assuming that is a quote from a real heretic/murtadd and not just a hypothetical one, such a slave of science should be questioned - how can you disprove the existence of jinn? if it is just because you do not have evidence, you should say: "we do not have evidence for jinn" instead of saying "scientific facts" prove that there is no jinn. @uwaisi: for someone who writes pages and pages of text, how difficult is it to note that a certain paragraph is quoted from a certain book? nobody will send you to the guillotine for not doing it, and certainly, you won't be banned for it. do as you like.
Speaking about 'brothers' some well known african shaykh from the tijani tariqa, made some disgusting comments about the nation of islam being our brothers, praising farrakhan, giving him big titles etc etc . I quizzed him in a decent respectable manner, he just starts throwing fallacies after fallacies. This guy did not even know the basic of aqeedah yet his a big global shaykh that is invited to this gobal deviant conferences i.e gateway. I started digging up info on this fella, rabbit hole is quite deep.
Its Fatawa al Haramayn, that much is clear, everyone knows that book, who the author is. Whats to cite? Also, a person reading it can clearly distinguish between the text and the commentary, because the commentary is not in speech marks. Sorry If I breached forum rules.
@snaqshi sorry, I asked because I thought you were translating directly from some book. Here's what I think about the issue: Suppose the statement is kufr-sareeh i.e - the statement is unambiguously contradicting a daruri percept (because we are discussing al-Ihtimal Fi al-Mutakallim as opposed to al-Ihtimal Fi al-Kalam or Takallum, (please note that I am not aware of these terms I am simply relying on the definitions you have provided) and thus it is a case of sariH-kufr) then there are two possibilities: 1. The person is completely aware of the import of his statement but not aware that it amounts to kufr. For e.x he says "Jinns don't exist, it's just ancient superstition. There's no 'scientific' evidence to support it. We Muslims should be above such superstitions else how can we expect the modern educated youth to accept the message of Islam when it is presented to them replete with such folkloric fibs? Don't you see that this is precisely why people became disenchanted with Christianity? The church refused to re-interpret the biblical verses which clearly contradicted modern scientific discoveries and the newly accumulated corpus of direct, reproducible and unambiguous observations. And what was the result of this arrogant preferring of age-old unproven dogmas over irrefutable facts? People turning to atheism en-masse! Now tell me how is the attitude of our mullas different from that of the christian clergymen of three centuries afore? Is it not like telling them that the mythology of 'Islam' is better than that of other religions and so you should accept it without a murmur? Yes, I am aware that the Quran does mention that a race called Jinns exist and that it was created from fire but you must know that the Quran is full of metaphors and parables and similitude and so we should interpret these verses so as to make them agree with established scientific 'facts'. It is not like this is some personal philosophy of one person uninitiated in Islamic sciences. No, in-fact I can point out several scholars of Islam, some of them trained in the classical sciences of Islam at no less than the great Azhar, who have forwarded varying interpretations of such decidedly allegorical verses, interpretations which bring them in harmony with scientific facts. These are the great-men of Islam whom we can look up to if there is to be any meaningful progress of the ummah in the 21st century. They and their students or intellectual heirs alone carry the banner of Islam in the proper sense of the term and indeed they are the true inheritors of the Prophetic spiritual and intellectual heritage". Thus, this person knows full well what he is speaking about BUT he does not know that such a belief is sariH-kufr. This ignorance will not save him from takfeer and his kufr is iltezami. 2. The person does not know the correct meaning of the words he is uttering - what he actually meant is completely different to what he comes across as asserting. For e.x: someone informed me about a person who did know the english language and yet liked to intersperse english words into his urdu sentences. On one occasion, instead of saying, "It is a great mercy of Allah ('azzawajal) that our children are unhurt", he said, "It is a great MISTAKE of Allah('azzawajal) (al- i'yadhubillah!) that our children are unhurt". Clearly, he was not aware of the meaning of his words.) This is just one, real-life example. Similar is the case of a person who is a recent convert to Islam, he may be exempted from takfir on the grounds of ignorance. There may be other ways in which ignorance can become an excuse and, as you said, it is for the muftis to decide on a case-by-case basis. As for uttering sariH-kufr in an inebriated or drugged state, when the person willfully and illegally (sinfully) induced in himself a loss of discernment then I do not know if the ruling on him will be of luzum or iltizam and what the ruling would be if this person is habituated to getting drunk and uttering kufr, like a person who keeps on uttering blasphemous statements and each time takes cover under the excuse of 'slip-of-tongue'. Also the case of a person who utters sariH-kufr in a state of genuine shock on account of some huge unforeseen calamity that befell him, he is not to be excused, so far as I know.* --------- These are my impressions from what I have read/heard about the subject. Please correct me where I am wrong. Wassalaam. *a hadith: "extreme penury is nigh to cause a person to commit kufr"
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Salaam alaykom brother, \ccording to my limited understanding it would be up to the qazi/mufti issuing the fatawa to establish either or, Aala hadret alayhi rehma wardah, did not issue his fatawa in 1 hour, 2 hours 24 hour, in fact it took 16 years before a fatawa was given against the 4 arch molvi's of deoband. Al bayinatu wal muda3e wal yameenu aala man ankar comes to mind, I might be wrong on that maybe some more knowledgable brother can correct me if i am wrong.
"al-Ihtimal Fi al-Mutakallim - The possibility that the speaker was so thoughtless or so hugely ignorant of the consequence of such repugnant words, under drugs or in an intoxicated state. It also refers to the possibility of even the weakest report that the speaker repented, thereby escaping Iltizam al-Kufr." are ignorance and willful intoxication valid excuses for mitigating a case of iltizam to luzum?
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Generally, those people re. "why are there preachers in the UK that are saying innovators are our brothers?" tend to be the sulla kulli types. According to my very limited knowledge and understanding a scholastic debate being had regarding the ahle biddah viz. who is ahle biddah, what constitutes being ahle biddah and when does being ahle biddah become ahle kufr, do you get my point? When does a biddah constitute a biddah that effected whether or not you have exceeded the hadood of being a muslim ie biddah mukkaffarah (as the wahaabiyoun like to say)? It is true to say some things are kufr but do not make a person an our right disbeliever, yet there are thing that are kufr and make a person an out right disbeliever. In the bookTamhid al-Iman the following is stated: ”لزوم والتزام میں فرق ہے، اقوال کا کلمہ کفر ہونا اور بات اور قائل کو کافر مان لینا اور بات، ہم احتیاط برتیں گے، سکوت کریں گے جب تک ضعیف سا ضعیف احتمال ملے گا ،حکم کفر جاری کرتے ڈریں گے There is a distinct difference between Luzum and Iltizam. A word of Kufr (disbelief) from statements is an individual matter whilst recognizing the speaker to be a Kafir is another. There are three types of possibilities: al-Ihtimal Fi al-Kalam - This refers to any possible interpretation in the speech, thereby escaping Luzum al-Kufr. Though, no interpretation is accepted for clear cut Kufr statements. al-Ihtimal Fi al-Takallum - The possibility of a distorted transmission of the words from the speaker. It must be first ascertained that the speaker has uttered such words which would result in Iltizam al-Kufr. al-Ihtimal Fi al-Mutakallim - The possibility that the speaker was so thoughtless or so hugely ignorant of the consequence of such repugnant words, under drugs or in an intoxicated state. It also refers to the possibility of even the weakest report that the speaker repented, thereby escaping Iltizam al-Kufr. In the final analysis is a dangerous place to be when you have mehfil/gathering etc where there is a mixing of belief no clear outlines or perimeters regarding what constitutes the beliefs of ahle sunnah or not and whether its fine to hold beliefs contrary to ahle sunnah and still be a salik fit tariqah (smile).
I'm sure he won't include them as he'll say they are kafirs whereas the salafis are ahlu'l bid'ah and not kafir unless it's proven for an individual amongst them. point is, why are there preachers in the UK that are saying innovators are our brothers? #OnlyInOurTimes
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Brother Aqdas, does the above satement by "the Shahdhilli" also include Miza'ee, Ahmadi's and lahori's? Would he consider these people brothers too.......amazing?
someone quite well known in the shadhili path in the UK said this to me, that salafis are our brothers.
Not entirely, it is mixed with my own translation of the Arabic, Huseyn Hilmi's translation, and then some of my own commentary.
Question 13: The question asked along the lines of “the nadwa are deviant”, “they give speeches and write booklets”, “is it permissible, bearing in mind how little knowledge they have, and especially since their way of thinking is rather twisted?”, also, “bear in mind that they have made it one of their principles that, ‘nobody is allowed to criticise anyone else’.” The answer was along the lines of: “No it is not allowed. There is a hadith which states, “When the matter of teaching Islam is delegated to people not fit for the job, know the day of judgement is close”, this is recorded by al Bukhari and its narrated by Abu Hurayrah radiallahu anhu. Another hadith states “Other than the Antichrist, I seriously fear for my nation the deceiving, misguided religious leaders”, this was recorded by Imam Ahmed and narrated by Abu Dharr al Ghaffari. Ibn Adi and ad Daylami narrate from Abu Amamah, “Sometimes you find an ignorant worshipper and transgressive, sinful scholars, so filter out the ignorants from the worshippers and the sinners from the scholars”. And from the same companion, Abu Nuyam mentions in ‘Hilya’, “In the end of times you will find the maggots of qurra’ (reciters of scripture/callers to Islam), so whoever reaches that time, let him seek refuge in Allah from them”. And al Hakim mentions in his ‘tarikh’ from Anas the hadith, “Woe to/ I feel sorrow for my nation from the evil scholars”, and from Ahmed and Ibn Adi from Umar Ibn Al Khattab, and at Tabarani in his ‘kabir’, and al Bazzar from Imran Ibn Husayn, the hadith, “Among all the things I fear for my nation, I fear those scholars among them with hypocritical tongues”.
i.e. that their line of work was exactly in line with the Satanic agenda for that part of the world, and corrupting the faith of Muslims so that they would no longer agree on the norms that ruled the state and would have to adopt non-Islamic governing principles. He outlines one of their key tactics, which is to introduce a new heretical faith, under the disguise of ‘Muslim unity, “they introduce a new religion with their statement, ‘It is fard to unite Muslims’”. He mentions that it was a belief of Nadwa, like all cults similar to them, that all no believer would escape damnation except if he held their sectarian views, i.e. that it was not correct to have theological debate with deviants, and whoever disagreed would not have their worship accepted and nor would attain blessings and happiness.” Imam Ahmed Rida views this statement of their to be deviance on account of the implied denial of the Quranic verses which describe the forgiveness of Allah. For the reason that they regard an essential of faith (i.e. disputation with deviants) to be unlawful, Imam Ahmed Rida rightly views them to have dissented from Ahlus Sunnah, especially seeing how many hadiths there are about hostility towards deviants, “Their words, “Dispute with and hostility towards men of bid’a are sinful. This sin will not be forgiven. Pardon of it is impossible,” show that they have dissented from the right path of Ahl as-Sunna wa ’l Jama’a” (fatawa al haramayn, p.16). His advice to the believers was that there should be disassociation and enmity with the people of innovation as their existence was a sin, and he said that they should not be forgiven, they were outside the folds of forgiveness as they have exhibited clear exit from the folds of Sunni orthodoxy and because of their clear denial of the fundamental Sunni beliefs, and they could not be simply ignored on the basis of this, and that they needed to repent. They also changed the meanings of the words of the hadith that says, “Servants of God, be brothers to one another”, and they interpreted it to mean that anyone who recites the testimony of faith should not have argument and disagreement with another reciter of the same formula, i.e. all deviant sects should unite and Ahlus Sunna should also join with them. The Imam says, “As for the meaning of the words in the hadith, it is that you should become brothers by abandoning innovation and accepting the Sunni way, and this way, you (i.e. deviants) can earn the honour of becoming brothers to the People of Truth, instead of the opposite, which is that these people may remain on their innovations whilst ordering the People of Truth to tolerate them and sink to their level.” (fatawa al haramayn, p.17)
The syncretist propaganda of Nadwa was answered by Imam Ahmed Rida Khan by saying, “The above statements are not in accordance to Islamic teachings, they are harmful and lead to heresy. The Sharia commands enmity and prohibits friendship and alliance with deviants. A hadith in Sahih Muslim even shows that we should run from them to avoid hearing their speech. The hadîth reported from ‘Âbdullah ibn ’Umar (radiy-Allâhu ’anh) by Abu Dâwûd says, “Do not visit them when they get sick!” The hadîth reported from Jâbir by Ibn Mâja (radiy-Allâhu ’anh) states, “Do not greet them when you encounter them!” The hadîth reported by ’Ukailî from Anas ibn Mâlik (radiy-Allâhu ’anh) says, “Do not keep company with them! Do not eat or drink with them! Do not intermarry with them!” This hadîth forbids friendship, eating and marrying with ahl al-bid’a. It is written in Hindiyya and Bahr ar-râiq, “Zindîqs, Bâtînîs, Ibâhîs and all the groups with beliefs that cause kufr are mushriks (polytheists) like idolaters and worshippers of stars. Marriage with such mushriks or intercourse with their females as jâriyas is harâm.” After giving many examples of how it is necessary to show enmity towards the people of innovation, and mentioning how he was writing a booklet on how to deal with the deviants, the Imam states clearly that “the aim of Nadwatul Ulema is the same as that of the damned Satan”
The tenth question stated, “They say, ‘The most important aim of Nadwa is to annihilate the differences among Ahl al-qibla; to unite Muslims of different faith of Ahl as-Sunna and ahl al-bid’a; to do away with disagreements; to bring them all into a state of benefaction and sweet taste like milk and sugar; to render the simultaneous beat of hearts and the sharing of one another’s sorrow and loss; to make known that all who say kalimat ashshahâda are brothers even if their beliefs would be different. This is aimed on account of the command in the hadîth, “Oh Muslims! Be brothers to one another!” Disagreement on anything or speaking ill of one another is unnecessary. Such unity is a command, a fard, of Allâhu ta’âlâ. The salât, fast and tâ’a of only those who unite in this way are acceptable. Those who do not unite in this way will not attain to happiness in this and the next worlds. Moreover, unless Ahl al-qibla do not love one another, they cannot possess îmân and enter Paradise. Though men’s every kind of sins may possibly be forgiven, discord and enmity among them will not be forgiven.’
