Re: The Concept of Intercession is Polytheism
You don't know what this intercession is for which Allah will permit someone to intercede sor someone else. Allah, on the other hand, has very clearly made known the followings:-
Guard yourselves against the Day on which one soul shall not avail another - no intercession shall be accepted, no ransom shall be taken and no help shall be given.[2:48]
Do you not know that to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and that besides Allah, you have no protector or helper![2:107]
Guard yourselves against the Day when one soul shall not avail another, no ransom shall be taken, no intercession shall profit anyone, and no help shall be given.[2:123]
O believers! Spend out of the sustenance which We have provided for you before the arrival of that Day when there will be no bargaining, friendship or intercession. It is the unbelievers who are wrongdoers.[2:254]
If Allah helps you, then there is none who can overcome you. If He forsakes you, then who else is there other than Him who can help you? Therefore, in Allah let the believers put their trust.[3:160]
Thes clear verses unequivocally say that no intercession will benefit any human in the hereafter. This is the final say of Allah.
akhee M H Khan
I advise you for the sake fo Allah teh following
The prophet salallahu alaihi wa salam said 'Whoever interprets the Quraan on his own will be punished by the hellfire even if he gets it right"
The problem is that you have connected shafa'a with waseela and more importantly the waseela of the sufis.
Just because intercession is a real incident that will happen (and the denier of this is a kaafir) on that Day and the reality that Muhamamd will intercede hs nothing to do with the flasehood of the people who pract5ice shirk in that they need to use Muhamamd to get closeto Allah and swear by him and make dua to him for aid and benefit or to remove harm.
Basically what you did was make what is turth to be faslehood and shrk just based upon a group of people who took what was legislated and interpreted into the concepts of shirk. if that is the case we might as well throw the quraan aweay. If that is the case we might as well neagte the zakaah because (even though it is sanctioned the rulers throughout the Islamic eras sometimes have overtazed the people). We might as well throw the concetp of salaah away because a small band pops up and makes it a religious obligation of having riyya (hidden shirk which is to be seen by men) in making it, so therefore according to your own methodology that you are imploring we must negate the salaah and call it shirk.
basciaqlly you should not, actually it is haraam for you, to attribute the flase practice of the misguided in raising and going and making tawaf around graves and makign du'a to them and making the innovated waseela to them and attributing it to the legislated shafa'aah
And since for some reason you feel like you have the audacity to view the narrations of hadeeth in the methodology that you do, then since you only rely on quraan and basically almost nothing of hadeeth (unless if goes according to your intellect) then when you cite this
Guard yourselves against the Day on which one soul shall not avail another - no intercession shall be accepted, no ransom shall be taken and no help shall be given.[2:48]
and when you view this
Allah! there is no Allah but He the living the Self-subsisting Eternal. No slumber can seize him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth?
then by default there is a contradiction in the quraan which by default results in disbeleif in the ayaah of
'And have you not carefully considered that if this book came from other than Allah you would have fund many contradictions therein"
The religion is known and it takes knowledge to know and the most knowledgeable people after the prophet were the companions and then their studetns and then their students and then those who followed their way in creed and methodology and who deduced principles based off of that. So while you deem lowly the people of knowledge the religion is known through them, not through the ignorant ones.
The scholar has authentic precedent when he is right and is rewarded one reward for being wrong, whil the jaahil is in the hellfire for getting it right and maybe worse for getting it wrong. This alone is enough reason and proof to suport you to the abandoning of these unheard of stancess that you have been known to speak with here at times
as for this
Do those MUSHRIKS --who believe in Allah, His prophets, divine books, angels, the resurrection and the predestnation, say salah, pay zakah, fast in the month of Ramadhan and perform hajj; but whenever they supplicate to Allah, they ask Him to accept the supplication for the sake of Muhammed(pbuh) and other good people who have passed away to the hereafter -- belong to the ummah of Mohammed (pbuh) ?
you dont have the authority nor the knowledge to delve into the removal of who is and whop isnt in the ummah of Muhamamd. Before you can even warrent a ruling there are obstacle from the matters of usool that one has to go through in critique before anyone can even issue a verdict on the relity of a person. You on the other hand are making takfeer of muslims without any tafseel which is do to the lack of knowledge that you did not gain. so for one, even though what they practice is shirk, they cannot be called mushriks and do belong tothe ummah of Muhamamd until the iqaamati-hujjah has been established against them.
akhee Ahmad
What your saying is right, but the particular act comes if i recall correctly under shirk asghar i.e. the minor shirk which doesnt put one out of the fold of Islam. It is a major sin though.
what M H Khan said is right. These acts that they do is shirk al-akbaar and takes one out the fold. But the actual ruling of a claiment to be a kaafir an only br throught by the establishement fo the iqaamati-hujjah
One who obeys Allah and His prophet Muhammed (pbuh) cannot believe this as the words of Muhammed (pbuh) who himself has brought the Quran to us, while the said story denies many cardinal verses of the Quran; and what is he who denies a verse of Quran?
M H Khan
How did the Quran come to us.
The prophet
How did the actions and recitation fo the quraan by the prophet come to us. By the companions.
If you beleived in the same narratoprs who brought to you those ayaah of Allah about the matters which you seek justification of your own interpretation, then you must by default accept those same narrators who brought to us that same hadeeth as the narrators of the quranic ayaah you briing and those who brought that hadeeth are the same.
Everyone who beleived in Allah and His messenger Including Muhammad beleived in the reality of this hadeeth. WHen a hadeeth is clearly authentic and accepted by the ijmaa then its disbeleif is equal to the disbeleif if a letter in the quraan. Sicne the prophet did not see anything contrary between what he said and what ALlah said and sicne the narrators of the quraan did not see anythign contrary to what they themselevs narrated about that hadeeth and sicne the entire muslim nation for 14 centuries did not see any variance between those ayaah and this hadeth, then it follows that the only islam that is insufficient and cannot be considered islam is the Islam that you understand to be. It is either the way that the best of muslims whos Islam has been attested to by Allah, or the way that you see it. Quite frankly everyone here would rather rely on the Islam of the muslims whom Allah not only affirmed their Islam and emaan, but was pleased with it and them, than the islam of a claiment who claims Islam especially who came 1400 years after the real muslims. Their Islam is Islam wand whatever they did do or say or hold is not Islam and cannot be viewed to be Islam.
The same True Muslims and Imaams who were true scholars who made takfeer for the very issues that you speak of also made takfeer for the very thing you are rejecting. SO in one aspect you are making takfeer of a group of people, yet you yourself also fall in a similar state (of takfeer being made upon you) by the stance you are taking.
The shafa'a is part of the aqeedah of Muhamamd and the Aqeedah of Abu Bakr and that of Umar and Uthman and Ali just as the aqeedah of emaan in the the Messengers and in Allah and in His books and the mala'ika. a denial of any of these is the denialment of the very thing that the Messenger was sent with, Islam.
so at the end I advise you to first, put aside the overshadowing doubts about the hadeeth works as it is part of the revelation just as the quraan. And secondly, the best thing to do is rely more on the relied upon authorities of this ummah instead of following the intellect and rational as both have been made subserviant to following and the texts hve not been made subserviant to follow the intellect.
and lastly the religion is more complicated and you must understand that there are realities of the matters of the quraan and the sunnah that normal people like us cannot fathom nor will we be able to in a 100 years remaining in this same state (of ignorance). Th fact that Shafi'ee ( a real scholar) extracted a 1000 meanings of one hadeeth in one night at the house of Ahmad ibn Hanbal's (another real scholar) is enough proof to show that there are matters and implciation in the texts that takes a formalized portion of knowledge in order to even begin upon the embarkment of realizing the realities of the texts.
asalamu alaikum warahmatullah
