Shahaadah in English

[Muwaahid]

For those who say its okay to say it in english but not in arabic, how do you gather all the evidence that says, whover says laa ilaaha illa Allah... or the evidence of taking shahadah can be said in english? I am jus curious? I am NOT saying that their shahaadah is not valid im just curious. In addition I, not trying to nickpick but for the sake of the religion and being upon clarity we cannot or should not translate it as was mentioned previously:

Sis the shahada is "Ash hadu ALLAAA ilaaha illallaah wa ash-hadu anna Muhammadar-rasoolullaah"
"La ilaha illa Allah" means "There is no god but Allah" without the "I bear witness".

,
In reality this translation if understood just by the text itself can be shirk. How you may ask? Because this statement does not comprise of naafee [negation] and ithbaat [affirmation]. Nafeee and Ithbaat are the arkaan [pillars] of the shahadah without which one does not enter into Islam. to say that "there is NO god but Allah" is not a true statement, for there are many gods besides Allah! Allat and Uzza and Yaghooth wa Ya'ooq and Nasraa, and Jesus the son of Mary, Buddah, Uzair, other idols and images, graves, tombs, desires, monks and righteous people are considered Aaliha [gods] but the determining distinction is understood in light of understanding what the true shahadah means.

As I mentioned previously our shahadah is based on naafee [negation] and ithbaat [affirmation]. when we say, ash hadu an laa ilaaha what we are saying and should be understanding is laa ilaaha means laa ma3booda bi haqqin [that I bear witness that there is NO DEITY WORTHY OF BEING WORSHIPPED IN TRUTH AND BY RIGHT] This is what to be understood about the first part of our shahadah. Because those other things that people consider gods are not worthy of worship, why? because they were created, they ate food, they had a call of nature, they were born, they died, whether or not they were righteous or not. Some were carved out of stone or wood, or made out of dates,some were righteous, some were prophets or messengers or people endowed with knowledge. But all of them were NOT worthy of being worshipped. So when we say laa ilaaha we are saying from amongst those things which people hav e taken as dieties besides Allah, we bear witness that none of these d eities are worthy of being worshipped in truth and rightfully because Allah is the only deity deserving to be worshipped in truth and it is Allah's right over his creation. and the ILLA ALLAH is the second part of the shahaadah except Allah. That is the ithbaat[affirmation] of the shahadah. Allah says, [indicating that there must be negation and affirmation] when he says:

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower. 2:256

See where Allah says, "whoever disbelieves in Taghut [false deities] and believes in Allah then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold tht shall never break." 2:256

Do you see the negation and affirmation? Disbelieves in False deities is like your saying laa ilaaha and Allah saying, "and believes in Allah is the affirmation and it is like your saying illa Allah. Do you see it? Rememer Allah said:

"
And verily, We have sent among every Ummah (community, nation) a Messenger (proclaiming): "Worship Allah (Alone), and avoid (or keep away from) Taghut (all false deities, etc. i.e. do not worship Taghut besides Allah)." Then of them were some whom Allah guided and of them were some upon whom the straying was justified. So travel through the land and see what was the end of those who denied (the truth). 16:36

Look in this ayah, see where it says,"worship Allah" this is like you saying illa Allah [except Allah] where it says, and avoid the taghut [false deties] is like you saying, "laa ilaaha] negation of worship to any being. Allah informs us in His book, "Yuthabbitu Allahu allatheena amanoo bilqawli aththabiti fee alhayati addunya wafee al-akhirati wayudillu Allahu aththalimeena wayafAAalu Allahu ma yasha' 14:27

This qawlu thaabit is our saying laa ilaaha illa Allah meaning there is no deity WORTHY OF BEING WORSHIPPED IN TRUTH AND BY RIGHT EXCEPT ALLAH"

"

Allah will keep firm those who believe, with the word that stands firm in this world (i.e. they will keep on worshipping Allah Alone and none else), and in the Hereafter.And Allah will cause to go astray those who are Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.), and Allah does what He wills. 14:27

For more infrmation please read al-qawlu mufeed fee adilatit-tawheed by muhammad bin abdul Wahhaab al wasaabee al yemani he gives the correct meaning of laa ilaaha illa allah" also you can find this understading in many of the books of tawheed and aqeedah. So we should never explain the shahadah as there is no god but Allah because there are many gods besides Allaah but...but...but... they are not worthy of being in worshipped. Only Allah possesses the sole right to be worshipped in truth and by right. Also read kitaabu tawheed alladhee haqqu Allah alal ibaadah "the book of tawheed which is Allah's right over His slaves.

 

[Hulk]

Re: Shahada

I am also in agreement that the translation which negates other deities is more accurate but I wouldn't go as far as to say that the other translation is "shirk", I also get that the shahada is based on negating and affirming. I'm not sure what you're saying in your first paragraph though, are you saying someone said that its ok to say the shahada in English but not ok in arabic?

 

[Muwaahid]

Re: Shahada

I am also in agreement that the translation which negates other deities is more accurate but I wouldn't go as far as to say that the other translation is "shirk", I also get that the shahada is based on negating and affirming. I'm not sure what you're saying in your first paragraph though, are you saying someone said that its ok to say the shahada in English but not ok in arabic?

TO SAY THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH IS AN INDICA. TION OF WIHDATUL WUJOOD WHICH IS TO BELIEVE THAT EVERYTHING IN EXISTENCE IS AN EXPRESSION OF ALLAH so no matter what you worship from trees, animals,snakes, suns and moons and people you are still worshipping Allah . Because if you say no god but Allah then there isn't in this statement nafee negation so a person can worship a cow for example,we couldn't condemn or criticise him because with the understanding of no god but Allah it doesn't negate other deities whom people may think worthy of worship. As for the first paragraph, I was stating that all the hadeeth that mention who ever says Laa ilaaha illa Allah then such and such will happen, o.e entering paradise, and so forth and so on,how do these people reconciliate the textual evidence that is specific in its wording, man Qaalaa Laa ilaaha illa Allah dakhalal jannah. Whoever say Laa ilaaha illa Allah has entered paradise. To give the shahadah in English alone I'm trying to understand if it is valid? Also many people explain to non Muslims that our shahadah ash hadu an Laa ilaaha illa Allah wa ash hadha anna muhammadar rasoolullah means no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. Which is done in different masaajid all over the world . So new Muslims may have a corrupt understanding of their shahadah which may cause them to leave the fold of Islam. I remember there was a post on this board saying how some reverts apostate because they are basically left to their ownselves because born Muslims doubt their Islam and because they just left kufr and drinking alcohol and using drugs and being promiscuous. Well I say teach the reverts true tawheed and the correct aqeedah and manhaj and they will be stronger and have a greater love for Imaan.

 

[AabiruSabeel]

Re: Shahada



Brother Muwaahid, I think there is a misunderstanding in the translation of the Shahadah in English. By saying "There is no god but Allah", we are negating the god-hood (if such a word exists) of everything first, and then we affirm that only Allah is the God. This statement does not imply in any sense that everything is god, nor does it imply that there can be any god(s) besides Allah. I don't know how you are looking at this statement in that sense.

"There is no god" itself means that there can be no god at all, "but Allah" except Allah, ie Allah is the One and Only God.

But if you say "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah", then a question can arise from this statement; are there other deities other than Allah, but unworthy of worship? Since in this statement you are not negating the existence of all deities. You are only saying that Allah is the only deity who can be worshipped. So does it mean that there are other deities as well? The answer is No, but this statement does not make it clear.

Whereas the first statement "There is no god but Allah" makes it clear that there are no gods at all, except Allah.

I don't say that saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" is wrong, but linguistically there is nothing wrong in saying "There is no god but Allah".

 

[Muwaahid]

Re: Shahada

Brother Muwaahid, I think there is a misunderstanding towards the translation of the Shahadah in English. By saying "There is no god but Allah", we are negating the god-hood (if such a word exists) of everything first, and then we affirm that only Allah is the God. This statement does not imply in any sense that everything is god, nor does it imply that there can be any god(s) besides Allah. I don't know how you are looking at this statement in that sense.

*****Perhaps this explanation will clarify why this is a misunderstanding, as the Shaykh Al-Alaamah Saalih Al--Fawzaan Bin Abdillah Al-Fawzaan mentions in his book entitled Aqeedatu-Tawheed wa Bayaan Maa Yudaaduhaa aw Yanqusuhaa Minash-Shirkil Akbar wal Asghar wa Ta'teel wal Bid'e wa Ghayru Dhalik. [the creed of Tawheed and a clarirification of what its opposite and what decreases it from Major Shirk and Minor Shirk and Ta'teel [negation/nullifies it] and innovations and other than that.]
The Shaykh mentions under the meaning of the shahaadatain:
معنى شهادة أن لا اله الا الله: الاعتقاد و الاءقرار, أنه لا يستحق العبادة الا الله, والتزام ذلك و العمل به, <فلا اله> نفي لاستحقاق من سوى الله للعبادة كائنا من كان <الا الله> اثبات لاستحقاق الله وحده للعبادة, و معنى هذه الكلمة اجمالا: لا معبود بحق الا الله. فخبر <لا< يجب تقديره: <بحقّ> و لا يجوز تقديره بموجود, لأنّ هذا خلاف الواقع, فالمعبودات غير الله موجود بكثرة: فيلزم منه أن عبادة هذه الأشياء عبادة لله, و هذا من أبطل الباطل و هو مذهب أهل وحده الوجود الذين هم أكفر أهل الأرض. و قد فسرت هذه الكلمة بتفسيرات باطلة منها: أن معناه لا معبود الا الله. و هذا باطل: لأن معناه: أن كل معبود بحق أو باطل هو الله كما سبق بيانه قريبا. أن معناها لا خالق الا الله, و هذا جزء من معنى هذه الكلمة, ولكن ليس هو المقصود, لأنه لا يثبت الا توحيد الربوبية, و هو لا يكفي و هو توحيد المشركين>

أن معناها: لا حاكمية الا الله, و هذا أيضا جزء من معناها, و ليس هو المقصود, لأنه لا يكفي, لأنه لو أفرد الله بالحاكمية فقط و دعا غير الله أو صرف له شيئا من العبادة لم يكن موحدا, و كل هذه تفاسير باطلة أو ناقصة, و انما نبهنا عليها لأنها توجد في بعض الكتب المتداولة.

و التفسير الصحيح لهذه الكلمة عند السلف والمحققين: أن يقال:لا معبود بحق الا الله كما سبق.

"There is no god" itself means that there can be no god at all, "but Allah" except Allah, ie Allah is the One and Only God.

But if you say "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah", then a question can arise from this statement; are there other deities other than Allah, but unworthy of worship? Since in this statement you are not negating the existence of all deities.

*******Yes and I mentioned other deities in existence other than Allah by name, so that what ive been saying all along, laa ilaaha doesnt mean there are no other gods, except Allah because there are many,as I have mentioned a few, nor does laa ilaaha illa Allah mean there is no god but Allah, the shaykh explained it very well in the above text when he said that the ma3boodaat [those objects of worship] are in kathera [in abundance], have you read surah Nuh? When Nuh invited his people day and night, in open and in secret to tawheed? what did they say?

""And they have said: 'You shall not leave your gods, nor shall you leave Wadd, nor Suwa', nor Yaghuth, nor Ya'uq, nor Nasr (names of the idols);"71:24

These idols were their gods, but were they worthy of worship? No they were not worthy of worship. thats the defining point, yeah people worship anything and everything under the sky and yeah and there are some that worship celestial bodies suns and moon and stars. but they are not worthy of worship. the issue is worthiness which they are not. that is what is intended by bi-haqq. anything created is not worthy of worship. thats ashjaar[trees] wa ahjaar[stones] adhrihaah[tombs] quboor [graves] asnaam[idols] awthaan[images].

But if you say "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah", then a question can arise from this statement; are there other deities other than Allah, but unworthy of worship? Since in this statement you are not negating the existence of all deities.

You are only saying that Allah is the only deity who can be worshipped. So does it mean that there are other deities as well? The answer is No, but this statement does not make it clear.

***there are other gods besides Allah how can you say that?

Whereas the first statement "There is no god but Allah" makes it clear that there are no gods at all, except Allah.

***please read the above post.

I don't say that saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" is wrong, but linguistically there is nothing wrong in saying "There is no god but Allah".

yes there is, please read the above post in arabic also read al qawlu mufeed fee adillatit-tawheed, google it please. there are so many books written on tawheed that have been translated yet very few of them have clarified this matter as clear as the above text in Arabic. I dont think it is possible to argue against anything the shaykh said above in the post. read it please.

 

[Hulk]

"There are no deities worthy of worship except Allah" holds the stronger meaning in terms of translation of the meaning of the shahada as it negates the deities that people glorify. I think we would understand it better if we first make it clear that ilah and Allah are not the same(correct me if I am wrong please). Deity in translation refers to ilah which is what is being "glorified/worshipped".

 

[AabiruSabeel]

Posts moved to a new thread to avoid confusion for New Muslims.


The first point, which I forgot to mention in the previous post, is nobody in that thread claimed it is sufficient to say the Shahaadah in English and not in Arabic. All they said was it is not necessary to repeat the Shahaadah in English after you have said that in Arabic as long as you fully understand the meaning of the Shahaadah.

I don't know why you are trying to make an issue out of a non-issue.

*****Perhaps this explanation will clarify why this is a misunderstanding, as the Shaykh Al-Alaamah Saalih Al--Fawzaan Bin Abdillah Al-Fawzaan mentions in his book entitled Aqeedatu-Tawheed wa Bayaan Maa Yudaaduhaa aw Yanqusuhaa Minash-Shirkil Akbar wal Asghar wa Ta'teel wal Bid'e wa Ghayru Dhalik. [the creed of Tawheed and a clarirification of what its opposite and what decreases it from Major Shirk and Minor Shirk and Ta'teel [negation/nullifies it] and innovations and other than that.]
The Shaykh mentions under the meaning of the shahaadatain:
معنى شهادة أن لا اله الا الله: الاعتقاد و الاءقرار, أنه لا يستحق العبادة الا الله, والتزام ذلك و العمل به, <فلا اله> نفي لاستحقاق من سوى الله للعبادة كائنا من كان <الا الله> اثبات لاستحقاق الله وحده للعبادة, و معنى هذه الكلمة اجمالا: لا معبود بحق الا الله. فخبر <لا< يجب تقديره: <بحقّ> و لا يجوز تقديره بموجود, لأنّ هذا خلاف الواقع, فالمعبودات غير الله موجود بكثرة: فيلزم منه أن عبادة هذه الأشياء عبادة لله, و هذا من أبطل الباطل و هو مذهب أهل وحده الوجود الذين هم أكفر أهل الأرض. و قد فسرت هذه الكلمة بتفسيرات باطلة منها: أن معناه لا معبود الا الله. و هذا باطل: لأن معناه: أن كل معبود بحق أو باطل هو الله كما سبق بيانه قريبا. أن معناها لا خالق الا الله, و هذا جزء من معنى هذه الكلمة, ولكن ليس هو المقصود, لأنه لا يثبت الا توحيد الربوبية, و هو لا يكفي و هو توحيد المشركين>

أن معناها: لا حاكمية الا الله, و هذا أيضا جزء من معناها, و ليس هو المقصود, لأنه لا يكفي, لأنه لو أفرد الله بالحاكمية فقط و دعا غير الله أو صرف له شيئا من العبادة لم يكن موحدا, و كل هذه تفاسير باطلة أو ناقصة, و انما نبهنا عليها لأنها توجد في بعض الكتب المتداولة.

و التفسير الصحيح لهذه الكلمة عند السلف والمحققين: أن يقال:لا معبود بحق الا الله كما سبق.

There is no confusion regarding the given explanation in Arabic. The only misunderstanding is when you try to literally translate the above in English.

The Shaikh is simply saying that everything that people used to worship are all unworthy of worship and only Allah is the One who should be worshiped. If you translate that literally by saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" then ok, there is no problem with that. But if we follow your line of thinking then we can say that this translation if understood just by the text itself can be shirk. How you may ask? Because this statement does not comprise of naafee [negation] and ithbaat [affirmation]. (See your quote below)

In reality this translation if understood just by the text itself can be shirk. How you may ask? Because this statement does not comprise of naafee [negation] and ithbaat [affirmation].

This translation "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" is not negating the existence of other deities. Then how is this translation better than the other?

Whereas if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you are in fact negating the existence of all deities, and affirming that Allah is the One and Only God.

*******Yes and I mentioned other deities in existence other than Allah by name, so that what ive been saying all along, laa ilaaha doesnt mean there are no other gods, except Allah because there are many,as I have mentioned a few, nor does laa ilaaha illa Allah mean there is no god but Allah, the shaykh explained it very well in the above text when he said that the ma3boodaat [those objects of worship] are in kathera [in abundance], have you read surah Nuh? When Nuh invited his people day and night, in open and in secret to tawheed? what did they say?

""And they have said: 'You shall not leave your gods, nor shall you leave Wadd, nor Suwa', nor Yaghuth, nor Ya'uq, nor Nasr (names of the idols);"71:24

These idols were their gods, but were they worthy of worship? No they were not worthy of worship. thats the defining point, yeah people worship anything and everything under the sky and yeah and there are some that worship celestial bodies suns and moon and stars. but they are not worthy of worship. the issue is worthiness which they are not. that is what is intended by bi-haqq. anything created is not worthy of worship. thats ashjaar[trees] wa ahjaar[stones] adhrihaah[tombs] quboor [graves] asnaam[idols] awthaan[images].

By saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" you are only negating the Worship-ability of these false deities but still acknowledge that they are deities.
But if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you negate them completely. When they are not gods, then there is no question of their worship-ability. We do not have to specify separately that they are unworthy of worship. This is embedded by itself in saying there is no god (except Allah).


If you still want to say that everything else besides Allah is not worthy of worship then you can say "There is none worthy of worship except Allah".

 

[Muwaahid]

Re: Shahada

where is this post located now? I see it has been moved but i was unable to find this one except through my profile?

 

[AabiruSabeel]

This is in the Tawheed & Shirk sub-section, under the Aqeedah section of the forum.

You can easily check in which section a thread is located by scrolling to the top of the thread where it says:

Forum

Learn about Islam

Aqeedah

Tawheed & Shirk

Shahaadah in English​

 

[Muwaahid]

Posts moved to a new thread to avoid confusion for New Muslims.


The first point, which I forgot to mention in the previous post, is nobody in that thread claimed it is sufficient to say the Shahaadah in English and not in Arabic. All they said was it is not necessary to repeat the Shahaadah in English after you have said that in Arabic as long as you fully understand the meaning of the Shahaadah.

****The original issue I had with the post was the translation of laa ilaaha illa Allah. i.e there is no god but Allah. And thatys why I posted what I posted and I had to eventually post the Shaykh's words to clarify the issue. I mentioned that there are other deities besides Allah because they are, and simply saying Laa ilaaha illa Allah means no god but Allah doesnt signify devoting ones worship to Allah alone. All the anbiya wa rusul were sent with Tawheed right? but what kind of tawheed were they sent with? Ruboobiyyah? The belief that Allah is the Creator and Sustainer and Disposer of affairs for all His creation? No because everyone believes that even the mushrikoon and the Mulhidoon. So the Anbiya wa Rusul didnt come with that right? We have our fitrah right? Did they come with Uboodiyyah [directing all acts of worship to Allah alone]? Yes! of course they did ,so the Tawheed that was intended or desired by Allah in sending all His prophets and messengers and sending down all His books of revelation and the reason behind Allah creating the heavens and earths and the wisdom behind our creation is to worship Him. Did not Allah say, "wa maa khalaqtu jinna wal insa illa li-ya'budoon" And I have not created the jinn and humanity except to worship Me." thats the wisdom behind our creation akhee. to worship Allah.

I don't know why you are trying to make an issue out of a non-issue.

Its a huge issue and you acting as if it is a small issue is truely amazing. Its the difference between Imaan [faith] and Kufr [disbelief] its not just lip profession, there are conditions to this shahaadah and if they are not fulfilled the sayer of it will not benefit from stating it. There are things that nullify the shahaadah or decrease its potency. And I am only replying to you and standing up to you because it is a matter of Deen and I have jealousy for this deen. Its nothing personal.

There is no confusion regarding the given explanation in Arabic. The only misunderstanding is when you try to literally translate the above in English.

****I didnt translate anything I merely commented on a misunderstanding or bad translation of the meaning of laa ilaaha illa Allah. Its never anything personal, we are brothers and sisters in Islam and I wouldnt be considered a believer except if I love for my brothers what I love for myself. I love Tawheed so therefore I love for my brothers and sisters Tawheed. Not just any tawheed but the correct understanding of tawheed.

The Shaikh is simply saying that everything that people used to worship are all unworthy of worship and only Allah is the One who should be worshiped. If you translate that literally by saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" then ok, there is no problem with that. But if we follow your line of thinking then we can say that this translation if understood just by the text itself can be shirk. How you may ask? Because this statement does not comprise of naafee [negation] and ithbaat [affirmation]. (See your quote below)



This translation "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" is not negating the existence of other deities.

*****It doesn't have to say it because its not true, there are tons and tons of deities besides Allah, how can you misunderstand this point? who is Allat? who is Uzza? Who is Manat? Who is Nasraa? who is Hubal? Who is Jesus the Son of Mary? Did not the christians take him as a god? and Mary? Allah speaks about them in the Quran, Kaanaa yaqulaani Ta'aam" And they both ate food" why is it important to mention they both ate food? because it necessitates a call of nature which is not a befitting quality that is worthy of worship. Allahu Samad! It is Allah who feeds but is not fed!

Then how is this translation better than the other?

Whereas if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you are in fact negating the existence of all deities, and affirming that Allah is the One and Only God.

it is necessary to believe in the existence of other deities and to reject them all as being worthy of worship while worshipping Allah alone, this is the basic meaning of our kalimah. in the arabic post above the shaykh mentioned that that a person who believes that there is no haakimiyyah [ ruler or ruling] illla Allah which is a part of tawheed but it isnt the tawheed that Allah desired from us [in totality] but makes dua to the graves or makes sujood to created beings has he established tawheed in ibaadah? no of course not because he hasn't singled out Allah in all the aspects of worship. Haakimyyah is but a part of tawheed not the whole of tawheed, you understand?

By saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" you are only negating the Worship-ability of these false deities but still acknowledge that they are deities.

****That is what the anbiya wa rusul came to teach, ibaadah singling out Allah for worship. Allah says in surah Hud "wa ilaa madyan akhaahum shu'aybah qaalaa ya qawm ubudullah maa lakum min ilayhi ghayru" and to the people of madyun we sent their brother shu'ayb and he said oh my people! WORSHIP ALLAH you have no other deity besides Him" meaning he called them to uboodiyyah-ibaadah worship Allah alone. Is that clear? not to haakimiyyah although it is a part of tawheed not to ruboobiyyah which is a part of tawheed but to uboodiyyah, first command in the quran in surah baqarah is to uboodiyyah.

But if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you negate them completely. When they are not gods, then there is no question of their worship-ability. We do not have to specify separately that they are unworthy of worship. This is embedded by itself in saying there is no god (except Allah).

**** if you read the above arabic post you would know why that is incorrect akhee I will translate the text in totality in another post Wallahu alam

فالمعبودات غير الله موجود بكثرة: فيلزم منه أن عبادة هذه الأشياء عبادة لله, و هذا من أبطل الباطل و هو مذهب أهل وحده الوجود الذين هم أكفر أهل الأرض. و قد فسرت هذه الكلمة بتفسيرات باطلة منها: أن معناه لا معبود الا الله. و هذا باطل: لأن معناه: أن كل معبود بحق أو باطل هو الله كما سبق بيانه قريبا

If you still want to say that everything else besides Allah is not worthy of worship then you can say "There is none worthy of worship except Allah".

****That is the true meaning of Laa Ilaaha illa Allah.... we reject all false deities because they do not have the right nor are they worthy of being worshipped. we worship Allah why? because no one other than Him created us all, sustains us, provides for us,disposes of all of our affairs, He has complete and perfect dominion and sovereignty over all that exist, He was not born, was not created, does not consume food, nor excretes waste, the ever living and does not die, the originator of the heavens and earth, cannot be defeated by His creation, cannot be crucified cannot be wrestled with, total and complete omnipotence, above His creation, separate and distict, descends to the lowest heaven in a manner befitting His Majesty, completely unlike His creation yet He has the most beautiful names and lofty attributes, now compare that to Allat and Uzza and Uzair and Isaa ibn Maryam [alayhi salam] and manat and buddah and the sun and the moon and the stars! Are they worthy of worship? THEY ARE NOT WORTHY OF WORSHIP! THEY ARE NOT WORTHY OF WORSHIP! THEY ARE NOT WORTHY OF WORSHIP! Allah created us to worship Him he sent all not some but all the prophets and messengers with Tawheedul Ibaadah, it is the Tawheed that Allah wants from all His creation.

 

[AabiruSabeel]

who is Allat? who is Uzza? Who is Manat? Who is Nasraa? who is Hubal? Who is Jesus the Son of Mary? Did not the christians take him as a god? and Mary?

now compare that to Allat and Uzza and Uzair and Isaa ibn Maryam [alayhi salam] and manat and buddah and the sun and the moon and the stars!

thats ashjaar[trees] wa ahjaar[stones] adhrihaah[tombs] quboor [graves] asnaam[idols] awthaan[images].

* So basically our difference is that you call Laat, Uzza, Manat, Nasraa, Hubal, Buddha, the sun and the moon as deity but you consider them unworthy of worship.

* Whereas I say that they are not deities, but they are simply stones and mud and wood and plants and planets and stars, no more than that.



By the way, the definition of deity itself is something of divine origin. By calling them deities, aren't you raising their status? Just say that they are not deities and people who consider them deities are wrong.

If a new Muslim looks at your post, he might fall in to shirk as he may get the assumption that all that you have mentioned are still considered deities albeit unworthy of worship.


And did you say that Tawheed 'Uboodiyyah comes before Ruboobiyyah?

What does the first Ayah of Surah Al-Fatihah signify? Tawheed Ruboobiyyah or 'Uboodiyyah?
What does the second Ayah signify? Tawheed Asma was-Sifaat or 'Uboodiyyah?
The fourth Ayah signifies Tawheed 'Uboodiyyah. How does it come before Ruboobiyyah ?


The fact is, when you consider someone as your Rabb, then you start worshiping him. So as long as you consider only Allah as your Rabb, you won't worship anyone else besides Him.

The Kuffar of Makkah committed shirk in Ruboobiyyah first by considering their idols as the means of fulfilling their needs, and this shirk in Ruboobiyyah led them to the shirk in 'Uboodiyyah and they started worshiping the idols. It is not the other way round. Nobody would worship someone whom they do not consider as their Rabb first.


Hope you understood the difference.

 

[Insaanah]

All the anbiya wa rusul were sent with Tawheed right? but what kind of tawheed were they sent with?

Complete tawheed in every aspect. Not just certain aspects or parts of tawheed.

Ruboobiyyah? The belief that Allah is the Creator and Sustainer and Disposer of affairs for all His creation? No because everyone believes that even the mushrikoon and the Mulhidoon.

Everyone does not acknowledge Allah as Creator and Sustainer and Disposer of affairs. Atheists do not. He though, is still their Lord, even if they deny His existence. It is the mushrikoon of Makkah that acknowledged His Lordship but worshipped others along with Him, and thus were classified as disbelievers despite acknowledging His Lordship. They were called to leave their false gods and to worship Him alone. The Atheists of nowadays completely deny the existence of Allah.

So the Anbiya wa Rusul didnt come with that right?

Wrong. They came with complete and perfect tawheed.

The first verses revealed to Rasoolullah :saws: weren't "Worship." They didn't even mention worship. What did they mention? They introduced our Rabb, and mentioned some of His qualities:

Read in the name of your Lord who created -
Created man from a clinging substance.
Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous,
Who taught by the pen -
Taught man that which he knew not. (96:1-5)

The ayaat introduced Him and His qualities and His Lordship over us, and after that came the revelation to worship Him.

Tawheed al 'Uboodiyyah, comes along with Tawheed al Ruboobiyyah and Tawheed al Asmaa' wa Sifaat.

They are a package, and the messengers came with the whole package as far as tawheed goes, not just parts of it. They told people who Allah was, that He created everything and was their Lord and Sustainer, and that they should worship Him. To believe in Him as Lord, but not to worship Him alone, would not make them believers.

There is none worthy of worship except Allah, on that we all agree, and also on the importance of that, but we need to be careful not to say wrong things to justify that. Nobody is arguing with this fact that He alone should be worshipped.

We all agree, that there is no deity that anyone perceives to be a deity, no being that anyone perceives as being God or Lord, that is Truly God, EXCEPT Allah, and there is no being that is worthy of worship, EXCEPT Allah.

This contains negation, and affirmation.

In English, that part of the shahaadah is translated either as there is no God except Allah, or there is no God but Allah, or some translate it as there is none worthy of worship except Allah, it being understood what is meant by ilaah/God, and the connotations and implications of that shahaadah, which should be in Arabic.

It is erroneous to say that that is a statement of wahdat ul wujood. Wahdat al wujood is when people say only Allah exists and everything is Allah.

We need to be careful before making assumptions about other's understanding of the shahaadah, or it's translation. However we can share what we know, in a nice way.

 

[Muwaahid]

Complete tawheed in every aspect. Not just certain aspects or parts of tawheed.



Everyone does not acknowledge Allah as Creator and Sustainer and Disposer of affairs. Atheists do not. He though, is still their Lord, even if they deny His existence. It is the mushrikoon of Makkah that acknowledged His Lordship but worshipped others along with Him, and thus were classified as disbelievers despite acknowledging His Lordship. They were called to leave their false gods and to worship Him alone. The Atheists of nowadays completely deny the existence of Allah.



Wrong. They came with complete and perfect tawheed.

The first verses revealed to Rasoolullah :saws: weren't "Worship." They didn't even mention worship. What did they mention? They introduced our Rabb, and mentioned some of His qualities:

Read in the name of your Lord who created -
Created man from a clinging substance.
Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous,
Who taught by the pen -
Taught man that which he knew not. (96:1-5)

The ayaat introduced Him and His qualities and His Lordship over us, and after that came the revelation to worship Him.

Tawheed al 'Uboodiyyah, comes along with Tawheed al Ruboobiyyah and Tawheed al Asmaa' wa Sifaat.

They are a package, and the messengers came with the whole package as far as tawheed goes, not just parts of it. They told people who Allah was, that He created everything and was their Lord and Sustainer, and that they should worship Him. To believe in Him as Lord, but not to worship Him alone, would not make them believers.

There is none worthy of worship except Allah, on that we all agree, and also on the importance of that, but we need to be careful not to say wrong things to justify that. Nobody is arguing with this fact that He alone should be worshipped.

We all agree, that there is no deity that anyone perceives to be a deity, no being that anyone perceives as being God or Lord, that is Truly God, EXCEPT Allah, and there is no being that is worthy of worship, EXCEPT Allah.

This contains negation, and affirmation.

In English, that part of the shahaadah is translated either as there is no God except Allah, or there is no God but Allah, or some translate it as there is none worthy of worship except Allah, it being understood what is meant by ilaah/God, and the connotations and implications of that shahaadah, which should be in Arabic.

It is erroneous to say that that is a statement of wahdat ul wujood. Wahdat al wujood is when people say only Allah exists and everything is Allah.

We need to be careful before making assumptions about other's understanding of the shahaadah, or it's translation. However we can share what we know, in a nice way.

I'm not going to bother discussing this issue any longer because its clear with you that you have the ability to change and doctor up peoples post and for someone who speaks Arabic I find it ajeeb that with the Arabic post you would hold on to that erroneous belief, I await our standing before Al-Waahidul Qahhaar to settle this.

 

[Insaanah]

I did not "doctor" your post. I put what you quoted of brother AabiruSabeel into quote boxes, to clarify what were your own words, and which were his, as it was unclear otherwise, and difficult to follow what you were saying. And removed an inappropriate comment. And we do that for posts by any members; clarify if they're confusing because quotes haven't been used, or remove inappropriate remarks.

Also, because I can read the Qur'an and understand some of it without a translation, does not mean that I speak Arabic.

 

[جوري]

I'm not going to bother discussing this issue any longer because its clear with you that you have the ability to change and doctor up peoples post and for someone who speaks Arabic I find it ajeeb that with the Arabic post you would hold on to that erroneous belief, I await our standing before Al-Waahidul Qahhaar to settle this.

I did not "doctor" your post. I put what you quoted of brother AabiruSabeel into quote boxes, to clarify what were your own words, and which were his, as it was unclear otherwise, and difficult to follow what you were saying. And removed an inappropriate comment. And we do that for posts by any members; clarify if they're confusing because quotes haven't been used, or remove inappropriate remarks.

Also, because I can read the Qur'an and understand some of it without a translation, does not mean that I speak Arabic.

Can you put for us in a systematic style, what of the sister's post you find objectionable? What exactly in her beliefs or what she's written is erroneous?

 

[Muhammad]

:salamext:

Another translation I have seen is, 'there is no true God other than Allaah', or 'there is no true God worthy of worship except Allaah'. This appears to combine both of what is being said above: there exist things which people consider gods, but actually they are not true Gods deserving of any worship.

[EDIT:] I've just been thinking about the addition of 'worthy of worship'... I think one of the reasons why the 'worthy of worship' part is important to convey in the translation, is because the Polytheists generally believed in Rububiyyah. So that would mean they could accept the meaning of 'there is no God but Allaah', as they knew Allaah was the Creator and Sustainer etc. But they understood that the shahadah inherently meant there was no true God worthy of worship except Allaah, hence they couldn't accept it because it would mean they would also have to give up their worship of idols and false gods. Allaah (swt) knows best.

Ultimately, I think everyone here agrees regarding the meaning of the shahadah. We are just discussing what is the best way to translate it into English. So as Br. AabiruSabeel mentioned above, let us not allow it to turn into a bigger problem than it needs to be, and let us be able to discuss such matters with the manners and etiquettes that Islam teaches.

 

[Mustafa2012]

Re: Shahada

Brother Muwaahid, I think there is a misunderstanding in the translation of the Shahadah in English. By saying "There is no god but Allah", we are negating the god-hood (if such a word exists) of everything first, and then we affirm that only Allah is the God. This statement does not imply in any sense that everything is god, nor does it imply that there can be any god(s) besides Allah. I don't know how you are looking at this statement in that sense.

"There is no god" itself means that there can be no god at all, "but Allah" except Allah, ie Allah is the One and Only God.

But if you say "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah", then a question can arise from this statement; are there other deities other than Allah, but unworthy of worship? Since in this statement you are not negating the existence of all deities. You are only saying that Allah is the only deity who can be worshipped. So does it mean that there are other deities as well? The answer is No, but this statement does not make it clear.

Whereas the first statement "There is no god but Allah" makes it clear that there are no gods at all, except Allah.

I don't say that saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" is wrong, but linguistically there is nothing wrong in saying "There is no god but Allah".

Assalaamu alaykum wa rahmat Allaahi wa barakaatuh,

Please excuse me for entering into this discussion. I hope you don't mind.

This issue is not a small issue as some people think. It has very big implications so it's worth discussing until everyone is clear on the correct meaning.

I see that you believe that the translation of La ilaaha Illa Allaah as "There is No God but Allaah" is more accurate than the translation "There is None worthy of worship except Allaah".

The way someone understands and interprets each of these translations can be different depending on what perspective they look at it from.

The first one "There is No God but Allaah" according to your understanding negates the existence of Allaah other deities except Allaah and you believe this to be more accurate in translation.

Re: The second translation "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah", you say,

But if you say "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah", then a question can arise from this statement; are there other deities other than Allah, but unworthy of worship? Since in this statement you are not negating the existence of all deities. You are only saying that Allah is the only deity who can be worshipped. So does it mean that there are other deities as well? The answer is No, but this statement does not make it clear.

This is the way I understand the two translations based on several years of study.

In an ideal world, if there were only Muslims and no dis-believers and no polytheists worshipping other deities then one could argue that the first translation "There is no God but Allaah" is more accurate. If you take it literally, this translation only negates the existence of other deities and affirms the existence of Allah. There is no mention of the word worship in it (unless it is seen an an implied meaning)

However since the majority of people in this world are worshipping other deities (even if they are not real deities worthy of worship from our perspective) then the second translation acknowledges that yes, there are other deities being worshipped besides Allaah but even though they are being worshipped besides Allaah, it is Allaah alone that is worthy of being worshipped.

In the Qur'aan, Allaah speaks about the other deities that are worshipped besides him so if these other deities didn't exist, we need to ask ourselves, why did Allaah speak about them and refer to them and draw our attention to them.

Most of the modern books translate "La ilaaha illa Allaah" as "There is none worthy of worship except Allaah" and so do many of the Ahlus Sunnah scholars and daa'ees both arab speaking and english speaking.

 

[AabiruSabeel]

:wasalamex

I see that you believe that the translation of La ilaaha Illa Allaah as "There is No God but Allaah" is more accurate than the translation "There is None worthy of worship except Allaah".

No brother, I do not say that. I said:

I don't say that saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" is wrong, but linguistically there is nothing wrong in saying "There is no god but Allah".

But if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you negate them completely. When they are not gods, then there is no question of their worship-ability. We do not have to specify separately that they are unworthy of worship. This is embedded by itself in saying there is no god (except Allah).


If you still want to say that everything else besides Allah is not worthy of worship then you can say "There is none worthy of worship except Allah".

The discussion only started when brother Muwaahid said:

"La ilaha illa Allah" means "There is no god but Allah" without the "I bear witness".

,
In reality this translation if understood just by the text itself can be shirk.

I just tried to explain that the above translation does not contain any shirk. But if there is any translation that can be construed as shirk then it is:

If you translate that literally by saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" then ok, there is no problem with that. But if we follow your line of thinking then we can say that this translation if understood just by the text itself can be shirk. How you may ask? Because this statement does not comprise of naafee [negation] and ithbaat [affirmation].

This translation "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" is not negating the existence of other deities. Then how is this translation better than the other?

Whereas if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you are in fact negating the existence of all deities, and affirming that Allah is the One and Only God.

I think one of the reasons why the 'worthy of worship' part is important to convey in the translation, is because the Polytheists generally believed in Rububiyyah. So that would mean they could accept the meaning of 'there is no God but Allaah', as they knew Allaah was the Creator and Sustainer etc. But they understood that the shahadah inherently meant there was no true God worthy of worship except Allaah, hence they couldn't accept it because it would mean they would also have to give up their worship of idols and false gods.

Yes, the polytheists did believe in Ruboobiyyah but they associated partners to Allah in His Ruboobiyyah which in turn led them to the worship of those shurakaa (partners).

I am not against including the "worthy of worship" part in the translation. In fact I did say above:

But if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you negate them completely. When they are not gods, then there is no question of their worship-ability. We do not have to specify separately that they are unworthy of worship. This is embedded by itself in saying there is no god (except Allah).


If you still want to say that everything else besides Allah is not worthy of worship then you can say "There is none worthy of worship except Allah".

The only argument from my side is against the connotation that saying "There is no god but Allah" can be construed as shirk.


I think I have presented all my thoughts on the issue by now and there does not remain anything more to add.

 

[Mustafa2012]

Ok thanks for clarifying your point of view and please excuse me for missing what you said earlier.

So now, from reading through your previous comments it seems that you don't believe that "There is no God except Allaah is a more accurate translation of "La ilaaha illa Allaah" than "There is none worthy of worship except Allaah".

However you don't see that there's anything wrong with saying it and I refer back to these comments of yours for your reasoning...

By saying "There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah" you are only negating the Worship-ability of these false deities but still acknowledge that they are deities.
But if you say "There is no god but Allah" then you negate them completely. When they are not gods, then there is no question of their worship-ability. We do not have to specify separately that they are unworthy of worship. This is embedded by itself in saying there is no god (except Allah).

If you still want to say that everything else besides Allah is not worthy of worship then you can say "There is none worthy of worship except Allah".

In order to understand the difference between the two translations let us refer back to The Qur'aan and Sunnah and see what they affirm and negate.

The central point of Tawheed was not in denying the existence of other deities that were worshipped besides Allaah because the majority of people were actually worshipping idols, planets, trees animals etc. In their reality, these other deities existed so this was not the issue.

The challenge and task of the Messengers was not to negate their very existence because in the minds of the people, these other deities did exist. They worshipped them day and night.

The task of the Messengers was to affirm the right of Allaah as being The only one worthy of being worshipped due to His Perfect Names, Attributes and Actions which made Him The only One truly worthy of being worshipped.

If the meaning of La ilaaha illa Allaah is "There is no God but Allaah" then The Qur'aan and Sunnah would not have made any mention of other deities or idols etc. They would have been totally disregarded.

But this is not the case as we find that The Qur'aan and Sunnah acknowledged that people did worship things besides Allaah and spoke at length about various types of idols and deities. It puts forth many examples to try to reason with people and make them see the futility in worshipping things which have no power to harm or benefit them nor could these other deities give death or life or create and provide.

Re: your disagreement of Muhawwids statement that the translation "There is no God but Allaah" is shirk", I would not go as far as saying it is Shirk but I say that it is not a complete affirmation of the right of Allaah to be worshipped and in it there is no negation of the right of other deities to be worshipped.

P.S. When we use the word "deities" we are referring to what the polytheists or disbelievers worship. As Muslims we don't believe that these other deities are worthy of worship but just for reference and discussion purposes we use the word "deities" (which in our eyes are all false deities not worthy of being worshipped). We cannot totally deny that other (false) deities exist because people do worship other things besides Allaah and the word "Ilaah" is used many times in The Qur'aan.

 

[AabiruSabeel]

I agree with what you have said and there is no objection against that.
The only objection, as I said earlier, was against the connotation that saying "There is no god but Allah" can be construed as shirk.

The central point of Tawheed was not in denying the existence of other deities that were worshipped besides Allaah because the majority of people were actually worshipping idols, planets, trees animals etc. In their reality, these other deities existed so this was not the issue.

My argument regarding the negation of all deities was not about negating their existence, but it was about negating their deity-hood.

* Whereas I say that they are not deities, but they are simply stones and mud and wood and plants and planets and stars, no more than that.