Shaykh Google not helping me =(

[Re.TiReD]

:salamext:

Google isnt really my Shaykh btw but he's chucking some good stuff at me about Ijtihad and Taqleed. Problem is I dont want good, I want excellent. Any help?

Anything you've already read maybe? And whilst I'm at it, which Q sounds more interesting...

1) Discuss the importance of the 4 schools of Islamic Law. Comment on the concept of taqleed and its alternative tendencies.

2) Discuss the meaning and significance of Ijtihad and taqleed in the history of Islamic Jurisprudence. Comment on the door of ijtihad being closed.

WassalamuAlaykum

[Far7an]

Mufti Taqi Usmani's book called "The legal status of following a madhab"

http://www.cometoislam.com/fiqh/legal/main.htm

[Re.TiReD]

JazakAllah khayr! I have the actual book at home though. It's the only source I have at the moment.

[IbnAbdulHakim]

^ read it?

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Re.TiReD]

^ read it?

Yeah about 3 times. I did my book review on that too. It's fab masha'Allah but I have to use more in my assignment.

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:

this is useful insha Allah;
http://islamtoday.com/show_quest_sec...sub_cat_id=149


The doors to ijtihaad closed for a few reasons and Bilal Phillips has a book on it which is really good called 'the evolution of fiqh'.

read here;
http://www.kalamullah.com/knowledge.html [go down the page]


If you can get hold of that, it will be really good insha Allah since it has all the answers to your questions on a basic level and easy to understand.


He explains that closing the doors to ijtihaad caused alot of harm to the ummah so the ummah stopped advancing, and people relied on old fatwas which never took consideration into new factors/technologies etc. in the muslim world - so the muslims became slightly backward since they stuck to old fatwas without doing new ijtihaad for newer matters.

Also, sectarian issues increased because people started dividing based on the madhabs. Some 'ulama even saying that its haraam for people of different madhabs to get married to each other! [whereas nothing in Islam forbids marriage between different madhabs, infact - muslim males can even marry jews and christians.]

There was even warfare between the different madhabs where an 'aalim from one madhab could be imprisoned by people from another madhab, and his books burnt. Ibn Qudamah who was a Hanbali scholar was about to be assasinated in Egypt, because the Egyptians were predominantly Shaf'ie in madhab.


So you see there was alot of harm, and this kind of happened straight away after the Salaf (after about the 4th generation after the sahabah.)



Ibn Taymiyyah was one of the 'ulama who revived Ijtihaad [he was a mujtahid], although he was hanbali in madhab - he would prefer the Qur'an and Sunnah over all matters. And for this, he was imprisoned many times, sometimes people even attempted to assasinate him. But Allah revived ijtihaad a great deal through him alhamdulillah so that you see it becoming more common nowadays alhamdulillah.



Also, in regard to taqleed. Most of the laypeople who aren't students of knowledge can do taqleed on any mujtahid who is trustworthy (no matter what madhab he is from). A student of knowledge however studies under one madhab for starters, but nothing prevents him from studying another madhab [i.e. there is nothing which makes it an obligation upon him to be loyal to one madhab only throughout his life (i.e. he can study the hanafi madhab, then after the hanbali etc. although its better to learn them at separate times to avoid confusion. The reasons for this is because each madhab has a set of principles ['usul] to get to the truth.]

All the 'ulama who started each madhab were students of their respective shaykh [i.e. abu hanifah's student was imam malik whose student was al-shafi'ie - whose student was ahmad ibn hanbal.] Each imam said that his madhab is the sunnah, so if his madhab contradicts an authentic hadith - they accept the authentic hadith over their madhab. They might not have heard all the hadith throughout their lives which made them have different opinions. (i.e. a hadith in iraq may have been heard by abu hanifah but not by malik [because he never left madinah] etc. - causing them to have different rulings on similar issues.] Now that we know the ahadith, we would prefer the authentic hadith's ruling over any imam who did his ijtihaad which may have not been the correct ruling.

this is a really good article as to why the different imams differed in their rulings;
http://www.islamicawakening.com/view...articleID=633&



And Allah knows best.

[Yanal]

:sl:
Try using viewzi. It gathers all info from all known search engines and paste it in the results.

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum and JazakAllah kkayr Qatadah...

Although from your posts it seems my tutor would disapprove of your views lol for the doors of Ijtihaad being closed was a good thing and them being opened again was because some people thought religion was outdated and wanted to modernise it...? I'm talking this day and age and not Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullahs time)

JazakAllah khayr though

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:wasalamex


I understand what you mean, and yeh - your teacher would probably get angry at these kind of responses and probably shout out the word which starts with 'W', but we know that ijtihaad isn't closed simply because there is nothing in Islam to forbid it from being closed.

Think about it this way, if - after Allah's Messenger (sal Allah alaihi wasalam) passed away, the sahabah did ijtihaad. Then after them, the tabi'een did, then the generations of the imams did. Then their students did (i.e. on some issues, the students of Imam abu hanifah had differing opinions to him - these different opinions would also be based on the ijtihaad of the students.)

So who then can say that ijtihaad is forbidden? Since no-one can forbid it except Allah's Messenger. If someone was to say its the imams, then why did their students differ to them in some matters? Why did Muhammad ibn al-Hassan Al-Shaybani teach Al-Shafi'ie, who then created his own madhab?



Remember Ibn Taymiyyah came after the 4 imams, he came at a time when the idea of following one madhab only as an obligation was widespread. So he wanted to change that, not to change the religion - but to do ijtihaad (he was qualified) based on the Qur'an and Sunnah like the early Muslims did - since it might have been that one imam never had heard of one of the ahadith before, causing him to get the wrong understanding [but still 1 reward], whereas for someone to get the right ijtihaad would be a source of 2 rewards, as is well known from the famous hadith.

Remember that the famous books like Sahih Al Bukhari, Muslim etc. weren't compiled until after these 4 imams - so its obvious they wouldn't have access to all the authentic ahadith.


Anyway, i recommend you read that book evolution of fiqh at your own time insha Allah.

[Re.TiReD]

:salamext:

Nah it wouldnt be the W word, it'd actually be Salafi and Salafiyyah. I'm not sure if I'm recalling correctly but apprantly rather than stick to one of the 4 madhabs Salafiyyah aimed to open the door of Ijtihad again for those who sought to modernise the deen.

Khayr insha'Allah I'll do more reading and buy that book insha'Allah. I understand your point though. JazakAllah khayr

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:wasalamex


If someone uses the authentic Qur'an an Sunnah for ijtihaad - they can't really modernise the deen, try looking at a site like IslamQA which implements this today.


But jazak Allah khayr for the open mindedness.

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Yes thats true.

I'm actually confused as to what stance to take in my assignment but since my tutor seems to be against the whole concept of Ijtihad in this day and age and he is Hanafi, I guess I need to read Mufti Taqi Usmani's work again insha'Allah.

But the Bilal Philips one look interesting too and doesnt cost anything.

I just wanted to ask something really lame :$ erm why is it that Salafi's and madhabi's have like a different view on almost everything? Isnt there any concept at all that they agree on? :exhausted are their works on Tawheed different too?

WasslamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Remember that 'salafis' and 'madhabis' agree that you should follow a madhab, the only difference is that the 'madhabis' might prefer an opinion of their imam over an authentic saying of Allah's Messenger, and this is when salafis say that they will follow the sahih hadith over the madhab. The imams of the madhabs themselves said they would do similar [the sources are mentioned in that book by bilal philips].


I asked a question on the following link and asked what the scholars on IslamQA do.
http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=3333


A brother explained that they do comparative fiqh [and dont claim to be on the same level as the 4 imams], read more about that here;
http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showpost....75&postcount=5




The issue of aqeedah has some slight differences due to greek philosophy which entered islam during a similar time period.

The main difference being in regard to Allah's Attributes [i.e. salafis say we accept Allah's attributes without questioning 'how' they really look like - i.e. they're not similar to the creation but they are real.] Ash'aris deny certain attributes of Allah because they say that you are 'resembling Allah to the creation'. Whereas the 3 best generations of Islam accepted Allah's Attributes - all of them, and said that they are real, but we do not know their 'howness' i.e. how they look like.


"Nothing is like Him; and He is The Hearer, The Seer." (Quran ash-Shura 42:11)

http://cwis.usc.edu/dept/MSA/introdu...aimiyah_5.html


The verse is showing that there is nothing similar to Him, but He is the Hearing, Seeing.



There's other differences in regard to issues of worship too. But insha Allah you already know that you don't call upon anyone else for prayers after they've died - you pray to Allah alone. But alot of other sects permit this [i.e. in some aspects of sufism etc.] Salafis are against such practises since they contradict the Qur'anic teachings.

i.e.; "And the places of worship are for Allah (alone): So invoke [tad'u]* not any one along with Allah; [Quran Jinn 72:18]

*tad'u - coming from du'a.

[Re.TiReD]

:salamext:

JazakAllah khayr, yeah I have already read about the concept of Tawassul and Waseelah etc and agree that we pray to Allah (swt) alone.

I was just asking about Tawheed because apparantly Bilal Philips is Salafi and I was told not to read his work on Tawheed (the fundamentals of tawheed). And since I dont claim to be Salafi, I was wondering about the book you recommended also.

I'm not saying we limit our ilm and take from certain scholars only, its just that if those books say something completely different to the Hanafi fiqh I'd rather be safe and read something else. Although your explanation of how their ideas on Allah's attributes differ is helpful. JazakAllah khayr

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:wasalamex


Sis, the aqeedah issues aren't to do with any madhab or fiqh issue. The aqeedah issues - all of the Muslims have to agree upon them. Since they make up the foundations of our beliefs. So we don't have differences of opinion on them as Muslims, and if people do - this is what causes sects. [most of these sects began from influence from outside religions from other countries which mixed with the new followers of Islam, so their cultural religion was mixed with islam to form the new sects. look at wahdatul wujud for example - its a hindu concept but certain sufis believe in it which makes them go astray from pure islamic teachings].


I've read his book Fundamentals on Tawheed, and i believe that if you read that - you would find nothing wrong with it (you'd probably even question what the person meant when they said you shouldn't read it - since its got nothing controversial and its backed with Qur'an and Sunnah for all chapters.) This usually isn't the case with other sects books.

The main issue with people from pakistan and india etc is to do with issues such as waseelah etc. and i'm paki too, with a similar background to what you're going through. By going past that barrier, i've noticed that you don't need to be called 'salafi' to follow the way of the salaf - you just need to practise their way, so long as you keep the principles of islam as your first priority throughout your life.


i.e. its not compulsory to blindly follow anyone except Allah's Messenger. [although you can do taqleed in fiqh on certain issues due to a lack of knowledge of ijtihad etc.]

That you stick to the aqeedah of the salaf, since they followed the way of the sahabah - who followed the way of Allah's Messenger.




Aqeedah is soo important and its the first thing we should learn as Muslims, simply because our Islam stands upon that. For example, if you ask a certain ash'ari (who is knowledgable on his ash'ari beliefs, remember many who claim to be sufis say they are ash'ari in aqeedah) if Allah speaks - he will say no. He will say that Allah doesn't speak since that is being similar to His creation, rather Allah creates speech - so the Qur'an is not Allah speaking, but something which Allah created of speech and Angel Jibreel spoke to Prophet Muhammad.

You know who Abul-Futuh is? He is the Ash'arite who would leave his mosque, wearing thick armoury, mounting his horse, and then proclaiming in public: "This Quran is not Allah's Speech! This is just paper and ink!" while the Muslim population of Baghdad would stone him and throw filth at him. This was your past, and this still remains your present. But you simply do not have the courage of Abul-Futuh.

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/s...74&postcount=8

Whereas the salaf said that Allah speaks without His speech being similar to the creation. And that Allah really spoke the Qur'an to us.



Now see how these issues are totally crazy and against pure Qur'an and Sunnah? That's why salafis study aqeedah first of all [so they know what they need to know to enter jannah], whereas other sects teach other issues without actually teaching aqeedah properly first. I'm not saying all, but generally.

So what would be more convincing? To study aqeedah with someone who has firm foundations for his faith - backed with Qur'an or Sunnah? Or someone who learns other issues without even knowing what he needs to get to jannah?


I can really tell you through experience that if someone told you to study aqeedah and you asked any good books, they'd simply have books on telling you that Allah exists and that He created everything, and some will inform about Allah's attributes [if the book was for simple people]. If they had to define what 'ibaadah is, they wouldn't. They'd simply say its 'sajdah' and the pillars of islam, and thats it.

Now you might wonder why i'm saying this, but when somethings the truth. It becomes apparent, even if people try to hide it or prevent it from shining forth. The truth seekers, Allah guides them. Ask Allah to guide all of us, ameen.

[Al-Zaara]

Honey, no disrespect towards our dear brother -Qatada- whom I respect deeply, but you have a tutor, why don't you ask him, rather than someone from the Net? Nothing against brother -Qatada-, or brother Abu Sayyad whom I'd imagine would join this discussion, but ask your primary sources first, talk with your tutor or others you know in real life that are rather knowledgable. All this, which is said here and which isn't said here, you can find it anywhere in the Net, darling, anywhere. Been there, done that. But it's not the same as hearing it from someone's mouth, really seeing a reaction.

[Civilsed]

Try Alwahy instead of google

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Thumma Ameen at your du'aa. JazakAllah khayr.

Hmm ok. You say the aqeedah issues all muslims have to agree on them so what is the asharee, athari and maturidi divide about then akhee? (btw I'm not dissing I sincerely want to learn)

And yeh at the waseelah thing, although I've come to my own conclusion regarding that after doing my research and its similar to urs. Alhamdulillah.

And btw, those who call themselves 'Salafi', are they athari in aqeedah?

And also, the works on aqeedah, could you list/name some insha'Allah.

And I ask Allah (swt) to forgive my ignorance.

WassalamuAlaykum

[Re.TiReD]

Honey, no disrespect towards our dear brother -Qatada- whom I respect deeply, but you have a tutor, why don't you ask him, rather than someone from the Net? Nothing against brother -Qatada-, or brother Abu Sayyad whom I'd imagine would join this discussion, but ask your primary sources first, talk with your tutor or others you know in real life that are rather knowledgable. All this, which is said here and which isn't said here, you can find it anywhere in the Net, darling, anywhere. Been there, done that. But it's not the same as hearing it from someone's mouth, really seeing a reaction.

JazakAllah khayr hun and I'd do that if it wasnt christmas break. I have a tendency to take over the whole class with my persistent questions which is why I'm not as clueless as I used to be, alhamdulillah.

That is also the reason I'm reading some of bro Qatadah's posts and not taking parts in since it is contrary to what I've read and been taught (no offence bro)

So yeh sis, JazakAllah khayr! *wub*

WassalamuAlaykum

[Al-Zaara]

We iyyaki. It's neither what I believe nor what I have been taught. I have been in a confused state due to stuff like this, elhamdulillah I am now being guided.
Glad I could help! Keep asking questions!! ;)

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Athar means 'narrations' or 'texts' of the early muslims i.e Qur'an and Sunnah/hadith etc. So people who claim to follow their way [i.e. of the salaf as-saalih] say they are atharis.


Ash'aris and maturidis, these groups were influenced by the greek philosophy which entered the Muslim world during the late period of the salaf. I.e. Imam Ahmad was tortured because of this greek philosophy where he said Allah spoke the Qur'an and the rationalists said that no, Allah cannot speak because humans speak. You've probably read about this already.

You don't really need to go into the issues of this stuff since alot of it is basic alhamdulillah and the Muslim on the fitrah already knows Allah really spoke the Qur'an and that Allah is above His creation and that there is none like Him, that He can see, hear, speak etc. and that all worship is for Him alone etc. So you don't even really need to learn about the philosophy behind what the ash'ari beliefs are. You just need to know the foundations of true Islam by seeing Qur'an and Sunnah.


It would be really good if you studied the aqeedah etc with a teacher obviously who had authentic knowledge. But that fundamentals of tawheed book is good because it covers alot of the stuff briefly, and if you've touched upon Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahaab's books - thats kool (since their brief and to the point), especially the ones with an explanation since they elaborate on what is meant.

There's some good ones here too;
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/tawheed/
http://kalamullah.com/aqeedah.html


If you ever have any questions, you can even ask here insha Allah;

http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/forumdisplay.php?f=4 [theres a scholar there and alot of students of knowledge alhamdulillah].


ps: no i'm not offended.

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Hmm I'm learning loads today alhamdulillah.

I've bought that book just placed my order now btw, the fundamentals of tawheed one btw. Also I didnt know that Ibn Taymiyyahs was aqeedah al wasitiyyah. I only knew of Imam Abu Ja`far al-Tahawi's aqeedah tahawiyyah.

One other question is that Fiqh and aqeedah is seperate na'am so in abu Haneefah's fiqh al akbar I'm pretty sure -unless I'm mistaken- that it says the same things about the attributes of Allah (swt) that the atharees take. I.E. similar to what you said before:

Whereas the salaf said that Allah speaks without His speech being similar to the creation. And that Allah really spoke the Qur'an to us.

But what about the people who claim to be hanafi in fiqh but ashari/maturidi in aqeedah? Dont the two contradict since you just said that Ashari's do not believe that Allah (swt) spoke etc

I hope my Q makes sense insha'Allah

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


The issue on books such as Fiqh al Akbar is something more detailed and some say its attributed to imam abu hanifah while others say its not. I dont know myself so i'm going to stay quiet on it. Even then, i prefer to stick to aqeedah books which aren't controversial and prefer my beliefs which are backed with Qur'an and Sunnah and are clear and apparent. So books like the ones i linked to above


About the issue of madhabs, they're there to get your fiqh life sorted out. So basically, if you want to become a scholar - you learn under one madhab as a student of knowledge. For the layman who doesn't really have knowledge on fiqh, and just needs a fatwa - they go to any scholar who is trustworthy of any madhab and follow his ruling.

That makes logical sense and its well known through examples of lay people from the salaf. There's stories on this like two brothers got married to two women, but they slept with the wrong person on the first night. They only realised they had got married to the other person the next morning. So they got a fatwa from Sufyan al-Thawri, and he said that they should go to their original partner [who they did the nikah with], and then they heard the view of Abu Hanifah and he said that they should divorce the one they did nikah with and get married to the one they slept with [probably to make their future easier]. Obviously they weren't sinful because it was error. But it shows that these people asked two imams [who both had their own madhabs - sufyan had his own madhab too and they were both from iraq - contemporaries.] So these people asked two shaykhs from different madhabs for a fatwa. Then they chose Abu Hanifahs since it would be more wiser in the situation.

Allahu a'lam.



Anyway, so in regard to aqeedah - the truth is one. You follow that truth so long as it is the belief of true Islam. Later in history the madhabs got influenced by the different philosophies due to the nations they were spread in, due to the rulers, and other issues. The hanbali madhab stayed firm alot on Sunnah because of the firmness of Imam Ahmad during his trial - so the aqeedah of the imam was well known and firmly recorded in history.

So if someone claims to be hanafi and is ash'ari, they're straying from the way of the salaf in aqeedah matters. They're even straying from imam abu hanifah himself and the other imams. So they should really fear from that and follow the true aqeedah of the salaf (which includes the aqeedah of their imam). How can someone be ash'ari and claim to be following imam abu hanifah in aqeedah when ash'ari came after imam abu hanifah (and even the other imams)? lol.



Allah knows best.

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

SubhanAllah what confusion!

And what is the Aqeedah of Imam Ahmed? Athaari?

What I was trying to say at al fiqh al akbar is the literalist argument. Doesnt it say the same thing as the athari aqeedah?

Ok I'm confusing myself.

Aaand....so you're saying being hanafi in fiqh and ashari in aqeedah is incorrect then are you saying one should be hanafi in fiqh and athari in aqeedah?

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Yeh, the aqeedah of Imam Ahmad would be athari simply because he accepted the hadith and texts [Qur'an and Sunnah] over philosophy and other things which oppose the Qur'an and Sunnah.

The people of the athar were differentiated by the other groups by this name simply because they stuck to the texts, while other groups most of the time preferred philosophy or desires over the texts.

Aaand....so you're saying being hanafi in fiqh and ashari in aqeedah is incorrect then are you saying one should be hanafi in fiqh and athari in aqeedah?

Yeh. You don't have a choice in aqeedah matters, since the imams of fiqh had the same aqeedah [of the athar - i.e. Qur'an and Sunnah], and they only had different fiqh due to their different methods of interpretation of the islamic law of fiqh. There's way more flexibility in fiqh matters compared to aqeedah.


The aqeedah of islam is one. But in fiqh, there are different methods of understanding the fiqh of the texts to get a ruling on certain matters i.e. whether camel meat breaks wudhu or something.

Since there are differences in fiqh on matters such as these - it won't prevent you from getting to jannah. However, to have wrong beliefs on whether Allah speaks or not, or whether Allah is mixed with His creation or not can be a matter of disbelief vs belief. Wouldn't a person be denying Qur'an if they rejected some parts of it?

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Ah okay I totally understand what you're trying to say now. JazakAllah khayr.

However, I'm not sure if I've asked this before but I'll ask it again insha'Allah. Just imagine for a second that fiqh al akbar was correctly attributed to Imaam Abu Hanifah rahimahullah...in there the concepts are atharee e.g. when Allah (swt) says He (swt) will get angry you take it literally and take His word for it rather than interpreting the anger as His punishment as the ashari's would...So how then do Hanafi Ashari's argue their point and backup their aqeedah? Since their Fiqh and aqeedah is saying two different things? =s

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


That's what i find strange too sister, most of the time these ash'aris [trust me i've seen alot on http://forums.islamicawakening.com] say they are strict followers of abu hanifah but they oppose his teachings in aqeedah, the same is in regard to malik, and even al-shafi'ie (alot of hanbalis stick to the aqeedah of imam ahmad easily like mentioned above).

I really don't know why this is, its probably because their shaykhs tell them this so they accept it blindly. Its like imam abu hanifah saying that if i find an authentic hadith which contradicts my madhab - it is my madhab. But people will still blindly prefer abu hanifahs opinion over an authentic hadith. They again, blindly follow what their shaykh teaches them. It really reminds me of christians saying we love jesus, but then they stray from his teachings of worshipping Allah alone. Or some sects saying that 'W'/salafis don't love Allah's Messenger (salAllah alaihi wasalam) simply because salafis say we shouldn't overpraise people or pray at graves etc [which was commanded by Allah's Messenger himself in numerous authentic ahadith].


What i've noticed is that its a pattern in Allah's creation. History repeats itself and many people who claim to excessively love someone may say it by mouth without following or knowing the true teachings of the one they claim to love.



Allahu a'lam.

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

JazakAllah khayr, I've been studying the Bilal Philips Aqeedah notes, the Islamic Online University ones and I found that some of it was similar to Fiqh al akbar. Wallahu A'lam.

JazakAllah khayr again akhee ima just talk to an asharee insha'Allah and then come back to clarify any doubts if thats ok.

WassalamuAlaykum

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Quick other question insha'Allah.

For more reading on the atharee aqeedah do I read aqeedah wasitiyyah?

And what is more important....fiqh or aqeedah? Not studying wise...Just...And people who call themselves Salafee....On what grounds do they call themselves salafee, that they dont attach themselves to a particular imam and disallow taqleed?

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


like said before, its way better to learn under someone. you can read the book on the link above insha Allah, it only took Ibn Taymiyyah like an afternoon to right that book mashaAllah and so its well known that its brief. you can read that and you'll see how simple and straightforward the aqeedah is of the salaf [athariyyah] is, and it wont take you too long either (you'll be surprised and say 'this is what i believed in already' inshaAllah since the beliefs of true Islam are the fitrah of human nature.)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/introduc...aimiyah_1.html


Or you can read a sharh/explanation of it;
http://www.islamicboard.com/tawheed-...asitiyyah.html


Aqeedah is so important in Islam because its knowledge thats required by every muslim to get to jannah. Whereas for fiqh, a muslim needs to know the basics to fulfill the duties i.e. salah, fasting etc. but the details of fiqh and 'usul is for the scholars or students of knowledge.


Salafis say they want to follow the way of the salaf in aqeedah, in regard to fiqh, and all issues of islam. [since they were the best generations]

Since the imams of the salaf said that they would follow the way of Allah's Messenger, and keep striving until they reached the true ijtihaad/correct ruling, even if this new ijtihaad opposed the teaching of their shaykh. That's why the imams who had their own madhab may have opposed the teaching of their teacher for a stronger evidence [and their teacher never hated them for it].

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


this link provides some evidences for hanafis [classical and even contemporaries] who aren't salafis (some of them are deobandis - who have some practises of sufism and have maturidi aqeedah somewhat) who actually did ijtihaad which differed from their own madhab;

http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=2877


its kind of useful, so check it out. its brief too alhamdulillah.

[Al-Hanbali]

:salamext:

^yh mashaAllaah some really good stuff...

...also to add; Shaykh Saifur-Rahmaan al-Mubarakpuri (rahimahullaah), who was a famous Hanafi Deobandi 'aalim in Madinah, author of the famous 'Ar-Raheeq al-Makhtoum'; regarding the issue of combining the prayers; he made ijtihaad differing from his madhab, and would combine the prayers when travelling .

[Aqeel Ahmed]

:sl:
May I recommend that you use a Islamic base source like islamq&a.com if there is no results on those topics you are speaking up maybe suggest a question. If it doesn't get accepted or takes to long try asking on yahoo answers because the answers might not be what you expect but click that link google main words of website and that website should show and click the link called " similar pages". It should work inshAllah.
Aqeel:sl:

[SixTen]

:salamext:

this is useful insha Allah;
http://islamtoday.com/show_quest_sec...sub_cat_id=149


The doors to ijtihaad closed for a few reasons and Bilal Phillips has a book on it which is really good called 'the evolution of fiqh'.

read here;
http://www.kalamullah.com/knowledge.html [go down the page]


If you can get hold of that, it will be really good insha Allah since it has all the answers to your questions on a basic level and easy to understand.


He explains that closing the doors to ijtihaad caused alot of harm to the ummah so the ummah stopped advancing, and people relied on old fatwas which never took consideration into new factors/technologies etc. in the muslim world - so the muslims became slightly backward since they stuck to old fatwas without doing new ijtihaad for newer matters.

Doors of itjihad was closed on issues which were without a doubt sealed, such as the wearing of hijaab being compulsory, or alcohol is definately prohibited (the doors are closed on such issues to avoid deviance, as many had done so, going against the Qur'an/sunnah with extrovert interpretations and so fourth). The idea that ijtihad on new technology and whatnot being not allowed is false. You are referring to those who adopted culture into religion, hence resulting in backwardness in many nations, it has nothing to do with closing of itjihaad.

Also, sectarian issues increased because people started dividing based on the madhabs. Some 'ulama even saying that its haraam for people of different madhabs to get married to each other! [whereas nothing in Islam forbids marriage between different madhabs, infact - muslim males can even marry jews and christians.]

Again, it seems like you are saying half truths, you should source this because, I would bet, it goes back to some nutters, and you have nutters everywhere.

There was even warfare between the different madhabs where an 'aalim from one madhab could be imprisoned by people from another madhab, and his books burnt. Ibn Qudamah who was a Hanbali scholar was about to be assasinated in Egypt, because the Egyptians were predominantly Shaf'ie in madhab.

I doubt any respectable madhabis would assassinate purely because of that - if someone does it is as previously stated - nutters. You can't discredit madhabs on what extremists do. Its like discrediting Islam because of Osama.

Ibn Taymiyyah was one of the 'ulama who revived Ijtihaad [he was a mujtahid], although he was hanbali in madhab - he would prefer the Qur'an and Sunnah over all matters. And for this, he was imprisoned many times, sometimes people even attempted to assasinate him. But Allah revived ijtihaad a great deal through him alhamdulillah so that you see it becoming more common nowadays alhamdulillah.

Incorrect, he was prisoned for having extremist/flawed beliefs and spreading it. (i.e. regarding Allahs attributes)

[Aqeel Ahmed]

:sl:
I apology because I cannot edit my post but heres the answer to your last question, the second question is complex and needs critical thinking so I would choose that one.:sl:

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Can I just say that since Qatadah started posting in this thread the topic of discussion has nothing to do with my assignment, I'm asking for my own knowledge bi'ithnillah.

I have several more questions insha'Allah. Sorry if they're lame.

1) This question I'm asking because somebody said that the athari Aqidah is not Literalist aqidah, Athari Aqidah falls under Ashari/Maturidi as a sub category. But isnt Aqeedah Wasitiyyah based on the athari aqeedah just as Aqeedah tahawiyyah is based on ashari/maturidi aqeedah...so arent they (athari and the wasitiyyah work) one and the same?

2) What does it mean by the athari aqeedah being literarist? I think I'm confusing things but how does the athari aqeedah differ when it coems to the paragraph below:

And this is tafwid:

The Divine Attributes and the way of Consigning (tafwid) the meaning to Allah
The preferred position of both the Ash`aris and Maturidis when it comes to understanding those Divine Attributes that may appear to indicate some similitude between the Creator and creation is:

[1] Affirming what Allah has affirmed, such as istiwa' or His Hand or Eyes, not more and not less.
[2] Negating what Allah has decisively negated, which is any similitude whatsoever between the Creator and creation--a negation that the sound intellect readily discerns, and which was affirmed by Allah's words, "There is absolutely nothing like unto Him." [Qur'an]
[3] Consigning (tafwid) the specific meaning and details of such matters to Allah Most High.

[Bajuri, Tuhfat al-Murid `ala Jawharat al-Tawhid; Nablusi, Sharh Ida'at al-Dujunna; Abu Mu`in al-Nasafi, Tabsirat al-Adilla; Qari/Abu Hanifa, Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar; Maydani/Tahawi, Sharh al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya; Bouti, Kubra al-Yaqiniyyat]

From here: http://qa.**************/issue_view....D=13016&CATE=1

3) Are the opinions regarding the attributes of Allah (swt) the major points of contention when it comes to the athari and ashari aqeedah? If not, what else is there?

4) Final question insha'Allah. Somebody recommended the Fundamentals of Tawheed by Bilal Philips and said that he'd recommend it to anybody regardless of Aqeedah or madhab etc etc but since Bilal Philips works seem to be based on the athari aqeedah and tawheed falls into topics on aqeedah then its incorrect to say that just anybody could take from that book since it'd contradict the ashari aqeedah sa7?

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

Doors of itjihad was closed on issues which were without a doubt sealed, such as the wearing of hijaab being compulsory, or alcohol is definately prohibited (the doors are closed on such issues to avoid deviance, as many had done so, going against the Qur'an/sunnah with extrovert interpretations and so fourth). The idea that ijtihad on new technology and whatnot being not allowed is false. You are referring to those who adopted culture into religion, hence resulting in backwardness in many nations, it has nothing to do with closing of itjihaad.

We agree that there is ijmaa' on certain issues i.e. the obligation of salah, and the pillars is something we're united upon - that there is ijmaa' on them.

But like you say - there were other issues which there was differences on, like the talaq [divorce] - whether its 3 talaqs in one sitting (i.e. 3 talaqs said at one time) or if they are 3 talaqs only if done at 3 different times. So why did Ibn Taymiyya get imprisoned for having a different view?


Furthermore, if the early salaf and Muslims united that we should pray behind one imam for salaah, no matter what his madhab - then why did the khalaf differ to this and separate the unity of the muslims based on their madhabs? You know that the early Muslims did have differences in issues of salah (i.e. whether fatiha should be read or you should stay quiet etc), but they still prayed behind each other and never caused disunity amongst themselves.



Imam Ahmad held the opinion that eating camel meat nullifies ones Wudhu, an opinion that the majority of scholars differed from. Some students asked him, "If you find an Imam eating camel meat in front of you and - without first making Wudu - then leads the Salah, would you pray behind him?" Imam Ahmad replied, "Do you think I would not pray behind the likes of Imam Malik and Sa'eed ibn Al-Musayyab?"

http://www.islamfortoday.com/differences.htm

Thats a pure example of how Imam Ahmad [who had his own madhab] was willing to pray behind the imam of another madhab [Imam Malik ibn Anas] - even though their fiqh was different in regard to the prayer itself.



Just look at the pic below of Masjid Al Haram a few centuries ago, there were 3 different minbars for each madhab, with different adhans, different imams, different congregations.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/h...ed2kx/mak3.jpg


I'm from a sufi family background myself, and i've heard the hanafi 'shaykhs' from india/pak say that you shouldn't pray behind the imams in the haram, and if you do - you pray separately to them after that.

Is this the unity Islam is trying to achieve? Is this the way of the salaf who were the most rightly guided of people?

Again, it seems like you are saying half truths, you should source this because, I would bet, it goes back to some nutters, and you have nutters everywhere.

The new ruling was made by the famous Hanafee scholar titled, “Muftee ath-Thaqalayn”, who allowed the marriage of Shaafi’ite women on the basis of the allowance of marriage to christian and Jewish women (Zayn ad-Deen Nujaym, quoted by the 16th century CE Egyptian Hanafee scholar in his eight volume work entitled al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq.

However, this ruling implied that Hanafite women were still not allowed to marry Shaafi’ite men just as they cannot marry chiristian and Jewish men!

Evolution of Fiqh p.143 by Bilal Phillips.

I doubt any respectable madhabis would assassinate purely because of that - if someone does it is as previously stated - nutters. You can't discredit madhabs on what extremists do. Its like discrediting Islam because of Osama.

We don't discredit madhabs, but we know that a madhab derives an opinion from the texts. Therefore the authentic texts take precedence over an opinion of a scholar from a madhab.

Incorrect, he was prisoned for having extremist/flawed beliefs and spreading it. (i.e. regarding Allahs attributes)

Akhi you should read up on Ibn Taymiyya's beliefs. http://saheefah.org [a site which refutes ash'aris based on the texts and beliefs of the salaf].

He was imprisoned for a fiqhi matter, a famous one being in regard to triple divorce and whether that is one divorce or three in one go [him saying that 3 talaqs in one sitting = 1 divorce].


If you say he went against ijmaa';

Imam Muslim narrated in his Saheeh on the authority of Ibn Abbaass RAA:

Muslim Book 009 [book of divorce], Number 3491:

The (pronouncement) of three divorces during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and that of Abu Bakr and two years of the caliphate of Umar (was treated) as one.

But Umar b. Khattab said: Verily the people have begun to hasten in the matter in which they are required to observe respite. So if we had imposed this upon them, and he imposed it upon them.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamen...m/009.smt.html

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Try asking that person how the athar come as a subsection under the Ash'aris if the athar [texts i.e. Qur'an and Sunnah] were existent before them. The same can be said about the imams of ahlus sunnah who had the beliefs which i've mentioned earlier i.e. that Allah spoke the Qur'an, that Allah will be seen on Judgment Day with the believers own eyes because Allah says [translation of meaning];

Some faces, that Day, will beam (in brightness and beauty);-

Looking towards their Lord; [Quran Qiyamah 74:22-3]

It's amazing how Allah makes the part in bold the 23rd aayah, separate to the part before (22nd verse.) Maybe emphasizing on the 'looking towards their Lord' part.




I don't want to go into details, but i'll tell you that certain ash'aris reject authentic [mutawatir - with so much chains of narration that it couldn't be a lie] ahadith! simply because it contradicts their philosophy. i.e. the philosophers will say that you can't see Allah because you are attributing a 'direction' to Allah i.e. that He is somewhere, and you are saying that the human eye can perceive Allah.

But if Allah says it, then why isn't it possible? Subhan Allah this is why we are believers, because we accept the Qur'an and Sunnah even on things which we can't comprehend.




To go one step further, the other sects say that the 'W'/salafis are evil because they take the Qur'an literally. Then they jump directly to the false conclusion that we give Allah human attributes [anthromorphism].

That's a lie, what the salaf say is that we accept Allah's attributes as they are apparent (dhahir). i.e. Allah says that He created Adam with His hand, so we say that Allah has a hand - that's the most apparent meaning.

(Allah) said: "O Iblis! What prevents thee from prostrating thyself to one whom I have created with my hands? Art thou haughty? Or art thou one of the high (and mighty) ones?"

[Quran Saad 38:75]

We say that Allah created Adam with His hands, that's why He said it. The ash'aris say Allah meant power when He said this. But then you have to question, didn't Allah create iblis with His power too? So why was Adam mentioned as one being created by Allah's hands and iblis not? Adam simply had this high position because Allah created him with His hands. Otherwise, everything's created with His power.


The salaf accepted Allah's aayaat with a dhahir [apparent] meaning. What does the term: dhahir mean?



Ibn Qudama says in Rawdhat al-Nadhir (2/25 with Ibn Badran’s comments):

The second type: al-Dhahir (literal), and that is the meaning that comes first to the mind when uttered, while other meanings might also be possible. If you wish, you may say: That which has two possible meanings, one of them more obvious than the other“

more explanation of the term dhahir;
http://saheefah.org/2006/08/16/the-m...ahir-apparent/

This is what the salaf did, and this is what salafis try to call back to. We say Allah has a hand but it is not similar to that of His creation. We say He has a hand because Allah says He has a hand.



So you see, the muslim on the fitrah already accepts this. But its the philosophers who themselves got confused and used to cry and wish that their minds were like old women (their minds being plain and simple.)

So if i were you, don't even call yourself ash'ari - because you're not. You're fitrah is islam and the beliefs of the salaf, so insha Allah you just accept it. You don't need no deep study, you just need to know what you need to believe in regard to Allah's attributes so you don't fall into the mistakes of the philosophers. Insha Allah if you're truthful to yourself, things will make sense and Allah will make it easy for you to understand.

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:

3) Are the opinions regarding the attributes of Allah (swt) the major points of contention when it comes to the athari and ashari aqeedah? If not, what else is there?

Yeh i think the major points are about Allah's attributes, but due to other factors - its effected other points of aqeedah too, such as praying to the people who have passed away for waseelah.


Related to the waseelah thing, ash'aris have this thing with the atom theory. So everything is to do with atoms (i.e. the smallest thing existent is an atom [during that time this was the official belief of science]). They said that since time is also based on atoms, i.e. atomic time [every moment in this world is like a piece of time, an atom piece of time - then they are like layers upon each other to form a history timeline you could say]. Therefore they said that during one atomic time period, Prophet Muhammad was Allah's Messenger when he conveyed the message etc, but when he passed away, atomic time moved forward and he died (Quran 39:30). Which therefore 'meant' that he isn't Allah's Messenger anymore (to the ash'aris), because time has moved forward, and he isnt alive in this world anymore. So how can he be Allah's Messenger?

When they held this belief and portrayed it to others, one of them was executed by the khalifah. Alot of them started fearing this [because its apostasy to say Prophet Muhammad isn't Allah's Messenger.] So they said he is still alive in his grave in the real sense (just to support their theory) and they said he hasn't died [which contradicts what abu bakr said at the day of his death (sal Allah alaihi wasalam)], and therefore they permitted praying to him for intercession, the same way the companions asked him to pray for them when he was in this world.


the refutation to that claim (for arguments sake if it was real) is refuted here;
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/a....html#post5460
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=593


But it shows how their philosophy was used, and they would twist the religion every now and then with their philosophy, which caused fitnah among the people like you see today - so alot pray to the dead.

We know the salaf and those who follow them always believe Muhammad is Allah's Messenger since the time he got his message and even after his death (sal Allah alaihi wasalam.)

4) Final question insha'Allah. Somebody recommended the Fundamentals of Tawheed by Bilal Philips and said that he'd recommend it to anybody regardless of Aqeedah or madhab etc etc but since Bilal Philips works seem to be based on the athari aqeedah and tawheed falls into topics on aqeedah then its incorrect to say that just anybody could take from that book since it'd contradict the ashari aqeedah sa7?

Someone whose ash'ari probably doesn't like The fundamentals of tawheed book, because of the reasons mentioned earlier. Although again, i'd like to emphasise that he produces proofs from Qur'an and Sunnah for what he says.


Allahu a'lam.

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Ok JazakAllah khayr akhee. Could you explain what ta'weel means please? I was told but I've forgotten and you know how you say that athari's accept the attributes with a dhaahir meaning, isnt tafwid similar?

WassalamuAlaykum

[Re.TiReD]

:salamext:

Hang on, athari's say that ashari's make ta'weel whilst they themselves make tafweedh. When ashari's actually say that they use tafweedh anyway =S

The Divine Attributes and the way of Consigning (tafwid) the meaning to Allah
The preferred position of both the Ash`aris and Maturidis when it comes to understanding those Divine Attributes that may appear to indicate some similitude between the Creator and creation is:

Hmm

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:wasalamex


Ta'weel in this context would mean turning away from the obvious meaning of the texts towards possible, preferred meanings. I.e. power instead of hand etc.


Tafweedh would mean;

Also among the Ashaira are those that made tafweedh of the texts mandatory; saying that the reality is that these texts do not prove any understandable meaning; that no one understood them, neither the Messenger nor the Sahaba nor anyone else. They say that the requirement, and in fact the reality, of these texts is that these attributes do not contain any explanation for the people...
http://saheefah.org/2007/12/02/a-res...nger-of-allah/


The difference therefore is that the salaf accepted Allah's hand being a hand [but not similar to the creation], whereas the people of tafweedh might say that 'we do not know what hand means at all'.


You see the difference? Without a doubt the dhahir is better, more truthful and the proper guidance since that is the belief of the sahabah, tabi'een and the imams. So whose more rightly guided? The pious people who Allah's Messenger testified to as 'the best of generations', or those that came after them and had less knowledge of the religion?

If you really want i can provide you with loads of quotes of the salaf accepting the dhahir of the texts.

[Re.TiReD]

:wasalamex


Ta'weel in this context would mean turning away from the obvious meaning of the texts towards possible, preferred meanings. I.e. power instead of hand etc.


Tafweedh would mean;

Also among the Ashaira are those that made tafweedh of the texts mandatory; saying that the reality is that these texts do not prove any understandable meaning; that no one understood them, neither the Messenger nor the Sahaba nor anyone else. They say that the requirement, and in fact the reality, of these texts is that these attributes do not contain any explanation for the people...
http://saheefah.org/2007/12/02/a-res...nger-of-allah/


The difference therefore is that the salaf accepted Allah's hand being a hand [but not similar to the creation], whereas the people of tafweedh might say that 'we do not know what hand means at all'.

Akhee I think you might have made a slight mistake in your post, wallahu A'lam.

But at one point you explain tafweedh and then say the people of tafweedh, which means that they are the 'other' i.e. ashari? Right? So what did the salaf accept if not tafweedh nor ta'weel?

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

Akhee I think you might have made a slight mistake in your post, wallahu A'lam.

But at one point you explain tafweedh and then say the people of tafweedh, which means that they are the 'other' i.e. ashari? Right? So what did the salaf accept if not tafweedh nor ta'weel?

WassalamuAlaykum

:salamext:


The link that i quoted said the ashaa'irah were the people of tafweedh and ta'wil.

The salaf accepted the dhahir [apparentness] of the verses/ahadith.


So if hand was mentioned, they said we accept its hand [but not like the creation]. The ash'aris would say its not hand [its power], or they would say we dont know what hand means - full stop.


I have to go now. Read the saheefah.org link for more info, type in the search box. It's brief and to the point alhamdulillah.

:salamext:

[Re.TiReD]

AsslaamuAlaykum

Ooh I understand now! JazakAllah khayr!

The only thing I was confused about is that I thought from ta'weel and tafweedh, one was accepted by the atharites and the other by the asharites but from what you're saying both are attributed to the ashari's and the athari's go by the dhaahir.

JazakAllah khayr

Although I came across the following:

3) Salaf: They refused to make Ta’weel and practised Tafweedh which meant that they consigned the true meanings and modality (how’ness) of these verses pertaining to Hands of Allah (SWT) etc. both to Allah. In summary these said that we don’t want to debate with you as to what these verses mean we simply say, “We believe in them and only Allah (SWT) knows truly what these verses actually mean and since Allah (SWT) & His Rasool (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) remain silent on this, we will also remain silent about them” and we will also not interpret these to mean “Power etc.”….we simply believe in them and remain silent

Anyway I think I understand most of it now and I'll check the links insha'Allah

WassalamuAlaykum

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


what that quote said is wrong, we say hand is hand - but not like the creation. the salaf didn't do tafweedh.


..yeh, now i'm really going. jazak Allah for understanding.


:salamext:

[Re.TiReD]

:wasalamex

I know you've gone but I just want to say that I've quoted an excerpt that says ashari's accept just that too ^ even though they leave specific matters to Allah (swt) which seems much safer anyway.

Basically they affirm what Allah (swt) affirms such as His hand. Nothing more and nothing less.

Anyway JazakAllah khayr for your time, I think I should get back to my assignment lol because I've sidetracked a lot.

WassalamuAlaykum