The difference between the the friend of God, Cabdul--Qaadir (qs) and Paul the Aposle.

[magicbird]

Haatu;980015 wrote:

Anwar al Awlaki was a misguided fellow and a terrorist. Hardly an authority on religious matters.

 

Khayr, one question. Do you believe iimaan increases and decreases or is it static and one level?

Ittaqillah bro, watch your tongue over the dead, for you just ate your bros flesh. As a somali and as a muslim you should know we never talk bad about the dead, so wateva wrong he did, leave it to his master. And second thing the Imam rh was a great individual that fought for his rights like a real man, not in the comfort of the west. Anyways wasn't it his place of birth America that teaches about fighting for what is yours cuz no1 will hand your rights to u without a fight. I cant see why one american is 'defending his nation' and the other guy is a terrorist. And I know alot of people that would actually befriend these that bombed our people aka veterans. And for those pacifists Im talking abt the fight against drone attacks not jihad.

[Khayr]

Haatu;980382 wrote:

Anyone who takes anything without proof is setting themselves up to fail. Taas shaki kuma jirto.

 

 

Indulge me for a while ina adeer and explain what you mean by this. I am a plain Somali and big words give me a headache.

The idea of having a proof for something to be true is a very modern and science based thinking.

Deductive reasoning is very limited. You need Inductive reasoning to see patterns and confirm things.

In hadith classification, a حديث can become stronger if there are other similiar hadiths that come to the same

conclusion. For example, the hadith about having three daughters and two and one daughter. The conclusion being that raising one righteous

child can be a ticket to heaven. (If I used a wrong example, then forgive me.)

 

The deen is based on experiential knowledge. You can't understand anything without having endured and tasted. The Ahl al tasawuf are

all about that.

[Khadafi]

Khayr;984594 wrote:

The idea of having a proof for something to be true is a very modern and science based thinking.

Deductive reasoning is very limited. You need Inductive reasoning to see patterns and confirm things.

In hadith classification, a حديث can become stronger if there are other similiar hadiths that come to the same

conclusion. For example, the hadith about having three daughters and two and one daughter. The conclusion being that raising one righteous

child can be a ticket to heaven. (If I used a wrong example, then forgive me.)

 

The deen is based on experiential knowledge. You can't understand anything without having endured and tasted. The Ahl al tasawuf are

all about that.

The bizarre thing is that Haatu says "bring the proof", it's a catchy phrase that sounds good. But how can I as layman without the basic extensive knowledge of the quranic verses (tafsir, sababu.nuzuul, hadith etc...) make a sound judgement, should I just go to the saxixaynand learn how to pray by reading random hadithes about salat?. Now, we do not. We learn how to pray by the way explained by the

mujatahadin. Haatu, sxb you should know that even the most deviant sects often have "proofs" for their stance. The way to salvation is

by following the ijmaac (the common understanding) and being sincere to God.

[Haatu]

magicbird;984555 wrote:

Ittaqillah bro, watch your tongue over the dead, for you just ate your bros flesh. As a somali and as a muslim you should know we never talk bad about the dead, so wateva wrong he did, leave it to his master. And second thing the Imam rh was a great individual that fought for his rights like a real man, not in the comfort of the west. Anyways wasn't it his place of birth America that teaches about fighting for what is yours cuz no1 will hand your rights to u without a fight. I cant see why one american is 'defending his nation' and the other guy is a terrorist. And I know alot of people that would actually befriend these that bombed our people aka veterans. And for those pacifists Im talking abt the fight against drone attacks not jihad.

Awlaki was a terrorist (khaariji) and the world is a better place without his fitnah. That's not slander that's a fact.

[Haatu]

Khayr;984594 wrote:

The idea of having a proof for something to be true is a very modern and science based thinking.

Deductive reasoning is very limited. You need Inductive reasoning to see patterns and confirm things.

In hadith classification, a حديث can become stronger if there are other similiar hadiths that come to the same

conclusion. For example, the hadith about having three daughters and two and one daughter. The conclusion being that raising one righteous

child can be a ticket to heaven. (If I used a wrong example, then forgive me.)

 

The deen is based on experiential knowledge. You can't understand anything without having endured and tasted. The Ahl al tasawuf are

all about that.

In matters relating to the aqeedah and manhaj, there is no dispute among the scholars and it is as the Prophet SCW said "its night is like its day". Where differences of opinion due occur and scholars use their ijtihad is in fiqh.

 

As for the importance of daleel/athar/proof, it is well established in this religion since the time of the Salaf:

 

It is reported that ‘Uthmân b. Hâdir said, “I said to Ibn ‘Abbâs: ‘advise me.’ He replied, ‘It is upon you to be upright, follow al-athar, and beware of innovating [in religion].’”

Ibn Battah, Al-Ibânah Al-Kubrâ Vol. 1 p214.

 

It is reported that ‘Abdullâh b. Al-Mubârak said, “Let it only be the narrations (al-athar) that you rely upon, and take from reasoning and opinion that amount that will help you to understand and explain hadîth.”

Ibn ‘Abd Al-Barr, Jâmi’ Bayân Al-‘Ilm wa Fadlihi Vol. 3 p329.

 

It is reported that Sufyân Al-Thawrî said, “The narrations (al-âthâr) are the religion.”

 

And it is reported that he also said, “A man should not even scratch his head except based on a narration.”

Al-Harawî, Dhamm Al-Kalâm wa Ahlihî Vol. 2 p264.

 

I don't know what you mean by "the deen is based on experimental knowledge". Allah sent a book and a prophet to teach us the deen, nothing experimental about that.

[Haatu]

Khadafi;984834 wrote:

The bizarre thing is that Haatu says "bring the proof", it's a catchy phrase that sounds good. But how can I as layman without the basic extensive knowledge of the quranic verses (tafsir, sababu.nuzuul, hadith etc...) make a sound judgement, should I just go to the saxixaynand learn how to pray by reading random hadithes about salat?. Now, we do not. We learn how to pray by the way explained by the

mujatahadin. Haatu, sxb you should know that even the most deviant sects often have "proofs" for their stance. The way to salvation is

by following the ijmaac (the common understanding) and being sincere to God.

The "proofs" they usually have are fabricated/weak ahaadeeth. And I agree with you, salvation lies in following the ijmaac and being sincere.