format_quote Originally Posted by
azc
It's self contradictory.
You are applying penalty of execution for 1 evidence of sinning due to laziness whereas, in contrast, you are defending 99 evidences of kufr.
Like brother @ Al Khorasani has addressed, the penalty of execution is applied as a hukm in itself for not praying - not as a penalty of apostasy. So, they are basically executed as 'lazy Muslims not praying'
No, penalty of execution isn't applied to fisq.
Any other punishment can be applied here.
See your post again. This part of your post is self contradictory.
It is not self-contradictory. How can something be contradictory if it is not pertaining logic? Penalties are a different layer beside Belief.
The saying with the 99:1 proportion is a wisdom concerning judgement in doubtful matters. You should not take it literally. It is stated by Ibn Abidin, a famous scholar of the later Ottoman period. His book Raddul Mukhtar is one of the great Hanafi fiqh references.
Penalty of execution is not applied to fisq. That is the general rule. However, the scholars and judges might decide on the penalty of the person. And in the case of salaah, as it is a major pillar of Islam, they judge upon death penalty (Hanbalis, Malikis and Shafiis) or imprisonment till tauba (Hanafis).
What is your intention in opening this topic, if you already know the rule?
- - - Updated - - -
format_quote Originally Posted by
Al Khorasani
I just have a few minor disagreements (e.g their strong belief in Taqlid), but they are still perfectly acceptable Muslims and most of their opinions are legitimate differences, not crazy things like permitting music or shrines.
Then I do not understand why you distinguish them with "at least", as if they were inferior to Salafis... If everyone acts like this, there can never be unity among Muslims. You are certainly aware that there are many Deobandi or reminiscent Muslims in this forum, yet your statement contains the mood that Salafiyyah is the sole right path and everyone reading you approves of this axiom.
There is nothing wrong in Taqlid. Why shouldn't ordinary people who lack knowledge follow those who possess it? Are you advocating that they should judge the evidences of the Shariah themselves? With the scarce knowledge they possess?
- - - Updated - - -
format_quote Originally Posted by
Zzz_
Imaam Ahmad said that the one who does not pray because of laziness is a kaafir. This is the more correct view and is that indicated by the evidence of the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and by the words of the Salaf and the proper understanding. (Al-Sharh al-Mumti’ ‘ala Zaad al-Mustanqi’, 2/26).
It was narrated that Buraydah ibn al-Husayb (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: ‘The covenant that distinguishes between us and them is the prayer, and whoever neglects it has disbelieved (become a kaafir).’” (It was narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawood, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nisaa’i and Ibn Maajah).
At-Tabaraani narrated in al-Mu‘jam al-Kabeer (8941) with a saheeh isnaad from ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ood (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: “Whoever does not pray has no religion.”
https://islamqa.info/en/5208
Sunnah over fatwas, prophet (S) over scholars.
Islam (Quran and sunnah) over opinions, simple facts over eloquent speakers and deceivers.
You are neither quoting the Quran, nor the Sunnah. You are quoting Shaykh Muhammad Salih al-Munajjid. Please don't fool yourself. The Quran and the Sunnah is Arabic. I wonder whether you know Arabic, brother... If yes, what is your degree of knowledge? Have you mastered nahv, sarf, balaghah etc. Have you studied Quranic sciences like asbab an-nuzul, an-nasikh wa'l mansukh etc. Have you studied the Hadith sciences? It is obvious that an ordinary person busy with work and family is not capable of reaching the level of ijtihad - the level of deriving judgements from the Quran and the Sunnah. It is the mercy of Allah that he did not obligate this upon us. An ordinary person will ask his local mufti on the rules concerning his matters and follow these rules. It does not matter whether that mufti is Hanafi, Shafii, Maliki or Hanbali. You claim that you are independent of madhahib, yet Salih al-Munajjid and most Saudi scholars are basing their views on the Hanbali school and on Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya who, along Hanbaliyya, has some distinct views.
Let's say I am convinced of what you have said. What should I do now? I am abandoning every single knowledge I read in Hanfi fiqh books or heard from scholars surrounding me. Should I start reading the verses and ahadith narrated in internet pages and then follow my own judgement? Or shall I follow the conclusion reached in those pages? If I am supposed to follow those conclusion, then it is obvious that these conclusions do in no way differ from the conclusions reached by former scholars, who, as one may claim, were more knowledgeable than the contemporary.