, put the following in their correct perspective and context, save me from my ignorance! (1) al - Fudayl said : " Do not trust the innovator concerning your Deen, and do not seek his advice in your affairs, and do not sit with him since whoever sits with an innovator - Allah will cause him to become blind ." 'Sharh Usool I'tiqaad Ahlis-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah' - (2) Imân an-Nawawî (d.676H) mentions in al-Adkhâr (p.323): “Chapter: Dissociating from the people of Innovation and the people of Sin.†(3) Abu 'Abdullaah became angry and said, " Do not be fooled by his fearfulness, nor his gentleness. Do not be fooled by how he droops his head. He is an evil person. This will not be known except by one well-acquainted with him. Do not sit with him, for there is no honour for him. Will you sit with everyone who narrated the ahaadeeth of Allaah's Messenger (saaws) and is an innovator?!" (4) The Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) also warned against the People of Innovation, from befriending, supporting or taking from them saying: "Whoever innovates or accommodates an innovator then upon him is the curse of Allaah, His Angels and the whole of mankind." Reported by Bukhaaree (12/41) and Muslim (9/140) (5) IMAAM IBNUL QAYYIM AL-JAWZIYYAH said “The war against the innovators is greater than the war against the Mushrikeen.†Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salafi_Online Posted September 22, 2004 double post Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
