Indeed the hypocrites are exposing themselves clearly to anyone with eyes to see. They talk like the kuffaar, behave like them and probably even look like them. Just look what kind of language these people use.
Those who say "wahabi" they don't even know what they say because the word itself has no meaning. It's just another word to scare people like "terrorist", "extremist" or "radical". Those words are being used by the enemies of Islam. Be free to imitate them,but then you will be like them
mr. faruk715, you know what is wahdatul wajood, if no then i will explain, all things in universe are shadow or avtar of allah, in hindi its same as kan kan bhagwan, this is wahdatul wajood and founder of this kufr was ibne arbi. if u cant beleive just check the following link. this is a genuine barelvy
the rule for someone being right or wrong is not judged by majority. so if the position of the 3 schools differ from any one school that can certainly mean probability is higher that the other 3 schools are right but it's not a guarantee and there is still a chance that the 1 school is RIGHT and the other 3 are WRONG. The only guarantee we have is of the companions who were given glad tidings of jannah. focus on what they said and did, before coming down to scholars.. no guarantee of any scholar
if say Ibn-e-Taymiyah and many others were not at that level where Ibn-e-Arabi was, and say this is true and Ibn--e-arabi was way misunderstood, then i assure you brother, we are nowhere near even Ibn-e-Taymiyah.
Safest path is to avoid reading criticized works of Ibn-e-Arabi, till you reach that stage....
Imam ibn Katheer in his book of Islamic history- Al-bidaya Wal Nihaya comments on ibn Arabi “He has a book named beads of wisdom in which there are many things that are apparently clear kufr.”
Imam adh-Dhahabi said (in Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala) that “if ibn Arabi’s book (Beads of wisdom) does not contain clear Kufr, then there is no Kufr in the world!
I just say avoid controversial ppl like ibn-e-arabi. because many major scholars objected to his views.
btw, Brother Faruk, can you kindly give some reference from Ibn-e-Taymiya that he claimed that Ibn-e-Arabi was a kafir.... will be grateful.
check out "Ibn Taymiyya, Tawhid al-rububiyya in Majmu`a al-Fatawa al-kubra (Riyad, 1381) 2:464-465"
Ibn Taymiyya is notorious for his condemnation of Ibn `Arabi's tiny book entitled Fusus al-hikam, but he praised his Futuhat. I am told Shaykh Abdur Rahman also did not consider the Fusus al Hikam to be an Authentic book of Ibn Arabi.
As far as guarantee's are concerned, there is no guarantee that Ibn-e-Arabi was a wali or not. We accept this because people say so. Similarly check with ANY Hanbali scholar to verify what I said about Hanbali school's position on voluntarily missing prayers. I said the logic used in the video to determine that Ibn-e-Taimiyyah (ra) is kafir, can also be used for Imam Ahmed (ra). Even great scholars like Ibn-e-Kathir and Ibn Al-Jawziyyah consider Ibn-e-Taimiyyah a Muslim Scholar.
Mr. Faruk715, using the logic you gave in this video, is Imam Ahmed Bin Hanbal also a kafir? He says that any one who misses even a single salah voluntarily becomes a kafir.. so kindly comment... also your comment would apply to all hanbalis....
This statement of Imam Hanbel has nothing to do with Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi who is being seeing as one of the great Awliya and being loved by millions of moslems. Actually I even dont know whether Imam Hanbal did make such a statement. Besides, this is not the view of the other three mazhap. And at last but not least, who says that Imam Hanbal is here right ? Perhaps he is wrong !! Do you have a guarantee that this statement of his is absolutely correct ? NO !
@faruk715 Would you like A list of scholars who made takfir of Ibn Arabi - read:Source :al-Bikai, Tanbihu'l Gabiyyi ila Takfiri İbn Arabi p.135-183 Sample: - İmam Şuhabuddin Ebul-Fadl Ahmed İbn Hajer - Shayk al Islam Sirajuddin Umar İbn Reslan el-Bulkini - Allamah Burhanuddin es-Sefakisi - İmam Şemsuddin Muhammed İbn Ahmed İbn Osman ez-Zehebi - Seyfuddin İbnul-Mecjd Ali el-Hariri - Alauddin Muhammed İbn Muhammed el-Bukhari el-Hanefi - Imam Nuruddin Ali İbn Yaqub el-Bekri esh-Shafii
Ibn 'Arabi -- All the Sunni Scholars of his time made Takfeer (declared him a disbeliever) of him except for his followers & the Sufees for his saying like 'There is nothing in my garment except God' .
Shaykhul Islam Imaam Ahmad ibn Haleem at-Taymiyyah (died 728H) -- His books which he authored speak of him. Hundreds of Books on every subject in Islamic Sciences. Even the opponents make good mention of him. Just have a look at any of his books & then claim what you claim.
The Slave girl as testified by Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) better than the Ash'aris. She answered 'Fi Asama'" and Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) testified she was a believer".
Shaikh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (Ruhmatullahi 'alaihi) in Al-Ghunya li-Talibi Tariq al-Haqq:
"And Allah, exalted is He, is over the Throne and below Him are veils of fire, light, and darkness, and what He only knows" - from al-Ghunyah Li Talibi Tariq al-Haqq1/121,123.
Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
Imaam, Badr ud-Deen al-'Ainee said, "Whoever says Ibn Taymiyyah is a disbeliever is himself a disbeliever and whoever says that he was a heretic is himself a heretic. How can this be possible when his works are widely available and not a hint of deviation and departure (from the truth)
@myyou1 hahaha,that bitch of taymiyah said allah is siting with muhammad on his arsh.Allah sits on al-Kursiyy and has left a space for the Messenger of Allah to sit with Him. At-Taj Muhammad Ibn ^Aliyy Ibn ^Abd-il-Haqq al-Baranbariyy pretended that he is a promoter of his ideas and tricked him, until he took it from him; we read that in it. [The author of "Kashf-uz-Zunun" reported that about him also in Volume 2, page 1438.]
Bismillah, Alhamdulllah, The expressions that you use is a good indicators of who your Murshids are.
Why then did the supporters of Ibn Arabi lost the debate with Ibn Taymiyyah concerning his Aqidah? Alhamdulillah, the reliable Scholar had spoken:
"Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, refuting the one who opposed that Ibn Taymiyyah be termed 'Shaykhul-lslam':
"The acclaim of Taqi ad-Din (Ibn Taymiyyah) is more renown than that of the Sun and titling him Shaykhul-Islam of his era remains until our time upon the virtuous tongues. It will continue tomorrow just as it was yesterday. No one refutes this but a person who is ignorant of his prestige or one who turns away from equity."
In contrast, Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani challenged an Ibn Arabi defender in to a Mubahala -- calling the curse of Allah (Subhanehu wa ta'alaa) on the one who is denying the truth.
Kafir or not, Ibn Taymiyyah was indubitably a zindiq, the fact that he was a zindiq in matters of aqeedah is acknowledged even by those who worship him.
People who do not know about Ibn Taymiyyah should not defend him, this zindiq is an intellectual pioneer of Wahhabism and much more
subhanallah its not good to point out peaople as kafir t ibn taimiyyah was a good scholler and who knows who put out this vidio mayby he is trying to put doubt in muslims hearts and its not good fore ús to talk about this we have bigger issues and the biggest is to stay in the path of allah so dont look on other people
By his claim that Allah sits on the throne, he is equivalently saying Allah is a body.
Ash-Shafi^i who was the teacher of Imam ahmad said: Al mujasimu kafir (Narrated by As-Suyuti in his book ashbah wan-nadha'ir)
Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: Man Qala Allaha jismun lakal ajsami kafar which means whoever says Allah is a body not like our body blasphemes (Narrated by Badrud-Din Az-Zarkashi in his book Tashniful Masami^, Volume 4)
SubhanAllaah. Ibn Tayymiyah was not a kafir. Ibn 3arabia was a clear kafir! Ibn 3arabi referred to himself as the seal of sainthood which he implied was a status higher prophethood. He beleived that everything which exist is Allah and Allah is everything.
He is a clear kafir and ibn taymiyyah is a true muslim. Alhamdulillaahi ta3ala..
I hope this will benefit the people who watch your ignorant movie
you ppl have made islam very un attractive to me, i thought islam was one and muslims were all brothers, how wrong i was. for me only Allah Quran ,and his prophet is all i need, as for all u rotten sectarian stinking muslims u all can rot in hell
@lebrocky - you don't know what you're saying. if you saw what imam ahmad said in aqida you would see that ibn taymiyyah says the same thing. ibn taymiyyah was a hanbali and an orthodox scholar. ibn al-qayyim as well. don't believe the hype. maybe when you actually read the scholars' books you will see what i mean.
As for the creator of this video, he is beyond ignorant as he has judged ibn taymiyya for his lineage (Harrani), and has clearly never read a book of his.
@rafunkus Ibn Taymiyyah said in his book which he called Majmu^ al Fatawa, in the second volume, in the 2nd and 3rd section on page 229. Ibn Taymiyah says: After all of this, the scholars which are highly accepted by Allah and the righteous muslims have all unanimously agreed that Allah is sitting on his throne and he sits his prophet Muhammad with him on it.
Ash-Shafi^iy who was praised by the prophet in the hadith said: whoever believes Allah sits on the throne is a blasphemer
@lebrocky - you don't know what you're saying. if you saw what imam ahmad said in aqida you would see that ibn taymiyyah says the same thing. ibn taymiyyah was a hanbali and an orthodox scholar. ibn al-qayyim as well. don't believe the hype. maybe when you actually read the scholars' books you will see what i mean.
the Prophet ^alayhis-Salatu wa salam said: Ya ayyuhan-nass ta^alamu fa inna mal ^ilmu bit-ta^alum which means o people learn, learning is by being taught. The prophet taught us to learn by being taught from a teacher. The books of ibn Abdil wahhab, ibn Qayyim, I dont trust them for they are the books of wahabis. I look at what scholars such as Ash-Shafi^iy said, Malik, Abu Hanifa, Imam Ahmad and the like.
I hope I can get to know u better Insha Allah, May Allah guide us :)
10. Lastly, Dont debate with me if ur just going to copy and paste ur information from the internet. EVERYTHING u said, literally word for word was from a website and I will post the website now. Dont u fear Allah? is this how the prophet taught us to learn? maybe this is why ur so lost. Everything u posted was word for word, copy and pasted.
as-salaf ( add the w w w and the c o m) . Thats where this man got all his information from, to back up his claim. He learnt from the internet.
@lebrocky debate is for the scholars not for the likes of me, i was just referring to you some sayings of the salaf about the attributes of Allah, and i'm not a man i'm only a boy, and as for learning then maybe you should read the following books, kitab al tawhid by shaykh abdul wahab, Ar-Risalat ut-Tabukiyyah by ibn qayim explanation to the beautiful and perfect names of Allah by shaykh as-sadi, and as muslims we take knowledge from whenever we see it even if it is by the means of websites
8. I dont believe at tirdmidhi said all of that, that verse itself had nothing to do with our prophet Adam. Do u see what u result to when u learn from the internet?
9.Al hussain Al baghawi, if he is a scholar, ive never heard of him but nevertheless, he wouldnt say anything against making ta'weel because the prophet made du^a that ^abdullah ibn ^Abbas would know the ta'wil of the book. The prophet said: Allahuma ^alimuhul hikmata wa ta'wil al kitab
5. regarding ur claim about al-Waleed bin Muslim. The saying pass them on as they came, this goes back to my previous point in which they left them as they r, applying no meaning whatsoever.
6. The claim about Sufyan. Do u see that little bracket u put in there where you said 'Without (asking) how. Where did this word 'Asking' come from? they used to say we take them 'bila kayf' without a how. They didnt apply a how. Do u see what ur sect has resulted to into trying to deviate the muslims
3. Ishaq bin Rahwaih. This can EASILY mean in arabic. Tashbih is to say: yad like our yad which goes against YOU because u guys are the ones who say yad is hand so u r basically saying 'Yad like a hand'.
4. Regarding ur claim about wakee' bin al jarrah, this goes back to my previous point in which some of salaf used to accept the mutashabih hadiths and ayahs as they came without applying a how and without taking them literally so this goes back against u.
This is basically saying one is not permitted to do ta'weel but this in itself goes against the religion so he wouldnt say this. The prophet said aboout ^abdullah ibn ^Abbas: allahumma ^alimuhul hikmata wa ta'weel al kitab narrated by Bukhari and At-Tirmidhi. This shows the validity of doing ta'wil because the prophet made du^a that ^Abdullah ibn ^Abbas would know the ta'wil of the Book (the Qur'an)
2. Your claim about about ^abddur-Rahman bin al Qasim comes back to the same point that I just mentioned. If you have the arabic text of what he said. it would be equivalent to saying 'it is not permissible for anyone to describe Allah except which he described himself within the Qur'an, and one is not to resemble his 'Yadayn' with anything or his 'wajh' with anything etc etc. [Continued]
1. if ayah 22 in Surat al-Fajr were taken literally, it would mean: "Your Lord comes.". It was narrated that Imam Ahmad, that is imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said that this ayah means: An indication of the Power of Allah has come. Al Bayhaqiy narrated this in his book 'Manaqib Ahmad' and he said the chain of narration is sahih.
Whereas u people LIE about imam malik and u say that he said 'the istiwa is known but the how is unknown' if according to u the how is unknown, why do u say hes sitting on the throne or rising, its contradictory to ur claim that imam malik said its unknown because according to u Allah is sitting so according to u, u do know.
@lebrocky Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said: "We worship Allah with His Attributes as He described Himself … we do not exceed the Quran and Hadeeth. We say as He said, and we describe Him as He described Himself, and we do not exceed that. We believe in all of the Quran, the muhakam and the mutashabeh (Narrated by Ibn Battah in “Al-Ibanah Al-Kubra ) part 1
@lebrocky - Abdur-Rahman Bin Al-Qasim (d. 191 H.), the companion of Imam Malik, said: "It is not permissible for anyone to describe Allah except with that which He described Himself with in the Quran, and one is not to resemble His (Allah’s) two Hands with anything, nor His Face with anything, but he is to say: ‘He (Allah) has two Hands as He described Himself in the Quran, continued."
@lebrocky and He has a Face as He described Himself’. He is to stop at what Allah described Himself with in The Book (Quran), there is no like to Him, nor a similar, he is Allah la ilaha illa huwa (no diety is worthy of worship but He) as He described Himself." -Narrated by Ibn Abi Zamanin in “Usool As-Sunnah continued
@lebrocky - Ishaq bin Rahwaih (d. 238 H.) said: “Tashbeeh (resembling/likening Allah to creation) is to say: ‘Hand like a hand” or ‘Similar to a hand’, or ‘Hearing like a hearing’ or ‘Similar to a hearing’, so if one says: ‘Hearing like a hearing or similar to a hearing’, then this is Tashbeeh. But if one says like Allah –The Exalted- said, Yad (Hand), Sam` (Hearing), and Basar (Sight), without saying: how, or saying: like a hearing or similar to a hearing, then this is not tashbeeh. continued
@lebrocky Wakee` Bin Al-Jarrah (d. 197 H.) said, regarding Allah’s Attributes: “We submit to these Hadiths as it came, and we do not say: ‘How is this?’ nor ‘Why was this sent down? Narrated by Abdullah the son of Imam Ahmad in his book “As-Sunnah” (1/267) with a sahih chain continued
@lebrocky Al-Waleed bin Muslim said: “I asked Al-Awza`I, Ath-Thawri, Malik bin Anas, and Al-Layth bin Sa`d about the Hadeeths of Sifat (The Attributes), and they said: «Pass them on as they came.»
- Sufyan Ibn `Uyaynah (d. 198 H.) said: «Everything that Allah described Himself with in the Quran, its interpretation is its recitation, without (asking) how, and without likening Him (to creation).» Kitab As-Sifat” by Ad-Daraqutni continued
@lebrocky Imam Tirmidhi (d. 270 H.) said in his Sunan:
“This is how it has been reported from Imam Malik, Sufyan bin `Uyainah and `Abdullah bin Mubarak, that they said about these narrations, ‘Pass them without getting into their ‘how-ness’’. This is the saying of the scholars of Ahl As-Sunnah Wal-Jama`ah. As for the Jahamiyah, then they rejected these narrations and said that this is tashbeeh [resembling Allah to His creation]. continued
@lebrocky continued from the saying of tirmidhi In more than one place in the Qur’an, Allah Mentioned His Yad (Hand), Basar (Sight) and Sam` (Hearing); The Jahamiyyah made tawil of these ayat, and interpreted it differently than how the people of knowledge interpreted it, and they said: Allah did not Create Adam with His Hand’, they said: ‘The meaning of yad (hand) here (meaning in the ayah [38:75]) is ‘power’ (quwwah).- Al-Jame` Al-Kabir” (Sunan At-Tirmidhi)
@lebrocky Al-Husain Al-Baghawi (d. 516H.) said, after speaking about several ayat and hadiths regarding Allah’s Attributes:
“Upon this [creed] were the Salaf of this nation of Islam, and the scholars of Sunnah. They all received these with faith and acceptance, while avoiding likening Him to His creation or making Taweel, and rendering its knowledge [of how-ness] to Allah Sharh As-Sunnah” by Al-Baghawi continued
@evilheem Your saying that Imam Ahmad left the ayahs as they are doesnt prove that he took the mutashbih ayahs literally. The difference between leaving them as they are and applying the literal meaning is that when u leave them as they are, you dont apply a meaning whatsoever. This is what most of the salaf did
When one like Imam malik says innovation and dispraises it, hes referring to the innovation of misguidance, the innovation in belief i.e what you guys have come up with and others. When the man appeared to him and asked him 'kayfas-stawa' imam malik KNEW he was a person who attributes allah with a body because a muslim doesnt ask how, rather he asks what is the meaning of istiwa so Malik said The istiwa is known and we dont say how, that is we dont apply how and i see that u r a innovator
What about in Suratul hadid where Allah PRAISED the followers of prophet Issa for the state of abstinence in worldly pleasures and dedication to worship, that which they INNOVATED for themselves 'Warah baniyyatan ibtada^ooha' and then Allah said 'Ma katabnaha ^alayhim' meaning Allah did not ordain upon them to do so and netiher did issa order them to do so. then Allah said 'illa btighaaa ridwanillah' meaning they only seeked the reward from Allah
it was roughly 3 months before his death and AFTER this ayah was revealed, the ayah which made riba haram was revealed so according to your claim, is the verse which made riba not permissible not part of the Qur'an, according to u should it be taken out?
And one more thing, the Status of ^umar ibnul Khattab, one who was promised PARADISE said the words Ni^matul bid^ah as narrated by Bukhariy and Muslim!! whos more knowledgable, you or ^umar?
Because it is known the person blind since birth would surely not have the forbidden look, and it is known the Prophets would never commit such an abject sin. The word kul as used in both hadiths refers to ‘most,’ although it can mean "every" it does not mean this in all cases.
Whats your next proof? Allah said in the qur'an: al yawma akmaltu lakum deenakum. Well At-Tabariy and other scholars of Tafsir narrate that this ayah was revealed in hajjatul wada^ so the prophet hadnt died yet
Whats your proof that there is only a bad Bid^ah? kullu bid^atin Dalala? well we look back at how the scholars explained this hadith and from these scholars is an-nawawi who said that this hadith is ^am Makhsus which means it is a general statement giving a specific meaning jus like the hadith al Bayhaqiy narrated where the prophet said: kullu ^aynin zaniya. this hadith does not mean "Every eye gazes the look of the adulterer;" rather, "Most people are guilty of the forbidden look." [Continued]
As the prophet said which was narrated by muslim in his sahih: man sana fil islamin sunnatan hassanatan fa lahu ajruha wa ajru man ^amila biha ila yawmil qiyama meaning whoever innovates in islam a good innovation then he has its rewards and the rewards of those who perform it till the day of judgement
Why is it that the Ummah has agreed that Allah exists without a place and u guys say otherwise. This is a matter of consensus and scans are available for the people who want to see the consensus. Why is it that u change books to prevent us visiting the prophets grave, the wahabis changed in an-nawawis book, from ziyaratal qabr ash-sharif to ziyaratul masjidil sharif.
What r u trying to prove from saying Bid^ah, there are two types of Bid^ahs anyway, Bid^ah hassana and Bid^ah Sayi2a
According to you, you believe in oneness, but ur so called religion says Allah is in the skies or on the throne, either way as Abu Ja^far as-Sadiq said: whoever claims Allah is in somethign on something or from something then he commits shirk because had he been in something he would have been contained, had he been on something he would have been carried and had he been from something he would have been created (narrated by Al Qushayri in his Risala)
Why is it that ^Aliy said there will be a people of this nation who will return to being blasphemers for attributing Allah with limbs? whos more knowledgable, u or ^Aliy, or u or Abu Ja^far At-Tahawiy? Allah is clear of Limbs and according to ur claim that everything in the qur'an is to be taken literally. U make the Qur'an and hadith contradict. For example, Wahabis say Allah sits on the throne then they say after he lives in the sky, this is a so called religion which was made up 200 years ago
When one says face but not like our face, this statement is contradictory in itself. when one takes 'Wajh' literally in suratul Qasas, Ayah 88, then it means face which is a body part composed of flesh, bone and muscle and nerve.
Why is it that the scholars have done Ta'weel to these Ayahs, when words such as Wajh, Yad, etc are mentioned? r all of these scholars of the salaf and khalaf misguided? why is it that Abu Ja^Far at-Tahawi said Allah is clear of limbs and he was also from the salaf?
"Such learning and accompanying practices," R.J. Austin wrote, "often led Ibn Arabi, even while he was still young man in Seville, to spend long hours in the cemeteries communing with the spirits of the dead."(!) (16)
Muhiyddin Ibn Arabi, one of the leading authorities on Sufi mysticism, who captured the imagination and the adulation of Sufis around the world, was born in the year 560 A.H. (1165 A.D.), and pursued the study of the occult and the metaphysical doctrines of the Sufis.
Ahlu al-Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah, on the other hand, are agreed that Allah is One Alone, qualified with all the attributes wherewith He has qualified Himself and named with all names whereby He has named Himself, without resembling creation in any respect; that His essence does not resemble the essences of His creatures nor His attributes resemble theirs. Allah the Supreme says:
"There is nothing like unto Him; He is the Al-Hearing, the All-Seeing."(42.11)
@inamahsan1 When one says Allah has a face then he belies the Verse 'Laysa kamithlihi shay'. Al Hafidh al ^Iraqiy said in his book Ghaythil hawi^ Sharhi Jami^l Jawami^ fi kitabil Ijtihad said that the verse Laysa Kamithlihi shay' came BEFORE wa huwas samee^ul basseer so that people dont misunderstand that the hearing of Allah is like our hearing or the sight of Allah is like our sight.
The concept of the Oneness of Being is all-embracing one, in that all Ibn al-Arabi's other concepts are but facets of it, just as he would say that all distinction, difference and conflict are but apparent of a single and unique reality, the 'seamless garment' of Being, whose reality underlies all derivatives being and its experience."(15)
"Of his main theme," R.W.J. Austin wrote, "the one that predominates over the rest and to which they are subordinate in the oneness of being (wihdat al-wujood).
Ibn Arabi's doctrine of pantheism was a combination of Manichean, Gnostic, Neo-Platonic, Vedantic and Christian philosophies and speculations, which he tried vainly to give an Islamic sanction by relating it to Prophetic traditions.
Sufi occultism, with its host of philosophical and theosophical doctrines, is beyond doubt antithetical to Islam. Islam proclaims that the matchless entity and essence of Allah is totally different from that of His slaves, i.e., man. Sufis, on the contrary, subscribe to the belief that matter, man and God form in effect one single entity and essence.
Vedanta, the chief Hindu philosophy, which is an example of pantheism in its metaphysical strictness, also had a great impact on Sufism following the conquest of Sindh by Muhammad b. Qasim in the second century A.H.
Greek philosophy, and in particular the teachings of Neo-Platonists, have left an indelible mark on many aspects of Sufism. This came about as a result of the translation of Greek philosophical works into Arabic during the third Islamic century. Greek pantheism became an integral part of Sufi doctrine. (13)
Sufism is a blend of various thoughts and philosophies. By intermingling a few traces of Islamic teachings with it, the Sufi thinkers attempted to sanctify their doctrines and demonstrate its conformity to Islam
If Sufis insist that they are Muslims, then what is the sense of identifying themselves with Sufism rather than with Islam. The word "Sufism" was not familiar to those who lived in the first and the best three generations of as-Salaf as-Salih (the pious predecessors) who were commanded by Allah the Exalted and His Messenger
"Allah has chosen the Muslims, honoured them, and distinguished them exclusively of other nations by the most honourable Messenger and the most perfect religion, and He has not overburdened them with more than they can bear."(12)
True Muslims should be content with the name "Muslims given to them by Almighty Allah as he says:
which means,
"He has chosen you (to conform to His religion) and has imposed no difficulty upon you in religion, the religion of your father Ibrahim. He named you 'Muslims' both before (in the preceding Divine Scriptures) and in this Book." (22.78)
(i.e. until the Day of Judgment).Adhering to anything other than the two aforementioned Divine sources is deviation itself. We are commanded by Allah to hold only to that which the Messenger has commanded and taught, and to refrain from that which he had forbidden.(7). Qur'anic texts and Prophetic traditions signify:
"I have left you with two things after which you shall never go astray, as long as you adhere to them: the Book of Allah and my Sunnah. The two shall never part until they attend my hawd al-Kawther."(6)
The Sufis exploited the chaotic state of affairs during the fifth and sixth centuries A.H. and invited people to follow their way, alleging that the remedy to this chaos was conformity to the guidance of their order's shaikhs. They invented their own orders and set their own criteria to distinguish loyalty from animosity, though these criteria were not sanctioned either by Qur'an or the Sunnah. Imam Malik b. Anas, may Allah grant him His mercy, emphasized;
The Prophet made a point of opening all the speeches with a warning against bid'ah (innovations) in matters of religion. His warning words signify:
"Verily, the best of speech is the Book of Allah, and the best of guidance that of Muhammad and the evil of all religious matters is their own innovations. Every innovation is a bid'ah, and every bid'ah is a misguidance, and very misguidance is in the Fire." (5)
He addressed them with: Your saying ‘we take it by its literal meaning and it is incomprehensible' is contradictory in itself. If you take by its literal meaning, then ‘saq' in Surat al-Qalam, ayah 42, is a ‘shin' which is a body part composed of bone, flesh, muscle, and nerves.
they are claiming that the Prophet did not know the meaning of the attributes of Allah revealed to him; and they are claiming he called the creation to believe in that of which he was ignorant.”
Az-Zabidiyy proceeded to quote: "Those people who take a position against assigning acceptable meanings are basically likening Allah to the creation."
The Hanafiyy linguist and scholar of Hadith, Imam Murtada az-Zabidiyy, in his book, Ithafus-Sadatil-Muttaqin, refuted those who reject the practice of assigning acceptable meanings to the mutashabih ayahs and insist on taking them by their literal meanings
Az-Zabidiyy Quoting Abu Nasr al-Qushayriyy in his book at-Tadhkirah ash-Sharqiyyah said: "In essence, they are slandering the office of Prophethood [Continued]
But what do the deviants do. they say rather we accept them as they literally are but we dont know how so according to this claim Allah has a look, he has a shape, a form but how we dont know. This is nonsense and the sound mind doesnt accept it. It has actually reached a level where some deviants are saying 'Maybe Allah has hair but not like our hair' :s. this is what it has resulted to
An-Nawawi said that it can mean 'makan' or 'makana'. makan meaning location and makana meaning Status so as a result he said: the question wasnt where was Allah rather the question was how much do u glorify Allah and she replied Fis-sama' which affirmed her belief that Allah has highest status. This is how the scholars did it. We look back at what the scholars had said. one can say 'I accept the mutashabihat without applying a how' so when Istiwa' is mentioned, it is accepted without a how.
When I last checked the dictionary I saw around 7 different meanings for the word 'Yad'. How do u know which meaning to apply? you look at what the scholars have mentioned with regards to them.
For example, the hadith of the slave girl which had reached the level of being mudtarib. Some scholars actually accepted the hadith where the prophet said 'AynAllah'. Imam An-Nawawi explained that this wasnt a question of location rather it was a question of status because 'ayna' can have 2 meanings
You have to understand that the arabic at the time of the prophet was much stronger then than it is now to the point where they didnt make mistakes in Arabic grammar and the like. The arabic now is weaker so we do not interpret the mutashabiha ayahs according to our own desires, we look at what the scholars have mentioned because they are the ones who are firm in the arabic language. If u open up an arabic dictionary and look up the word 'Yad', you will find many meanings for it.
Abu ja^far at-tahawi wrote a book called Aqeedah At-Tahawiyya and the nation is in agreement that this book is the belief of Ahlus-Sunnah. He says in this book: He is clear from having limits, boundaries, sides, organs or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are. Here abu Ja^far At-Tahawi says Allah is clear of Limbs. According to your claim that, Allah has hands and the like you are basically saying Abu Ja^far was ignorant about his lord
a hand is a limb, a leg is a limb, a shin is a limb, ^Aliy said they will return to being blasphemers. To say a face but not like our face is still a face and it indicates that it is a part. When Istiwa and the like is mentioned. They are known as ayat mutashabihat and this is mentioned in the qur'an and its also mentioned in the Qur'an that they are not to be taken literally. So when Wajh is mentioned, it is not allowed that u take it literally and say its face because this is against the Quran
Are all these scholars denying the attribute of face, shin, hands etc that u claim Allah has? Why did ^Aliy say; A people of this Nation shall return to being blasphemers when the Day of Judgment is near." A man asked, "O Prince of the Believers! What is their blasphemy for? Is it for inventing something, or for denying something?" `Ali said: "It is for denial. They deny their Creator; they say He is attributed with a body and limbs." Narrated by Ibnul mu^alim al Qurashi, Najm al-Muhtadi
Both Imam al-Fakhr ar-Raziyy in his Explanation of the Qur'an, Volume 30, page 94 and Imam al-Bayhaqiyy in his books, Al-‘Asma' was-Sifat, (page 245) Related this explanation from Ibn ^abbas. Ibn Qulayb related the same about Sa^id Ibn Jubayr who took his knowledge from ^Abdullah Ibn ^abbas and Ibn ^umar.
So why did Bukhari say that Wajh means his dominion in suratul qasas (Narrated in his Sahih, under chapter tafsirul Qur'an), why did Imam Mujahid, the student of Ibn ^abbas say Wajhullah in suratul baqarah means Qiblatullah (Narrated by at-Tabariy), Why did the Salaf explain the term saq to mean hardship and NOT a shin,' and the ayah to mean a day of anguish and hardship.' in suratul Qalam, verse 42. From these scholars was Ibn Abbas, Sa^id Ibn jubair, Mujahid, Qatadah and others. (continued)
what you are saying is the talk of philosophers,such as aristotle, you have basically described the prime mover with the changes aquinas made to show how the cosmological argument proved the existence of God. having a face and hands might mean Allah is similar to you but not to ahlus sunnah, i.e Allah's face is eternal and immortal, many hadith talk of seeing Allah's face in paradise, these are authentic, you can't just deny them because you don't agree with them (continued)
@evilheem on Ibn taymiyya its is sufficient to know that he said the following 'The comprehensive statement concerning all of this matter is that Allaah is to be described as He has described Himself or His Messenger has described Him, and as the early generation have described Him, and we are not to go beyond what the Qur’aan and hadeeth say. '
that which has a body, is in need of the one who specified it with that body and whatever is in need is weak, and whatever is weak is not Allah.
Islam does not contradict the sound mind, it is not the source of our religion, but it does not contradict it. The sound mind bears witness to the truth of Islam and the wahabi belief contradicts the sound intellect. The mind doesnt accept it.
@lebrocky what you are saying is the talk of philosophers,such as aristotle, you have basically described the prime mover with the changes aquinas made to show how the cosmological argument proved the existence of God. having a face and hands might mean Allah is similar to you but not to ahlus sunnah, i.e Allah's face is eternal and immortal, many hadith talk of seeing Allah's face in paradise, these are authentic, you can't just deny them because you don't agree with them (continued)
@lebrocky you have a face and Allah has a face, however Allah's face is not similar to yours, i.e it is not contingent on a body for existence, how would you feel if i compared your face to the face of a dog, both you and a dog have faces yet would you say they are similar, continued
One cannot say Allah sits because this likens Allah to the humans and animals. evne if they say laysa kamithlihi shay'. They recite laysa kamithlihi shay' with there tongues, and belie it with their hearts. if someone says to u Allah sits, rises, descends, laughs, smiles, he gets bored, has a face, legs, shin, two right arms, eyes, ears, fingers and they say Allah doesnt resemble the creations. Hasn't he just contradicted himself?
This reporting of Abu Hayyan was omitted from the old printed copy. However, the manuscript confirms it. In his commentary on "as-Sayf-us-Saqil", page 85, az-Zahid al-Kawthariyy said explaining the reason of omitting these statements of Ibn Taymiyah: The editor of as-Sa^adah Printing House told me that he found it very ugly and he omitted it upon printing so that the enemies of al-'Islam would not use it.
In his Tafsir named "an-Nahr", the Grammarian Abu Hayyan al-'Andalusiyy reported about Ibn Taymiyah having the belief that Allah sits. He said: In his handwriting, a book of Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah, who was contemporary with us, which he called "Kitab-ul-^Arsh", I read: Allah sits on al-Kursiyy and has left a space for the Messenger of Allah to sit with Him
"No doubt, when Ibn Nàsir wrote his book, he was deceived by the praises he heard some people making of Ibn Taimiyah." These are all the words of The Ghumari scholars.
King Muhammad Ibn Qalawun issued a decree to be read on the manabir in Egypt and ash-Sham to warn people against him and his followers.
Another Prob is, the wahabis have forged books and changed them, fabricating to make some scholars look like they praised ibn Taymiyah but really they did not. This is something Ive seen.
Consequently, he deviated from following the Book and Sunnah to innovation, and deviated from the Jama^ah of the Muslims
it was mentioned by the Ghumari scholar. He says: I think; rather, I am sure that if Ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi had some idea of Ibn Taimiyahs execrable beliefs, he would never have defended him in his book al-Radd al-Wafir [from the scathing attack of ‘Alâ al-Din al-Bukhari who wrote a book called Man Qala Ibn Taimiyah Shaikh al-Islam fa huwa Kafir (continued)
okay, thank you! I will ask but how do you trust a book which was written by a man who was judged as a blasphemer by consensus? Consensus was narrated by Taqiud-din Al-Husni in his book Daf^u shubah (page 45). Why dont u trust the proper scholars instead such as ibn hajar al asqalani, al awza^i, An-nawawi, ash-shafi^i etc btw what country do u live in! thanks
@lebrocky I live in england as for ibn taymiyya, his funeral showed his iman and that he was a great scholar by consenus, as it was attended by all in damascus except for 3 individuals who stayed away due to the fear of death, ibn taymiyya students include ibn qayim, ibn kathir, ibn abdul-hadi, dhahabi, al-mizzi, muhammad bin muflih, abu hafs al bazzar. ibn al-wardi and qadi ibn Fadl-ullah, so how is this man a heretic by conensus
@evilheem Because the consensus of his blasphemy was reported by Taqiud-din al Husni, in his book Daf^u Shubah. Taqiud-din reported in this book in page 45 he said: Fa sara kufruhu majmu^an ^alayhi. For example, when Ibn Taymiyyah says Allah sits, this is blasphemy and the many other things that he differed with such as saying tawassul by the prophet is not permissible and the like.
@lebrocky so would you say his students ate heretics since they defended him and praised him, Shaykh Ibn Naasir al-Deen al-Dimashqi wrote a book called al-Radd al-Waafir ‘ala man za’ama anna man sammaa Ibn Taymiyah Shaykh al-Islam kaafir, In it he mentioned eighty five imams, all of whom described Ibn Taymiyah as Shaykh al-Islam, and he quoted their words from their books to that effect. as part of the introduction to that book ibn hajr said part 1 (continued)
@lebrocky The fame and position of Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen as an imam is brighter than the sun, and his title as the Shaykh al-Islam of his own era has lasted until today and will continue tomorrow. Nobody rejects that except one who is ignorant of his position, or is unfair. Al-Radd al-Waafir by Imam Ibn Naasir al-Deen al-Dimashqi (p. 145, 146), al-Haafiz al-Sakhaawi – the student of Ibn Hajar – quoted the words of his Shaykh in his book al-Jawaahir wa’l-Durar (2/734-736). (part 2)
@lebrocky Ibn taymiya said The early generation of this ummah and its imams are unanimously agreed that there is nothing like unto Allaah, either in His essence or His attributes or His actions. One of the imams said: Whoever likens Allaah to His creation is a kaafir, and whoever denies that which Allaah has ascribed to Himself is a kaafir; there is nothing like unto that which Allaah has ascribed to Himself or His Messenger has ascribed to Him. End quote.
@evilheem At first some scholars praised Ibn Taymiyah but after they found out about his beliefs, they refuted him. For example, In "ad-Durrat-ul-Mudiyyah", he said what means: Ibn Taymiyah innovated the foul things in the Usul of belief and infringed the foundations of al-'Islam, after he was covering himself with following the Book (the Qur'an) and Sunnah, showing outwardly that he is a caller to truth and a guide to the Jannah. (continued)
@lebrocky The author is ibn taymiyya, sorry for a late reply, i think there is a pdf file of the book which you could download, it contains the hadith in arabic
yeah Al hafidh al ^iraqiy said in his book Ghaythil hawi^ Sharhi Jami^l Jawami^ fi kitabil Ijtihad said that the verse Laysa Kamithlihi shay' came BEFORE wa huwas samee^ul basseer so that people dont misunderstand that the hearing of Allah is like our hearing or the sight of Allah is like our sight. This results to attributing Allah with body parts such as ears and eyes which some deviants claim. Can you please give me them in arabic so that I can ask what the scholars have mentioned about them
The hadith are in the book sharh al aqeedat il wasitiyah, the commenter is shaykh khalil harras of egypt, allah after saying there is nothing like him says he is the all hearing the all knower in refutation of the jahmiyyah,
or u can follow the way of the khalaf and apply ta'weel which is necesary nowadays because people are misinterpreting the ayahs and hadiths to mean something else. We always look back at what the scholars have said. According to your claim that Allah has two hands, and face. When u take suratul qasas literally and according to u it means everything would be destroyed except his face, what happened to the two hands that u claimed Allah has? do u see how u have destroyed the idol u worshipped?
@lebrocky The hadith are in the book sharh al aqeedat il wasitiyah, the commenter is shaykh khalil harras of egypt, allah after saying there is nothing like him says he is the all hearing the all knower in refutation of the jahmiyyah,
nevertheless, the one who attributes Allah with a face, hand, legs or any kind of limbs blasphemes because he belied the ayah 'Laysa kamithlihi shay'. The mutashabih ayahs that are in the qur'an and mutashabih hadiths, u can follow the way of most of the salaf and that is to apply no meaning whatsoever to them and say I accept them without a how as al bayhaqiy narrates about imam malik, layth ibn sa^d and others that they take the mutashbih ayahs without a how
If these things are really hadiths, you look at what the schoalrs have said, and what ta'weel is made but as you can see, not everything can be taken literally. but for example ur saying yadayn can mean two hands. but the actual word yadayn what other words can it mean? linguistically it has other meanings for example it can mean 'care'. In the arabic language some words may have up to 25 meanings. Give the hadiths in arabic with narrators so that I can ask my teacher about what they mean
Really it is narrated by abdullah bin amr atha allah created three things with his own hands.... yadain along with the grammatical forms meant for two is recognised for real hands alone also at taa'if the prophet said i take shelter in that radiance of your countenance by which you illuminated the darkness so how can taweel be made of these things
We look at what the scholars have said with regards to the verses and we dont interpret the Qur'an according to our own desires. We are not scholars, so we look at what the scholars have said. Isn't it true that if you take the Ayah 'Wa huwa ma^akum aynama kuntum' literally it would mean Allah is physically with us everywhere. Rather the scholars including ash-Shafi^iy, Malik, Ahmad, Sufyan Ath-thawri said it means Allah has knowledge of us whereever we may be
Allah is clear of being attributed with limbs like the people of misguidance claim. One who says Allah has a face, hands,etc, they r infact saying Allah is made up of body parts. Ash-Shafi^iy said: the one who attributes allah with a body is a kafir. Narrated by As-Suyuti in his book 'Al ashbah wan-nadha'ir. Even if they say body but not like our body, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: whoever says Allah is not like our body is a kafir. Narrated by Badrud-din Az-Zarkashi in his book Tashniful Masami^
For example, The ayah 'Allahu nooru samawati waal ard' we dont say Allah is light because Allah is the one who created light. The one who says he is light then he is saying Allah is created. Abdullah ibn Abbas the companion and cousin of the prophet said this verse means 'Allah is the one who guides the believers to the light of islam' This was narrated by At-Tabarani and Al-Bayhaqiy in his book 'Al asma'i was-Sifat'
when we say Allah is attributed with having the attribute of hearing and we say the creation are attributed with hearing, they mean two totally different things. Allahs hearing is without an ear or an instrument whereas the humans and animals hear with an ear and instrument so there is no likening Allah to the creation involved.
As Ash-Shafi^iy said: man ^itaqada an Allah jalisun ^alal ^arsh fa huwa kafir which means whoever says Allah sits on the throne he is a blasphemer....
@evilheem No because when 'Wajh' is mentioned, it doesnt mean face with regards to Allah, lignuistically in the arabic language it means something else. For example, when Wajh is mentioned in suratul qasas ayah 88, Bukhari says in his sahih in the chapter tafseerul quran Wajh means dominion, not face. If it meant face, the verse would mean 'everything would be destroyed except his face' so according to ur claim that Allah has hands, his hands would be destroyed
Ibn Taimiyyah was sorry for that, he repented himself before the court. 6. Tebiul Ahira 707 year. It is in the book Nedžmul Muhted and in commentary of book »Sejfu Sakil fi reddi ala Ibn Zefil« from Šejhul Islama Muhammed Zahid El Kevserija, page 477. Main judge was Bedruddin Ibn Džema'ah. I hope Allah dž. have mercy on his soul.
Ibn Taymiyah did say that, and I have actually seen the book so why would i lie about that. He wasnt a mujahid as u claim, rather he attributed sitting to Allah, saying that Allah sits on his throne and if u can read arabic, ill show u scans of the book.
Ash-Shafi^iy who was praised by the prophet said: whoever believes Allah sits on the throne, he is a kafir narrated by ibn al-mu^alim al Qurashi in his book Najm al-Muhtadi wa rajm al mu^tadi
@lebrocky Would you deny that your are alive, would you say Allah is alive, if you answer yes to both questions as you must then according to your ideology have you not compared yourself to Allah
@evilheem: no because we say Allahs life is not similar to our life, his life is without a beginning, without flesh, without blood, etc..but when people say Allah is attributed with sitting, what have they done? they r basicaly saying Allah is a body. even if they say sitting but not like our sitting, even if they say body but not like our body. the ummah blasphemes them. the attribute of life was mentioned in the qur'an, 'al hayy' but when they say sitting, where is the word 'jalasa' mentioned?
Indeed the hypocrites are exposing themselves clearly to anyone with eyes to see. They talk like the kuffaar, behave like them and probably even look like them. Just look what kind of language these people use.
Those who say "wahabi" they don't even know what they say because the word itself has no meaning. It's just another word to scare people like "terrorist", "extremist" or "radical". Those words are being used by the enemies of Islam. Be free to imitate them,but then you will be like them
mr. faruk715, you know what is wahdatul wajood, if no then i will explain, all things in universe are shadow or avtar of allah, in hindi its same as kan kan bhagwan, this is wahdatul wajood and founder of this kufr was ibne arbi. if u cant beleive just check the following link. this is a genuine barelvy
the rule for someone being right or wrong is not judged by majority. so if the position of the 3 schools differ from any one school that can certainly mean probability is higher that the other 3 schools are right but it's not a guarantee and there is still a chance that the 1 school is RIGHT and the other 3 are WRONG. The only guarantee we have is of the companions who were given glad tidings of jannah. focus on what they said and did, before coming down to scholars.. no guarantee of any scholar
if say Ibn-e-Taymiyah and many others were not at that level where Ibn-e-Arabi was, and say this is true and Ibn--e-arabi was way misunderstood, then i assure you brother, we are nowhere near even Ibn-e-Taymiyah.
Safest path is to avoid reading criticized works of Ibn-e-Arabi, till you reach that stage....
Imam ibn Katheer in his book of Islamic history- Al-bidaya Wal Nihaya comments on ibn Arabi “He has a book named beads of wisdom in which there are many things that are apparently clear kufr.”
Imam adh-Dhahabi said (in Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala) that “if ibn Arabi’s book (Beads of wisdom) does not contain clear Kufr, then there is no Kufr in the world!
I just say avoid controversial ppl like ibn-e-arabi. because many major scholars objected to his views.
btw, Brother Faruk, can you kindly give some reference from Ibn-e-Taymiya that he claimed that Ibn-e-Arabi was a kafir.... will be grateful.
check out "Ibn Taymiyya, Tawhid al-rububiyya in Majmu`a al-Fatawa al-kubra (Riyad, 1381) 2:464-465"
Ibn Taymiyya is notorious for his condemnation of Ibn `Arabi's tiny book entitled Fusus al-hikam, but he praised his Futuhat. I am told Shaykh Abdur Rahman also did not consider the Fusus al Hikam to be an Authentic book of Ibn Arabi.
As far as guarantee's are concerned, there is no guarantee that Ibn-e-Arabi was a wali or not. We accept this because people say so. Similarly check with ANY Hanbali scholar to verify what I said about Hanbali school's position on voluntarily missing prayers. I said the logic used in the video to determine that Ibn-e-Taimiyyah (ra) is kafir, can also be used for Imam Ahmed (ra). Even great scholars like Ibn-e-Kathir and Ibn Al-Jawziyyah consider Ibn-e-Taimiyyah a Muslim Scholar.
Mr. Faruk715, using the logic you gave in this video, is Imam Ahmed Bin Hanbal also a kafir? He says that any one who misses even a single salah voluntarily becomes a kafir.. so kindly comment... also your comment would apply to all hanbalis....
This statement of Imam Hanbel has nothing to do with Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi who is being seeing as one of the great Awliya and being loved by millions of moslems. Actually I even dont know whether Imam Hanbal did make such a statement. Besides, this is not the view of the other three mazhap. And at last but not least, who says that Imam Hanbal is here right ? Perhaps he is wrong !! Do you have a guarantee that this statement of his is absolutely correct ? NO !
@faruk715 Would you like A list of scholars who made takfir of Ibn Arabi - read:Source :al-Bikai, Tanbihu'l Gabiyyi ila Takfiri İbn Arabi p.135-183 Sample: - İmam Şuhabuddin Ebul-Fadl Ahmed İbn Hajer - Shayk al Islam Sirajuddin Umar İbn Reslan el-Bulkini - Allamah Burhanuddin es-Sefakisi - İmam Şemsuddin Muhammed İbn Ahmed İbn Osman ez-Zehebi - Seyfuddin İbnul-Mecjd Ali el-Hariri - Alauddin Muhammed İbn Muhammed el-Bukhari el-Hanefi - Imam Nuruddin Ali İbn Yaqub el-Bekri esh-Shafii
Ibn 'Arabi -- All the Sunni Scholars of his time made Takfeer (declared him a disbeliever) of him except for his followers & the Sufees for his saying like 'There is nothing in my garment except God' .
Shaykhul Islam Imaam Ahmad ibn Haleem at-Taymiyyah (died 728H) -- His books which he authored speak of him. Hundreds of Books on every subject in Islamic Sciences. Even the opponents make good mention of him. Just have a look at any of his books & then claim what you claim.
The Slave girl as testified by Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) better than the Ash'aris. She answered 'Fi Asama'" and Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) testified she was a believer".
Shaikh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (Ruhmatullahi 'alaihi) in Al-Ghunya li-Talibi Tariq al-Haqq:
"And Allah, exalted is He, is over the Throne and below Him are veils of fire, light, and darkness, and what He only knows" - from al-Ghunyah Li Talibi Tariq al-Haqq1/121,123.
Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
Imaam, Badr ud-Deen al-'Ainee said, "Whoever says Ibn Taymiyyah is a disbeliever is himself a disbeliever and whoever says that he was a heretic is himself a heretic. How can this be possible when his works are widely available and not a hint of deviation and departure (from the truth)
@myyou1 hahaha,that bitch of taymiyah said allah is siting with muhammad on his arsh.Allah sits on al-Kursiyy and has left a space for the Messenger of Allah to sit with Him. At-Taj Muhammad Ibn ^Aliyy Ibn ^Abd-il-Haqq al-Baranbariyy pretended that he is a promoter of his ideas and tricked him, until he took it from him; we read that in it. [The author of "Kashf-uz-Zunun" reported that about him also in Volume 2, page 1438.]
Bismillah, Alhamdulllah, The expressions that you use is a good indicators of who your Murshids are.
Why then did the supporters of Ibn Arabi lost the debate with Ibn Taymiyyah concerning his Aqidah? Alhamdulillah, the reliable Scholar had spoken:
"Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, refuting the one who opposed that Ibn Taymiyyah be termed 'Shaykhul-lslam':
"The acclaim of Taqi ad-Din (Ibn Taymiyyah) is more renown than that of the Sun and titling him Shaykhul-Islam of his era remains until our time upon the virtuous tongues. It will continue tomorrow just as it was yesterday. No one refutes this but a person who is ignorant of his prestige or one who turns away from equity."
In contrast, Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani challenged an Ibn Arabi defender in to a Mubahala -- calling the curse of Allah (Subhanehu wa ta'alaa) on the one who is denying the truth.
Indeed the hypocrites are exposing themselves clearly to anyone with eyes to see. They talk like the kuffaar, behave like them and probably even look like them. Just look what kind of language these people use.
Those who say "wahabi" they don't even know what they say because the word itself has no meaning. It's just another word to scare people like "terrorist", "extremist" or "radical". Those words are being used by the enemies of Islam. Be free to imitate them,but then you will be like them
IslamistTerrorist 4 days ago
Mr Farukh715 your logic proves you kafir as well "one who calls anyone kafir is kafir" Also please quote reference to this hadith.
scorpisd 1 month ago
@scorpisd
You are wrong. I am just repeating. Was Imam Ghazali a Kafir when he called some muslim philosophers like Ibn Sina as Kafir ?
faruk715 4 weeks ago
Faruk, can you tell me where is Allah?
hbk711x 6 months ago
mr. faruk715, you know what is wahdatul wajood, if no then i will explain, all things in universe are shadow or avtar of allah, in hindi its same as kan kan bhagwan, this is wahdatul wajood and founder of this kufr was ibne arbi. if u cant beleive just check the following link. this is a genuine barelvy
saddi781 6 months ago
adfasfasdfasdf
saddi781 6 months ago
may allah honour sheik ibn thaimiyyah and sheik muhammad ibn abd al wahhab and other salafi sheiks.....
syeddmm 7 months ago 3
the rule for someone being right or wrong is not judged by majority. so if the position of the 3 schools differ from any one school that can certainly mean probability is higher that the other 3 schools are right but it's not a guarantee and there is still a chance that the 1 school is RIGHT and the other 3 are WRONG. The only guarantee we have is of the companions who were given glad tidings of jannah. focus on what they said and did, before coming down to scholars.. no guarantee of any scholar
bilaltoru 8 months ago
Let me help you look at it from another angle.
if say Ibn-e-Taymiyah and many others were not at that level where Ibn-e-Arabi was, and say this is true and Ibn--e-arabi was way misunderstood, then i assure you brother, we are nowhere near even Ibn-e-Taymiyah.
Safest path is to avoid reading criticized works of Ibn-e-Arabi, till you reach that stage....
bilaltoru 8 months ago
The following should also be kafir, no?
Imam ibn Katheer in his book of Islamic history- Al-bidaya Wal Nihaya comments on ibn Arabi “He has a book named beads of wisdom in which there are many things that are apparently clear kufr.”
Imam adh-Dhahabi said (in Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala) that “if ibn Arabi’s book (Beads of wisdom) does not contain clear Kufr, then there is no Kufr in the world!
I just say avoid controversial ppl like ibn-e-arabi. because many major scholars objected to his views.
bilaltoru 8 months ago
btw, Brother Faruk, can you kindly give some reference from Ibn-e-Taymiya that he claimed that Ibn-e-Arabi was a kafir.... will be grateful.
check out "Ibn Taymiyya, Tawhid al-rububiyya in Majmu`a al-Fatawa al-kubra (Riyad, 1381) 2:464-465"
Ibn Taymiyya is notorious for his condemnation of Ibn `Arabi's tiny book entitled Fusus al-hikam, but he praised his Futuhat. I am told Shaykh Abdur Rahman also did not consider the Fusus al Hikam to be an Authentic book of Ibn Arabi.
bilaltoru 8 months ago
As far as guarantee's are concerned, there is no guarantee that Ibn-e-Arabi was a wali or not. We accept this because people say so. Similarly check with ANY Hanbali scholar to verify what I said about Hanbali school's position on voluntarily missing prayers. I said the logic used in the video to determine that Ibn-e-Taimiyyah (ra) is kafir, can also be used for Imam Ahmed (ra). Even great scholars like Ibn-e-Kathir and Ibn Al-Jawziyyah consider Ibn-e-Taimiyyah a Muslim Scholar.
bilaltoru 8 months ago
Mr. Faruk715, using the logic you gave in this video, is Imam Ahmed Bin Hanbal also a kafir? He says that any one who misses even a single salah voluntarily becomes a kafir.. so kindly comment... also your comment would apply to all hanbalis....
bilaltoru 8 months ago
@bilaltoru
This statement of Imam Hanbel has nothing to do with Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi who is being seeing as one of the great Awliya and being loved by millions of moslems. Actually I even dont know whether Imam Hanbal did make such a statement. Besides, this is not the view of the other three mazhap. And at last but not least, who says that Imam Hanbal is here right ? Perhaps he is wrong !! Do you have a guarantee that this statement of his is absolutely correct ? NO !
faruk715 8 months ago
myyou1 3 months ago
Ibn 'Arabi -- All the Sunni Scholars of his time made Takfeer (declared him a disbeliever) of him except for his followers & the Sufees for his saying like 'There is nothing in my garment except God' .
Shaykhul Islam Imaam Ahmad ibn Haleem at-Taymiyyah (died 728H) -- His books which he authored speak of him. Hundreds of Books on every subject in Islamic Sciences. Even the opponents make good mention of him. Just have a look at any of his books & then claim what you claim.
seeker1400 9 months ago
wallahi anyone who calls Ibn taymiyyah a kafir and exposes this lie on the internet should be thrusted into the hellfire
whatamuslim 9 months ago 7
@whatamuslim
MAy Allah guide him, for Ashari's don't even know where is Allah ,from what I have seen.
hbk711x 6 months ago 2
@hbk711x
The Slave girl as testified by Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) better than the Ash'aris. She answered 'Fi Asama'" and Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) testified she was a believer".
Shaikh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (Ruhmatullahi 'alaihi) in Al-Ghunya li-Talibi Tariq al-Haqq:
"And Allah, exalted is He, is over the Throne and below Him are veils of fire, light, and darkness, and what He only knows" - from al-Ghunyah Li Talibi Tariq al-Haqq1/121,123.
myyou1 4 days ago
@whatamuslim
Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
Imaam, Badr ud-Deen al-'Ainee said, "Whoever says Ibn Taymiyyah is a disbeliever is himself a disbeliever and whoever says that he was a heretic is himself a heretic. How can this be possible when his works are widely available and not a hint of deviation and departure (from the truth)
myyou1 3 months ago
@myyou1 hahaha,that bitch of taymiyah said allah is siting with muhammad on his arsh.Allah sits on al-Kursiyy and has left a space for the Messenger of Allah to sit with Him. At-Taj Muhammad Ibn ^Aliyy Ibn ^Abd-il-Haqq al-Baranbariyy pretended that he is a promoter of his ideas and tricked him, until he took it from him; we read that in it. [The author of "Kashf-uz-Zunun" reported that about him also in Volume 2, page 1438.]
AhlusSunnahWahJammat 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AhlusSunnahWahJammat
Bismillah, Alhamdulllah, The expressions that you use is a good indicators of who your Murshids are.
Why then did the supporters of Ibn Arabi lost the debate with Ibn Taymiyyah concerning his Aqidah? Alhamdulillah, the reliable Scholar had spoken:
"Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
"
myyou1 4 days ago
@whatamuslim
Bismillah, Alhamdulillah,
Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, refuting the one who opposed that Ibn Taymiyyah be termed 'Shaykhul-lslam':
"The acclaim of Taqi ad-Din (Ibn Taymiyyah) is more renown than that of the Sun and titling him Shaykhul-Islam of his era remains until our time upon the virtuous tongues. It will continue tomorrow just as it was yesterday. No one refutes this but a person who is ignorant of his prestige or one who turns away from equity."
myyou1 4 days ago
@whatamuslim
@myyou1
In contrast, Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani challenged an Ibn Arabi defender in to a Mubahala -- calling the curse of Allah (Subhanehu wa ta'alaa) on the one who is denying the truth.
myyou1 4 days ago
Who posted this is a very ignorant person. I think he has to educate himself prior to calling down a great scholar like ibn taymmya.
bodpaka 10 months ago
ARABI WAS A FAG
glower125 11 months ago
Kafir or not, Ibn Taymiyyah was indubitably a zindiq, the fact that he was a zindiq in matters of aqeedah is acknowledged even by those who worship him.
People who do not know about Ibn Taymiyyah should not defend him, this zindiq is an intellectual pioneer of Wahhabism and much more
linguafranca123 11 months ago
subhanallah its not good to point out peaople as kafir t ibn taimiyyah was a good scholler and who knows who put out this vidio mayby he is trying to put doubt in muslims hearts and its not good fore ús to talk about this we have bigger issues and the biggest is to stay in the path of allah so dont look on other people
Cologeroshibetta 11 months ago
arabi was a kaafir !
hypez555 11 months ago
By his claim that Allah sits on the throne, he is equivalently saying Allah is a body.
Ash-Shafi^i who was the teacher of Imam ahmad said: Al mujasimu kafir (Narrated by As-Suyuti in his book ashbah wan-nadha'ir)
Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: Man Qala Allaha jismun lakal ajsami kafar which means whoever says Allah is a body not like our body blasphemes (Narrated by Badrud-Din Az-Zarkashi in his book Tashniful Masami^, Volume 4)
lebrocky 1 year ago 2
SubhanAllaah. Ibn Tayymiyah was not a kafir. Ibn 3arabia was a clear kafir! Ibn 3arabi referred to himself as the seal of sainthood which he implied was a status higher prophethood. He beleived that everything which exist is Allah and Allah is everything.
He is a clear kafir and ibn taymiyyah is a true muslim. Alhamdulillaahi ta3ala..
I hope this will benefit the people who watch your ignorant movie
Muslimaaa123 1 year ago
astagfirallah
harisraja786 1 year ago
you ppl have made islam very un attractive to me, i thought islam was one and muslims were all brothers, how wrong i was. for me only Allah Quran ,and his prophet is all i need, as for all u rotten sectarian stinking muslims u all can rot in hell
wild0hawk 1 year ago
Ibn Taymiya should be caned with his trousers down.
raficsulejmanovic 1 year ago
@lebrocky - you don't know what you're saying. if you saw what imam ahmad said in aqida you would see that ibn taymiyyah says the same thing. ibn taymiyyah was a hanbali and an orthodox scholar. ibn al-qayyim as well. don't believe the hype. maybe when you actually read the scholars' books you will see what i mean.
As for the creator of this video, he is beyond ignorant as he has judged ibn taymiyya for his lineage (Harrani), and has clearly never read a book of his.
rafunkus 1 year ago
@rafunkus Ibn Taymiyyah said in his book which he called Majmu^ al Fatawa, in the second volume, in the 2nd and 3rd section on page 229. Ibn Taymiyah says: After all of this, the scholars which are highly accepted by Allah and the righteous muslims have all unanimously agreed that Allah is sitting on his throne and he sits his prophet Muhammad with him on it.
Ash-Shafi^iy who was praised by the prophet in the hadith said: whoever believes Allah sits on the throne is a blasphemer
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky You lie. And this is the way of the opponents, they lie,fabricate & interpolate.
seeker1400 9 months ago
@lebrocky - you don't know what you're saying. if you saw what imam ahmad said in aqida you would see that ibn taymiyyah says the same thing. ibn taymiyyah was a hanbali and an orthodox scholar. ibn al-qayyim as well. don't believe the hype. maybe when you actually read the scholars' books you will see what i mean.
rafunkus 1 year ago
the Prophet ^alayhis-Salatu wa salam said: Ya ayyuhan-nass ta^alamu fa inna mal ^ilmu bit-ta^alum which means o people learn, learning is by being taught. The prophet taught us to learn by being taught from a teacher. The books of ibn Abdil wahhab, ibn Qayyim, I dont trust them for they are the books of wahabis. I look at what scholars such as Ash-Shafi^iy said, Malik, Abu Hanifa, Imam Ahmad and the like.
I hope I can get to know u better Insha Allah, May Allah guide us :)
lebrocky 1 year ago
10. Lastly, Dont debate with me if ur just going to copy and paste ur information from the internet. EVERYTHING u said, literally word for word was from a website and I will post the website now. Dont u fear Allah? is this how the prophet taught us to learn? maybe this is why ur so lost. Everything u posted was word for word, copy and pasted.
as-salaf ( add the w w w and the c o m) . Thats where this man got all his information from, to back up his claim. He learnt from the internet.
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky debate is for the scholars not for the likes of me, i was just referring to you some sayings of the salaf about the attributes of Allah, and i'm not a man i'm only a boy, and as for learning then maybe you should read the following books, kitab al tawhid by shaykh abdul wahab, Ar-Risalat ut-Tabukiyyah by ibn qayim explanation to the beautiful and perfect names of Allah by shaykh as-sadi, and as muslims we take knowledge from whenever we see it even if it is by the means of websites
evilheem 1 year ago
8. I dont believe at tirdmidhi said all of that, that verse itself had nothing to do with our prophet Adam. Do u see what u result to when u learn from the internet?
9.Al hussain Al baghawi, if he is a scholar, ive never heard of him but nevertheless, he wouldnt say anything against making ta'weel because the prophet made du^a that ^abdullah ibn ^Abbas would know the ta'wil of the book. The prophet said: Allahuma ^alimuhul hikmata wa ta'wil al kitab
lebrocky 1 year ago
5. regarding ur claim about al-Waleed bin Muslim. The saying pass them on as they came, this goes back to my previous point in which they left them as they r, applying no meaning whatsoever.
6. The claim about Sufyan. Do u see that little bracket u put in there where you said 'Without (asking) how. Where did this word 'Asking' come from? they used to say we take them 'bila kayf' without a how. They didnt apply a how. Do u see what ur sect has resulted to into trying to deviate the muslims
lebrocky 1 year ago
3. Ishaq bin Rahwaih. This can EASILY mean in arabic. Tashbih is to say: yad like our yad which goes against YOU because u guys are the ones who say yad is hand so u r basically saying 'Yad like a hand'.
4. Regarding ur claim about wakee' bin al jarrah, this goes back to my previous point in which some of salaf used to accept the mutashabih hadiths and ayahs as they came without applying a how and without taking them literally so this goes back against u.
lebrocky 1 year ago
This is basically saying one is not permitted to do ta'weel but this in itself goes against the religion so he wouldnt say this. The prophet said aboout ^abdullah ibn ^Abbas: allahumma ^alimuhul hikmata wa ta'weel al kitab narrated by Bukhari and At-Tirmidhi. This shows the validity of doing ta'wil because the prophet made du^a that ^Abdullah ibn ^Abbas would know the ta'wil of the Book (the Qur'an)
lebrocky 1 year ago
2. Your claim about about ^abddur-Rahman bin al Qasim comes back to the same point that I just mentioned. If you have the arabic text of what he said. it would be equivalent to saying 'it is not permissible for anyone to describe Allah except which he described himself within the Qur'an, and one is not to resemble his 'Yadayn' with anything or his 'wajh' with anything etc etc. [Continued]
lebrocky 1 year ago
1. if ayah 22 in Surat al-Fajr were taken literally, it would mean: "Your Lord comes.". It was narrated that Imam Ahmad, that is imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said that this ayah means: An indication of the Power of Allah has come. Al Bayhaqiy narrated this in his book 'Manaqib Ahmad' and he said the chain of narration is sahih.
lebrocky 1 year ago
Whereas u people LIE about imam malik and u say that he said 'the istiwa is known but the how is unknown' if according to u the how is unknown, why do u say hes sitting on the throne or rising, its contradictory to ur claim that imam malik said its unknown because according to u Allah is sitting so according to u, u do know.
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said: "We worship Allah with His Attributes as He described Himself … we do not exceed the Quran and Hadeeth. We say as He said, and we describe Him as He described Himself, and we do not exceed that. We believe in all of the Quran, the muhakam and the mutashabeh (Narrated by Ibn Battah in “Al-Ibanah Al-Kubra ) part 1
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky - Abdur-Rahman Bin Al-Qasim (d. 191 H.), the companion of Imam Malik, said: "It is not permissible for anyone to describe Allah except with that which He described Himself with in the Quran, and one is not to resemble His (Allah’s) two Hands with anything, nor His Face with anything, but he is to say: ‘He (Allah) has two Hands as He described Himself in the Quran, continued."
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky and He has a Face as He described Himself’. He is to stop at what Allah described Himself with in The Book (Quran), there is no like to Him, nor a similar, he is Allah la ilaha illa huwa (no diety is worthy of worship but He) as He described Himself." -Narrated by Ibn Abi Zamanin in “Usool As-Sunnah continued
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky - Ishaq bin Rahwaih (d. 238 H.) said: “Tashbeeh (resembling/likening Allah to creation) is to say: ‘Hand like a hand” or ‘Similar to a hand’, or ‘Hearing like a hearing’ or ‘Similar to a hearing’, so if one says: ‘Hearing like a hearing or similar to a hearing’, then this is Tashbeeh. But if one says like Allah –The Exalted- said, Yad (Hand), Sam` (Hearing), and Basar (Sight), without saying: how, or saying: like a hearing or similar to a hearing, then this is not tashbeeh. continued
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky Wakee` Bin Al-Jarrah (d. 197 H.) said, regarding Allah’s Attributes: “We submit to these Hadiths as it came, and we do not say: ‘How is this?’ nor ‘Why was this sent down? Narrated by Abdullah the son of Imam Ahmad in his book “As-Sunnah” (1/267) with a sahih chain continued
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky Al-Waleed bin Muslim said: “I asked Al-Awza`I, Ath-Thawri, Malik bin Anas, and Al-Layth bin Sa`d about the Hadeeths of Sifat (The Attributes), and they said: «Pass them on as they came.»
- Sufyan Ibn `Uyaynah (d. 198 H.) said: «Everything that Allah described Himself with in the Quran, its interpretation is its recitation, without (asking) how, and without likening Him (to creation).» Kitab As-Sifat” by Ad-Daraqutni continued
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky Imam Tirmidhi (d. 270 H.) said in his Sunan:
“This is how it has been reported from Imam Malik, Sufyan bin `Uyainah and `Abdullah bin Mubarak, that they said about these narrations, ‘Pass them without getting into their ‘how-ness’’. This is the saying of the scholars of Ahl As-Sunnah Wal-Jama`ah. As for the Jahamiyah, then they rejected these narrations and said that this is tashbeeh [resembling Allah to His creation]. continued
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky continued from the saying of tirmidhi In more than one place in the Qur’an, Allah Mentioned His Yad (Hand), Basar (Sight) and Sam` (Hearing); The Jahamiyyah made tawil of these ayat, and interpreted it differently than how the people of knowledge interpreted it, and they said: Allah did not Create Adam with His Hand’, they said: ‘The meaning of yad (hand) here (meaning in the ayah [38:75]) is ‘power’ (quwwah).- Al-Jame` Al-Kabir” (Sunan At-Tirmidhi)
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky Al-Husain Al-Baghawi (d. 516H.) said, after speaking about several ayat and hadiths regarding Allah’s Attributes:
“Upon this [creed] were the Salaf of this nation of Islam, and the scholars of Sunnah. They all received these with faith and acceptance, while avoiding likening Him to His creation or making Taweel, and rendering its knowledge [of how-ness] to Allah Sharh As-Sunnah” by Al-Baghawi continued
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky And similarly those who mentioned them in books on “Sunnah”, “Refutation of Jahamiyah” and “Fundamentals of Religion”, some examples are:
* “Refutation of Jahamiyyah” by Muhammad `Abdullah Al-Ju`fi, the teacher of Imam Bukhari.
* “Khalq Af`al Al-`Ibad” by Al-Imam Al-Bukhari.
* “As-Sunnah” by Abu Dawud
* “As-Sunnah” by Abu Bakr Al-Athram
* “As-Sunnah” by Abdullah son of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal
* “As-Sunnah” by Hanbal bin Ishaq
* “As-Sunnah” by Abu Bakr Al-Khallal
evilheem 1 year ago
@evilheem Your saying that Imam Ahmad left the ayahs as they are doesnt prove that he took the mutashbih ayahs literally. The difference between leaving them as they are and applying the literal meaning is that when u leave them as they are, you dont apply a meaning whatsoever. This is what most of the salaf did
lebrocky 1 year ago
When one like Imam malik says innovation and dispraises it, hes referring to the innovation of misguidance, the innovation in belief i.e what you guys have come up with and others. When the man appeared to him and asked him 'kayfas-stawa' imam malik KNEW he was a person who attributes allah with a body because a muslim doesnt ask how, rather he asks what is the meaning of istiwa so Malik said The istiwa is known and we dont say how, that is we dont apply how and i see that u r a innovator
lebrocky 1 year ago
What about in Suratul hadid where Allah PRAISED the followers of prophet Issa for the state of abstinence in worldly pleasures and dedication to worship, that which they INNOVATED for themselves 'Warah baniyyatan ibtada^ooha' and then Allah said 'Ma katabnaha ^alayhim' meaning Allah did not ordain upon them to do so and netiher did issa order them to do so. then Allah said 'illa btighaaa ridwanillah' meaning they only seeked the reward from Allah
lebrocky 1 year ago
it was roughly 3 months before his death and AFTER this ayah was revealed, the ayah which made riba haram was revealed so according to your claim, is the verse which made riba not permissible not part of the Qur'an, according to u should it be taken out?
And one more thing, the Status of ^umar ibnul Khattab, one who was promised PARADISE said the words Ni^matul bid^ah as narrated by Bukhariy and Muslim!! whos more knowledgable, you or ^umar?
lebrocky 1 year ago
Because it is known the person blind since birth would surely not have the forbidden look, and it is known the Prophets would never commit such an abject sin. The word kul as used in both hadiths refers to ‘most,’ although it can mean "every" it does not mean this in all cases.
Whats your next proof? Allah said in the qur'an: al yawma akmaltu lakum deenakum. Well At-Tabariy and other scholars of Tafsir narrate that this ayah was revealed in hajjatul wada^ so the prophet hadnt died yet
lebrocky 1 year ago
Whats your proof that there is only a bad Bid^ah? kullu bid^atin Dalala? well we look back at how the scholars explained this hadith and from these scholars is an-nawawi who said that this hadith is ^am Makhsus which means it is a general statement giving a specific meaning jus like the hadith al Bayhaqiy narrated where the prophet said: kullu ^aynin zaniya. this hadith does not mean "Every eye gazes the look of the adulterer;" rather, "Most people are guilty of the forbidden look." [Continued]
lebrocky 1 year ago
As the prophet said which was narrated by muslim in his sahih: man sana fil islamin sunnatan hassanatan fa lahu ajruha wa ajru man ^amila biha ila yawmil qiyama meaning whoever innovates in islam a good innovation then he has its rewards and the rewards of those who perform it till the day of judgement
lebrocky 1 year ago
Why is it that the Ummah has agreed that Allah exists without a place and u guys say otherwise. This is a matter of consensus and scans are available for the people who want to see the consensus. Why is it that u change books to prevent us visiting the prophets grave, the wahabis changed in an-nawawis book, from ziyaratal qabr ash-sharif to ziyaratul masjidil sharif.
What r u trying to prove from saying Bid^ah, there are two types of Bid^ahs anyway, Bid^ah hassana and Bid^ah Sayi2a
lebrocky 1 year ago
According to you, you believe in oneness, but ur so called religion says Allah is in the skies or on the throne, either way as Abu Ja^far as-Sadiq said: whoever claims Allah is in somethign on something or from something then he commits shirk because had he been in something he would have been contained, had he been on something he would have been carried and had he been from something he would have been created (narrated by Al Qushayri in his Risala)
lebrocky 1 year ago
Why is it that ^Aliy said there will be a people of this nation who will return to being blasphemers for attributing Allah with limbs? whos more knowledgable, u or ^Aliy, or u or Abu Ja^far At-Tahawiy? Allah is clear of Limbs and according to ur claim that everything in the qur'an is to be taken literally. U make the Qur'an and hadith contradict. For example, Wahabis say Allah sits on the throne then they say after he lives in the sky, this is a so called religion which was made up 200 years ago
lebrocky 1 year ago
When one says face but not like our face, this statement is contradictory in itself. when one takes 'Wajh' literally in suratul Qasas, Ayah 88, then it means face which is a body part composed of flesh, bone and muscle and nerve.
Why is it that the scholars have done Ta'weel to these Ayahs, when words such as Wajh, Yad, etc are mentioned? r all of these scholars of the salaf and khalaf misguided? why is it that Abu Ja^Far at-Tahawi said Allah is clear of limbs and he was also from the salaf?
lebrocky 1 year ago
"Such learning and accompanying practices," R.J. Austin wrote, "often led Ibn Arabi, even while he was still young man in Seville, to spend long hours in the cemeteries communing with the spirits of the dead."(!) (16)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Muhiyddin Ibn Arabi, one of the leading authorities on Sufi mysticism, who captured the imagination and the adulation of Sufis around the world, was born in the year 560 A.H. (1165 A.D.), and pursued the study of the occult and the metaphysical doctrines of the Sufis.
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Ahlu al-Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah, on the other hand, are agreed that Allah is One Alone, qualified with all the attributes wherewith He has qualified Himself and named with all names whereby He has named Himself, without resembling creation in any respect; that His essence does not resemble the essences of His creatures nor His attributes resemble theirs. Allah the Supreme says:
"There is nothing like unto Him; He is the Al-Hearing, the All-Seeing."(42.11)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
@inamahsan1 When one says Allah has a face then he belies the Verse 'Laysa kamithlihi shay'. Al Hafidh al ^Iraqiy said in his book Ghaythil hawi^ Sharhi Jami^l Jawami^ fi kitabil Ijtihad said that the verse Laysa Kamithlihi shay' came BEFORE wa huwas samee^ul basseer so that people dont misunderstand that the hearing of Allah is like our hearing or the sight of Allah is like our sight.
lebrocky 1 year ago
The concept of the Oneness of Being is all-embracing one, in that all Ibn al-Arabi's other concepts are but facets of it, just as he would say that all distinction, difference and conflict are but apparent of a single and unique reality, the 'seamless garment' of Being, whose reality underlies all derivatives being and its experience."(15)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
"Of his main theme," R.W.J. Austin wrote, "the one that predominates over the rest and to which they are subordinate in the oneness of being (wihdat al-wujood).
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Ibn Arabi's doctrine of pantheism was a combination of Manichean, Gnostic, Neo-Platonic, Vedantic and Christian philosophies and speculations, which he tried vainly to give an Islamic sanction by relating it to Prophetic traditions.
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Sufi occultism, with its host of philosophical and theosophical doctrines, is beyond doubt antithetical to Islam. Islam proclaims that the matchless entity and essence of Allah is totally different from that of His slaves, i.e., man. Sufis, on the contrary, subscribe to the belief that matter, man and God form in effect one single entity and essence.
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Vedanta, the chief Hindu philosophy, which is an example of pantheism in its metaphysical strictness, also had a great impact on Sufism following the conquest of Sindh by Muhammad b. Qasim in the second century A.H.
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Manicheanism is also one of the mainstreams of Sufism. N. Fatemi observed:
"It is interesting how near to Manichean ideas the Sufis are, remembering that both Manicheanism and Sufism were nurtured in Persia."(14)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Greek philosophy, and in particular the teachings of Neo-Platonists, have left an indelible mark on many aspects of Sufism. This came about as a result of the translation of Greek philosophical works into Arabic during the third Islamic century. Greek pantheism became an integral part of Sufi doctrine. (13)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Sufism is a blend of various thoughts and philosophies. By intermingling a few traces of Islamic teachings with it, the Sufi thinkers attempted to sanctify their doctrines and demonstrate its conformity to Islam
inamahsan1 1 year ago
If Sufis insist that they are Muslims, then what is the sense of identifying themselves with Sufism rather than with Islam. The word "Sufism" was not familiar to those who lived in the first and the best three generations of as-Salaf as-Salih (the pious predecessors) who were commanded by Allah the Exalted and His Messenger
inamahsan1 1 year ago
"Allah has chosen the Muslims, honoured them, and distinguished them exclusively of other nations by the most honourable Messenger and the most perfect religion, and He has not overburdened them with more than they can bear."(12)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
True Muslims should be content with the name "Muslims given to them by Almighty Allah as he says:
which means,
"He has chosen you (to conform to His religion) and has imposed no difficulty upon you in religion, the religion of your father Ibrahim. He named you 'Muslims' both before (in the preceding Divine Scriptures) and in this Book." (22.78)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
Turning away from the Book and the Sunnah is the practice of disbelievers and hypocrites.(8)
It is incumbent on Muslims to refer their disputes and controversial issues to the two Divine sources.(9)
Refraining from them leads to failure and the loss of authority and power.(10)
The Messenger is our model of the best way of life. (11)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
(i.e. until the Day of Judgment).Adhering to anything other than the two aforementioned Divine sources is deviation itself. We are commanded by Allah to hold only to that which the Messenger has commanded and taught, and to refrain from that which he had forbidden.(7). Qur'anic texts and Prophetic traditions signify:
inamahsan1 1 year ago
"I have left you with two things after which you shall never go astray, as long as you adhere to them: the Book of Allah and my Sunnah. The two shall never part until they attend my hawd al-Kawther."(6)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
"That which was not religion at the time of the Messenger and his companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, is never to be religion today."
He went on to say;
"He who introduces a bid'ah in the religion of Islam and deems it a good thing, claims by so doing that Muhammad betrayed the Message,"
(i.e. he did not convey it fully and perfectly as commanded by Allah), despite the fact that Allah revealed;
inamahsan1 1 year ago
The Sufis exploited the chaotic state of affairs during the fifth and sixth centuries A.H. and invited people to follow their way, alleging that the remedy to this chaos was conformity to the guidance of their order's shaikhs. They invented their own orders and set their own criteria to distinguish loyalty from animosity, though these criteria were not sanctioned either by Qur'an or the Sunnah. Imam Malik b. Anas, may Allah grant him His mercy, emphasized;
inamahsan1 1 year ago
The Prophet made a point of opening all the speeches with a warning against bid'ah (innovations) in matters of religion. His warning words signify:
"Verily, the best of speech is the Book of Allah, and the best of guidance that of Muhammad and the evil of all religious matters is their own innovations. Every innovation is a bid'ah, and every bid'ah is a misguidance, and very misguidance is in the Fire." (5)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
"This day I have perfected your religion for you and completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you al-Islam as religion." (5:3)
inamahsan1 1 year ago
He addressed them with: Your saying ‘we take it by its literal meaning and it is incomprehensible' is contradictory in itself. If you take by its literal meaning, then ‘saq' in Surat al-Qalam, ayah 42, is a ‘shin' which is a body part composed of bone, flesh, muscle, and nerves.
lebrocky 1 year ago
they are claiming that the Prophet did not know the meaning of the attributes of Allah revealed to him; and they are claiming he called the creation to believe in that of which he was ignorant.”
Az-Zabidiyy proceeded to quote: "Those people who take a position against assigning acceptable meanings are basically likening Allah to the creation."
lebrocky 1 year ago
The Hanafiyy linguist and scholar of Hadith, Imam Murtada az-Zabidiyy, in his book, Ithafus-Sadatil-Muttaqin, refuted those who reject the practice of assigning acceptable meanings to the mutashabih ayahs and insist on taking them by their literal meanings
Az-Zabidiyy Quoting Abu Nasr al-Qushayriyy in his book at-Tadhkirah ash-Sharqiyyah said: "In essence, they are slandering the office of Prophethood [Continued]
lebrocky 1 year ago
But what do the deviants do. they say rather we accept them as they literally are but we dont know how so according to this claim Allah has a look, he has a shape, a form but how we dont know. This is nonsense and the sound mind doesnt accept it. It has actually reached a level where some deviants are saying 'Maybe Allah has hair but not like our hair' :s. this is what it has resulted to
lebrocky 1 year ago
An-Nawawi said that it can mean 'makan' or 'makana'. makan meaning location and makana meaning Status so as a result he said: the question wasnt where was Allah rather the question was how much do u glorify Allah and she replied Fis-sama' which affirmed her belief that Allah has highest status. This is how the scholars did it. We look back at what the scholars had said. one can say 'I accept the mutashabihat without applying a how' so when Istiwa' is mentioned, it is accepted without a how.
lebrocky 1 year ago
When I last checked the dictionary I saw around 7 different meanings for the word 'Yad'. How do u know which meaning to apply? you look at what the scholars have mentioned with regards to them.
For example, the hadith of the slave girl which had reached the level of being mudtarib. Some scholars actually accepted the hadith where the prophet said 'AynAllah'. Imam An-Nawawi explained that this wasnt a question of location rather it was a question of status because 'ayna' can have 2 meanings
lebrocky 1 year ago
You have to understand that the arabic at the time of the prophet was much stronger then than it is now to the point where they didnt make mistakes in Arabic grammar and the like. The arabic now is weaker so we do not interpret the mutashabiha ayahs according to our own desires, we look at what the scholars have mentioned because they are the ones who are firm in the arabic language. If u open up an arabic dictionary and look up the word 'Yad', you will find many meanings for it.
lebrocky 1 year ago
Abu ja^far at-tahawi wrote a book called Aqeedah At-Tahawiyya and the nation is in agreement that this book is the belief of Ahlus-Sunnah. He says in this book: He is clear from having limits, boundaries, sides, organs or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are. Here abu Ja^far At-Tahawi says Allah is clear of Limbs. According to your claim that, Allah has hands and the like you are basically saying Abu Ja^far was ignorant about his lord
lebrocky 1 year ago
a hand is a limb, a leg is a limb, a shin is a limb, ^Aliy said they will return to being blasphemers. To say a face but not like our face is still a face and it indicates that it is a part. When Istiwa and the like is mentioned. They are known as ayat mutashabihat and this is mentioned in the qur'an and its also mentioned in the Qur'an that they are not to be taken literally. So when Wajh is mentioned, it is not allowed that u take it literally and say its face because this is against the Quran
lebrocky 1 year ago
Are all these scholars denying the attribute of face, shin, hands etc that u claim Allah has? Why did ^Aliy say; A people of this Nation shall return to being blasphemers when the Day of Judgment is near." A man asked, "O Prince of the Believers! What is their blasphemy for? Is it for inventing something, or for denying something?" `Ali said: "It is for denial. They deny their Creator; they say He is attributed with a body and limbs." Narrated by Ibnul mu^alim al Qurashi, Najm al-Muhtadi
lebrocky 1 year ago
Both Imam al-Fakhr ar-Raziyy in his Explanation of the Qur'an, Volume 30, page 94 and Imam al-Bayhaqiyy in his books, Al-‘Asma' was-Sifat, (page 245) Related this explanation from Ibn ^abbas. Ibn Qulayb related the same about Sa^id Ibn Jubayr who took his knowledge from ^Abdullah Ibn ^abbas and Ibn ^umar.
lebrocky 1 year ago
So why did Bukhari say that Wajh means his dominion in suratul qasas (Narrated in his Sahih, under chapter tafsirul Qur'an), why did Imam Mujahid, the student of Ibn ^abbas say Wajhullah in suratul baqarah means Qiblatullah (Narrated by at-Tabariy), Why did the Salaf explain the term saq to mean hardship and NOT a shin,' and the ayah to mean a day of anguish and hardship.' in suratul Qalam, verse 42. From these scholars was Ibn Abbas, Sa^id Ibn jubair, Mujahid, Qatadah and others. (continued)
lebrocky 1 year ago
what you are saying is the talk of philosophers,such as aristotle, you have basically described the prime mover with the changes aquinas made to show how the cosmological argument proved the existence of God. having a face and hands might mean Allah is similar to you but not to ahlus sunnah, i.e Allah's face is eternal and immortal, many hadith talk of seeing Allah's face in paradise, these are authentic, you can't just deny them because you don't agree with them (continued)
evilheem 1 year ago
@evilheem on Ibn taymiyya its is sufficient to know that he said the following 'The comprehensive statement concerning all of this matter is that Allaah is to be described as He has described Himself or His Messenger has described Him, and as the early generation have described Him, and we are not to go beyond what the Qur’aan and hadeeth say. '
evilheem 1 year ago
that which has a body, is in need of the one who specified it with that body and whatever is in need is weak, and whatever is weak is not Allah.
Islam does not contradict the sound mind, it is not the source of our religion, but it does not contradict it. The sound mind bears witness to the truth of Islam and the wahabi belief contradicts the sound intellect. The mind doesnt accept it.
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky what you are saying is the talk of philosophers,such as aristotle, you have basically described the prime mover with the changes aquinas made to show how the cosmological argument proved the existence of God. having a face and hands might mean Allah is similar to you but not to ahlus sunnah, i.e Allah's face is eternal and immortal, many hadith talk of seeing Allah's face in paradise, these are authentic, you can't just deny them because you don't agree with them (continued)
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky you have a face and Allah has a face, however Allah's face is not similar to yours, i.e it is not contingent on a body for existence, how would you feel if i compared your face to the face of a dog, both you and a dog have faces yet would you say they are similar, continued
evilheem 1 year ago
When we say Allah is attributed with life, we say his life is not similar to ours we have body, soul, a beginning etc
when we say allah is attributed with kalam, we say his kalam is without a letter, sound, language etc because these things are created.
When we say Allah is attributed with hearing, we explain that his hearing is not liek our hearing that is without an ear or instrument.
But when 1 says Allah sits but not like how we sit. This doesnt work because sitting entails a body
lebrocky 1 year ago
One cannot say Allah sits because this likens Allah to the humans and animals. evne if they say laysa kamithlihi shay'. They recite laysa kamithlihi shay' with there tongues, and belie it with their hearts. if someone says to u Allah sits, rises, descends, laughs, smiles, he gets bored, has a face, legs, shin, two right arms, eyes, ears, fingers and they say Allah doesnt resemble the creations. Hasn't he just contradicted himself?
lebrocky 1 year ago
This reporting of Abu Hayyan was omitted from the old printed copy. However, the manuscript confirms it. In his commentary on "as-Sayf-us-Saqil", page 85, az-Zahid al-Kawthariyy said explaining the reason of omitting these statements of Ibn Taymiyah: The editor of as-Sa^adah Printing House told me that he found it very ugly and he omitted it upon printing so that the enemies of al-'Islam would not use it.
lebrocky 1 year ago
In his Tafsir named "an-Nahr", the Grammarian Abu Hayyan al-'Andalusiyy reported about Ibn Taymiyah having the belief that Allah sits. He said: In his handwriting, a book of Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah, who was contemporary with us, which he called "Kitab-ul-^Arsh", I read: Allah sits on al-Kursiyy and has left a space for the Messenger of Allah to sit with Him
lebrocky 1 year ago
"No doubt, when Ibn Nàsir wrote his book, he was deceived by the praises he heard some people making of Ibn Taimiyah." These are all the words of The Ghumari scholars.
King Muhammad Ibn Qalawun issued a decree to be read on the manabir in Egypt and ash-Sham to warn people against him and his followers.
Another Prob is, the wahabis have forged books and changed them, fabricating to make some scholars look like they praised ibn Taymiyah but really they did not. This is something Ive seen.
lebrocky 1 year ago
Consequently, he deviated from following the Book and Sunnah to innovation, and deviated from the Jama^ah of the Muslims
it was mentioned by the Ghumari scholar. He says: I think; rather, I am sure that if Ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi had some idea of Ibn Taimiyahs execrable beliefs, he would never have defended him in his book al-Radd al-Wafir [from the scathing attack of ‘Alâ al-Din al-Bukhari who wrote a book called Man Qala Ibn Taimiyah Shaikh al-Islam fa huwa Kafir (continued)
lebrocky 1 year ago
okay, thank you! I will ask but how do you trust a book which was written by a man who was judged as a blasphemer by consensus? Consensus was narrated by Taqiud-din Al-Husni in his book Daf^u shubah (page 45). Why dont u trust the proper scholars instead such as ibn hajar al asqalani, al awza^i, An-nawawi, ash-shafi^i etc btw what country do u live in! thanks
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky I live in england as for ibn taymiyya, his funeral showed his iman and that he was a great scholar by consenus, as it was attended by all in damascus except for 3 individuals who stayed away due to the fear of death, ibn taymiyya students include ibn qayim, ibn kathir, ibn abdul-hadi, dhahabi, al-mizzi, muhammad bin muflih, abu hafs al bazzar. ibn al-wardi and qadi ibn Fadl-ullah, so how is this man a heretic by conensus
evilheem 1 year ago
@evilheem Because the consensus of his blasphemy was reported by Taqiud-din al Husni, in his book Daf^u Shubah. Taqiud-din reported in this book in page 45 he said: Fa sara kufruhu majmu^an ^alayhi. For example, when Ibn Taymiyyah says Allah sits, this is blasphemy and the many other things that he differed with such as saying tawassul by the prophet is not permissible and the like.
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky so would you say his students ate heretics since they defended him and praised him, Shaykh Ibn Naasir al-Deen al-Dimashqi wrote a book called al-Radd al-Waafir ‘ala man za’ama anna man sammaa Ibn Taymiyah Shaykh al-Islam kaafir, In it he mentioned eighty five imams, all of whom described Ibn Taymiyah as Shaykh al-Islam, and he quoted their words from their books to that effect. as part of the introduction to that book ibn hajr said part 1 (continued)
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky The fame and position of Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen as an imam is brighter than the sun, and his title as the Shaykh al-Islam of his own era has lasted until today and will continue tomorrow. Nobody rejects that except one who is ignorant of his position, or is unfair. Al-Radd al-Waafir by Imam Ibn Naasir al-Deen al-Dimashqi (p. 145, 146), al-Haafiz al-Sakhaawi – the student of Ibn Hajar – quoted the words of his Shaykh in his book al-Jawaahir wa’l-Durar (2/734-736). (part 2)
evilheem 1 year ago
@lebrocky Ibn taymiya said The early generation of this ummah and its imams are unanimously agreed that there is nothing like unto Allaah, either in His essence or His attributes or His actions. One of the imams said: Whoever likens Allaah to His creation is a kaafir, and whoever denies that which Allaah has ascribed to Himself is a kaafir; there is nothing like unto that which Allaah has ascribed to Himself or His Messenger has ascribed to Him. End quote.
Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam (2/126).
evilheem 1 year ago
@evilheem At first some scholars praised Ibn Taymiyah but after they found out about his beliefs, they refuted him. For example, In "ad-Durrat-ul-Mudiyyah", he said what means: Ibn Taymiyah innovated the foul things in the Usul of belief and infringed the foundations of al-'Islam, after he was covering himself with following the Book (the Qur'an) and Sunnah, showing outwardly that he is a caller to truth and a guide to the Jannah. (continued)
lebrocky 1 year ago
who is the author of 'Al aqeedat il wasitiyah' as well please
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky The author is ibn taymiyya, sorry for a late reply, i think there is a pdf file of the book which you could download, it contains the hadith in arabic
evilheem 1 year ago
@evilheem Reply is below
lebrocky 1 year ago
yeah Al hafidh al ^iraqiy said in his book Ghaythil hawi^ Sharhi Jami^l Jawami^ fi kitabil Ijtihad said that the verse Laysa Kamithlihi shay' came BEFORE wa huwas samee^ul basseer so that people dont misunderstand that the hearing of Allah is like our hearing or the sight of Allah is like our sight. This results to attributing Allah with body parts such as ears and eyes which some deviants claim. Can you please give me them in arabic so that I can ask what the scholars have mentioned about them
lebrocky 1 year ago
The hadith are in the book sharh al aqeedat il wasitiyah, the commenter is shaykh khalil harras of egypt, allah after saying there is nothing like him says he is the all hearing the all knower in refutation of the jahmiyyah,
evilheem 1 year ago
or u can follow the way of the khalaf and apply ta'weel which is necesary nowadays because people are misinterpreting the ayahs and hadiths to mean something else. We always look back at what the scholars have said. According to your claim that Allah has two hands, and face. When u take suratul qasas literally and according to u it means everything would be destroyed except his face, what happened to the two hands that u claimed Allah has? do u see how u have destroyed the idol u worshipped?
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky The hadith are in the book sharh al aqeedat il wasitiyah, the commenter is shaykh khalil harras of egypt, allah after saying there is nothing like him says he is the all hearing the all knower in refutation of the jahmiyyah,
evilheem 1 year ago
nevertheless, the one who attributes Allah with a face, hand, legs or any kind of limbs blasphemes because he belied the ayah 'Laysa kamithlihi shay'. The mutashabih ayahs that are in the qur'an and mutashabih hadiths, u can follow the way of most of the salaf and that is to apply no meaning whatsoever to them and say I accept them without a how as al bayhaqiy narrates about imam malik, layth ibn sa^d and others that they take the mutashbih ayahs without a how
lebrocky 1 year ago
If these things are really hadiths, you look at what the schoalrs have said, and what ta'weel is made but as you can see, not everything can be taken literally. but for example ur saying yadayn can mean two hands. but the actual word yadayn what other words can it mean? linguistically it has other meanings for example it can mean 'care'. In the arabic language some words may have up to 25 meanings. Give the hadiths in arabic with narrators so that I can ask my teacher about what they mean
lebrocky 1 year ago
Really it is narrated by abdullah bin amr atha allah created three things with his own hands.... yadain along with the grammatical forms meant for two is recognised for real hands alone also at taa'if the prophet said i take shelter in that radiance of your countenance by which you illuminated the darkness so how can taweel be made of these things
evilheem 1 year ago
We look at what the scholars have said with regards to the verses and we dont interpret the Qur'an according to our own desires. We are not scholars, so we look at what the scholars have said. Isn't it true that if you take the Ayah 'Wa huwa ma^akum aynama kuntum' literally it would mean Allah is physically with us everywhere. Rather the scholars including ash-Shafi^iy, Malik, Ahmad, Sufyan Ath-thawri said it means Allah has knowledge of us whereever we may be
lebrocky 1 year ago
Allah is clear of being attributed with limbs like the people of misguidance claim. One who says Allah has a face, hands,etc, they r infact saying Allah is made up of body parts. Ash-Shafi^iy said: the one who attributes allah with a body is a kafir. Narrated by As-Suyuti in his book 'Al ashbah wan-nadha'ir. Even if they say body but not like our body, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: whoever says Allah is not like our body is a kafir. Narrated by Badrud-din Az-Zarkashi in his book Tashniful Masami^
lebrocky 1 year ago
For example, The ayah 'Allahu nooru samawati waal ard' we dont say Allah is light because Allah is the one who created light. The one who says he is light then he is saying Allah is created. Abdullah ibn Abbas the companion and cousin of the prophet said this verse means 'Allah is the one who guides the believers to the light of islam' This was narrated by At-Tabarani and Al-Bayhaqiy in his book 'Al asma'i was-Sifat'
lebrocky 1 year ago
when we say Allah is attributed with having the attribute of hearing and we say the creation are attributed with hearing, they mean two totally different things. Allahs hearing is without an ear or an instrument whereas the humans and animals hear with an ear and instrument so there is no likening Allah to the creation involved.
As Ash-Shafi^iy said: man ^itaqada an Allah jalisun ^alal ^arsh fa huwa kafir which means whoever says Allah sits on the throne he is a blasphemer....
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky ah that makes sense so when it says in the qu'ran that Allah has a face and hands we accept this as Allah having a face and hands
evilheem 1 year ago
@evilheem No because when 'Wajh' is mentioned, it doesnt mean face with regards to Allah, lignuistically in the arabic language it means something else. For example, when Wajh is mentioned in suratul qasas ayah 88, Bukhari says in his sahih in the chapter tafseerul quran Wajh means dominion, not face. If it meant face, the verse would mean 'everything would be destroyed except his face' so according to ur claim that Allah has hands, his hands would be destroyed
lebrocky 1 year ago
Ibn Taimiyyah was sorry for that, he repented himself before the court. 6. Tebiul Ahira 707 year. It is in the book Nedžmul Muhted and in commentary of book »Sejfu Sakil fi reddi ala Ibn Zefil« from Šejhul Islama Muhammed Zahid El Kevserija, page 477. Main judge was Bedruddin Ibn Džema'ah. I hope Allah dž. have mercy on his soul.
sanel1107 1 year ago
Ibn Taymiyah did say that, and I have actually seen the book so why would i lie about that. He wasnt a mujahid as u claim, rather he attributed sitting to Allah, saying that Allah sits on his throne and if u can read arabic, ill show u scans of the book.
Ash-Shafi^iy who was praised by the prophet said: whoever believes Allah sits on the throne, he is a kafir narrated by ibn al-mu^alim al Qurashi in his book Najm al-Muhtadi wa rajm al mu^tadi
lebrocky 1 year ago
@lebrocky Would you deny that your are alive, would you say Allah is alive, if you answer yes to both questions as you must then according to your ideology have you not compared yourself to Allah
evilheem 1 year ago
@evilheem: no because we say Allahs life is not similar to our life, his life is without a beginning, without flesh, without blood, etc..but when people say Allah is attributed with sitting, what have they done? they r basicaly saying Allah is a body. even if they say sitting but not like our sitting, even if they say body but not like our body. the ummah blasphemes them. the attribute of life was mentioned in the qur'an, 'al hayy' but when they say sitting, where is the word 'jalasa' mentioned?
lebrocky 1 year ago
Indeed the hypocrites are exposing themselves clearly to anyone with eyes to see. They talk like the kuffaar, behave like them and probably even look like them. Just look what kind of language these people use.
Those who say "wahabi" they don't even know what they say because the word itself has no meaning. It's just another word to scare people like "terrorist", "extremist" or "radical". Those words are being used by the enemies of Islam. Be free to imitate them,but then you will be like them
IslamistTerrorist 4 days ago
Mr Farukh715 your logic proves you kafir as well "one who calls anyone kafir is kafir" Also please quote reference to this hadith.
scorpisd 1 month ago
@scorpisd
You are wrong. I am just repeating. Was Imam Ghazali a Kafir when he called some muslim philosophers like Ibn Sina as Kafir ?
faruk715 4 weeks ago
Faruk, can you tell me where is Allah?
hbk711x 6 months ago
mr. faruk715, you know what is wahdatul wajood, if no then i will explain, all things in universe are shadow or avtar of allah, in hindi its same as kan kan bhagwan, this is wahdatul wajood and founder of this kufr was ibne arbi. if u cant beleive just check the following link. this is a genuine barelvy
saddi781 6 months ago
adfasfasdfasdf
saddi781 6 months ago
may allah honour sheik ibn thaimiyyah and sheik muhammad ibn abd al wahhab and other salafi sheiks.....
syeddmm 7 months ago 3
the rule for someone being right or wrong is not judged by majority. so if the position of the 3 schools differ from any one school that can certainly mean probability is higher that the other 3 schools are right but it's not a guarantee and there is still a chance that the 1 school is RIGHT and the other 3 are WRONG. The only guarantee we have is of the companions who were given glad tidings of jannah. focus on what they said and did, before coming down to scholars.. no guarantee of any scholar
bilaltoru 8 months ago
Let me help you look at it from another angle.
if say Ibn-e-Taymiyah and many others were not at that level where Ibn-e-Arabi was, and say this is true and Ibn--e-arabi was way misunderstood, then i assure you brother, we are nowhere near even Ibn-e-Taymiyah.
Safest path is to avoid reading criticized works of Ibn-e-Arabi, till you reach that stage....
bilaltoru 8 months ago
The following should also be kafir, no?
Imam ibn Katheer in his book of Islamic history- Al-bidaya Wal Nihaya comments on ibn Arabi “He has a book named beads of wisdom in which there are many things that are apparently clear kufr.”
Imam adh-Dhahabi said (in Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala) that “if ibn Arabi’s book (Beads of wisdom) does not contain clear Kufr, then there is no Kufr in the world!
I just say avoid controversial ppl like ibn-e-arabi. because many major scholars objected to his views.
bilaltoru 8 months ago
btw, Brother Faruk, can you kindly give some reference from Ibn-e-Taymiya that he claimed that Ibn-e-Arabi was a kafir.... will be grateful.
check out "Ibn Taymiyya, Tawhid al-rububiyya in Majmu`a al-Fatawa al-kubra (Riyad, 1381) 2:464-465"
Ibn Taymiyya is notorious for his condemnation of Ibn `Arabi's tiny book entitled Fusus al-hikam, but he praised his Futuhat. I am told Shaykh Abdur Rahman also did not consider the Fusus al Hikam to be an Authentic book of Ibn Arabi.
bilaltoru 8 months ago
As far as guarantee's are concerned, there is no guarantee that Ibn-e-Arabi was a wali or not. We accept this because people say so. Similarly check with ANY Hanbali scholar to verify what I said about Hanbali school's position on voluntarily missing prayers. I said the logic used in the video to determine that Ibn-e-Taimiyyah (ra) is kafir, can also be used for Imam Ahmed (ra). Even great scholars like Ibn-e-Kathir and Ibn Al-Jawziyyah consider Ibn-e-Taimiyyah a Muslim Scholar.
bilaltoru 8 months ago
Mr. Faruk715, using the logic you gave in this video, is Imam Ahmed Bin Hanbal also a kafir? He says that any one who misses even a single salah voluntarily becomes a kafir.. so kindly comment... also your comment would apply to all hanbalis....
bilaltoru 8 months ago
@bilaltoru
This statement of Imam Hanbel has nothing to do with Muhyiddin Ibn Arabi who is being seeing as one of the great Awliya and being loved by millions of moslems. Actually I even dont know whether Imam Hanbal did make such a statement. Besides, this is not the view of the other three mazhap. And at last but not least, who says that Imam Hanbal is here right ? Perhaps he is wrong !! Do you have a guarantee that this statement of his is absolutely correct ? NO !
faruk715 8 months ago
myyou1 3 months ago
Ibn 'Arabi -- All the Sunni Scholars of his time made Takfeer (declared him a disbeliever) of him except for his followers & the Sufees for his saying like 'There is nothing in my garment except God' .
Shaykhul Islam Imaam Ahmad ibn Haleem at-Taymiyyah (died 728H) -- His books which he authored speak of him. Hundreds of Books on every subject in Islamic Sciences. Even the opponents make good mention of him. Just have a look at any of his books & then claim what you claim.
seeker1400 9 months ago
wallahi anyone who calls Ibn taymiyyah a kafir and exposes this lie on the internet should be thrusted into the hellfire
whatamuslim 9 months ago 7
@whatamuslim
MAy Allah guide him, for Ashari's don't even know where is Allah ,from what I have seen.
hbk711x 6 months ago 2
@hbk711x
The Slave girl as testified by Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) better than the Ash'aris. She answered 'Fi Asama'" and Resoolullah (sallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) testified she was a believer".
Shaikh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (Ruhmatullahi 'alaihi) in Al-Ghunya li-Talibi Tariq al-Haqq:
"And Allah, exalted is He, is over the Throne and below Him are veils of fire, light, and darkness, and what He only knows" - from al-Ghunyah Li Talibi Tariq al-Haqq1/121,123.
myyou1 4 days ago
@whatamuslim
Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
Imaam, Badr ud-Deen al-'Ainee said, "Whoever says Ibn Taymiyyah is a disbeliever is himself a disbeliever and whoever says that he was a heretic is himself a heretic. How can this be possible when his works are widely available and not a hint of deviation and departure (from the truth)
myyou1 3 months ago
@myyou1 hahaha,that bitch of taymiyah said allah is siting with muhammad on his arsh.Allah sits on al-Kursiyy and has left a space for the Messenger of Allah to sit with Him. At-Taj Muhammad Ibn ^Aliyy Ibn ^Abd-il-Haqq al-Baranbariyy pretended that he is a promoter of his ideas and tricked him, until he took it from him; we read that in it. [The author of "Kashf-uz-Zunun" reported that about him also in Volume 2, page 1438.]
AhlusSunnahWahJammat 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AhlusSunnahWahJammat
Bismillah, Alhamdulllah, The expressions that you use is a good indicators of who your Murshids are.
Why then did the supporters of Ibn Arabi lost the debate with Ibn Taymiyyah concerning his Aqidah? Alhamdulillah, the reliable Scholar had spoken:
"Muhammad bin 'Abdul-Barr as-Subkee said, "By Allaah, no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramus or the person of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he came to know it."
"
myyou1 4 days ago
@whatamuslim
Bismillah, Alhamdulillah,
Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, refuting the one who opposed that Ibn Taymiyyah be termed 'Shaykhul-lslam':
"The acclaim of Taqi ad-Din (Ibn Taymiyyah) is more renown than that of the Sun and titling him Shaykhul-Islam of his era remains until our time upon the virtuous tongues. It will continue tomorrow just as it was yesterday. No one refutes this but a person who is ignorant of his prestige or one who turns away from equity."
myyou1 4 days ago
@whatamuslim
@myyou1
In contrast, Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani challenged an Ibn Arabi defender in to a Mubahala -- calling the curse of Allah (Subhanehu wa ta'alaa) on the one who is denying the truth.
myyou1 4 days ago
Who posted this is a very ignorant person. I think he has to educate himself prior to calling down a great scholar like ibn taymmya.
bodpaka 10 months ago