My Shaykh Vs. Your Shaykh

[Signor]

My Shaykh Vs. Your Shaykh

Truth must be told, that we as Muslims tend to at times act in ways that blatantly contradict the teachings of Islam as put forth in the Quran and Sunnah. If you go through YouTube or message boards across the Internet, you will not have a hard time finding Muslims attacking each other over their differences in opinions. Sadly, you will also not find it very difficult to find young Muslims who have not spent in the big picture much time getting educated in the Tradition, with such audacity and shamelessness, attacking scholars from the past and present, because they hold different opinions than the scholars they hold in high regard. It seems to be the case that if you like Imam Ibn Taymiyyah, then you must attack Imam Al Ghazali. If you prefer Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, then to you Shaykh Al Qaradawi must have a large “X” in red ink on him. If you listen to Shaykh Bilal Philips, then you automatically must avoid Shaykh Hamza Yusuf. It’s as if the scholars must be put in a boxing ring or an octagon to fight each other, and one of them MUST come out on top. While they’re fighting, the supporters of one must have their signs with big letters showing their support for “their” Shaykh, while chanting for the destruction of the “enemy of Islam” that’s in the opposite corner.


Unfortunately, it doesn’t just end with how I just described it. There are also the lies that are perpetuated about each scholar on the tongues of the crowd in opposition. Statements are usually taken out of context so a point can be made about the deviance of this scholar or the ignorance of the other. I remember having heard and read statements attributed to Shaykh Bin Bazz and Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, which were used to show the “ridiculous nature of their thought process”. I went and searched for the audio recording of the lectures where these statements were made, and NOT to my surprise, how these statements were taken out of context and perpetuated was completely antithetical to what these scholars were saying. On the other hand, there are the outright lies being promoted about Shaykh Abdullah Bin Bayyah and Shaykh Hamza Yusuf that are set up in a way to make them come across to the regular Muslim as “Sufi” and “deviant”. Again, being that in this case I didn’t search for any audio recording and I actually have sat with them face to face, what is being spread about them wasn’t even something taken out of context, but it was rather a straight up and flat out LIE.


In Islam, it’s forbidden to gamble. But if I were to use it metaphorically here, I’m betting that if any of the people that spread falsities about any of the scholars, past or present, are asked to provide their evidence, or at least their source, they will say that they heard it from someone. OK! Let’s go to that someone. Where did they get their information about the so-called “deviance” of such and such scholar? The response will typically be that they heard it from someone else. Fine! Where did that someone else get their information from? Most likely, if you go far enough, you’ll find that they got it from some message board, or some YouTube clip, where it’s someone claiming that a particular scholar says so and so, and therefore be warned and don’t listen to them or read their writings for they will lead you astray. Again, no “direct” evidence will be provided. All of it is just hearsay that is being spread around as “truth”.


You know what’s interesting? The Prophet peace be upon him said:

كفى بالمرء كذبا أن يحدث بكل ما سمع

It’s enough for a person to lie to tell everything they hear

This means that all these people spreading what they “heard” can officially be considered LIERS according to Islamic Law, which means their witness can never be accepted and if they happen to be students of Sacred Knowledge, anything they transmit from the Tradition can’t be accepted either because they’re not trustworthy individuals.


I’ve had several conversations with many Muslims in the past few months where at times a name of a Muslim scholar will be dropped and all of a sudden faces change. Reason for that is because of something the person heard about this prominent figure where they should be warned about him. Before your mind goes too far, I’m not singling out a particular person here. For example, some Muslims have a problem with Imam Ibn Taymiyyah for certain opinions they heard he had through someone telling it to them. On the other hand, other Muslims will have a problem with Imam Al Ghazali because of what they heard about him through someone else. Nowadays, we have Muslims having a major problem with scholars like Shaykh Bin Bayyah and Shaykh Al Qaradawi, while others have a major problem with scholars like Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen and Shaykh Bin Bazz and Shaykh Al Albani. All of this is typically because they were basically instructed and told that they should have a problem with these scholars, and unfortunately without much consideration they just went ahead and followed the instructions.


When it comes to North America, if you’re a so-called Salafi, and by that I mean you attribute yourself to the way of the Salaf even though you’re violating many of their principles, you’re supposed to have a problem with Shaykh Hamza Yusuf. On the other hand, if you’re a so-called Sufi, and by that I mean you’re being labeled as such by some people because you attend events where Shaykh Hamza Yusuf speaks and teaches, you’re supposed to have a problem with Shaykh Bilal Philips. In all of these cases, the anti-this Shaykh or that Shaykh attitude is more often than not based on having heard something from someone about the Shaykh saying this or that. Well, here is a small little reminder I tell myself before I tell it to others. God says in the Quran:

يا أيها الذين آمنوا إن جاءكم فاسق بنبأ فتبينوا – سورة الحجرات 6

O’ you who believe, if a profligate comes to you with a news then confirm it – Surah Al Hujurat 6

What’s interesting about the above verse is that the word na’ba’ (نبأ) in Arabic is only used when the news being told is in fact true as far as the deliverer believes it to be. Yet in the verse God is describing the one bringing forth this news, which is used to cause a problem (you can refer to the exegesis of Imam Al Qurtubi to get the full story behind the revelation of this verse), to be a profligate and a liar.
OK then, with that in mind, I make it a consistent practice to first ask the question: did you get this information directly from the scholar in question, or did you just hear it from someone else? Because I personally have lost count of how many times I’ve heard Muslims say something about a particular scholar or public figure, and I found it to be a complete LIE. If it’s a scholar from the past, I go and get the full text where the particular statement in question was taken from and I read it in context. Sure enough, he was saying something other than what this profligate was claiming about him. If it’s a contemporary scholar, I try to get to them directly if it’s really important, or I’ll try to get a full recording to hear everything that was said by them. Again, it turns out to be them saying something other than what this profligate is trying to say they said.


We live in an age when the narration of the Prophet peace be upon him mentions that:

يحدث المرء الكذب فيبلغ الآفاق

A person will tell a lie and it will reach the horizons

All one needs to spread a lie about anyone is to literally get online and within seconds it will reach the opposite side of the globe. It just seems that many haven’t really paid attention to that. Worse yet, they themselves will participate in spreading the lie by taking it and re-telling it without realizing what they’re actually doing, which can only be a result of extreme heedlessness over their actions.


It’s very hypocritical of us Muslims to speak of how some individuals take things out of context and don’t understand what is meant by a particular narration in the Tradition, and that they should be asking and inquiring before issuing judgments on us, when at the same time that’s exactly what we do with each other.

But let’s say that it happened to be true that a particular scholar or public figure had a maverick opinion that deviated from the majority, or just was equally valid but different from what you learned. So what? According to the Sunni position, no one after the Prophet peace be upon him is infallible, which means that absolutely everyone will be bound to falling into some mistakes. The learned will obviously make fewer mistakes than the ignorant, but they will still make them. Imam Ibn Taymiyyah had certain positions which went against the consensus of the scholars and were rejected. Does that mean that as a scholar he should be disregarded? That’s an extreme position that is unbefitting for the community of the Prophet peace be upon him. We have people that treat scholars in two extreme ways; they’re either infallible and what they say is the ultimate truth and they don’t make mistakes, or they’re completely deviant and they’re the cause for the problems of the Muslims nowadays.


How arrogant can one be?

Some have taken it upon themselves to judge major scholars like Imam Ibn Taymiyyah and Imam Al Ghazali, when in fact these “judges” don’t qualify to lead the prayer in congregation, let alone speak on the status of these scholars. On the other hand, some have elevated some scholars to levels unbefitting for them, and I truly believe that if these scholars were to come nowadays, they would beat those people elevating them to this infallibility status with a stick. Muslims wonder why the state of the Ummah is the way it is – this is why. It’s the lack of respect to some scholars and fanatical attachment to particular scholars to the point of discounting and disregarding everyone else. Just because you like Imam Ibn Taymiyyah, that doesn’t give you the right to insult Imam Al Ghazali, and the opposite is equally true.


The Prophet peace be upon him said:

الحكمة ضالة المومن أنى وجدها فهي له

Wisdom is the lost property of the believer; wherever they find it it’s theirs

This narration means that even if an Atheist says something wise, as a Muslim I can take it and apply it, and that’s someone who might have 98% of what they say be rejected, but that other 2%, if it’s good, as a Muslim I have a right to it, and I will take it. What about our scholars? These are people who had 98% of what they said be good. Unfortunately, because we like to personalize everything, and we “enjoy” character assassinations, if a scholar held unorthodox views in 2% of what they said, we’re more than willing to throw that and the 98% of good out to the ocean, and follow that with spitting at it.
It’s getting really annoying when I hear someone always talk about the maverick positions of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah, or those of Imam Al Ghazali, etc. If you took a little bit of time to look at how the scholars dealt with each other’s maverick opinions, it was always in beautiful discourse that sought excuses for each other by saying things like: may be the Shaykh missed this, or may be the Shaykh meant this other thing. They acted upon the narration of the Prophet peace be upon him:

التمس العذر لأخيك ولو سبعين مرة

Seek the excuse for your brother/sister even if it’s for 70 times

But nowadays, it’s NOT even scholars that are doing the criticism. It’s Muslims that are not educated in the Tradition, fanatical in their views, emotional in their attachment to particular scholars, arrogant in their attitudes, and unmannered in their discourse who seem to feel that they for some reason have the authority to even speak, let alone judge scholars and teachers that spent 20 to 70 years of their lives dedicated to studying the Tradition.


I think it’s time for these people to wake up and smell the qahwa!


Not everyone will have similar inclinations, and that’s the Divine wisdom in having different types of scholars. God made some people have more of a soft spot in their heart for Imam Ibn Taymiyyah’s character, while for others it was Imam Al Ghazali’s. It’s the nature of the world to have these difference, and Islam is big enough to envelop both types of scholars as well as others.
It’s upon the lay Muslims to understand that and to just realize that all these scholars have served Islam more than they have and to show them the respect they deserve, and to stop labeling them with negative labels to demean their legacy by calling this one a so-called “Sufi” as a way to say they had problematic issues in their theology, and that one a “deviant” as a means of insult because they held some unorthodox position in a certain issue. God says in the Quran:

ولا تنابزوا بالالقاب بيس الاسم الفسوق بعد الايمان – الحجرات 11

And do not call each other with negative names, becoming a profligate is a bad name after faith – Surah Al Hujurat 11

[ardianto]

There's no my Shaykh, there's no your Shaykh. They are our Shaykh.

[Scimitar]

My Shaykh Vs. Your Shaykh

I mujst admit, his blog is pretty good: http://mohamedghilan.com/2011/10/12/...s-your-shaykh/ it would help to include source links bro :)

Scimi

[Signor]

it would help to include source links bro

Assalamu Alaikum

I embed URLs on title head of any article posted(just in case you don't know:threads either rejected or edited by mods if I don't provide links).Insha'Allah it helps next time.

God Bless

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

[ardianto]

But, other members do not know that the article title contains link if they do not move their cursor to the title.

:)

[Signor]

^^I didn't know that,Jazakallah Khayr for telling me.I do purposefully to make a post looks neat and easy to read,also it less time consuming.(sshhh don't tell anyone,I am not an Intellectual like these guys,what I admire is what I share here)

[Muwaahid]

After reading the post it has become clear that there are a few issues with the post itself. The average reader perhaps may be unaware of some of the issues but it isnt as the writer of the original article states. It is NOT a matter of my Shaykh vs your Shaykh! Its a matter of what is right and what is wrong and do we follow that personality that fell into error or is the truth most beloved to us than the personality and thus deserves to be followed. Comparing Uthaymeen to Ghazali is comparing apples to oranges. An the calling of Hamzah Yusef a Shaykh is also an error. The people have abandoned the principles of Islaam and championed personalities, they have have left is the pure creed of the prophet [alayhi salam] in exchange for philosophy and heretical beliefs not known by the Prophet [alayhi salam] nor his companions [ridhwaanullah alayhim] nor who came after them upon their way. No doubt, the Muslim who has aql [intellect] places the what Allah says and what His messenger [alayhi salam] says above the statement of any man. Indeed Imaam Maalik [rahimahullah] was most correct when he said, "kullun kalaami feehi maqbool wa mardood illa kalaam saahibu hadha al qabr: ya'nee an-nabee [alayhi salam], Everyones statement is either accepted or rejected EXCEPT the occupant of this grave! meaning the prophet [alayhi salam]. And because of this Ahlus Sunnah weighs the statements and actions of the people upon two scales. And those two scales are a text [either from the kitaab or sunnah and ijmaa [concensus] As for the nass [text] it is that which originates from the kitaab and the sunnah so whoever has with him a text from the kitaab or the AUTHENTIC sunnah then it is accepted from him and what ever opposes or contradicts the text or ijmaa then his statement or action is rejected or refuted. This Islaam is a religion based on text, based on evidence and proofs. When anyone from the children of Aadam opposes the texts and the ijmaa then we donot follow them no matter how attached we are to the personality. Al Haqq is more beloved to us than the personality of any individual. We adhere to the text and we worship Allah upon proofs and we make wuqoof [we do not proceed except with a text meaning we stop where the text stops]. We do not go any further and this is a proof of mutaba'ah [following the prophet (alayhi wa salam)] We obey him in that whih he commanded us and we believe in everything he narrated to us and we abstain and turn away from everything he prohibited us or forbade us and we do not worship Allah except with what he legislated.


The fact that the original article is from a sufi website needs to be known because sufism was not a practice of the prophet [alayhi salam] nor was it a practice of the companions [radhiya Allahu anhum] nor those who followed after them in beliefs, statements, actions, and understanding and implementation of the religion. Some of the individuals mentioned in this article have huge issues in their aqeedah and manhaj and they call the people to other than what Allah had revealed and beliefs other than the prophet alayhi salam believed or encouraged the believers to believe. So beware of this and take your religion from the scholars with proofs and evidences and abandon taking knowledge from personalities who just entertain you. Wa billahit-tawfeeq

[YusufNoor]

:sl:

not all "Sufi" scholars follow in the footsteps of those who could be labeled Sufi of days long gone by. it isn't a matter of who vrs who, it's a matter of b'idah.
when it comes to innovation, we must be aware and be careful.

if you call yourself a "salafi" or a "sufi" or "wahaabi", you're not on the "straightest" path.

i'll take the instruction of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah, Shaykh Bin Bazz, Ibn Uthaymeen and Dr Bilal Philips, especially in regards to innovation, any day. it serves a purpose.

to the OP, one "doth protest to much", when one has something to worry about. innovation should worry you.

and Allahu Alam

ma Salaama

[Cabdullahi]

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

:sl:

The original post [and I skimmed it] is pretty awesome. Thank you for posting it.

An the calling of Hamzah Yusef a Shaykh is also an error.

The people have abandoned the principles of Islaam and championed personalities, they have have left is the pure creed of the prophet [alayhi salam] in exchange for philosophy and heretical beliefs not known by the Prophet [alayhi salam] nor his companions [ridhwaanullah alayhim] nor who came after them upon their way. No doubt, the Muslim who has aql [intellect] places the what Allah says and what His messenger [alayhi salam] says above the statement of any man. Indeed Imaam Maalik [rahimahullah] was most correct when he said, "kullun kalaami feehi maqbool wa mardood illa kalaam saahibu hadha al qabr: ya'nee an-nabee [alayhi salam], Everyones statement is either accepted or rejected EXCEPT the occupant of this grave! meaning the prophet [alayhi salam]. And because of this Ahlus Sunnah weighs the statements and actions of the people upon two scales. And those two scales are a text [either from the kitaab or sunnah and ijmaa [concensus] As for the nass [text] it is that which originates from the kitaab and the sunnah so whoever has with him a text from the kitaab or the AUTHENTIC sunnah then it is accepted from him and what ever opposes or contradicts the text or ijmaa then his statement or action is rejected or refuted.

Are you the only one or is the group you tend to follow the only group that agrees on this? I really don't get when you guys keep saying this over and over as if you're the ONLY ones, out of the entire ummah, that agrees on this point? Like are you serious? Are the scholars who disagree with you by default 'abandoned the principles of Islam' and are dishonest somehow to the Qur'an and Sunnah? Like are you seriously accusing other Muslims, passively, that they're not honest to Allah?

How arrogant must a people be to claim that all truth resides with them, and anyone who disagrees has deviated. May Allah protect us.

This Islaam is a religion based on text, based on evidence and proofs. When anyone from the children of Aadam opposes the texts and the ijmaa then we donot follow them no matter how attached we are to the personality. Al Haqq is more beloved to us than the personality of any individual. We adhere to the text and we worship Allah upon proofs and we make wuqoof [we do not proceed except with a text meaning we stop where the text stops]. We do not go any further and this is a proof of mutaba'ah [following the prophet (alayhi wa salam)] We obey him in that whih he commanded us and we believe in everything he narrated to us and we abstain and turn away from everything he prohibited us or forbade us and we do not worship Allah except with what he legislated.

Not sure why you keep going on about this. I don't think any Muslim disagrees with this lol

The fact that the original article is from a sufi website needs to be known because sufism was not a practice of the prophet [alayhi salam] nor was it a practice of the companions [radhiya Allahu anhum] nor those who followed after them in beliefs, statements, actions, and understanding and implementation of the religion.

Oh God, the same mantra over and over. Guess what bro, the science known as "aqeedah" wasn't around the Prophet's time either. And you know the divisions of Tawheed, well that wasn't around then either. That fact that it came later doesn't make it any less valid. It was codified by scholars later. Same thing with Tasawwuf/Tazkiyyah/Sulook etc. These are just terms and until you can raise yourself to a level of discussion and understanding where you look beyond the apparent name of something whereby you judge it based on the name itself, you're not going to be doing justice whatsoever. The scholars use a principle, that differences are on concepts not terminologies - so lets be just and look beyond simple terminology and address concepts.

Some of the individuals mentioned in this article have huge issues in their aqeedah and manhaj and they call the people to other than what Allah had revealed and beliefs other than the prophet alayhi salam believed or encouraged the believers to believe. So beware of this and take your religion from the scholars with proofs and evidences and abandon taking knowledge from personalities who just entertain you. Wa billahit-tawfeeq

Bro, this is the height of arrogance. This is what you've done:

1) You've judged the people mentioned in the article and have essentially declared them heretics (issues in "aqeedah" and so called "manhaj"). As a side note, I wonder why Islamic scholarship had no problem taking of all things, Tafseer of the Qur'an from Zamakshari, I mean, the guy was Mu'tazili!
2) You have claimed that they are callers to falsehood ("call people to other than what Allah had revealed")
3) You've accused the person posting the article of taking knowledge from people that entertain him. ("who just entertain you")

I really don't know what to say to you. Please get over yourself. If whatever "knowledge" you've learned leads you to make statements like this, then you haven't learned knowledge, you've learned arrogance.

It is fine to disagree with people, and even to justly criticize, but that should never lead to arrogance and putting others down - which is exactly what you've done here. I'm not doubting your sincerity and your zeal to help your brothers to what you understand to be the truth, but what I am doing is disagreeing with you and criticizing you for the manner and the [incorrect] statements you've made, statements that are very heavy and will be taken into account. Unfortunately, today with the easy access to knowledge people have forgotten the adab and the tongues have become loose. This isn't knowledge and this isn't the fruit of knowledge.

[Muwaahid]

:sl:

The original post [and I skimmed it] is pretty awesome. Thank you for posting it.

Are you the only one or is the group you tend to follow the only group that agrees on this? I really don't get when you guys keep saying this over and over as if you're the ONLY ones, out of the entire ummah, that agrees on this point? Like are you serious? Are the scholars who disagree with you by default 'abandoned the principles of Islam' and are dishonest somehow to the Qur'an and Sunnah? Like are you seriously accusing other Muslims, passively, that they're not honest to Allah?

How arrogant must a people be to claim that all truth resides with them, and anyone who disagrees has deviated. May Allah protect us.

*****I am not sure why you chose to personally attack me nor am I sure why you accused me of all these horrible things. And what is this "you guys" and this "arrogant" and where did i claim all truth lies with me or the supposed group I am affiliated with. By Allah I am holding you personally accountable before Allah for what you accused me of because this is Dhulm [oppression].



Not sure why you keep going on about this. I don't think any Muslim disagrees with this lol

******You are laughing at this? This is a matter of deen, why are you laughing? Do you think the religion of Islaam is a laughing manner? Fear Allah!



Oh God, the same mantra over and over. Guess what bro, the science known as "aqeedah" wasn't around the Prophet's time either. And you know the divisions of Tawheed, well that wasn't around then either. That fact that it came later doesn't make it any less valid. It was codified by scholars later. Same thing with Tasawwuf/Tazkiyyah/Sulook etc. These are just terms and until you can raise yourself to a level of discussion and understanding where you look beyond the apparent name of something whereby you judge it based on the name itself, you're not going to be doing justice whatsoever. The scholars use a principle, that differences are on concepts not terminologies - so lets be just and look beyond simple terminology and address concepts.

*****First of all, Soofiyyah is not from Islaam at all, the deen of Islaam calls to unity and togetherness, how do you explain the Tareeqahs? The Tareeqahs differ and they have their own ways and means and acts of Ibaadah and all of them are based upon misguidance. Allah commanded us to stick together wa'tasimoo bi habli Lillah Jamee'an wa laa tafaraqoo" [3:103]And hold fast all of you to the rope of Allah and do not be divided" and Allah says, "minal alladheena farraqoo deenahum wa kanu shi'an kullu hizbaan bimaa laydahi farihoon" [30:32] From those who split up their religion and became parties &groups each one rejoicing in that which is with them." [30:32] likewise Allah says, "fataqata'oo amrahum baynahum zubraa kullu hizbin bimaa ladayhi farihoon" "But the people divided their religion among them into sects - each faction, in what it has, rejoicing." [23:53] From these so called tureeqaat where is the unity?these tareeqahs do not promote unity nor do they adhere to the rope of Allah which is the Qur'an and Sunnah. We have words that describe what you falsely attribute to Islaam. Tazkiyyatu nufoos [purification the souls] sulook is manhaj and as for the orgin of soofiyyah being dawning the garments of the poor then Az-Zuhd isnt the dawning of dirty clothes nor is it dressing slummy, but rather Zuhd is merely taking the bare minimum needed from this dunyaa to worship Allah until you die. I do not wish to discuss all the innovative practices found with those upon soofiyyah but all that innovative dhikr and the dhikr beads and the dancing and the spinning and the saying huwa huwa until they sound like barking dogs or when they say laa ilaaha 400 times commiting kufr and illa Allah 500 times both of these statements in absence of the other exits them from the fold of islam. How is this Islaam? How is this sticking to the rope of Allah. Did Abu Bakr As-Sideeq and Umar Bin Khattab Al-Farooq and Dhoo Nurayn Uthmaan Bin Affaan and Abu Turaab Alee Ibn Abee Taalib [radhiya Allahu anhum ajmaa'een] practice sitting in circles swaying back and forth making dhikr collectively? Stop supporting the deception of the average layman muslim into supporting practicises that the prophet [alayhi salam ] was not upon nor his companions nor those who followed after them in beliefs statements and actions and UNDERSTANDINGS.



Bro, this is the height of arrogance. This is what you've done:

1) You've judged the people mentioned in the article and have essentially declared them heretics (issues in "aqeedah" and so called "manhaj"). As a side note, I wonder why Islamic scholarship had no problem taking of all things, Tafseer of the Qur'an from Zamakshari, I mean, the guy was Mu'tazili!


******I am not arrogant at all but all the name calling indicate that you are the arrogant one. Tell me this, if some one was to equate the prophet [alayhi salam] with Allah would you get upset? Yes or no? Would you me jealous for Allah? Would you be mad at the individual who did the equating of Allah with His messenger [alayhi salam] when the prophet forbade us to exalt him above his station like the christians did with Isaa Ibnu Maryam! Should we as muslims be upset? Be honest Muslims, is this correct? Well Hamzah Yusef did this when he translated the poem entitled al burda by Al-Busiri. That poem is full of shirk and he encourages people to read it and memorise it and recite it. But Im more than sure that this response will either not be posted because or deleted or I will be asked to produce evidence when all a person has to do is google it and see. But all the allegations you made are here to stay.



2) You have claimed that they are callers to falsehood ("call people to other than what Allah had revealed")

Any individual who outwardly expresses the creed of the Ashaa'irah and outwardly expresses one of the tareeqahs of soofiyyah is indeed calling to a way other than what the prophet [alayhi salam] was upon. Do you agree? I met a man from the indo pakistan sub continent and he said to me that he was Hanafi Maturidee and I asked him what is that? He responded by saying, "Hanafi is my madhhab in fiqh and because im from Pakistan I follow the aqeedah of the maturidees." What was the madhhab of the messenger of Allah? And what was his aqeedah? For sure the prophet [alayhi wa salam] was not hanafi nor was he maturidee!


3) You've accused the person posting the article of taking knowledge from people that entertain him. ("who just entertain you")


*********I did not accuse the original poster of anything other than posting an article from sufi sources if you look through out my post I never speak of him pecifically I say the people, its general just as the prophet [alayhi salam] said concerning those sahabis who came to A'isha radhiya allahu anhaa and asked her about the worship of the prophet [alayhi salam] so they all concluded that one would fast and not break his fast, one said I will not marry and the other said I will pray all night. So the prophet alayhi salam said who are those individuals that said such and such, he didnt mention their names nor point at them but he spoke generally just as I have done.

I really don't know what to say to you. Please get over yourself. If whatever "knowledge" you've learned leads you to make statements like this, then you haven't learned knowledge, you've learned arrogance.


****Again with the personal attacks masha Allah, I do not think high of myself akhee nor am I an arrogant person I know who I am and I am in desparate need of my Lord's rahmah and maghfirah. Just because I hve gheerah [halal jealousy for this deen] and I refuse to allow individuals to speak about Allah or His Messenger [alayhi salam] or the deen of Islaam without proofs and evidences misguiding the people I am arrogant? My honor is permissible to be harmed by others right? Allahu Akbar!

It is fine to disagree with people, and even to justly criticize, but that should never lead to arrogance and putting others down - which is exactly what you've done here. I'm not doubting your sincerity and your zeal to help your brothers to what you understand to be the truth, but what I am doing is disagreeing with you and criticizing you for the manner and the [incorrect] statements you've made, statements that are very heavy and will be taken into account. Unfortunately, today with the easy access to knowledge people have forgotten the adab and the tongues have become loose. This isn't knowledge and this isn't the fruit of knowledge.

******There was no justice in your criticism, it was to mock me and to support the baatil. I ask you by Allah, is sufism from Allah and His Messenger? Is sitting in the circles doing dhikr collectively swaying back in forth from the practice of the prophet [alayhi salam]? is saying huwa huwa until one is not able to distinguish what he says anymore a practice of the prophet and his noble companions? In front of Allah can you honestly say to Allah sufism is from your religion that you are pleased with Allah? Can you testify to this? Can you testify that what Hamzah Yusuf teaches is what the Prophet [alayhi salam] came to teach humanity? When it is known that Hamzah Yusef said the aqeedah can be learned in 10 minutes in the deserts of mauritania. When the prophet taught tawheed for more than 13 years. Is this justice? I ask you is it permissible to seek refuge in other than Allah? Is it permissible to say that others have knowledge of the unseen besides Allah? Is it permissibl to swear by other than Allah? Please produce evidence for the answers to these questions because Hamzah Yusef translation of al- burda calls to this. So I ask you this,if someone calls to this, is this the way the prophet [alayhi salam] called humanity to Tawheed? Did the prophet [alayhi salam] say that that others have knowledge of the unseen? Did the prophet say it was permissible to swear by other than Allah? So this whole my shaykh is better than your shaykh is rubbish but rather it could have justly been entitled "What is more beloved the following of religious personalities even if they are in error or following Allah's Messenger [alayhi salam] in all good?"

[IslamicRevival]

******There was no justice in your criticism, it was to mock me and to support the baatil. I ask you by Allah, is sufism from Allah and His Messenger? Is sitting in the circles doing dhikr collectively swaying back in forth from the practice of the prophet [alayhi salam]? is saying huwa huwa until one is not able to distinguish what he says anymore a practice of the prophet and his noble companions? In front of Allah can you honestly say to Allah sufism is from your religion that you are pleased with Allah? Can you testify to this? Can you testify that what Hamzah Yusuf teaches is what the Prophet [alayhi salam] came to teach humanity? When it is known that Hamzah Yusef said the aqeedah can be learned in 10 minutes in the deserts of mauritania. When the prophet taught tawheed for more than 13 years. Is this justice? I ask you is it permissible to seek refuge in other than Allah? Is it permissible to say that others have knowledge of the unseen besides Allah? Is it permissibl to swear by other than Allah? Please produce evidence for the answers to these questions because Hamzah Yusef translation of al- burda calls to this. So I ask you this,if someone calls to this, is this the way the prophet [alayhi salam] called humanity to Tawheed? Did the prophet [alayhi salam] say that that others have knowledge of the unseen? Did the prophet say it was permissible to swear by other than Allah? So this whole my shaykh is better than your shaykh is rubbish but rather it could have justly been entitled "What is more beloved the following of religious personalities even if they are in error or following Allah's Messenger [alayhi salam] in all good?"

The article is trying to address exactly this ^ sort of garbage mentality and jahiliya! Dont be so arrogant to think the deen belongs to you and youre the only people on the face of the earth who are on Haq, this is ignorance in its worst form.

[Signor]

Br Muwaahid,Here is a thread Islam and Internet which you need to read before turning up this one into a debating one.Br Ibn Abi Ahmed has already addressed many of your points,so there is no need to carry this on further.

[Muwaahid]

The article is trying to address exactly this ^ sort of garbage mentality and jahiliya! Dont be so arrogant to think the deen belongs to you and youre the only people on the face of the earth who are on Haq, this is ignorance in its worst form.

Ok you mind explaining to me why under your nickname you have Ya Nabi Salamu Alayka? This is what I am referring to, you deem its okay to call on the prophet alayhi salam even though he is not alive. Did you know the prophet alayhi salam said, "ad-duaa huwa ibaadah" that supplication is worship. I ask you if supplication is worship and worship is only to be directed to Allah then why are you calling on the messenger? Does Tawheed even exist in this way of life that you claim adherance to? Did not Allah say, "the masaajid are only for Allah so do not call upon others along with Him" We are Muslims right? We worship Allah alone upon Tawheed right? We single out Allah alone for every act of worship right? Is it from Islaam that we say "ya Nabi salamu alayka"? When will we honor Allah? When will we follow the prophet [alayhi salam] when will we worship Allah alone? I am being criticized because I am trying to uphold Tawheed and call to it and warn the people from shirk and from alien beliefs that oppose what the prophet [alayhi salam] was upon and his companions. Ajeeb! Muslims are opposing Tawheed and opposing the guidance of the Messenger [alayhi salam]? What is this? Look plain and simple, Are we going to change the religion of Islaam like the christians and jews did their religion? I didn't get that memo! Can you send me a copy of that memo? You can continue your tirade against me all you want but I know with certainty [without any arrogance or pride] that the truth of Tawheed is with me and everything i have stated in this post and those before this post I can back up with evidence from the book of Allah and the Sunnah upon the understanding of the companions. Can you? Not one ayah or hadeeth did you quote. If you consider clarifying the truth from falsehood as ignorance and jahiliyyah then I feel sorry for you. May Allah guide us all to see the truth as the truth and give us the success in following it.

[Abu Zainab]

Ok you mind explaining to me why under your nickname you have Ya Nabi Salamu Alayka? This is what I am referring to, you deem its okay to call on the prophet alayhi salam even though he is not alive. Did you know the prophet alayhi salam said, "ad-duaa huwa ibaadah" that supplication is worship. I ask you if supplication is worship and worship is only to be directed to Allah then why are you calling on the messenger? Does Tawheed even exist in this way of life that you claim adherance to? Did not Allah say, "the masaajid are only for Allah so do not call upon others along with Him" We are Muslims right? We worship Allah alone upon Tawheed right? We single out Allah alone for every act of worship right? Is it from Islaam that we say "ya Nabi salamu alayka"? When will we honor Allah? When will we follow the prophet [alayhi salam] when will we worship Allah alone? I am being criticized because I am trying to uphold Tawheed and call to it and warn the people from shirk and from alien beliefs that oppose what the prophet [alayhi salam] was upon and his companions. Ajeeb! Muslims are opposing Tawheed and opposing the guidance of the Messenger [alayhi salam]? What is this? Look plain and simple, Are we going to change the religion of Islaam like the christians and jews did their religion? I didn't get that memo! Can you send me a copy of that memo? You can continue your tirade against me all you want but I know with certainty [without any arrogance or pride] that the truth of Tawheed is with me and everything i have stated in this post and those before this post I can back up with evidence from the book of Allah and the Sunnah upon the understanding of the companions. Can you? Not one ayah or hadeeth did you quote. If you consider clarifying the truth from falsehood as ignorance and jahiliyyah then I feel sorry for you. May Allah guide us all to see the truth as the truth and give us the success in following it.

Brother I admire your efforts to spread Tawheed and your stance against bid'ah but in this case what is wrong in saying as salaamu alaika ya nabi...when during tashahhud in salah we say the same thing in the same manner. And saying salam does not imply that the prophet :arabic5: is alive or that we worship him when he :arabic5: himself taught us the dua of tashahhud. And besides we never say salaam to Allaah do we? We praise Him and seek His help but we never say salaam.

I hope I did not offend you in any way. May Allah reward you for your intentions and may He guide ALL of us to the truth.

And one more thing...I do not know the reference but there is a sahih hadith that the prophet :arabic5: said that a house on the outskirts of jannah is guaranteed for the one who refrains from argument (especially when the argument is going nowhere).

[Muwaahid]

Br Muwaahid,Here is a thread Islam and Internet which you need to read before turning up this one into a debating one.Br Ibn Abi Ahmed has already addressed many of your points,so there is no need to carry this on further.

Nothing was addressed in his response except mocking me and supporting individuals who spread misguidance. You will be as I will be responsible for our actions and what we narrate about Allah and His Messenger and the Deen of Islaam. By you posting what you posted [seeing that you are the original poster] you will stand before Allah alone on the day of ressurection and there will be no interpretor between you and Allah and He will question you concerning this and He will narrate unto you, what you used to do. All im saying is take account of yourself and think hard before you post something about Islaam. Be clear about what you are saying and if there are negative consequences that may result from posting then abstain.

If I was going to post something about Islaam that had a slant or a spin on it from people I was affiliated with I would abstain. The truth is more beloved to me than any personality. And belittling the differences between the Muslims and simplyfying it as my shaykh verses your shaykh is wrong, it is a matter of right and wrong. Its a matter of Tawheed and Shirk! Its a matter of Imaan and Kufr! Its a matter of Sunnah and Bid'ah!

You know what is ironic? When those individuals made that horrible movie about our Messenger [alayhi salam] and a large amount of the Muslims took to the streets and harmed the security of many nations, and evil burned and killed individuals, they did that out of so called love of islaam and the Messenger [alayhi salam] even individuals who normally didnt practice Islaam were outraged. Though I completely disagree with any protest and denostrations and anarchy and mob mentality look how outraged they were for this deen? You think I'm wrong for posting my comments when there was clear deception in the post that you posted? I am not accussing you personally of deception, all you did was copy paste it. But playing the timid little wholesome deer is not your best role. Man up and be honest about what you are about. If you are sufi or have leanings towards tasawoof then come clean. Claim it, because some people learn the religion from web boards and they should know who they are taking their knowledge from and whether their is a slant or spin on the info they are recieving.

[Muwaahid]

Brother I admire your efforts to spread Tawheed and your stance against bid'ah but in this case what is wrong in saying as salaamu alaika ya nabi...when during tashahhud in salah we say the same thing in the same manner. And saying salam does not imply that the prophet :arabic5: is alive or that we worship him when he :arabic5: himself taught us the dua of tashahhud. And besides we never say salaam to Allaah do we? We praise Him and seek His help but we never say salaam.




I hope I did not offend you in any way. May Allah reward you for your intentions and may He guide ALL of us to the truth.

And one more thing...I do not know the reference but there is a sahih hadith that the prophet :arabic5: said that a house on the outskirts of jannah is guaranteed for the one who refrains from argument (especially when the argument is going nowhere).

May Allah reward you Abu Zainab and bless you and have mercy on you! Allahumma Ameen, with respect to the saying as-salaamu alayka in our tashahud then I'd like to direct you to the statement of Ibn Mas'ood [radhiya Allah anhu] where he said, " qulnaa: "as-salaamu alayka ayyuhan nabi " fee tashahud wa nabee [sallallahu alayhi wa salam] hayyun falammaa maata a3dilu an dhalika wa qaaloo: "as-salaamu alan-nabee" Ibn Mas'ood [radhiya allahu anhu] said, "we USED to say peace be upon you oh prophet in the tashahud and the prophet [alayhi sallam] WAS ALIVE but when he died we left that and we said, "as-salaamu alan nabee" we said peace be upon the messenger [alayhi salaam] and this statement can be found in saheeh al bukhaaree and also in the musnad of Siraaj and also in sharh minhaaj by subkee as well. So after his demise [alayhi wa salam] the companions quit saying as-salaamu alayka but changed it to as-salaamu alan nabee.

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

I'm really not going to waste my time replying to anything that was said. This is a discussion that will never end.

*****I am not sure why you chose to personally attack me nor am I sure why you accused me of all these horrible things. And what is this "you guys" and this "arrogant" and where did i claim all truth lies with me or the supposed group I am affiliated with. By Allah I am holding you personally accountable before Allah for what you accused me of because this is Dhulm [oppression].

If you think that I did "dhulm" to you, then I'm sorry. But I do not and will not apologize for defending the honor of another believer, especially a scholar who's work has benefited so many people extensively, in his absence when he is being spoken ill of. It would be really nice and ideal if we can discuss this without getting emotional. But, clearly, that is a level of discussion that really can't be achieved when it comes to these issues so live and let live.

Wasalam.

[IslamicRevival]

Ok you mind explaining to me why under your nickname you have Ya Nabi Salamu Alayka? This is what I am referring to, you deem its okay to call on the prophet alayhi salam even though he is not alive. Did you know the prophet alayhi salam said, "ad-duaa huwa ibaadah" that supplication is worship. I ask you if supplication is worship and worship is only to be directed to Allah then why are you calling on the messenger? Does Tawheed even exist in this way of life that you claim adherance to? Did not Allah say, "the masaajid are only for Allah so do not call upon others along with Him" We are Muslims right? We worship Allah alone upon Tawheed right? We single out Allah alone for every act of worship right? Is it from Islaam that we say "ya Nabi salamu alayka"? When will we honor Allah? When will we follow the prophet [alayhi salam] when will we worship Allah alone? I am being criticized because I am trying to uphold Tawheed and call to it and warn the people from shirk and from alien beliefs that oppose what the prophet [alayhi salam] was upon and his companions. Ajeeb! Muslims are opposing Tawheed and opposing the guidance of the Messenger [alayhi salam]? What is this? Look plain and simple, Are we going to change the religion of Islaam like the christians and jews did their religion? I didn't get that memo! Can you send me a copy of that memo? You can continue your tirade against me all you want but I know with certainty [without any arrogance or pride] that the truth of Tawheed is with me and everything i have stated in this post and those before this post I can back up with evidence from the book of Allah and the Sunnah upon the understanding of the companions. Can you? Not one ayah or hadeeth did you quote. If you consider clarifying the truth from falsehood as ignorance and jahiliyyah then I feel sorry for you. May Allah guide us all to see the truth as the truth and give us the success in following it.

We salute the Holy Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wasallam) in Salah five times a day "Ayyuhannabiyyu" (Oh Prophet !), do you have a problem with that too?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRBO_LmqxEg

Secondly our Nabi peace be upon him IS alive contrary to what you say or believe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuxMwI1AgLo

I say Ya Nabi Salam Alayka loud and clear and if you have an issue with that its your loss.

[Muwaahid]

We salute the Holy Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wasallam) in Salah five times a day "Ayyuhannabiyyu" (Oh Prophet !), do you have a problem with that too?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRBO_LmqxEg

Secondly our Nabi peace be upon him IS alive contrary to what you say or believe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuxMwI1AgLo

I say Ya Nabi Salam Alayka loud and clear and if you have an issue with that its your loss.

I do not wish to discuss this any further lakum deenakum wa liya deen to you be your religion to me be mines. And if you listened to the bilal phillips clip that was in this thread he said, for those who say that the prophet is alive then why was he buried? Wouldnt that be oppressive to bury a a living man in the grave? For the average muslims who maybe reading this thread please disregard visions post, it is not permissible to call upon the dead, it is not permissible to call upon the absent in dua, but it is permissible to call upon Allah for He hears all things and posesses the power and ability to help you. Not like this individual vison who sees it okay to call upon the prophet alayhi salam. This individual refuses to be corrected when I furnished the narration of Ibn Mas'ood radhiya allahu anhu] where he mentioned that the companions used to say the tashahud like this while the prophet [alayhi salam] as-salaamu alayka ayyuhan nabiyyu WHILE HE WAS ALIVE BUT AFTER HE DIED WE SAID as-salaamu alan nabiyyi..... peace be upon the prophet.

Clarifying The Doubts About Sending Salaah Upon The Prophet (saw) And The Fact That He Cannot Hear Us Directly


















1 Votes



Our salaah upon the Prophet is only presented to him (for he cannot hear us directly and independently):

Aws Ibn Aws and Abu Mas’ood al-Ansaaree reported that the prophet (saw) mentioned:

“Indeed the best of your days is the day of jummah. On it, Aadam was created, on it he died, and on it will be the blow (of the Horn) and the concussion (causing all people to die). Therefore, say plenty of salah upon me during it, because your salaah will be presented to me.“

The Prophet (saw) was asked, ‘How can our salaah be presented to you when you will have decayed?‘ He (saw) replied:

“Indeed, Allaah prohibited for the earth to eat from the Prophets’ bodies.“

[Abu Dawood, an-Nisaa'ee and others. Authenticated in Saheeh Abu Dawood # 962 and as-Saheehah # 1527]

The Prophet (saw) cannot hear us directly:

Abu Bakr reported that the Prophet (saw) said:

“Say the salaah upon me frequently, because Allaah has appointed for me an angel who stays by my grave. Whenever one of my followers says salaah upon me, that angel says to me, ‘O Muhammad, so-and-so has just said salaah upon you.‘“

[al-Bazzaar, ad-Daymalee and others. Verified to be hasan by Al-albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami' # 1207 & as-Saheehah # 1530]

Say Salaah upon the Prophet from wherever you are:

Abu Hurairah reported the Messenger of Allaah said:

“Do not turn my grave into a place of seasonal celebration and visitations (Ar. ‘Eid), and do not turn your houses into graves (by not praying in them). Wherever you are, pray upon me, because your prayer (Ar. Salaah) will reach me.“

[Abu Dawood, Ahmad and others. Verified to be saheeh by Al-Albaani in 'Ahkaam ul-Janaa'iz' p. 280]

For you do not need to go to the grave of the Prophet (saw) to do so:

Once al-Hasan, son of al-Hasan Ibn ‘Alee (i.e., The Prophet’s grandson’s son), saw a man standing by the grave of the Prophet and saying salaam to him. So al-Hasan told him that it would suffice him to say the salaam upon him entering the Prophet’s Masjid. He then narrated the above hadeeth and added:


“You and those in Andalus (i.e., Spain) are equivalent (in that your salaam can reach the Prophet).”

[Recorded by Saa'eed Ibn Mansoor, Ibn Abee Shaybah and others. Verified to be authentic by Al-Albaani in 'Ahkaan ul-Janaa'iz' Pp. 280-281]

For an Angel conveys your salaah to him:

When we say salaah or salaam upon the Prophet (saw), Allaah appoints angels to convey these supplications to him. Ibn Mas’ood reported the Messenger of Allaah as saying:

“Allaah hsa angels that travel over the earth, delivering to me (after my death) the salaam from my ummah.“

[Abu Dawood and others. Verified to be authentic by Al-Albaani in 'al-Aayaat ul-Bayyinaat]

This (above) indicates that the Prophet (saw) cannot independently hear the salaam of his followers. He (saw) receives it solely by means of angels who deliver it to him (saw) – regardless of whether those saying the salaam are standing right next to his grave or at the farthest point of the world.

Allaah restores his (saw) soul into him (saw) for the response:

Abu Hurairah reported the Messenger of Allaas as saying:

“Whenever a person says salaam upon me (after my death), Allaah restores my soul to me so as to respond to his salaam.“

[Abu Dawood, al-Bayhaqee and others. Verified to be authentic by Al-Albaani in 'Saheeh ul-Jaami' # 5679 and as-Saheehah # 2266]


You are very immature vision

[Hamza Asadullah]

I do not wish to discuss this any further lakum deenakum wa liya deen to you be your religion to me be mines. And if you listened to the bilal phillips clip that was in this thread he said, for those who say that the prophet is alive then why was he buried? Wouldnt that be oppressive to bury a a living man in the grave? For the average muslims who maybe reading this thread please disregard visions post, it is not permissible to call upon the dead, it is not permissible to call upon the absent in dua, but it is permissible to call upon Allah for He hears all things and posesses the power and ability to help you. Not like this individual vison who sees it okay to call upon the prophet alayhi salam. This individual refuses to be corrected when I furnished the narration of Ibn Mas'ood radhiya allahu anhu] where he mentioned that the companions used to say the tashahud like this while the prophet [alayhi salam] as-salaamu alayka ayyuhan nabiyyu WHILE HE WAS ALIVE BUT AFTER HE DIED WE SAID as-salaamu alan nabiyyi..... peace be upon the prophet.

Clarifying The Doubts About Sending Salaah Upon The Prophet (saw) And The Fact That He Cannot Hear Us Directly


















1 Votes



Our salaah upon the Prophet is only presented to him (for he cannot hear us directly and independently):

Aws Ibn Aws and Abu Mas’ood al-Ansaaree reported that the prophet (saw) mentioned:

“Indeed the best of your days is the day of jummah. On it, Aadam was created, on it he died, and on it will be the blow (of the Horn) and the concussion (causing all people to die). Therefore, say plenty of salah upon me during it, because your salaah will be presented to me.“

The Prophet (saw) was asked, ‘How can our salaah be presented to you when you will have decayed?‘ He (saw) replied:

“Indeed, Allaah prohibited for the earth to eat from the Prophets’ bodies.“

[Abu Dawood, an-Nisaa'ee and others. Authenticated in Saheeh Abu Dawood # 962 and as-Saheehah # 1527]

The Prophet (saw) cannot hear us directly:

Abu Bakr reported that the Prophet (saw) said:

“Say the salaah upon me frequently, because Allaah has appointed for me an angel who stays by my grave. Whenever one of my followers says salaah upon me, that angel says to me, ‘O Muhammad, so-and-so has just said salaah upon you.‘“

[al-Bazzaar, ad-Daymalee and others. Verified to be hasan by Al-albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami' # 1207 & as-Saheehah # 1530]

Say Salaah upon the Prophet from wherever you are:

Abu Hurairah reported the Messenger of Allaah said:

“Do not turn my grave into a place of seasonal celebration and visitations (Ar. ‘Eid), and do not turn your houses into graves (by not praying in them). Wherever you are, pray upon me, because your prayer (Ar. Salaah) will reach me.“

[Abu Dawood, Ahmad and others. Verified to be saheeh by Al-Albaani in 'Ahkaam ul-Janaa'iz' p. 280]

For you do not need to go to the grave of the Prophet (saw) to do so:

Once al-Hasan, son of al-Hasan Ibn ‘Alee (i.e., The Prophet’s grandson’s son), saw a man standing by the grave of the Prophet and saying salaam to him. So al-Hasan told him that it would suffice him to say the salaam upon him entering the Prophet’s Masjid. He then narrated the above hadeeth and added:


“You and those in Andalus (i.e., Spain) are equivalent (in that your salaam can reach the Prophet).”

[Recorded by Saa'eed Ibn Mansoor, Ibn Abee Shaybah and others. Verified to be authentic by Al-Albaani in 'Ahkaan ul-Janaa'iz' Pp. 280-281]

For an Angel conveys your salaah to him:

When we say salaah or salaam upon the Prophet (saw), Allaah appoints angels to convey these supplications to him. Ibn Mas’ood reported the Messenger of Allaah as saying:

“Allaah hsa angels that travel over the earth, delivering to me (after my death) the salaam from my ummah.“

[Abu Dawood and others. Verified to be authentic by Al-Albaani in 'al-Aayaat ul-Bayyinaat]

This (above) indicates that the Prophet (saw) cannot independently hear the salaam of his followers. He (saw) receives it solely by means of angels who deliver it to him (saw) – regardless of whether those saying the salaam are standing right next to his grave or at the farthest point of the world.

Allaah restores his (saw) soul into him (saw) for the response:

Abu Hurairah reported the Messenger of Allaas as saying:

“Whenever a person says salaam upon me (after my death), Allaah restores my soul to me so as to respond to his salaam.“

[Abu Dawood, al-Bayhaqee and others. Verified to be authentic by Al-Albaani in 'Saheeh ul-Jaami' # 5679 and as-Saheehah # 2266]


You are very immature vision

Why end the post in mocking another brother? If you really want to be effective in giving dawah then learn proper mannerism and approach others with wisdom and tact. Do not think your current approach has any goodness in it for it will push people further away rather than bring them close.

Our example of the way we conduct ourselves should be taken from the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). So let us strive to be like him and conduct ourselves the way he did.

Your approach only exhumes arrogance and harshness. There is no good in such an approach. May this be a reminder to myself first and then others.

[Muwaahid]

Why end the post in mocking another brother? If you really want to be effective in giving dawah then learn proper mannerism and approach others with wisdom and tact. Do not think your current approach has any goodness in it for it will push people further away rather than bring them close.

Our example of the way we conduct ourselves should be taken from the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). So let us strive to be like him and conduct ourselves the way he did.

Your approach only exhumes arrogance and harshness. There is no good in such an approach. May this be a reminder to myself first and then others.

I expected nothing less from you, by Allah I knew you would jump on this bandwagon. Khayran, where is the hikmah in this:

"The article is trying to address exactly this ^ sort of garbage mentality and jahiliya! Dont be so arrogant to think the deen belongs to you and youre the only people on the face of the earth who are on Haq, this is ignorance in its worst form."

And this:

"How arrogant must a people be to claim that all truth resides with them, and anyone who disagrees has deviated. May Allah protect us."

And this statement:

"I really don't know what to say to you. Please get over yourself. If whatever "knowledge" you've learned leads you to make statements like this, then you haven't learned knowledge, you've learned arrogance. "

But do we hear a word of advice to our other brother? No not a kalimah, not even a harf not even a khardalah not even a dharrah. No one has to agree with me, I don't post things to curry favor with people I post for Allah's sake alone. I do not seek reaward or praise from the people. that would brings about no benefit to me. If anyone says anything about this religion that is foreign to it then let them bring their proof. I don't know how the moderators or admins feel about soofiyyah, for all I know they themselves could be soofees wallahu alam. If they support it by allowing posts to remain that could be a possible sign. As far as I know I thought this was a web board that adhered to the beliefs and practices of ahlus sunnah wal jamaa'ah. Feel free to correct me if im wrong.

We should be mindful though that when it comes to supporting the truth we support it and when it comes to refuting the baatil even if it comes from an old friend or someone who has been on the board longer we refute the baatil no matter what because Allah will ask us about this Amanah [trust] that we were entrusted with.

I agree proper mannerism are needed in dawah but if you reviewed the thread without any biases then you would see that I was attacked, people got upset because I mentioned somethings about individuals [islamic personalities] who hold evil beliefs about Allah and His Messenger [alayhi salaam]. Should we not have gheerah for this deen? Should we not perform al amr bil maroof wa nahiya anil munkar or has that been abolished? Who has a greater right to be defended Allah and His Messenger [alayhi salam] or these personalities that championed greek philosophy and logic over the beliefs and practices of the companions? Did Allah say "radhiya allahu anhum wa radhu anhu""Allah is pleased with them and they are please with Him" [9:100] concerning Socrates and Plato? Or did He say that about the companions?

and your statement:

Your approach only exhumes arrogance and harshness. There is no good in such an approach. May this be a reminder to myself first and then others. "

I think your approach exhumes arrogance and harshness. Did you approach me with wisdom and tact? All I see is accusations and harhsness, where is the rifq? where is the qawlan layin? Be just! Fear Allah! Don't oppress your brother in Islaam. Perhaps you can re-read all of the posts in this thread and look how I presented the issues and look how they attacked. Look at the name calling and the "us against them mentality. "you guys do such and such" and "why do you guys think you are the only ones upon the truth" and stuff like that.

You see I think the people have an idea about me, which is false but none the less they have this view like OMG here comes one of those guys, bid'ah police, one of those guys who the people use one of Allah's names unjustly, someone who always wants argue and call people this and that but by Allah that is not true. I stand up for the Haqq as any muslim should and if I see my brothers or sisters fall into something doubtful or a branch of misguidance im going to warn them from it. Allah obligated this upon this ummah , enjoining everything that is right and forbidding everything that is wrong in that which we have the ability to do. So the prophet [alayhi salam] said "whoever sees a wrong then let him change it with his hands and if he cant do that then with his tongue and if he cant do that then let him hate it with his heart and that is the weakest form of imaan" Am I to blame because I tried to change the munkar with my hand? I think not. Allahul Muta'aan wa Billahit-Tawfeeq

[Cabdullahi]

Secondly our Nabi peace be upon him IS alive contrary to what you say or believe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuxMwI1AgLo

That's fine, is he alive in this world or another world, our dimension or another dimension?

[~Zaria~]

******There was no justice in your criticism, it was to mock me and to support the baatil. I ask you by Allah, is sufism from Allah and His Messenger? Is sitting in the circles doing dhikr collectively swaying back in forth from the practice of the prophet [alayhi salam]? is saying huwa huwa until one is not able to distinguish what he says anymore a practice of the prophet and his noble companions? In front of Allah can you honestly say to Allah sufism is from your religion that you are pleased with Allah? Can you testify to this? Can you testify that what Hamzah Yusuf teaches is what the Prophet [alayhi salam] came to teach humanity? When it is known that Hamzah Yusef said the aqeedah can be learned in 10 minutes in the deserts of mauritania. When the prophet taught tawheed for more than 13 years. Is this justice? I ask you is it permissible to seek refuge in other than Allah? Is it permissible to say that others have knowledge of the unseen besides Allah? Is it permissibl to swear by other than Allah? Please produce evidence for the answers to these questions because Hamzah Yusef translation of al- burda calls to this. So I ask you this,if someone calls to this, is this the way the prophet [alayhi salam] called humanity to Tawheed? Did the prophet [alayhi salam] say that that others have knowledge of the unseen? Did the prophet say it was permissible to swear by other than Allah? So this whole my shaykh is better than your shaykh is rubbish but rather it could have justly been entitled "What is more beloved the following of religious personalities even if they are in error or following Allah's Messenger [alayhi salam] in all good?"

Assalamu-alaikum,

We are truly not interested in ones personal opinions when it comes to matters of deen.

If anyone has a query/ needs clarification on any issue in Islam, then the most recommended action would be to contact ones ulama directly.
vs. using ones limited knowledge to try to understand such concepts.

If one believes that his/ her knowledge is already at such a level, that it can challenge the likes of the 4 respected imams (ra), then surely this stems only from ignorance and arrogance.

As an example, the following reply regarding some of the comments made above, may insha Allah serve to clarify many brothers and sisters' confusion.

Those we do not wish to follow the advises of our imams and ulama (within ones madhab) - whose purpose is to clarify such matters for us, then they are instead chosing, to follow their own whims and desires - picking and chosing ayats and ahadith to suit their current belief systems and blatantly rejecting all those who have contrary beliefs (in keeping within shariah).

Also, do realise that the very personalites that we chose to critisize and condemn, may be so close to Allah (subhanawataála) and our very harshness may actually be the means of drawing us away from Allah and earning His displeasure.

There are respected personalities who themselves were engaged in various levels of tasawwuf/ sufism (within the confines of shariah) - and who were so beloved to Allah, that their final breathes were taken whilst still facing the Kaaba, after just completing tawaaf.
Are we to be critical of them as well, when Alllah azza wajjal found such pleasure in such of His slaves?

Lets stop and reflect on ourselves - before pointing fingers at others.

We are going to be accountable for OUR words and actions, not that of any other soul.

And leave the judgements and fatwas to those who have been given the responsibility of such a task.


:wa:

Question

Question regarding Fatwa #17519 from the United States concerning aqeedah. I have also wondered about innovation among practices of Tassawuf. I clearly understand Tassawuf as internal dhikr for Allah ta'ala; however, my opinion is that the whirling associated with Tassawuf is an innovation. Please refer me to hadith and sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (saw) that reflects whirling associated with Tassawuf. Jazakallah khair.


Answer
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful


Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh


The science of Tasawwuf is not confined to internal dhikr as you presume. At times, external forms of dhikr and spiritual exercises are prescribed by the Shaykh. The various ashghāl (spiritual exercises) depend on the spiritual condition of the student and the intent of the Shaykh for the student.

You have also stated that it is your “opinion” that “the whirling associated with Tasawwuf is an innovation”. Although at certain times and under certain circumstances the whirling and dancing could be considered as an innovation, the statement made is very serious and grave.

In order for a person to meet the bare requirements of having an inkling of an opinion, one would need to have a sound knowledge of the Arabic language consisting of Nahw, Sarf, Balāghah, as well as the sciences of Fiqh, Usūl al-Fiqh, Hadīth, Usūl al-Hadīth, Tafsīr, Usūl al-Tafsīr and a host of other sciences. Needless to say, acquiring such knowledge would take a lifetime to acquire.

Perhaps after acquiring the knowledge of these various sciences, one’s personal opinion might hold an atom’s weight of authority.

After years of study and specialization in jurisprudence and Hadīth, students are taught never to express their own personal opinion; rather, to find an exact passage or text expressing the opinion of our pious predecessors and masters of the Islamic sciences whose opinions actually hold some weight.

If one has not studied and mastered the mentioned sciences, how reliable and valid would his or her opinion be? Upon what understanding and what knowledge is such an opinion based?

It is extremely dangerous and perilous for such a person to hold an opinion in any matter of the Sharī‘ah for which he or she has no expertise. It is repeatedly mentioned and rightfully so, that in other fields and sciences such as medicine or law etc, people do not voice their opinion and abide by the statements and views of the experts of the field; yet when it comes to the Sharī‘ah, everyone seems to have their own opinion. Having stating thus, we wish to reiterate a point made in our previous answer, namely,
“To those unfamiliar with Tasawwuf, such exercises may seem extremely peculiar and unusual. It is understandable for people to feel uncomfortable and queasy during their first experience with such exercises. However, to repel this discomfort, one should bear in mind that the Shuyūkh don’t claim that these adhkār and spiritual exercises are new forms of worship where it would be classified as an innovation (bid‘ah) in Dīn. Only those bereft of the understanding of Fiqh and the subtleties of Dīn make such professions. These spiritual prescriptions should be seen and regarded as a form of treatment (tadāwī) for the sicknesses of the heart.”
Whether or not the whirling of the Sūfīs constitutes an act of bid‘ah or not does not revolve around whether there is a Hadīth of Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم to substantiate the act or not. Before a person claims something to be an innovation, one first needs to have a proper understanding of the institution and concept of bid‘ah and its various categories.


Imām Muhammad al-Zarqānī رحمه الله states in his commentary of Mu’atta Imām Malik that linguistically, the word bid‘ah means that which has been brought about without a previous similitude preceding it.
وهو لغة ما أحدث على غير مثال سبق (شرح الزرقاني على موطأ الإمام مالك ج 1 ص 340 , العلمية)

Thus, any new concept, practice, belief or action that was not existent in previous generations, specifically in the era of Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم would technically fall under the linguistic definition of bid‘ah without necessarily falling under the juristic definition. Such a broad all-inclusive linguistic meaning was never intended under the Hadīth, “Every invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is misguidance. (Abū Dawūd)

كُلَّ مُحْدَثَةٍ بِدْعَةٌ وَكُلَّ بِدْعَةٍ ضَلاَلَةٌ
He further mentions that the purport of this Hadīth is general; however, with some exclusion. The Hadīth, for obvious reasons, cannot be left upon its generality to include every single new and innovated thing.
حَدِيثُ كُلُّ بِدْعَةٍ ضَلَالَةٌ عَامٌّ مَخْصُوصٌ (شرح الزرقاني على موطأ الإمام مالك ج 1 ص 340 العلمية)
For example, during the era of Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم there were no such things as guns, bombs, tanks and other modern weapons. Thus, using such weapons in Jihād and warfare would linguistically qualify as a bid‘ah. However, is there a single jurist or scholar who claims that using such weaponry is an innovation and that the Mujāhidīn have to restrict themselves to using only swords, shields and horses? Furthermore, there was no such concept as the internet and computers in the era of Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم ; thus, would any jurist classify using the internet to propagate Dīn as an innovation under the generilty of the above-mentioned Hadīth? It is quite evident that the Hadīth was not intended be left unspecified. Moreover, there is a well-known narration in Mu’atta Imām Malik wherein Umar رضى الله عنه regarded the Tarāwīh Salāh behind one Imām as a good bid‘ah. If we take the above Hadīth of Rasūlullah to be all-inclusive of every innovation, it would necessitate Umar رضى الله عنه blatantly opposing the narration of Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم, which is unfathomable. Abū al-Hassan al-Mubarakpūri, one of the prominent ‘Ulamā of the salafi sect discusses this issue in his commentary of Mishkāt. He quotes Ibn Taymiyyah and states that when Umar رضى الله عنه referred to Tarāwīh Salāh as a bid‘ah, he was referring to its linguistic meaning and not its juristic meaning. This would then necessitate that the Hadīth of Rasūlullah be taken to refer to certain types of bid‘ah with the exclusion of others. Shaykh Mubarakpūri then continues to quote Ibn Taymiyyah and states that a juristic innovation is a misguidance that does not have any juristic evidence to substantiate it. He then gives examples such as deeming an act to be Mustahab whereas Allah does not deem it such, deeming something to be wājib whereas Allah has not ordained it or deeming something to be harām whereas Allah has permitted it.

لأن البدعة لغة ما فعله أحد ابتداء من غير أن يتقدمه غيره فالمراد بالبدعة في قوله هي البدعة اللغوية ، وهي ههنا اجتماعهم على إمام واحد ، والاهتمام لذلك ، والمواظبة عليه ، لا أصل التراويح ، أو نفس الجماعة ، فإنهما قد ثبتا من فعل النبي {صلى الله عليه وسلم} وفعل الصحابة في عهده بحضرته. قال ابن تيمية : إنما سماها عمر بدعة ؛ لأن ما فعل ابتداء بدعة لغة ، وليس ذلك بدعة شرعية ، فإن البدعة الشرعية التي هي ضلالة ما فعل بغير دليل شرعي ، كاستحباب ما لم يحبه الله ، وإيجاب ما لم يوجبه الله ، وتحريم ما لم يحرمه الله. وبه يندفع ما يقال إن قول عمر : "نعمت البدعة" مخالف لحديث : (مرعاة المفاتيح ج4 ص 327 ادارة البحوث العلمية)

In regards to the classification of bid’āt, some ‘Ulamā state that there is only one type of bid‘ah, namely such innovations that fall under the jurisitic denotation of bid‘āh. These ‘Ulamā do not consider the innovations that merely fall under the linguistic meaning as being included in the ambit of bid‘āt. They state that as long as there is some Shar‘ī substantiation for the innovation from juristic principles of substantiation, the innovation will not be considered as a bid‘ah. Other ‘Ulamā have classified bid‘ah into two categories, namely, bid‘ah hasanah (good innovation) and bid‘ah sayyi’ah (evil innovation). They state that good innovations are such innovations in accordance with juristic principles and evil innovations are those in opposition to them. Another famous classification of innovations mentioned by ‘Ulamā such as Allāmah al-Qarāfī and Hāfiz Ibn Hajr categorizes bid‘āt into five different classifications, namely wājib, harām, mandūb, makrūh and mubāh:
wajib (compulsory innovations): those innovations which the principles of the Sharī‘ah necessitate and indicate towards being compulsory such as compiling the Qur'ān in one book, codifying the Sharī‘ah through juristic compilations and studying and teaching linguistic sciences such as Sarf (Arabic morphology) and Nahw (grammar and syntax) etc. for the sake of preserving and disseminating the Sharī‘ah etc.

harām (impermissible innovations): those innovations which the principle of the Sharī‘ah necessitate and indicate towards being impermissible such as innovated taxes levied on Muslims from oppressive leaders, inheriting a position by a person not fit for it by the mere fact that he is a offspring of the previous ruler, attributing to a Nabī or Walī some of the same attributes of Allah which would constitute shirk etc.

mandūb (praiseworthy innovations): those innovations which the principles of the Sharī‘ah necessitate and indicate towards being praiseworthy such as performing Tarāwīh Salāh in congregation behind one Imām, establishing Madāris for the dissemination of Islamic knowledge and discussing the in depth subtleties of Tasawwuf etc.

makrūh (reprehensible innovations): those innovations which the principles of the Sharī‘ah necessitate and indicate towards being reprehensible such as specifying a specific day or time for a specific type of worship and attaching importance to that time where as the Sharī‘ah did not do so, such as the prohibition of Rasūlullah for specifying the day of Friday for fasting and performing other types of worship like Tahajjud Salāh etc. Another example of this is celebrating the birthday of Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم and attaching specific importance to that day or night for specific types of worship whereas it was not practiced by Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم himself or his Sahābah رضى الله عنهم .

mubāh (permissible innovations): those innovations which the principles of the Sharī‘ah necessitate and indicate towards being permissible such as using a sieve for flour and eating delicacies and luxurious food. Certain narrations state that the first innovation to crop up into the Ummah is using the sieve for flour whereas using refined flour was not the custom during the era of Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم . However, it is known that increasing one’s comfort in life by eating good food and wearing comfortable clothing etc. is from among the mubāhāt (permissible actions).

وقال بن عبد السلام في أواخر القواعد البدعة خمسة أقسام فالواجبة كالاشتغال بالنحو الذي يفهم به كلام الله ورسوله لأن حفظ الشريعة واجب ولا يتأتى الا بذلك فيكون من مقدمة الواجب وكذا شرح الغريب وتدوين أصول الفقه والتوصل إلى تمييز الصحيح والسقيم والمحرمة ما رتبه من خالف السنة من القدرية والمرجئة والمشبهة والمندوبة كل إحسان لم يعهد عينه في العهد النبوي كالاجتماع عن التراويح وبناء المدارس والربط والكلام في التصوف المحمود وعقد مجالس المناظرة ان أريد بذلك وجه الله والمباحة كالمصافحة عقب صلاة الصبح والعصر والتوسع في المستلذات من أكل وشرب وملبس ومسكن وقد يكون بعض ذلك مكروها أو خلاف الأولى والله أعلم (فتح الباري شرح صحيح البخاري ج 13 ص 254 دار المعرفة)

From the statements and views of the ‘Ulamā, we come to know that each and every new thing is not to be considered as a rejected innovation and termed as a bid‘ah.

First, it would have to be examined in light of the principles of the Sharī‘ah to ascertain what position it holds in the Sharī‘ah. If the principles and tenets of the Sharī‘ah indicate to the fact that it is compulsory to bring about such an innovation, it will be considered compulsory to do so. Similarly, if the principles of the Sharī‘ah indicate to the fact that bringing about such an innovation is harām or makrūh, it will be considered as such.
Bearing the above in mind, if we analyze the whirling of the Sūfīs we would understand that making dhikr is something praiseworthy in the Sharī‘ah.

Thus, if whirling around in rhythmic gyrations is something intrinsically and inherently permissible in certain Madhāhib as the Shāfi‘īyyah; combining the two would also be permissible when analyzed through the principles of the Madhhab.

However, this is would be the case only when no other corruptive factors are existent. For example, if a person deems the act of whirling in itself as a special form of worship and a means of closeness to Allah, then he will be trespassing the bounds of permissibility in his madhhab and entering the sphere of innovation. Such a belief would bring about a change in the Sharī‘ah thus constituting an innovated belief. The same is generally stated in regards to standing up and reciting salutations (salāt wa salām) upon Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم. Standing is a perfectly permissible act and reciting salutations upon Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم is one of the best forms of worship and means of reward. Thus, inherently, it will be permissible to stand up and recite the salutations. However, if a person couples this with the belief that Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم visits that gathering, or with the belief that Rasūlullah صلى الله عليه و سلم hears and sees everything with the complete omniscience attributed to Allah, or with the belief that it is compulsory or mustahab, then the act will leave the realm of permissibility and enter the ambit of innovation.

In conclusion, one cannot state unequivocally that the whirling or dancing of the Sufis is an inherent innovation since according to the principles of the Shāfi‘ī Madhhab, dancing and whirling are intrinsically mubāh (permissible).

One would have to analyze other pertinent factors similar to the ones mentioned above before deeming it as an innovation.

Furthermore, classifying something as a bid‘ah is the duty of the ‘Ulamā and Fuqahā and not that of the general masses. Therefore, one should be extremely cautious and avoid making any a statement or conclusion regarding which one has no knowledge.

And Allah knows best
Wassalam u Alaikum
Ml. Yusuf bin Yaqub,
Student Darul Iftaa
Checked and Approved by:
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah

http://www.askimam.org/public/question_detail/17667

[جوري]

contact ones ulama directly.

Surely the basics of tawheed don't need a slew of Ulemma? If a person considers him/herself Muslim but doesn't understand what shirk is, then that it is truly a very sad state of being. I don't agree with Insults in general- however that isn't the topic here and much is usually lost in semantics and vain discourse and the nuggets are neglected.
:w:

[جوري]

Letter to the Cape Argus by Shaykh Faaik Gamieldien:

To the Editor,

On Sunday December 31 SABC (channel) 2 screened a documentary showing "Muslims" visiting the shrine at Robben Island. The presenter of the programme went to great pains to try to link the occasion to Islam and "spirituality". In fact the whole presentation was peppered with the word "spirituality" and the visuals of "Muslims" chanting and putting their foreheads on the grave seemed to reinforce the existence of such a connection.


I wish to state clearly and categorically that this kind of "shrine-worship" or "shrine-honouring" has absolutely nothing to do with Islam as a religion nor with its sense of spirituality.
In fact, Islam abhors such practices as shirk (ascribing partners to Allah) which is an unpardonable sin. Islam prides itself on its uncompromising monotheism and the absence of forms and figurines in its sacred spaces.


The erection of shrines to the dead and the veneration of such shrines are anathema to these fundamental beliefs. In fact the eradication of pagan beliefs and the physical destruction of all forms of idolatry were the central focus of the calling of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
Draping the grave with multi-coloured layers of cloth in an eloborate pagan ceremony of chanting and incense burning in veneration of the occupant of the grave becomes laughable when one considers that, historically, the corpse supposed to be buried there was taken back to Madura in the Indonesion archipelago for burial.


And to add further insult to injury the present shrine was constructed by the apartheid regime in 1969, two hundred and fifteen years after the death of Sayed Abdurahman Moturu, also known as Hadji Matarim, who is supposed to be buried there.
This was yet another elaborate ploy by the apartheid regime to keep the Muslims in spiritual serfdom. Many are the Muslims, but few are those who have accepted Islam.


Sheikh Faaik Gamieldien
Imam - Masjid Sunni
Rondebosch East
(Cape Town, South Africa)
Cape Argus, Monday, January 8, 2001 (Page 11)

if you're not sure of what shirk is then let's us define it. It is a basic tenet the first and most important in Islam when one declares their shahada:

________________________________________________

• 1. Shirk in Knowledge
• 2. Shirk in Disposing
• 3. Shirk in Worship
• 4. Shirk in One's Daily Routine Chores

It is necessary to gain knowledge about the characteristics which Allah has peculiarised for Himself so that none of them be attributed to any other else. Such things are countless. We, on our part, shall be mentioning some of those things and prove them in the background of Qur'an and hadith so that the people may understand the other pertinent things also with their help.
Shirk in Knowledge

The first thing is that Allah is present everywhere by His Knowledge which means that His Knowledge encompasses everything. This is why He has a complete cognizance of everything, every time, whether a thing happens to be far or near, hidden or apparent, up in the heavens or inside the earth, on the tops of the mountains or at the bottom of an ocean. This magnificence belongs to none but Allah. If a person calls upon someone (by invoking his name) other than Allah, while doing his everyday routine chores, so that the one called upon may help him obviate his distress, or attacks an enemy by invoking his name, or keeps pronouncing his name on the beads of a rosary, or makes a vow in his name or conjures up his picture in his imagination by nursing a faith that whenever he invokes his name, or think of him vividly in his mind or contemplate on his grave, he gains cognizance of him; none of his affairs is hidden from him, and whatever circumstances he goes through, namely, sickness and good health, abundance and distress, life and death, sadness and happiness etc., are all known to him; any word which his mouth utters is heard by him and he knows about his thoughts and imaginations. All the above things and acts prove the presence of the elements of shirk. This is called a shirk in knowledge which means one is trying to prove that someone other than Allah possesses a similar kind of knowledge which is only the prerogative of Allah.
By nursing this kind of faith, a man undoubtedly turns into a mushrik (polytheist) whether he nurses such a faith in regard to an honorable human being or any of the exalted angels, or whether such a knowledge which is attributed to him, happens to be a personal one or granted by Allah. Whatever the situation may be, this is an absolutely polytheistic faith.
Shirk in Disposing

Disposing the matters of the universe with intention, exercising authority, killing at will and resuscitating, awarding abundance and giving distress, giving healthiness and sickness, giving victory and defeat, succeeding and preceding, fulfillment of one's desires, obviating calamities, providing help in distress situations and whenever one stands in need of it, are all attributed to Allah and none but Him Alone. None but Allah can have this magnificence. A human being or an angel, despite acquiring great ranks, may never have these characteristics. A person who seeks to prove that an entity other than Allah may have an authority of this nature, makes vows to this entity or makes an animal sacrifice for the purpose of fulfillment of his wishes, and invokes it's name in distress so that it can obviate his troubles, such a person is called mushrik and this kind of act is called shirk in authority or disposing. It means that cherishing a belief that any entity other than Allah may have this authority, whether as the one granted by Allah or as one of it's personal traits, is a polytheistic faith anyway.
Shirk in Worship

Allah has particularized all acts of worship for Him Alone which are defined as ibadah like prostrating, bowing, standing with folded hands, giving charity in the Name of Allah, fasting in His Name and undertaking long journeys to visit His Sacred House by putting on such a clothing that the people may distinguish them as the visitors of His Sanctified House, invoking Allah's Name on the way, avoiding indecent talk and hunting, circumambulating His House with an utmost caution, making prostrations in its direction, carrying the animals of sacrifice towards it, making vows there, putting a covering on Ka'bah, making supplications while standing on the threshold of Ka'bah, asking for the virtuosity in the religious as well as worldly matters, kissing of the Black-Stone, touching the walls of Ka'bah by one's mouth and chest, making supplications by getting hold of the fringes of its covering, illuminating its surroundings, taking up residence there as one of its servants, sweeping and cleaning it, offer drinking water to the pilgrims, providing water for wudu (ablution) and bathing, partaking of Zam-Zam water by considering it as a sanctified act, getting oneself drenched with it, drinking it to one's heart content, distributing it among themselves, carrying it to be presented to one's relatives, venerating the forest surrounding it, to refrain from hunting there, not to cut trees there, not to pull out grass from there, not to graze animals there: these are acts which Allah has prescribed for Muslims to be observed as His worship.
Now, if a person makes, bow or prostration before the grave of a Prophet, saint, ghost, apparition, jinn, fairy or any of the real or fake graves or a specified place inside a tomb, or a certain sign or house, or, Eucharist and coffin; observes fast in their names; stands in front of them with folded hands; makes offerings to them or hoisting a flag in their name or walking backwards (with a reverse motion of feet); kisses a grave or undertakes along journey to visit graves and other places; lights earthen lamps there or makes arrangements for illuminating them; or puts coverings on their walls or offers a sheet as a covering on the grave, manually fanning the air by hand (by using a morchhal, a fanning contrivance); erects a tent there; kisses it's threshold; offers supplications there with folded hands; asks for the fulfillment of wishes there; serves the shrine by becoming its servant and venerates the forest around it: anyone doing any of the above acts commits a clear and manifest shirk.
In brief, all the above acts and the alike, are called shirk in worship. It implies paying one's respect to an entity other than Allah in a manner which is prescribed for Allah Alone either by believing that this particular entity is personally entitled to such a veneration or by believing that Allah becomes pleased if any of these entities are held in high esteem or with the blessing of their veneration, troubles are warded off and done away with. Whatever may be the case, such faith is purely polytheistic in its nature.
Shirk in One's Daily Routine Chores

Allah, the Exalted, has taught His slaves the norms of respect to the effect that they should remember Allah while performing their everyday worldly chores and pay Him their tributes for the enhancement of their Faith and to secure Allah's blessing in day-to-day assignments. These norms include:

1. making vows to Allah and calling upon Him Alone whenever a catastrophe befalls his slave;
2. invoking His Name for His blessing whenever commencing an assignment;
3. slaughtering animals to express one's gratitude to Allah in the case of having been blessed with a child;
4. giving one's children such names as Abdullah, Abdur-Rahman, Ilahi Bakhsh, Allah Diya, Amatullah, Allah Di etc.;
5. taking out a small portion of the crop produce and giving it away in the Name of Allah;
6. apportioning some of the fruits to His name out of the total produce;
7. specifying some of the animals and allocating them for the purpose of sacrifice in the Name of Allah;
8. treating the animals which are carried to the House of Allah with due respect by neither riding them nor mounting any load on them;
9. observing Divine Instructions in the manners concerning food and dress;
10. restricting oneself to the use of permissible things only and avoiding the ones that are not allowed;
11. considering that all the different conditions and situations which one comes across in this world, like expensive and inexpensive rates and prices, health and sickness, victory and defeat, succeeding and preceding, sadness and happiness, are all commanded by Allah;
12. pronouncing a standard formula of insha'Allah while making an intention to perform an assignment;
13. pronouncing the Name of Allah, the Exalted One, in such a manner that His Greatness is conspicuously highlighted and one's slavery is clearly exhibited, by using such words like, our Rabb, our Master, our Creator or Ma'btid (the object of our worship) etc.;
14. in case a need arises on a certain occasion to administer an oath at all, undertaking an oath only in the Name of Allah.

These and the other similar things have been singled out by Allah as His own and personal prerogative for the sake of His veneration and magnificence. Anybody showing such kind of respect to an entity other than Allah, commits shirk; as for example: making a vow to it with the intention of facilitating a difficult assignment; giving one's children names like Abdun-Nabi, Imam Bakhsh, Peer Bakhsh etc.; apportioning part of the produce of one's farm or orchard to it's name; separating part of the fruits and keeping them aside (in the name of a deity) immediately after they are picked up from trees and then only putting the rest to one's use; dedicating some animals from among the whole herd to a deity and then treating those animals with respect by not removing them from the fodder and water and not to strike them with stick or stone; observing customs and traditions in terms of dress and food to the effect that a specified group of people should not eat such and such food and should not wear such and such dress; attributing the virtues and evils of the world to them by making such statements that as long as that particular person has been cursed by that particular deity, he has gone mad or that certain person has turned into a handicapped person due to the fact that he was driven away by that deity or by saying that as long as that person was blessed by a certain saint, he is now on a flood tide of success; or that famine was wrought by that star or by observing that this assignment was not accomplished as long as the same was commenced at a certain time and on a certain date or by observing that if Allah and His Prophet will it, one would be coming; or by saying that it will happen if one's religious mentor wishes it to take place or using such adjectives like, the Sustainer, Independent, Lord of lords, the Master of the universe or the King of kings etc.; the undertaking of an oath in the name of the Prophet or the Qur'an or 'Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, or an Imam, or a religious mentor or their graves or one's own self etc.
All the above practices generate shirk which is called a shirk in day-to-day chores, which implies paying one's respect to an entity other than Allah exactly in the same manner as the one prescribed for Allah.
(s) Taqwiyat ul-Iman (Stregthening of the Faith)


____________________

People often follow their parents blindly while Islam is a covenant between the individual and Allah :swt: if you find your ancestors in error and folks clearly pointing out the error of your ways then it is better to humble oneself and relearn the religion than to live a life time in darkness!
Al-Imran (The Family of Imran)[3:31]

[RECITE]

[top] [next match]

Qul in kuntum tuhibboona Allaha faittabiAAoonee yuhbibkumu Allahu wayaghfir lakum thunoobakum waAllahu ghafoorun raheemun

3:31 Say: "If ye do love Allah, Follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

the Sunnah of rasool Allah wasn't to stand on graves & venerate them or call upon the dead!