Popular @troid.org
  • Home
  • Shirk - troid.org | Islamic Articles and Audio

Shirk - troid.org | Islamic Articles and Audio

ASFA Lies on Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah

   

Once again ASFA continues its legacy of lying upon the Scholars of Salafīyyah. Here they have claimed that Ibn Taymīyyah accepted ‘saints’ and ‘sainthood’.

Benefit: Practicing Magic or Being Pleased with It Is Disbelief!

In the Name of Allāh, the Ever Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy

Allāh says, what means:

( Rather the devils disbelieved,
teaching the people magic )
[ al-Baqarah: 102 ]

And He sent angels to teach magic, testing the people's belief.  They would warn anyone who was interested in magic, saying:

( We are but a fitnah,
So do not disbelieve! )
[ al-Baqarah: 102 ]

Harry Potter books are all about magic.  The hero is a magician.  Magic spells and potions can be learned by reading these books.


For more details refer to the recorded lecture: The Evils of Harry Potter and the Kufr of Magic

Benefit: Refuting the Ḥabashī Doubts on Ibn Taymiyyah

In the Name of Allāh, the Ever Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy

Asalāmu ʿAlaykum 


In an attempt to bring a follower of ʿAbdullāh al Habashi to the right path, I received the following response. Please refute the following claims they made so that I can send it back to the brother. Jazak Allāh Khair....

 1. There is blasphemy in Majmu Al Fatawa, volume number 4, page 374 on the right side, on the 4th line. Ibn Taymīyyah said: "Allāh firmly established himself on the throne and leaves a space beside Him for Prophet Muḥammad."   

2. Ibn Taymīyyah said: "Angels are the helpers of Allāh" and this is clear blasphemy because Allāh does not need anything. The logical proof is the one who needs something is imperfect, and the imperfect doesn't deserve to be worshipped. Also in Surat Āl-ʿImrān, āyah number 97, Allāh said which means: "Allāh does not need any of the worlds." This means: Allāh does not need anything. Also, Ibn Taymiyyah said: "The world (by its kind), exists without a beginning" and this is clear blasphemy because Muslim scholars judged as a blasphemer the one who believes the world is eternal. Among them are Al-Mutawalli (a Shafiʿī scholar), Qaḍi ʿIyāḍ  (Malikiyy scholar who died in the year 544 AH), Ibn al-Daqiq al-ʿĪd (who was famous for teaching both the Malikiyy and Shafiʿī schools, and died 702 AH), and the famous Ḥāfiẓ, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaniyy.  

3. Ibn Taymīyyah is a blasphemer by him saying this: "10.1.2 HENCE ALLĀH'S ISTIWAA UPON HIS THRONE MEANS: That He is above and established upon it in a manner that befits Him. It is one of His Attributes that pertain to His Actions. And this is proven by the Book, the Sunnah, and the Consensus of the Salaf."  

4. First of all saying that He is above is blasphemy because the scholar Abū Manṣur al-Bagdadiyy who died in the year 429 AH, in his book Al-Farq Baynul-Firaq, conveyed the consensus that Allāh exists without a place, so that means Allāh has no above, or below, in front of, or behind, a left or a right. Also, Abū Jaʿfar at-Tahawiyy (d. 322 AH) wrote a famous book called 'Al-Aqidah At-Tahawiyyah he said in this book which means: "Allāh is supremely clear of all Boundaries, extremes, sides, organs and instrument. The six directions do not contain him, for these are attributes to all created things." This proves that what Ibn Taymiyyah said is false and blasphemy. Also, the Messenger of Allāh Prophet Muḥammad said:  O Allāh you are Ad-dhahir, there is not above you and you are al-Batin there is nothing underneath you" and now you're telling me that Ibn Taymiyyah is not a BLASPHEMER.

Bismillāh, wa al-hamdulilāh, wa al-ṣʿalátu wa-al-sʿalámu ʿalá rasūl Allāh, wa baʿd:  

The person who sent this e-mail has only regurgitated a few old doubts concocted by the Aḥbāsh. In shaʿ Allāh, this is a humble effort to shortly address these fallacies and shed some light on the underlying reason for this onslaught. Alhamdulillāh, books have been written in English and Arabic exposing the deviations of this group so the reader should try and refer back to them for a more detailed account. Why do the Ahbaash declare Ibn Taymīyyah and other scholars to be infidels? The reason is obvious. Ibn Taymīyyah, during his lifetime and later, through his writings, commanded the people to worship Allāh alone and shun all forms of Shirk. This treatment is not peculiar to Ibn Taymīyyah, and anyone who warns the people about supplicating to the dead and asking for their assistance will be treated in exactly the same fashion. Ask the noble brother ʿAbd al-Ḥafīz, a brother who has been a propagator of the Sunnah for many years in Philadelphia, USA, and who is currently the Imām of a well-known Sunni Masjid there, about the harm that some of the callers to Tawḥīd endured in Philadelphia at the hands of the Aḥbāsh.  

Why? 

Well, the founder of this movement condones and propagates these types of acts so anyone who warns against them is an obstacle in their path. The father of this movement, ʿAbdullāh āl-Ḥabashī, who was supposedly the Muftī of Ṣumālīa, even though most Ṣumālīs had never heard of him, said: “The problem with the people who pronounce takfīr upon anyone who practises tawaṣṣul and istigāthah with the Prophets and Awliyāʾ after their death and when not in their presence is their misunderstanding of the verses and aḥadīth that they rely on…”(Al-Maqālāt As-Sunniyyah 1st edition: 45). He also said: “It is obligatory not to rebuke the Muslim that says: ‘Help, O Messenger of Allāh.’ He should not be criticised” (Al-Dūr al-Mufeed: 194).   

The First Doubt: 

There is blasphemy in Majmūʿ al-Fatawá, volume number 4, page 374 on the right side, on the 4th line. Ibn Taymīyyah said: "Allāh firmly established himself on the throne and leaves a space beside Him for Prophet Muḥammad."   

1. This translation is inaccurate to say the least “..leaves a space beside Him for Prophet Muḥammad” is not mentioned anywhere in the quote that they allude to. If they are deliberately adding or twisting words, how can we rely on anything they claim without verification!  

2. Let us compare what Ibn Taymīyyah said to what they allege he said:  فقد حدث العلماء المرضيون وأولياؤه المقبولون أن محمدا رسول الله يجلسه ربه على العرش “If this is understood, then it (should be known) that reputable scholars and respectable Awliyaa have mentioned that Allāh will sit Muhammed upon the throne...” (Majmūʿ al-Fatāwá́: 4/374). 

3. It can be seen from the above quote that Ibn Taymīyyah was not elaborating on his belief in this issue; all he was doing is conveying the opinion of some scholars on this matter. If merely transmitting these words is blasphemy, then they have to accuse other illustrious scholars who committed no crime but relaying this opinion of the same thing and amongst them is Ibn Ḥajr al-ʿAsqʿalánī (Fat‘h: 11/435), Ibn Jarīr al-Tabarī (8/134-135), al-Dhahabī (al-ʿUlūʿ: 2/1180-1182) and others.

4. What does Ibn Taymīyyah actually believe? Ibn Taymīyyah believes that all the aḥadīth about this topic are fabricated and that we should not treat scholarly opinions like we do ḥadīth of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ʿalayhī wa-sallam). As highlighted by Ibn Taymīyyah, this statement is ascribed to Mujāḥid, the famous scholar of Tafsīr, but there is no authentic ḥadīth to support this. So do they accuse Mujāḥid, the famous Tābʿī Mufassir, who the actual statement was meant to have emanated from, of blasphemy as well? By Allāh, the scholars of the Muslims are not safe from these people’s vile tongues and bloody pens.  

Ibn Taymīyyah (Dār al- Taʿāruḍ 5/237-238) said: كحديث قعود الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم على العرش رواه بعض الناس من طرق كثيرة مرفوعة وهي كلها موضوعة وإنما الثابت أنه عن مجاهد وغيره من السلف “

Like the ḥadīth which mentions the Messenger (ṣallallāhu ʿalayhī wa-sallam) sitting upon the throne. This has been narrated and ascribed to the Prophet by some people with many different chains of narration however they are all fabricated. This has only been authentically relayed from Mujāḥid and others from the scholars of the past.”  

Ibn Taymīyyah continues:لكن لا بد من الفرق بين ما ثبت من ألفاظ الرسول وما ثبت من كلام غيره“

It is incumbent to differentiate between what has authentically been reported from the words of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ʿalayhī wa-sallam) and what has been authentically relayed from other than him…”  

5 Finally, whether the statement of Mujāḥid – about the Prophet sitting on the throne - is authentic or not, and some scholars state that it is not, it is impermissible to take this as part of the religion or creed because there is no proof for this in the Qurʾān or the Sunnah (Mukhtasir al-ʿUlūʿ: 19-21). 

The Second Doubt: 

Also Ibn Taymīyyah said: "The world (by its kind), exists without a beginning" and this is clear blasphemy because Muslims scholars judged as blasphemer the one who believes the world is eternal. Among them are al-Mutawallī (a Shafiʿī scholar), Qaḍī ʿIyāḍ (Malikī scholar who died in the year AH 544), Ibn al-Daqīq  al-ʿĪd (who was famous for teaching both Malikī and the Shafiʿī school and died AH 702), and the famous Hafiḍ Ibn Ḥajar al-Asqʿalánī.     

1.     “Glory be to You (O Allāh). This is a great lie.” (24:16)

The Aḥbāsh have once again just parroted the accusations of the adversaries of Ibn Taymīyyah like Muḥammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī and others who preceded him.  

2.     Ibn Taymīyyah, Minḥāj al-Sunnah (1/437-438), states: “But the Muslims and adherents to all other religions…state that everything besides Allāh is created and brought into existence after non-existence…” Similar words appear in other books like Dār aʿ-Tʿāruḍ (2/267), Majmūʿ al-Fatāwá́ (6/230) and the list could go on and on. 

  1. After reading these lines will they repent and correct their wrongdoing?
  2. The Aḥbāsh and their forefathers have distorted and twisted some of the words of Ibn Taymīyyah where he was refuting the rhetoric and philosophy used by a few of the deviant sects, some even use their arguments to justify their denial of some or all the attributes of Allāh. Thus Ibn Taymīyyah was compelled to extinguish their falsehood. Ibn Taymīyyah in various places in his books discusses these issues, which he himself described as difficult to comprehend and confusing to the mind (Minḥāj al-Sunnah (1/299)).  
  3. It suffices us to say that Ahl al-Sunnah believes that Allāh creates whatever He wills whenever He wills. 
  4. It is ironic that the Aḥbāsh invent this lie upon Ibn Taymīyyah to pronounce takfīr upon him but they defend individuals such as Ibn ʿArabī, the well-known ṣūfī, even though he expressed that the world has no beginning as reported by the scholars of his era (refer to Siyar ʿAlām al-Nubalá (23/48). The same Ibn ʿArabī who authored the book ‘al-Fuṣūṣ’ about which Al-Dhahabī said: “If (it is claimed) that this book contains no disbelief, then no disbelief exists in the world.”[1] 
  5. Why?
  6. The reason is because they hate the people who call mankind to worship Allāh alone without associating any partners.  And Allāh is the grantor of success.
  7. And Allāh is the grantor of success.

[1] Quotes and References were taken from the book Firqāt al-Aḥbāsh.
Prepared by Abū ʿAbdullāh

Benefit: Refuting the Muslim but Not the Kāfir?

In the Name of Allāh, the Ever Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy
After mentioning that those who deviate from the orders of Allāh are in categories Ibn Qudama al Maqdisi (d. 689 Hijra) mentioned: 

Section Two: The innovator, if he is one who calls toward innovation and the innovation is from those that will make him a disbeliever (bid'ah mukaffarah), then his matter is more severe than that of a Thimmi  because he would neither agree to pay the Jizyah  nor would he make an agreement to live as a Thimmi. And if it is that his innovation does not make him a disbeliever, then the affair between himself and Allāh is less severe than the situation of the Kāfir without doubt. But in terms of detesting what he does (in terms of his innovation) then this is dealt with more severity than the Kāfir.

This is because the evil of the Kāfir does not extend (to the Muslims) as none of the Muslims would pay attention to his speech. And this is different than the innovator who calls toward his innovation because he thinks that what he is calling toward is the truth. He therefore becomes a reason for the misguidance of the creation and his evil extends (to the Muslims). Therefore openly displaying enmity toward him, boycotting him, being an enemy toward him, humiliating him, being harsh upon him because of his innovation and running the people away from him becomes more severe.

As for the innovator who is ignorant and unable to call (toward his innovation) and it is not feared that he would be followed then this affair is less harmful. And what takes precedence is that one should be kind toward him in giving advice since the hearts of the laymen change quickly. However, if advice does not benefit him and turning away from him would show hate for his innovation in itself, then it is preferable to turn away from him. And if he knows that this has no effect upon him because of his stubborn nature and firm belief in his heart (for the innovation) then turning away from him takes precedence, because if one does not show hatred for innovation it will spread between the creation and the evil of it will become common.

(Ibn Qudama Al Maqdisi, Minḥāj Al Qaasidīn pg. 123, Maktabah Al Islāmi Print)

Benefit: Shaykh Ibn Bāz on How to Advise Someone Who Commits an Act of Shirk

In the Name of Allāh, the Ever Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy

Question: What should I do if I see someone calling upon a dead person at his gravesite, seeking his help, someone committing an outright act of  shirk?  When calling him to worship Allāh alone, do I advise him as a Muslim, or should I consider him a polytheist?

Answer: (by Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Ibn Bāz, may Allāh have Mercy on him): Invite him using a different approach, not this way or that way.  Say to him, "O Fulān!  O ʿAbdullāh!  This thing you are doing is a kind of shirk, and it is not (the correct way of) worship!  It is the way of the pagans from Jāhiliyyah (the pre-Islamic period of ignorance)!  It is the way of (the pagans of) Quraysh and those like them!"

This is because there may be reasons he should not be declared outside of Islām in this case, and declaring him outside of Islām would run him away as soon as you speak to him!

Declaring someone outside of Islām is based on more than just an action of shirk.  The action may be  shirk, but the one doing may not be a mushrik (polytheist), since there could be something preventing us from making  takfīr (declaring him a disbeliever), like ignorance or not understanding firmly what the scholars say (about his action).

Also, to address him as a polytheist would run him away. So call him by his name, and explain to him clearly that what he is doing is shirk.

Source: Al-Fawaa'id al-'Ilmiyyah min ad-Duroos al-Bāziyyah (2/273, Ar-Risālah printing, 1430, as quoted by Shaykh Aḥmad Zahraanee)
Arabic: http://www.sahab.net/forums/showthread.php?t=380484
Prepared by: Mūsá Richardson (1431/8/28)

Class: al-Kitāb al-Tawḥīd

  Abū ʿUways

Our beloved brother, Abū ʿUways (raḥimahullāh), translates a 4-part lecture titled al-Kitāb al-Tawḥīd from the Imām of al-Jarḥ wa-al-Taʿdīl, al-ʿAllāmah Rabīʿ ibn Hādī al-Madkhalī, on February 24th, 2003. All of the prophets of Allāh had the same fundamental principles. The battles, disagreements, animosity, and wars with other nations and religions all centred around Tawḥīd al-ʿUbūdiyyah (oneness of Allāh in His worship). 

Creed Comes First...Without a Doubt!

  Shaykh ʿAbd al-Salām ibn Burjiss

The Shaykh explains that the cause for Allāh's goodness and blessing is to affirm the tawḥīd of Allāh and that the root of all evil is shirk with Allāh. He also recounts how this vile act of shirk first appeared in the world.

Fear of Shirk

   

The supplication of Prophet Ibrāhīm to Allāh, seeking protection from shirk.

Fear of Shirk

  Abū  ͑Abdillāh Ḥasan al-Ṣumāli

Our noble brother Abū  ͑Abdillāh Ḥasan al-Ṣumālī (hafiẓahullāh) gives an excellent short, yet comprehensive reminder regarding the importance of studying tawḥīd, and the need for its dissemination to the people in general due to the widespread ignorance concerning what is obligated upon the Muslim with regards to singling out Allāh alone in worship, upon the correct understanding of the meaning of Lā ilāha illā Allāh and its conditions, and the importance of knowing and abandoning shirk and its many forms and manifestations.

Let the Sunnah Go Forth

   

Our need for the Sunnah is so great that without it our religion would be incomplete. Books such as the Bible and the Torah are so lacking in divine explanation that one can never understand (from them) how to worship Allāh properly.

On the Use of Tamīmah/Taʿwīdh

   

A warning from the senior Scholars against the well-known innovation and superstition of wearing amulets, necklaces and ‘lucky charms’ for the purpose of removing evil and harm.

  • 1
  • 2

RT @AbuKhadeejahSP: Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Al-Qayyim were not the first to say that Ahlul-Kalām (and the Ash'aris) are Ahlul-Bid'ah. And a r…

troid.org troid.org

RT @AbuIyaadSP: Muḥammad Ḥijāb’s Horrendous Analogy in Considering Debating as the Instrument of Truth Similar to Laboratory Experiments.…

troid.org troid.org

RT @GtownMasjid: Alhamdu lillah - we are pleased to announce that our teacher, Ustādh Uwais Taweel [Master’s Degree from Uni of Madinah] wi…

troid.org troid.org

RT @hikmahpubs: “If someone disobeys Allāh in the way that they treat you, it is still obligatory upon you to obey Allāh in the way that yo…

troid.org troid.org